Batman V Superman: 10 Reasons It's Not As Bad As The Critics Are Saying
The worst superhero movie of all-time? No way!
Without question, the most shocking thing about Batman v Superman's long-awaited arrival is that director Zack Snyder somehow turned in a film that has a scored lower than Freddy vs. Jason on critical aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes (29% if you're wondering, whilst Freddy vs. Jason has 44%). Is this the end of cinema as we know it?
First things first: Batman v Superman is not a great movie. 255 critics haven't got a collective agenda and they haven't - as some fanboys have claimed - been paid off by Marvel; they've rallied against the film because there's lots wrong with it. It's messy, it's occasional ugly, and there are quite a few nagging problems with the characters.
That said, there's still a sense that - on the whole - the critics have been way too harsh in their reviews of Batman v Superman; that, despite its flaws, it isn't quite the disaster it's been painted to be. One critic even called it "the worst superhero movie of all-time," which is just about the most hyperbolic statement imaginable. Worse than Catwoman? Worse than Green Lantern? Worse than the most recent Fantastic Four movie, even? C'mon - it isn't.
You can understand the critics' disapproval, in a way: they're disappointed. But you could still argue that, ultimately, Batman v Superman does the job - especially if you've been waiting for 3 years to see it. And yet the critics have attacked the film as though it's a crime against cinema, when - in reality - it's more on the "OK" side of things and is certainly worth a watch (it most definitely deserves more critical acclaim than Freddy vs. Jason).
Here are 10 reasons Batman v Superman isn't as bad as the critics are saying...