The Metaphysics of Batman v Superman: A 15,000 Word Analysis

>“This has been the most rigorous intellectual exercise I’ve had in my writing life. For Batman v Superman I really want to dig into everything from ideas about American power to the structure of revenge tragedies to the huge canon of DC comics to Amazon mythology.[…]If you told me the most rigorous dramaturgical and intellectual product of my life would be superhero movies, I would you were crazy. But I do think fans deserve that. I felt I owed the fan base all of my body and soul for two years because anything less wouldn’t have been appreciating the opportunity I had.” – Chris Terrio, screen-writer of Batman v Superman.

Zack Snyder’s “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” is the most ambitious and original superhero film of the modern era. Not since Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight has any director working in this otherwise lifeless and stagnant genre elevated it to such thematic heights. Batman v Superman is multilayered in its thematic and symbolic depth, but at its core, it has one central ambition: casting the Superhero as modern mythological hero. This task alone provides more than enough thematic content for an entire film, but Snyder and Terrio decided to take things a step further, using the film to…

1. Comment on media-fueled xenophobia in post-9/11 America,
2. Restore Superman and Batman to their roles as genuine role models worth looking up to, rather than inhuman abstractions.
3. Explore, as Man of Steel did, the relationship between Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism (which advocates selfishness as a moral virtue) and Christianity.
4. Rehabilitate superheroes through the retelling of the comic book Watchmen.

Attached: BvS in essense.jpg (2048x2048, 565.03K)

Other urls found in this thread:

vimeo.com/189876347
youtube.com/watch?v=FUthfKQsZ4M
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

However, above all else, the central theme of the film, in my opinion, is this: “Superheroes are modern gods and heroes, and their stories are modern mythology. Time to take them seriously.” The film does not deal exclusively with these themes (for instance, BvS draws heavily from John Boorman’s 1981 film “Excalibur”), but they are the primary ones, and as such will be my primary focus. It should go without saying that I am not certain my interpretation of the film is correct. In fact, I’m certain that some of what I think about BvS is wrong. But I’m quite confident that themes I am interpreting are present in the film.

Essays written about the thematic content of a particular film tend to be written independently of the narrative structure of the film they’re analyzing, but given the dense and sprawling nature of the film, I’ve decided the best way to lay out my interpretation is through a chronological, scene-by-scene analysis. This essay is designed to be read on its own: however, given the linear structure, it could be read as a companion piece while watching BvS.

Rather than spend time defending this film against common criticisms, I would rather lay out why it’s good than why it’s not bad: with a focus on the symbolic, religious and psychological content of the film. This film is too esoteric and complex to be judged on the basis of how fun it is, or the tightness of the narrative.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 49.73K)

You are a cultist freak. Drink the kool aid, you absolute psycho.

Attached: pepe1.jpg (1100x1007, 62.45K)

>There was a time above… a time before. There were perfect things… diamond absolutes. But things fall, things on Earth. And what falls… is fallen. In the dream, they took me to the light. A beautiful lie.

The entire film centers around this scene and these lines. In his Wall Street Journal interview, Chris Terrio had this to say:

>“It’s almost archetypal. In Batman’s origin [the murder of his parents], the primary thing I was thinking about is the fact he falls. It’s the primary metaphor for Western literature: There was a moment before and then everything fell. That brings up questions of Superman.”

Bruce’s monologue sets up his character at the start of the film perfectly. By using such language, (“time before,” “things fall,” “they took me to the light,”) Bruce is established as the archetypal tragic hero, in the vein of Hamlet, Orpheus, Oedipus, etc. He’s also identified with a fundamental theme of Western mythology: the fallen nature of mankind. This is derived, in a political and historical context, from the fall of the Roman Empire, but on a religious and spiritual level from the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden. Bruce’s monologue immediately establishes the tone and ambition of the film.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 508.6K)

Welcome back, theoryautist. I didn’t get a chance to read the whole thing last time so thanks for the repost

>essense.jpg
good morning sirs

Attached: 1647791925970.jpg (642x86, 5.07K)

Note that the theatre is playing the the 1981 film Excalibur, mentioned earlier. Boorman’s Excalibur, an absolute masterpiece in it’s own right, is a retelling of the central Arthurian myth as described in the 15th century book Le Morte d’Arthur. It’s also a favorite film of Snyder’s, and influenced BvS heavily. BvS is, in part, a retelling of that film, with Batman and Superman playing the roles of Arthur and Lancelot. Lois Lane is the Lady of the Lake, Lex Luthor is Morgana, and Doomsday is Mordred. I will explain all of those connections when they become relevant. The central theme of Excalibur is this: “The King and the Land are one.” That motif permeates the film, and appears to be prominent in Justice League as well.

Snyder said that he wanted Bruce to have seen knights fighting on the most important day of his life. One has to keep in mind that everything Batman is, as a character, is a result of the death of his parents. That is Batman, at his core. His nightly escapades are a never-ending attempt to redeem the original sin of his parent’s death. Every detail of that night was etched into his brain. Him seeing Excalibur, or having seen a trailer for it, influenced his psychology regarding Superman.

Take care also to note the number on the building to their left, 1108. This corresponds to a verse from the Book of Revelation:
>“And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.”
Credit to user “V” on Vimeo, who created this excellent video, “Batman v Superman: Allegory,” which I will reference again later. Here's the video:
vimeo.com/189876347

You may think this is a coincidence, but given Snyder’s attention to detail, interest in Christianity and Christian imagery, the direct relationship of the verse to the scene, and the fact that he’s done this before, I would assume intent.

I am always glad to talk about this amazing film.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 276.93K)

Thomas Wayne tries to fight back against Joe Chill, rather than talk him down or abide by his demands, as generally happens in Batman origin stories. In this universe, Bruce witnessed his father meet violence with violence, which influences him immensely.

It’s also, on a technical level, a beautiful scene, and one that recreates perfectly the same event depicted in The Dark Knight Returns. If you don’t think Snyder is one of the foremost visual directors working in mainstream cinema today, you’re not paying attention.

I use the Opera browser and don't see the need to save these image files on my personal computer.

Attached: file.png (860x1396, 1.22M)

Bruce runs into the woods before falling into the cave. The woods, of course, has a psychological connotation. The unknown, dangerous chaos of nature. There is a tracking shot of Bruce before his fall, which will be visually referenced later in the film. Take note of this moment.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 260.58K)

To be fair, you have to have a high IQ to understand Snyder movies. His art is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of religion and philosophy, not to mention a truly deep knowledge of comics, most of the references will go over a typical viewer's head. There's also Superman's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterization - his personal philosophy draws heavily from the gnostic Biblical teachings of Valentinus, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these references, to realize that they're not just fanservice- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Snyder movies truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the depth in Superman's existential catchphrase "Martha", which itself is a cryptic reference to Rand’s Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Snyder's genius unfolds itself on the silver screen. What fools...how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, I DO have a Batman V Superman tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

And, of course, Thomas Wayne calls out to Martha before his death. Aside from the obvious set up for the plot, as well as establishing Bruce’s Freudian psychology, this is a reference to Citizen Kane. Great reference.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 162.35K)

The symbolism of Bruce in the cave is obvious. The identity of Batman is how Bruce saved himself from his fallen state. Bruce’s subconscious portrays this in Christ imagery. This is no pointless religious symbolism: this indicates that Bruce ascent into Batman, a god-like identity, is his salvation. Bruce is no longer a man. He is man-made-God. Or, to be more accurate, Bruce is the archetypal tragic hero, and Batman is a god. What separates, in pagan terms, a man from a god? Power. Bruce acquires power, takes on a supernatural form, and thereby ceases to be just a man. However, after being “introduced to the Superman,” Bruce views this as a “beautiful lie.” His method of escaping the psychological “underworld” he was was to obtain power. In the face of Superman, he is no longer powerful. A central theme in the film is “power,” but it’s deeper than simply “power corrupts.” In fact, in the film, the idea that power corrupts is portrayed as a result of psychological trauma. The relative loss of power, in the face of a greater power, also corrupts. This mimetic rivalry is present in both Bruce and Lex.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 186.38K)

They talk about you in this book.

Attached: Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 4.00.54 PM.png (392x580, 422.18K)

Always a pleasure to see this kind of content.

They pay you too little given how loyal you are to the mouse.

“The” Superman, referring to him as an abstract metaphysical concept rather than an individual. The scene is Bruce Wayne’s memory/dream, recounted from his POV. Among others’, Bruce’s dehumanization of Superman is a recurring theme in the film.

In an impressive display of attention to detail, the Metropolis scene in the beginning of BvS corresponds perfectly to the Metropolis scene at the end of MoS (up to the point of Zod and Superman’s fist fight.) There’s no great symbolism in that, of course, but it’s indicative of the respect Snyder has for his work. Here's a video showing it:
youtube.com/watch?v=FUthfKQsZ4M

One of the absolute key concepts you need to grasp in order to understand this movie is that Batman is the villain of the film, in the same way that Harvey Dent is the villain of The Dark Knight. “Why does Batman kill people?” Because he’s the villain of the story. “Why does Batman brand people?” Because he’s the villain of the story. “Why does Batman want to kill Superman?” Because he’s the villain of the story. The film does not intend to show Superman and Batman as equals morally and philosophically, as Captain America: Civil War does.

When Wayne Enterprises employee Jack realizes his death is imminent, he begins praying. His prayer helps remind the audience that the entire film is grounded in religion, and it’s no coincidence that his prayers are “answered” with death. He prays to God, and in return he’s killed by another kind of god.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 250.1K)

Here I would like to quote from the fantastic essay “Batman v Superman: The Modern Revenge Tragedy.” In many ways, the BvS community owes its existence to this essay.

This image was not created by me; it has gone around the BvS fandom for many years. Bruce’s complex psychology is indicated beautifully purely through visuals. Anybody who tells you Zack Snyder is “style over substance” is fantastically misguided. Style is substance. The horse imagery will be seen several times throughout the movie and this analysis.

Attached: file.png (860x994, 540.97K)

In Fruedian psychology, the father is the first enemy. Lex and Bruce, the antagonists of the film, project their fathers onto Superman. Lex does so by relating Superman to his abusive father and the archetypal sky-father(“Horus, Apollo, Jehovah.”) For Bruce, Snyder & Terrio took things in a more interesting direction. As I mentioned before, Thomas’ last act was to physically fight Joe Chill, in order to protect young Bruce. What Bruce sees in the battle of Metropolis is Superman failing to save his children. Superman, in Bruce’s eyes, is a failed Thomas Wayne, who lets his children – humanity – die. Thomas Wayne is a benevolent father, deified in Bruce’s mind, and as such Superman fails to live up to that standard.

This event is analogous to Watchmen. Batman is analogous to Rorschach, of course, which means that the events of Metropolis are analogous to the murder of the young child that happens prior to the events of Watchmen. In both cases, we have the obsessive, dark, but noble non-powered vigilante suffer a psychotic break after witnessing a tragedy(involving a little girl) which causes him to begin killing criminals. Rorschach, in the flashback to the beginning of the Watchmen, is far more psychologically stable. The same is true of Bruce.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 421.69K)

We then cut to Lex’ team searching for Kryptonite. There’s no symbolism here, that I can see, I just think it’s a beautiful shot. I love these kind of shots in Snyder's movies.

Attached: FEA6TxMUcAQmiPl.jpg (1500x1500, 223.74K)

The desert scene opens with Jimmy Olsen drinking with his guide, who foreshadows the carnage which will follow Superman. “All that wind is bad luck. Blood in the sky.” One of the points of criticism this film received was Snyder’s decision to kill Jimmy Olsen, the light-hearted Superman sidekick. As Snyder has said, this was done to subvert audience expectations about what kind of film this would be, and its relationship to the comics.

In the discussion Lois Lane has with General Amajagh, one could view America as an analogy for Superman. Superman tries to be neutral, but that is an impossibility. He has power, and he has no choice – as a good natured person – to use his power for the sake of good. What that means, inevitably, is that he will have to de facto “take sides” in conflicts. He can’t not do it. “No one is different; no one is neutral.” Conversely, you could view Superman in the entire film as a metaphor for the US. You might, if you’re a comic book fan, be annoyed that Superman is taken through the ringer in this film, faced with choices and problems as difficult as he is. What Snyder believes is that Superman is strong enough, as a character, as an abstraction, to survive what is thrown at him in this film: “And it’s the only way to move forward with a hero, because otherwise the hero drowns in the mire of his own morality, in that he never can go forward, he never can evolve. He becomes an allegory, he’s a lesson, like, ‘This is the way to be, kids,’ not a real story. He becomes like one of the Ten Commandments. He’s not like an actual [person].”

If you don’t want Superman to be put into the position where has to decide between killing the only other surviving member of his species, or letting a family die right in front of him, you just don’t believe in the character. It’s that simple.

The general’s suspicions are right, of course, as Jimmy Olsen is indeed working for the CIA. The US is not neutral.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 273.17K)

There’s some romanticism in this scene for the pre-drone era of US foreign policy, as the CIA agents on the ground, riding on horses (which indicates their nobility, by association with knights), tells the mission commander to “call off the goddamn drone.” The latter is all too willing to let Lois Lane die. It’s not a coincidence that Superman destroys a CIA drone in defense of innocents in an African village. Remember, Superman stands for “Truth, Justice, and the American way.” Snyder & Terrio are indicating that drone strikes on civilian-occupied villages are not the American way. You may disagree. That’s fine. Real art stirs the pot.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 277.13K)

Of course, this entire event was organized by Lex in order to turn the public against Superman. This is plan A: turn the US government against Superman by manipulating public opinion. He has backups.

We then have the village woman Lex has bribed/intimidated, testifying that Superman is responsible for the destruction in Africa, when in reality Lex bears responsibility.

Remember the main theme of the film. Lex is an archetype, a god. Or he was, until Superman showed up. What do you call a person who is defined archetypally and acquires great power? A god.

He is a liar and a manipulator, like Satan or Pan. He inverts and distorts everything; that is his primary characteristic. It’s assumed that the point of BvS and MoS is to say “Superman is not a god,” but that’s a little simplistic. A mythological god is merely a superpowered person who represents, in most cases, abstractions. Superman is the god of Truth, Justice, Hope. Lex is the god of Lies. Where does that put Batman?

Attached: FE1KZbdXoAQbNk1.jpg (640x640, 90.28K)

Then comes the Bat’s introduction. There is an easter egg for Watchmen, one of several: the Gotham City billboard has “The End is Nigh” graffitied onto it, a reference to Rorschach’s alter-ego as a wandering doomsayer.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 330.52K)

Batman’s introduction is the most interesting of all the main characters’. The entire scene is filmed like a horror movie, not an action-adventure superhero film. It is genuinely tense, reminiscent more of Tim Burton’s Batman than Christopher Nolan’s.

The trafficking victims refer to Batman in interesting terms: “It saved us. A devil.” Remember Chris Terrio: Superman is Apollo, the god of the Sun and of Truth(he does, after all, derive his power from the Sun), and Batman is, god of the underworld and Death. You might think this film is about God vs Man; my interpretation is more subtle than that.

When the officers try to help them, the women close the gate. They’re afraid of Hades. This whole scene hammers in the idea that Batman is the bad guy, yet some people still didn’t get it.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 193.46K)

Batman brands people in the same spot, left chest, where he has a prominent scar, as we see later in the film.

Batman takes his rage and pain out on criminals. When he runs, he crawls on the ceiling, in an inhuman way.
The trafficker is named Ceaser, which will become relevant later in the film.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 297.58K)

The film cuts to Lois Lane’s apartment, opening with a nice panning establishing shot reminiscent of the dinner scene with Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II from Watchmen. Another indication of this film’s association with Watchmen.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 292.63K)

Snyder is known for, among other things, macrophotography, which is utilized in this scene, allowing things to breathe. The camera lingers on her mailbox, mail, and twice on her faucet.

Compare that to other modern superhero films, which jump from wide-shot to wide-shot, not letting any one scene set in for too long, lest the audience start wondering when the next soulless action scene begins.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 204.17K)

There is a motif in the film of characters drinking alcohol when they are lying or otherwise hiding from the truth. This isn’t a pointless detail; if you’re attentive enough to notice it, you will be privy to when characters are lying. This is first seen when Lois throws her bloody shirt aside, and turns to drink wine. Immediately after drinking, she hides the bullet from Clark.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 249.15K)

Clark shows up holding flowers, which feature prominently in the film.

In Christian art, flowers are symbols of rebirth, life, and resurrection. Superman, while associated with Sun-god Apollo, is also(obviously) a Christ figure. You might think this contradictory, but I think the multi-layered symbolism of Jesus is directly relevant to what the film is trying to dramatically represent: the lack of meaning that flows from the absence of religion.

Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life.” Superman, in turn, represents “Truth, Justice, and the American way.” Apollo, again, is the god of the Sun and the god of Truth. Interesting, to say the least, that Superman’s antagonists in the film are Lex, who is a god of Lies, and Bruce, who is Hades, the god of Death.

That Bruce is a god of Death is made obvious in the film itself, with no added commentary necessary: his entire being is death. He dresses like a bat, a symbol of death. He “lives” underground. His entire psychological state is based on the death of his parents. He fully intends to die in his quest to kill Superman. Superheroes in Snyder & Terrio’s world are elevated to mythological archetype.

Lois informs Superman of the Senate panel surrounding his intervention to save Lois. Clark “doesn’t care.” Man of Steel was in part about the relationship between Objectivism and Christianity, philosophies that have both influenced Snyder heavily. That dynamic continues in BvS, wherein Superman is half-Jesus Christ and half-Howard Roark, the rationally self-interested hero of Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead(a book which Snyder plans to adapt.) Clark, over the course of both films, grapples with the desire to live up to the role humanity has thrust upon him as modern Christ, without becoming a slave to the will of the masses.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 205.13K)

Clark drops his glasses when enters the tub with Lois, a not-so-subtle indication that he’s comfortable with her; he doesn’t have to hide or pretend when he’s around Lois. This is all visual story-telling.

Lois plays a central role in the film (unlike other love interests in superhero films), both thematically and on a basic plot level. You are likely familiar with the pagan idea of woman as nature and man as culture, or civilization. The Christian worldview takes it in a slightly different direction. In the Christian worldview, women represent all earthly things, both civilization and nature, and men represent the divine or heavenly.

This might be considered sexist, but Christianity does not take the view of material world = bad and metaphysical world = good. The proper mode of being is the reconciliation of physical and metaphysical. This is what Christ is, and why the New Testament insists on a physical and literal, not (only) metaphysical or metaphorical, resurrection. The physical, which is to say Earth and the body, are exalted. This is why the relationship between Lois and Clark is central to the film. It is the union between the metaphysical and the physical.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 267.92K)

bump

There’s also the Excalibur connection. Lois is the Lady of the Lake, who appears in pools of water. The bathtub scene foreshadows her central role regarding the Spear in the last act of the film. Again, if you’re thinking “this is all a stretch,” remember that Chris Terrio said this was the most rigorous intellectual exercise in his life. This is Zack Snyder, without a doubt the most creative and ambitious director working in the genre today, working with an Oscar winning writer who has an academic background in Western literature.

The film cuts from a moment of elevation and happiness, in a bright white room, between Clark and Lois...

Attached: file.png (860x357, 238.62K)

To Bruce, wearing black and alone, descending into his underworld cavern, wherein he engages in hostile, dishonest, and sarcastic banter with Alfred.

In their conversation, Bruce lies about the potential of a dirty bomb. On a political level, Bruce represents the post-9/11 American, who is paranoid about “aliens” and their ill-intent. A common concern among American neo-conservatives is the potential of terrorist entities to detonate dirty bombs in major Western cities.

Alfred slams down a newspaper, headlining Bruce’s branding of Gotham’s criminals, asking “New rules?” Bruce is in denial. “We’re criminals, Alfred, we’ve always been criminals. Nothing’s changed.” To which Alfred replies, “Oh, yes, it has, sir. Everything’s changed.” Alfred is Bruce’s conscience, and as such is our conscience, and informs the audience that Batman’s violence is a recent phenomenon. Crime-fighting was once a noble pursuit for Batman, but his “fever, rage, the feeling of powerlessness” turned a “good man cruel.” Again, the theme of power. Power corrupts, indeed, but powerlessness corrupts as well.

Another interesting aspect is the way in which Bruce thinks of Superman and Zod as gods in a distant way, as though he’s not one of them.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 223.57K)

Then we have the introduction of Lex, presenting a lie. Lex Luthor, in the original comics, was just a mad-scientist. It was only in the 1980s that he became a corrupt corporate mogul. Snyder and Terrio have reinvented him, to be a more modern type of corrupt businessman, a Mark Zuckerberg. I’ve heard several people say that the main problem with BvS is it’s portrayal of Lex Luthor. Nonsense. For one, it is not a flaw that a character in a film is different from a character with the same name in a comic. But set that aside: at their cores, comic Lex and BvS Lex are the same. Theirs is a difference of style, not substance.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 324.1K)

Leaning into the god of lies role, his personality presented here is a lie. The entire thing is a facade. He tells a cute story about how his father lied to get money from investors, probably the only true thing he says in the entire scene. He references his father having to “wave flowers at tyrants,” which, in addition to being another flower reference, is an example of how Lex inverts and distorts everything(which we’ll see at Superman’s grave at the end of the film.) He also says he believes it to be “Providence” that his father’s son would be the one to resist the Tyrant that is Superman. Of course, Lex is an anti-theist, and as such doesn’t believe in Providence; at least, not as a good thing.

Attached: file.png (860x357, 320.45K)