Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice

With the success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it will be surprising if DC Comics did not attempt the same with their great many iconic characters. Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice is a product of such. 

The movie has been hyped for quite a while and of course stirred up quite a bit of discussion with Ben Affleck cast as the next Batman. Man of Steel was a successful movie despite the mixed review it received from critics. Nonetheless, Henry Cavill’s Superman did bring the Man of Steel back to life. So as the second entry to the DC Universe and the rebooting of another iconic character, how did Batman V Superman stack up?

The end product is a very long movie of 2.5 hours packing in a lot of characters and a lot of storylines. As I weaved myself through this maze of storyline I found myself lost in time and space, and wondering when would this all stop. Yes, it is a pity as the stories can be so rich and powerful, but with everything happening, there seems to be lots of loss of opportunities littering around the place. 

The first issue I had with the movie is the lack of motive for most of the characters. Even when they have motives you couldn’t help but wonder: “Is that it?” In the Marvel Cinematic Universe every character was given sufficient time to develop their character and their role in that world, so when Avengers came along, even when Black Widow first appeared in Iron Man 2, things made sense and puzzles pieced together neatly. However in Batman V Superman, it seems they tried to force marrying the worlds and thus leaving all characters quite hollow in their motives for doing what they wanted to do. I personally felt the whole back story of Batman could be taken out because we had already watched Chris Nolan’s trilogy, we know very well its back story. It is only being played by a different actor that’s all. For Batman / Bruce Wayne, there were jarring questions in his storylines: if he cares so much about people who suffered in the last Superman battle, why wouldn’t he follow up with the guy whom worked for him and Bruce rescued personally? Why would he let that guy go rogue by over-indulging in grand scale of things that had a foundation as thin as a piece of A4 paper? If Batman is so smart, how would he not know this is Lex Luthor’s doing when going through the whole server archive of information? These were just some huge plot holes that screaming to be filled but never filled.

As for Superman, I understand we want to talk about his human side and his care of this world. But his relationship with all those he cared about were just lightly brought up with a few scenes here and there. And honestly, if he is so super how could he not hear the trouble his mother was going through? Shouldn’t he have a specific channel tuned in for his mom? I mean he came just in time to save Lois and let his mother went through that? That is again beyond comprehension. 

As for Diana Prince, aka Wonder Woman, how would she not be able to decrypt the server archive if she was supposed to be smart and resourceful? She managed to do stuff under Batman’s nose and went almost unnoticed. Even the whole Lex Luthor thing did not make much sense with the whole father complex and personal over thinking about the world leading him to decide to kill off some superheroes and destroy the world? He might be a lunatic but lunatics still need better motives to do what they are doing.

The issue here is everyone is reacting to things that are trivial to their cause. When there are so little for you to react to and you kept on reacting to them, the characters got driven into hyper-hibernation and became extremely boring. This is a pity because each of the characters had so much potential and if done properly could rival people mounting interests and indulgence in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The only saving grace was Lois Lane, the person who figured out the whole plot bit by bit using her journalist instinct. Batman for me in the movie was just an angry piece of junk that annoyed the hell out of me. Seriously why would you want to destroy a character rebuilt by the Chris Nolan trilogy?

That said the film did have great visuals, especially when they re-created the Man of Steel battle scene from the ground perspective, which linked the two worlds neatly together. However, there were situations that CGI or special effects were used for the sake of it and I genuinely did not know why those scenes existed in the movie when they were not even significantly moving the plotlines.

Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice carried a lot of weight on its shoulder and in this case did weigh it down. I mean the scene when Wonder Woman showed up was great but it was already spoiled by the trailer, so there was nothing left to be excited about. Ben Affleck did a good middle aged Batman but I wished the screenwriters gave him more materials to work on, which applied the same to Gal Gadot and Henry Cavill. For me Batman V Superman is a missed opportunity and I think DC Comics really need to think about this holistically to avoid themselves being dragged into this cinematic mess again, for once their characters were destroyed it will take a long time to rebuild.

A Rebel with a Heart

No matter what the media said, there is no denial that Madonna still commands a huge influence in the performance industry and music scene. Not every single is a hit and there surely are prejudice against her in terms of air time for her music, but most of them still pack a punch and most of them are still unforgiving in terms of the messages they carried.

Recently got a chance to see her live performance in Sydney so decided to catch up with her recent catalogue before attending. I only remember the last song I listen to was 4 Minutes with Justin Timberlake and that’s about it. Did not notice MDNA was a standalone album (thought it was just another best compilations) but did notice Rebel Heart because of the controversy of “defacing pictures of historical icons”. Also the concert was named after this album so there you go.

People have been criticising her being late. So for me I had no expectation for her to come on stage on time. Sometimes I do feel people nowadays will just criticising her for the sake of criticising her. Seriously when you already knew she would be late and then complaining about her being late is a bit too much. Anyway she did address the part by saying “Greatness equates lateness” – typical Madonna style.

Once she was on stage there was no cheating at all. At 57 I personally think it is acceptable that you cheat a few dance numbers as they can be pretty demanding live on stage. However, there was no such thing that night. When the beats came up, she was dancing without any hesitation. Her dancers were brilliant and she did not show any sign of catching up at all. Her flexibility and fluidity on stage is beyond comprehension. I think that really what differentiates a good performer from a great performer. Choreography was done for specific numbers and those specific numbers intertwined with the emotion of the audience.

With a concert based on mostly new materials you would expect people to be more lukewarm as people might be there for her old materials. However surprisingly a lot of the audience managed to follow the tunes and lyrics of her latest materials. That showed that Madonna still has a strong following whether the current media likes her or not. Songs like Iconic, Rebel Heart, Body Shop Heartbreak City etc. were all greeted with excitement from the audience. There were of course her all time classics such as Vogue, Material Girl, Like a Virgin, Music and Like a Prayer. Some were remixed and some were delivered in their original flavours. The audience responded to every single track and none of them disappointed. Madonna’s ability to sing and dance without losing a beat or a tune proved that she is still one of the best live performers in the music industry.

During various chat sessions Madonna responded to all the negative media coverage claiming her experiencing a meltdown with her ongoing custody battle for her 15 year old son. She told the audience “Madonna is not having a meltdown. God forbid a mother missing her son. It is a crime for a mother to miss her son”. That pretty much summed up how she despised the modern media that tried to continuously write her off without even attempting to know her. But then how often modern media tries to understand something before reporting them anyway?

The concert was a full three hour fest with lots of memorable tunes and performances. It is something that you would relish and remember for a very long time. The show is about Rebel Heart and surely it is representational of Madonna as an artist. For me I do think Rebel Heart is Madonna return to form (I still failed to relate to MDNA and the Hard Candy albums in any sense except for 4 Minutes). As an artist Madonna is uncompromising, which I think is the reason that made her great and outstanding. She is also fearless about critics and continued to push her musical and creative boundaries. She does not give a shit to the media and various outlets whom have no relevance to her life. She really has the heart of a rebel inside her. 

Casting the First Stone

The world has really gone mad in the past few months. As the world is scrambling to deal with crises around the globe: the Islamic States, the Trump Presidency, Marriage Equality etc. etc., governments around the world seemed to have lost sight of what they are supposed to do as government or what it meant to be a government.

In Australia, the whole “us versus them” attitude in the government has never been as rife as now, thank you to the extreme right wing Tony Abbott government that tarnished and destroyed Australia’s reputation while trying to build a Pearly Gate that shuts everyone but his closest cabinet members out. A change of Prime Minister had not been as beneficial as most Australians had hoped to be. The issue here lies within the still strong extreme right wing influence in the Parliament that clipped the wings of this new Prime Minister, who seems to be working to just keep his job.

What really disappointed me is the extreme right wing’s continued use of “Christian values” to cast their stones against everyone. They branded all Muslims in the country or the world as Islamic State accomplices throwing out commentary that does nothing but divides the Australian community. Their attitude of Christianity is more supreme than other religions is building gaps in the society that are wider than the Grand Canyon. And then these “Christians” continue to attack the Safe School program and Marriage Equality claiming that they are grooming paedophiles and promoting distorted lifestyles in Australia. They held their Bibles high and yelled at anyone who did not agree with them. If their Bibles are made of stones they will not hesitate to cast them against anyone who opposed them.

However, is that what exactly the Bible taught us? Or are they just using the Bible as a weapon without properly understanding it? Brought up as a Christian from a Christian school one of the very basic things we learnt since we were kids were love and kindness for “God so love the world that he gave his only son”. That is what I took from the Bible. I honestly do not understand how people could act in the name of the Bible when they don’t even understand basic principles as such.

Looking closer at the records in the Bible, we also understand the Middle East descended from the same ancestor. Yes, for those who conveniently forgot about this, if you go back to Genesis you will find out that Ishmael, the son of Abraham was the ancestor of the Middle East. There is no denial that there might be bad blood (nope I am not referring to Taylor Swift and Katy Parry) but the fact is that if this is your own making, isn’t your own responsibilities to fix it? And if you all right wing Christians read the Bible carefully, you will remember God told Abraham that he will still bless Ishmael despite the fact that he was not the chosen one for that his promised. So looking from this angle, if Christians do think they are brothers in God’s faith, shouldn’t they be helping the refugees from Middle East because they are supposed to be blessed by the same God they believe in? If they are not doing so simply because they are not practicing the same faith, are they actually breaking God’s promise to them? Are they just not doing the duty they are supposed to do? It is convenient to divide by religion but if the religion is not meant to be divisive but keeping basic promises made by God, they probably should study it real hard again before making further claims against the rest of the world. Please note that this does not mean condoning what Islamic State is doing but to extend your love and fulfil your duty to bless and keep the descendants of the person God promised to bless.

The other thing is about how those right wing Christians attack the LGBT community as deviants and finding every excuse to put them down. I find it particularly hypocritical when Members of Parliament attack the Safe School program as grooming paedophiles. Hello aren’t we currently having a Royal Commission about the long history of paedophilia in the Australian Catholic Church? Just judging from this I do not know why these Members of Parliament who claimed to be Christians, and Catholics specifically can go around casting their stones against the LGBT community branding them as a breeding bed for paedophiles. Before you attack shouldn’t you be checking what’s happening in your house first? Also their repeated claims of this is against God’s will and these people will go to hell basically has not solid ground to base on. The foundation of their arguments is built on sand so to speak. The thing is God has repeated demonstrated He will bless and utilise people whom the so called “core Christians” would despise. Read through the Bible, God has used and blessed prostitute and non-Abraham-descendants as his messengers or agents to carry out His will. And really if God hasn’t opened up the Gospel to the Gentiles, I doubt these right wing Christians can even call themselves Christians now. So where is the logic that you can tell people who are God’s chosen people when your ancestors were just gentiles and outcasts? That is another fundamental principle these so called Christians need to remember and reflect upon.

It is always easy to cast the first stone in God’s name, but whether by doing so you are upholding God’s principles or you are actually committing blasphemy is another question. You can try building your earthly Pearly Gate and shut everyone else out in the name of God, but if you do believe in God, then what only matters is the pass to the real Pearly Gate, not the one you built in God’s name whatsoever. Christianity is a faith about doing good and not about how you interpret what is good at your own convenience for what man could have God’s wisdom to swear and act in God’s name? If you truly believe that you are a Christian, stay open mind like God did in the Bible and do whatever is good to the people around and the world, as the wrath of God is not yours to unleash but God’s.