New ‘Batman v Superman’ Deleted Scene Leaves Us With More Questions

bvs deleted scene lex luthor banner

This article contains major spoilers for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

It’s been a few days since the release of Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, but a new deleted scene from the movie has already emerged on the Warner Bros. Pictures Youtube account, featuring Lex Luthor and a mysterious creature on board the remains of the Kryptonian Scout Ship.

It’s hard to identity this thing, but it does resemble Steppenwolf, one of the members of Darkseid’s Elite. In the clip, the creature can be seen holding what looks like three motherboxes, which made an appearance in the movie during the brief Cyborg tease. However, despite their presence, it’s probably not Darkseid, since it doesn’t even remotely look like him.

You can check out the clip right below and sound-off your thoughts in the comment section. Perhaps you’ll have better luck identifying the mysterious creature.

Fearing the actions of a god-like Super Hero left unchecked, Gotham City’s own formidable, forceful vigilante takes on Metropolis’s most revered, modern-day savior, while the world wrestles with what sort of hero it really needs. And with Batman and Superman at war with one another, a new threat quickly arises, putting mankind in greater danger than it’s ever known before.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is out in theaters everywhere.

Michael Bezanidis

Michael Bezanidis

Michael is the Managing Editor of Heroic Hollywood. When he's not playing video games, he's usually writing about film and television.

  • Jimmi

    That, my friends, is Steppenwolf, one of Darkseid’s Elite. Can’t wait for the Ultimate cut!!

    • Hinscher

      Don’t personally know Darkseid stuff too well beyond the generics.
      1. What he looks like and how strong he is.
      2. Parademons and the boom boxes
      3. His wife is ugly as heck.
      4. His son looks stupid as heck.
      5. Apparantly some legend that says his son is the only one that can kill him. Which is disheartening imo cause as I said, I think his son is stupid and looks even dumber.

      • SAMURAI36

        3. His wife is ugly as heck.

        If you’re talking about Granny, then that’s not his wife. Technically, that’s his aunt. Both of DS’s wives are actually drop dead gorgeous.

    • O.G. Loc

      NEWS!!!

      Batman v Superman Ultimate Edition release date is false. They will announce the real date in a few weeks.

      Also, Frosty from Collider said Zack Snyder is making a DCP (Digital Cinema Package) for the movie.

      Could it mean that WB is planning on releasing the Ultimate Edition in theaters?

      • Jimmi

        Dude, I’d be there in a heartbeat for that. I hope its true.

        • O.G. Loc

          Hey, listen. If the movie drops more than 55% its second week. I would seriously consider doing that. If they want to reach that billion that is.

      • SA2

        I will camp in front of the theater the night before. I believe the ultimate cut will be the better version of the movie

  • breakerbaker

    Had they used this scene and taken out the Knightmare scene/Flash vision and the JL cameos, I think the movie would have been measurably better. I still don’t think I would have liked it, because there’s too much about the general plot that I just don’t like, but it would have at least provided a bit more insight in Luthor’s motivation, which the movie desperately needed more than it needed either of the other scenes.

    • Elliot

      Or the Africa sequence and Lois Lane subplot

      • Hinscher

        The Africa scene and Lois Lane were pivotal to the story.
        The African scene served many purposes.
        The first was it again showed Superman and Lois connection.
        It then set up a frame job of Lex on Superman due to events that transpired from his intervention.
        That the frame up job got congressional members more scared of Superman than already, and allowed Lex to import Kryptonite to the states that he found in the Indian Ocean. As well as access to the Kyrptonian ship and Zod’s body.
        It also set up another reason for Batman to want to fight Superman, which Lex is working towards. I’m of the mind that I believe Lex “LET” Batman steal the Kryptonite. You know, let the guy who is planning on kililng Superman have the one weapon that can.
        And Lois is going around figuring all of this out. Being the journalist that she is.

        • Elliot

          I don’t know it felt too complicated it would have been cooler if Batman went there and he investigates Superman and the bullets and then later when he is about to kill Superman the analysis gets done and Alfred helps convincing Bruce that is Lex fault. Also Superman should have gone after Batman because he KILLS people in this movie not because his mom was kidnapped. Sorry for writing so much I’m still in rant mode

          • Hinscher

            So you are upset that Lex played Batman like a fiddle? Is that your problem? You wish all of Lois’s great journalism and character building was instead given to Bruce?

            Superman did not go to kill batman because he kidnapped his mom. In that instance, yes, but if Superman wasn’t dealing with Lex, he would have gone to Batman on his own. He already warned Batman to stop shining the light in the sky. He was already after him for being ruthless.

            The only reason he was ignoring the light shining in the sky was because there was something bigger going on than little old batman. Superman could clearly see the bat signal shining, but had more important things going on.

            And dont’ forget superman first tried to talk to batman. He tried basically until he was hit with Kryptonite and batman started beating on him. At that point he realized there is no talking to this man and was going to start fighting for real, but was then hit again with kyrptonite.

        • Daniel

          Kudos. It’s all there on the screen. People just need to pay attention to it.

          Marvel’s films (which I enjoy) have conditioned some people (particularly critics apparently whose criticisms are almost all easily answered if you were actually paying attention) that they can watch super-hero movies without needing to be fully engaged. Marvel’s films are fun but they’re not particularly complex or challenging.

        • Alejandro Gonzalez

          I agree that the Africa Scene is important. My only problem with it, was that they did not explain or make it more simple for the dumb or average viewer that the “special” bullets were made to look like “laser holes” when they impacted to the object. To me it was clear when Lois sees her journal. It looks like a laser had hit it. I hope they had made that reference more clear. At least thats what i understood after watching the movie. I have heard many people saying “Superman was blame for shooting bullets to people?” and i have to go and explain.

          • Hinscher

            Ah, thanks for the insight.
            I also thought it was dumb that he was blamed for shooting deaths. I had assumed that he was being blamed for cause and effect type of deal.
            You know how Snyder said if he saves a cat someone is mad that the cat later had 100 off spring.
            I thought it was that he was being accused of his interention starting like a civil war type of situation.
            Didn’t see why Lex would risk giving experimental bullets when regular woudl work. But bullets that look like laser holes makes more sense. So it looked like to save Lois he came in and killed like 20 people.

          • Alejandro Gonzalez

            Exactly. Remember the black african lady at the congress? She made it clear that superman killed everybody in the village.

          • Hinscher

            Didn’t really understand what she was saying. It’s one of the scenes I am most anxious to see a second time, cause the first time i couldn’t understand at all what she was saying.
            She said something about a big sonic boom of supermans arrival and then like a ton of people being killed. Assumed she must have been talking about some other people than we saw, cause those were all terrorists that were killed right? So hardly think the U.S. would make a hearing for a lady crying about her dead terrorist husband.

          • Alejandro Gonzalez

            I guess. The thugs of Luthor leave the compound and are shown to be heading into the town. So, so i guess they go kill more. It could be interpreted that way. Or it could be that she was talking about those terrorists. LOL. Remember that the USA can’t just go into Africa and start shooting people, even if they are terrorists. Superman is viewed as a USA symbol. So the wife of an african terrorist could be protesting too. lol. Now we are getting into politics lol.

          • Hinscher

            Yea, one of the comics from the new Earth 1 stories dealt with Superman basically overthrowing some horrible regime.

            Superman realized later he should into do that and apologized. The whole world will fear him if he just up and overthrows and gov he doesn’t like.

            So that scene could be either/or or both easy. Bullets that make it look like he killed him, or just his intervention scaring governments. Some would say this movie does deal greatly with Politics.

          • Alejandro Gonzalez

            It does get into politics and some critics disliked that. I hope they are the same when Captain America Civil War comes out. I am a DC fan, but i also read and have seen every Marvel movie. So, i am not being a Troll against Marvel. I just want them to be equally fair.

          • SAMURAI36

            Yeah, I got the impression that she was either a victim of circumstance, who didn’t see the actual situation herself, and thus opted for what was (in her mind) the simplest explanation (which was that Superman did it), or she was a paid “informant”, intentionally spreading misinformation.

            My interpretation was that they wanted to leave either conclusion open for the viewer.

          • Alejandro Gonzalez

            Yes, she said that she heard the sky cracking open and then the dead were found (something like that). So, yes…she put 2 and 2 together….its superman who did it.

          • SAMURAI36

            I got it immediately.

      • breakerbaker

        I didn’t like that scene either, but it’s too central to the plot given that it reveals (later in the movie) the depth of Luthor’s knowledge about Superman as Clark (as well as his circle). I would have preferred they go in a different direction, one that put more of the focus on Lex and Bruce and even less focus on Clark and his circle (even though the Daily Planet stuff as individual scenes, are some of my favorite bits in the movie).

        I don’t think the movie does enough to really establish Lex as a character. It gives him too many opportunities to monologue, and not enough to interact with other characters.And when he does interact with other characters, nobody likes him, which I think is a problem. I would have preferred that we spend more time with him on the ship, learning about the universe, and I thought the mechanism for creating Doomsday was too easy. I think the script could have really explored where Lex’s xenophobia comes from, as opposed to all of the god talk, which just comes off as campy and too overtly antisocial.

        • Elliot

          Agree

        • SAMURAI36

          I don’t think the movie does enough to really establish Lex as a character. It gives him too many opportunities to monologue, and not enough to interact with other characters.And when he does interact with other characters, nobody likes him, which I think is a problem.

          *SMH*

          When in the entire history of Lex’s character, do you ever see him interacting with more than 1 or 2 people at a time?

          And nobody is supposed to like Luthor, that was the entire point.

          I would have preferred that we spend more time with him on the ship, learning about the universe, and I thought the mechanism for creating Doomsday was too easy. I think the script could have really explored where Lex’s xenophobia comes from, as opposed to all of the god talk, which just comes off as campy and too overtly antisocial.

          So, they should have spilled all the beans in this one movie, is that it?

          • breakerbaker

            1. In other iterations, Lex Luthor is actually quite well liked by other people, which is part of what makes him an effective villain. It’s not just that he has power, that he’s brilliant and manipulative, it’s that he has the capacity to make people like him. This version is a creepy obsessive who’s not particularly concerned with showing his crazy to everyone in every scene in which he appears.

            2. If you ask me, having seen the movie, I’ve been brought over to the belief that it would have been better had they chosen to wait on Doomsday altogether. But if they were going to use Doomsday, I would have preferred that Luthor created him using some of his own ingenuity–and out of the desire to have a check on Superman’s power–only to realize when it was too late that he couldn’t control it. I assumed that it would involve doors being opened by the Kryptonian tech, but I still think it would have been much better if Luthor walked through those doors on his own. When Snyder talked about establishing the mythology for Doomsday, I assumed his origin would be more complicated than Luthor putting Zod’s body into a pool and telling the Kryptonian computer to do something with it. And yes, if Luthor is making a giant unstoppable beast, the movie really does need to let us know if, for instance, Luthor has any control over it. At least under that scenario, we get to presume that he has a plan that goes beyond killing Superman. It doesn’t need to answer every mystery, as it were, but it does need to give the audience something to indicate that he wasn’t simply unleashing an unstoppable killing machine with no plan for what to do when it accomplished killing Superman.

          • SAMURAI36

            I’d say this scene still doesn’t do nearly enough, but it is far more important in the context of the narrative of this particular movie than seeing Wonder Woman open files on the future members of the League.

            Which iterations are those, exactly?

            2. If you ask me, having seen the movie, I’ve been brought over to the belief that it would have been better had they chosen to wait on Doomsday altogether. But if they were going to use Doomsday, I would have preferred that Luthor created him using some of his own ingenuity–and out of the desire to have a check on Superman’s power–only to realize when it was too late that he couldn’t control it. I assumed that it would involve doors being opened by the Kryptonian tech, but I still think it would have been much better if Luthor walked through those doors on his own.

            You mean, precisely what happened in the film?

            When Snyder talked about establishing the mythology for Doomsday, I assumed his origin would be more complicated than Luthor putting Zod’s body into a pool and telling the Kryptonian computer to do something with it.

            Such as….? And you are aware that that’s precisely how Doomsday is made in the most recent iteration in the comics (minus Zod, of course), ye

            And yes, if Luthor is making a giant unstoppable beast, the movie really does need to let us know if, for instance, Luthor has any control over it.

            Except we saw whether he had control over it. It was obvious. Just like it was obvious that his intent was to have control over it. Just like it was also obvious that he was never gonna have control, based on the warning that computer gave him.

            Not sure how else they could’ve spelled all this out, without putting it on a Sesame Street intelligence level.

    • Hinscher

      Lex’s motivations were clear in the movie and very much in line with many interpretations of Lex.

      But I agree this should have been in instead of Dream. This would have explain the Lex ending better to viewers, as I’ve said before the Dream sequence does not fit a stand alone movie well.

      For launching a universe of movies, you would think they would not want to toss in something that is confusing to most viewers.

      • breakerbaker

        Why do you think he creates Doomsday? And what do you think his plan is assuming Doomsday kills Superman and Batman?

        • Seb

          He’s probably working for or being controlled by Darkseid. Darkseid wanted Superman gone and Lex first attempts to do so with Batman and then Doomsday when that plan fails.

          • breakerbaker

            That’s my problem. It’s all based on guesswork, and the only evidence the movie gives for any of his Doomsday motivation is a cryptic line at the very end of the movie.

          • Hinscher

            Guesswork, or discussion.
            The Darkseid stuff is future movies. One does not simply spell out future movies, you hint at them and let your fans guess/speculate/theorize/ect as they wait.

          • SAMURAI36

            OMG, precisely this.

            Unlike other “Cinematic Universes”, the DCEU is meant to keep the audience talking about the films weeks, months, and years from now.

        • Hinscher

          Maybe the vid shows more light, but since at work video don’t work. Couldn’t use sound if did either. But here are some possible reasons solely based on what I saw in the movie.

          1. Lex’s blood being used might give him impression he can control DOomsday to an extent, or at least be immune to him.
          2. Doomsday if he beats Superman is stronger than Superman and thus gives Earth a better chance against Darkseid.
          3. Maybe he has some deal he set up with Darkseid to kill Superman and soften it up for him for some reward.
          4. Lex hates Superman and is willing to create something even more dangerous just to kill superman. Killing superman proves God’s can be killed, Superman is no God, Man can triumph over God. Lex isnt’ wiling to bow to no one, ect. Which this movies outcome did do.

          • breakerbaker

            The video seems to imply that he’s somehow invited Darkseid, which is kind of implied at the end of the movie, but in a way that makes absolutely no sense to the casual viewer. At least this gives some indication of who the “he” is that Lex refers to at the end of the movie.

            As for the question of why Lex would create an untameable beast who is stronger and more vicious than Superman in the hopes that it would kill Superman, and then…the point I’m making is that the movie doesn’t answer this question (as your three hypothetical scenarios illustrate). It acts like it’s not even a question that’s worth asking. Basically, it’s as though this Lex Luthor is an agent of chaos, ala Heath Ledger’s Joker. He doesn’t have a plan. He just wants to screw things up. But that’s not Lex Luthor. So what’s going on? Why is he doing any of this. I don’t think the movie does a good enough job answering that question at any point.

          • SAMURAI36

            The video seems to imply that he’s somehow invited Darkseid, which is kind of implied at the end of the movie, but in a way that makes absolutely no sense to the casual viewer. At least this gives some indication of who the “he” is that Lex refers to at the end of the movie.

            It makes no sense, because that’s not what happened.

            Clearly you must be the “casual viewer”, because nothing you said corresponds to any of the scenes in question.

            In fact, I’m very led to believe that you didn’t really watch the film.

            The Cyborg scene, which showed him merging with a Motherbox, stated that they had a box since 1982. That’s long before Lex ever came across any of this stuff.

            Also, the deleted scene shows a recording of Steppenwolf sending out Motherboxes. The recording is interrupted by the soldiers, and Lex snaps out of the trance (the same trance that Superman was in, during MOS, since that’s how the Kryptonian tech seems to work, on a telepathic level. Incidentally, it’s also why Martian telepathy doesn’t work on Kryptonians).

            As for the question of why Lex would create an untameable beast who is stronger and more vicious than Superman in the hopes that it would kill Superman, and then…the point I’m making is that the movie doesn’t answer this question (as your three hypothetical scenarios illustrate).

            And that’s the whole point: it’s not supposed to. All of this is a mystery to be solved/revealed at a later time. This is typical DC storytelling 101.

            It acts like it’s not even a question that’s worth asking. Basically, it’s as though this Lex Luthor is an agent of chaos, ala Heath Ledger’s Joker. He doesn’t have a plan. He just wants to screw things up. But that’s not Lex Luthor. So what’s going on? Why is he doing any of this. I don’t think the movie does a good enough job answering that question at any point.

            It would perhaps help you to be alot more informed about the stories that this movie draws from. Granted, fans like myself (and others here) are able to use it as a cheat sheet of sorts, and thus the DCEU is about seeing the journey unfold in live action form, but for (-/+) casual fans such as yourself, it seems to be more about the destination, that needs to be wrapped up in a nice little bow.

          • breakerbaker

            I’m sorry but your problem is that you mistake poor storytelling for mystery. Moreover, your rationalization that because you think you know what’s going to happen (I have a pretty good idea myself) as a fan justifies telling a story that is incomprehensible to the larger audience.

            As for Luthor, in the context of this movie, which still has to stand on its own, there is no mystery behind Luthor’s plot. It’s just stupid. Entirely. He decides to try to frame Superman by having his goons murder a bunch of terrorists with guns and prototype bullets. Why that points to Superman is anybody’s guess, but the rest of the movie characters are cool with that. He’s also sending letters to Bruce Wayne that Bruce doesn’t even see until deep into the plot. But even if you want to say that he’s got it in for Bruce Wayne for corporate competitiveness or because the Batman is making some of his shady dealings more complicated, those are just guesses. The movie doesn’t really give us a clue. Likewise, aside from some campy monologues about the nature of power and knowledge and godliness next to goodliness, there’s not a clear indication about what his beef with Superman is. Why they decided to rob him of the initial motivation of needing to have some means to check the powerful is beyond me. It’s clean, and coupled with his xenophobia and his broken narcissism, it would have made him feel like a truer character.

            But then he goes and creates Doomsday, which goes against all capacity for reason. An alien beast that cannot be controlled to defeat the alien “monster/devil” who he doesn’t like for reasons that suddenly make no sense at all. And again, say Doomsday wins, what then? That’s not mystery. It’s a question we are not meant to ask. There are a bunch of those in this movie–like why does Clark care so much about civil liberties in the abstract but violate them on his own and turn a blind eye to the fact that he catches Batman on a straight up murder spree?

            Alas, that’s a question nobody is going to answer in this movie or the next. It’s just not something you’re supposed to think about.

            And while it’s true that this deleted scene is mysterious, it provides some context to the bit at the end, when Luthor is in the cell and shouting about somebody coming. This scene, though mysterious, would provide the general audience with something to go on. And though it’s a less exciting sequence, it serves the plot and the audience so much better than either the Knighmare sequence or the YouTube fan films.

          • SAMURAI36

            I’m sorry but your problem is that you mistake poor storytelling for mystery. Moreover, your rationalization that because you think you know what’s going to happen (I have a pretty good idea myself) as a fan justifies telling a story that is incomprehensible to the larger audience.

            I wasn’t the biggest Watchmen fan, but I was able to keep up with the story. It’s really not that difficult.

            Once again, it’s just the fact that most people need to be handheld thru stuff like this, and you seem to happen to be one of them. Everything you’re asking (if case you haven’t been able to notice, based on people’s responses here–not just mine), is easily answered. Sometimes ridiculously so.

            Here, let me show you:

            As for Luthor, in the context of this movie, which still has to stand on its own, there is no mystery behind Luthor’s plot. It’s just stupid. Entirely. He decides to try to frame Superman by having his goons murder a bunch of terrorists with guns and prototype bullets. Why that points to Superman is anybody’s guess, but the rest of the movie characters are cool with that.

            Someone has already answered how Lois took notice to how the bullets in her journal looked like heat vision burns, rather than conventional bullet-holes.

            Lex is clearly playing the long game.

            And since it really seems that difficult for you to do some research on your own, here’s YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE:

            http://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/12/lexical-analysis-lex-luthor-on-disrupting-the-vigilante-industrial-complex/

            He’s also sending letters to Bruce Wayne that Bruce doesn’t even see until deep into the plot. But even if you want to say that he’s got it in for Bruce Wayne for corporate competitiveness or because the Batman is making some of his shady dealings more complicated, those are just guesses.The movie doesn’t really give us a clue.

            So wait, Lex can find images from 100 years ago of WW, deep in the ocean of Aquaman, in a RIVAL top secret lab of Cyborg, and what was barely a split second in a convenient store of Flash, but he can’t possibly figure out who Batman is?

            Not to mention, as the article above indicates, Lex is the USA’s main military supplier. Therefore, how hard is it for him to use the spy technology that he is providing them, to listen in on military affairs…. Say, such as when the army is using a drone to spy on Superman in MOS, and Superman reveals that he grew up in Kansas?

            As others have been constantly trying to tell you here, and you keep trying to remain willfully ignorant about, it really is all right there in the story.

            Likewise, aside from some campy monologues about the nature of power and knowledge and godliness next to goodliness, there’s not a clear indication about what his beef with Superman is. Why they decided to rob him of the initial motivation of needing to have some means to check the powerful is beyond me. It’s clean, and coupled with his xenophobia and his broken narcissism, it would have made him feel like a truer character.

            You mean, like a character you like? I’m really not sure why we need to see Lex from childhood, in order to fathom why he’d be a xenophobe.

            But here’s a question: what’s your earlier recollection of Lex, in any iteration?

            But then he goes and creates Doomsday, which goes against all capacity for reason. An alien beast that cannot be controlled to defeat the alien “monster/devil” who he doesn’t like for reasons that suddenly make no sense at all.

            You mean, aside from the reason(s) he gave to both senators on 2 separate occasions? Those clearly weren’t good enough for you, for some reason.

            Watch the movie again. I’m betting there’s TONS that you didn’t see, and/or pick up on.

            And again, say Doomsday wins, what then? That’s not mystery. It’s a question we are not meant to ask.

            You mean, this same question you’ve asked already, and others here have already given you the answer?

            Clearly Lex put his DNA in the mix, in hopes of controlling the beast. It didn’t work, obviously, but that doesn’t change the fact that Lex thought it would. Welcome to the wonderful world of mad scientists.

            That’s clearly not a plothole, as you are trying to make it, though. Notice the look on Lex’s face, when DD lashed out at him. If Superman hadn’t stepped in, Lex woulda been a splat on the wall. Not that Lex cares though, for all the reasons you listed.

            There are a bunch of those in this movie–like why does Clark care so much about civil liberties in the abstract but violate them on his own and turn a blind eye to the fact that he catches Batman on a straight up murder spree?

            Which liberties did he violate and turn a blind eye to?

            I saw him stop Batman at the end of that car chase. Not exactly turning a blind eye.

            And Superman isn’t coming close to killing people, let alone branding them. So there’s nothing for him to consider on his own part.

            Alas, that’s a question nobody is going to answer in this movie or the next. It’s just not something you’re supposed to think about.

            We’re not thinking about it, the same way when someone asks you “so what did you do today?” And you don’t answer that you took a crap, and wiped your butt. It’s just a given.

            And while it’s true that this deleted scene is mysterious, it provides some context to the bit at the end, when Luthor is in the cell and shouting about somebody coming. This scene, though mysterious, would provide the general audience with something to go on. And though it’s a less exciting sequence, it serves the plot and the audience so much better than either the Knighmare sequence or the YouTube fan films.

            I don’t know what “Youtube fan films” you’re talking about. But the actual Lex scene, in which he first entered the ship, and interacted with the computer is “plot” enough. The computer told him that there are 1000’s of worlds out there. THEN we see the Knightmare scene, with the GIANT &SS OMEGA SYMBOL in the desert (something that I distinctly recall you and I talking about months ago on here), as well as and THEN we see Cyborg merging with a Mother Box, which his father tells him was acquired decades ago, and THEN we see Lex saying “ding-ding-ding”.

            The deleted scene adds nothing that those FOUR scenes didn’t already establish. Never mind the fact that it’s not even clear who the figure is, and what it’s doing in the scene.

            Why is that somehow preferable to those 4 scenes??

          • JMMagwood

            Goodnight, Samurai. You either have the heart of a warrior, or the patience of a saint! Some lead headed trolls just aren’t worth the effort!

          • SAMURAI36

            Thanx man. I think it’s more of the former, than the latter. Somebody’s gotta fight the good fight. :-)

          • breakerbaker

            I wasn’t the biggest Watchmen fan, but I was able to keep up with the story. It’s really not that difficult.

            Okay. Cool. So long as we’re talking about unrelated stuff, would you like to know what my opinion is of the Cheers series finale?

            Once again, it’s just the fact that most people need to be handheld thru stuff like this, and you seem to happen to be one of them.

            This is what is called a self-serving and self-aggrandizing rationalization. You like the movie–you may even love it. Cool. You may not believe me, but I’m glad that you like it. A lot of people don’t like it. And for a lot of reasons, really. You can’t accept their criticism as valid, so you have to say there’s something wrong with the audience. This is a sign that you’re too emotionally invested in the idea that this movie is great to see things more clearly.

            So wait, Lex can find images from 100 years ago of WW, deep in the ocean of Aquaman, in a RIVAL top secret lab of Cyborg, and what was barely a split second in a convenient store of Flash, but he can’t possibly figure out who Batman is?

            As is always the case with you, we fall almost instantly into the realm of pure dishonesty. Nobody said anything about whether Luthor should be able to figure out who Batman is. The point is that it’s completely unclear what his beef with Batman/Bruce Wayne is. Is it corporate competitiveness (as Eisenberg implies in some interviews) or is it more specifically about Batman making shady dealings more complicated?

            Which liberties did he violate and turn a blind eye to?

            Whatever your perspective on a casually homicidal Batman is, that car chase that Superman puts an end to is a murder spree. It’s not just a murder spree. It’s a murder spree that Batman is committing in the process of trying to commit another crime–he’s not even fighting crime. He’s trying to rip off smugglers. And Superman lets him off with a warning, and then doesn’t do anything to help Batman’s victims. This is a guy who is supposedly very upset with Batman for branding criminals, but those concerns are apparently purely abstract concerns because when he’s confronted with a situation of catching Batman red handed while killing a bunch of guys, he does nothing but wreck the Batmobile and tell him not to do it again.

            I don’t know what “Youtube fan films” you’re talking about.

            Sorry, I thought it was self-evident that the JL cameos felt like a bunch of fan-made shorts.

            THEN we see the Knightmare scene, with the GIANT &SS OMEGA SYMBOL in the desert (something that I distinctly recall you and I talking about months ago on here), as well as and THEN we see Cyborg merging with a Mother Box, which his father tells him was acquired decades ago, and THEN we see Lex saying “ding-ding-ding”.

            You do understand that, for probably 90 percent of the audience this movie is trying to reach, the Omega symbol means absolutely nothing, right? They don’t know what a mother box is. Most of them don’t even know who Cyborg is. All of these things feel like a collection of disconnect scenes. And the problem with the Knightmare scene is that it’s completely incomprehensible about how or even if it fits into the narrative of the movie. Even the Flash cameo is compromised by the fact that he shows up inside a waking dream as opposed to when Bruce is clearly awake. (Note: I assume the later movies will tell us that Bruce’s proximity to the portal opened by the speed force triggered a prophetic vision his conscious mind interpreted as a dream, or something, but that’s just bad storytelling that relies on far too much foreknowledge for a movie that’s designed to reach a broad audience.)

            The deleted scene adds nothing that those FOUR scenes didn’t already establish.

            I completely disagree. The deleted scene at the very least reminds the audience that Lex is gaining knowledge that goes beyond the ancient and forbidden cloning processes of Krypton. Without this scene, we see no real evidence of that, so when he starts spouting off at the end, most of the audience is at a loss as to what he’s talking about. I’d say this scene still doesn’t do nearly enough, but it is far more important in the context of the narrative of this particular movie than seeing Wonder Woman open files on the future members of the League.

          • SAMURAI36

            Okay. Cool. So long as we’re talking about unrelated stuff, would you like to know what my opinion is of the Cheers series finale?

            And he calls me intellectually dishonest….

            So let’s try it this way: Unless Cheers:

            1) Was directed by the same person that directed BVS;

            2) Is a comic book property;

            3) Received a controversial rating,

            Then that was totally pointless of you to mention. Especially when you knew my mentioning Watchmen was meant to be correlative.

            This is what is called a self-serving and self-aggrandizing rationalization. You like the movie–you may even love it. Cool. You may not believe me, but I’m glad that you like it. A lot of people don’t like it. And for a lot of reasons, really. You can’t accept their criticism as valid, so you have to say there’s something wrong with the audience. This is a sign that you’re too emotionally invested in the idea that this movie is great to see things more clearly.

            It would really behoove you to refrain from making admonishments that you yourself are guilty of. Or don’t, makes no diff to me.

            Moreover, here’s the issue with what you just said: Most of the complaints (the lion’s share being “it lacks humor/it’s not like Marvel”) are easily explained. Especially the ones you’ve tendered here.

            I just saw the film for the 4th time yesterday. This time, my intent (besides enjoying it immensely) is looking for the flaws/plotholes that you and others keep trying to point out.

            The only thing I could honestly come up with, is the Batman killing issue. He is definitely guilty of manslaughter, but for me, it’s not an issue, because this is based on the story of a Batman that kills. You may have an issue with that, and that’s fine, but you can NOT say that there is no precedent for it.

            As is always the case with you, we fall almost instantly into the realm of pure dishonesty. Nobody said anything about whether Luthor should be able to figure out who Batman is. The point is that it’s completely unclear what his beef with Batman/Bruce Wayne is. Is it corporate competitiveness (as Eisenberg implies in some interviews) or is it more specifically about Batman making shady dealings more complicated?

            Dude, stop with the “dishonesty” nonsense. It was simply a matter of misreading what you wrote the first time.

            But to answer your question now, why is it so difficult to piece both examples you gave together, and come up with your own answer? This is not some earth-shattering, mind-boggling subplot. It was painfully obvious in the film.

            Whatever your perspective on a casually homicidal Batman is, that car chase that Superman puts an end to is a murder spree. It’s not just a murder spree. It’s a murder spree that Batman is committing in the process of trying to commit another crime–he’s not even fighting crime. He’s trying to rip off smugglers. And Superman lets him off with a warning, and then doesn’t do anything to help Batman’s victims. This is a guy who is supposedly very upset with Batman for branding criminals, but those concerns are apparently purely abstract concerns because when he’s confronted with a situation of catching Batman red handed while killing a bunch of guys, he does nothing but wreck the Batmobile and tell him not to do it again.

            First, we don’t know what Superman did after he stopped Batman, because it cut to another scene directly after.

            Second, I was under the impression that Superman was there because Batman was there, not necessarily to stop what Batman was actually doing there. Otherwise, why didn’t Superman just yank Batman off the crane when he was standing up there for who knows how long? Or at any point during that entire scene?

            Third, you are aware of the difference between manslaughter and murder, yes?

            Sorry, I thought it was self-evident that the JL cameos felt like a bunch of fan-made shorts.

            Is this an example of the “self-serving and self-aggrandizing rationalization” that you mentioned?

            I’m just asking; it becomes increasingly difficult to keep up with which rules apply to you, and which don’t.

            You do understand that, for probably 90 percent of the audience this movie is trying to reach, the Omega symbol means absolutely nothing, right? They don’t know what a mother box is. Most of them don’t even know who Cyborg is. All of these things feel like a collection of disconnect scenes. And the problem with the Knightmare scene is that it’s completely incomprehensible about how or even if it fits into the narrative of the movie.

            So for clarity’s sake, which side of the audience equation are you on, exactly… The casual, ignorant audience (who clearly doesn’t have enough of a brain, according to you), or the one that’s knowledgeable about this stuff?

            Because you seem to want to toggle the fence between the two positions here.

            Clearly the Knightmare scene is a dream sequence, since we clearly see Bruce, you know…. Wake up from it. Not to mention, We don’t see bug-like aliens anywhere else in the movie, or troops kneeling down to Superman.

            It’s really not as incomprehensible as you are trying to make it out to be.

            For those that know nothing about the Omega symbol, so what? When Thanos appeared at the end of Avengers, the general audience didn’t know who he was either. They never even said his name till a whole 4 movies later, and even then, he didn’t have a consequential role.

            But somehow, showing the Omega symbol ruined this movie, right? Got it.

            Once again, the purpose of this movie is to set up other movies. Despite what you seem to think, this is something that I’m pretty certain that at least 75% of the general audience is quite well aware of. And I dare say it did that in a far superior manner than Marvel has done in their nearly 2 dozen films.

            the Flash cameo is compromised by the fact that he shows up inside a waking dream as opposed to when Bruce is clearly awake. (Note: I assume the later movies will tell us that Bruce’s proximity to the portal opened by the speed force triggered a prophetic vision his conscious mind interpreted as a dream, or something, but that’s just bad storytelling that relies on far too much foreknowledge for a movie that’s designed to reach a broad audience.)

            So wait, you can make the assumption that later movies will explain something, but the dumb audience can’t. Why is that even your cross to bear? Especially when, unless the entire 75% of the audience that enjoyed this film are hardcore DC fans, then you are making the exact opposite assumption that you claim I was making.

            Also, here’s a bit of DC trivia for you…. After watching the film yet again, I came to realize that the Flash scene was not a dream sequence. It was live. And, it was not the Speed Force, but rather a Boom Tube. The reason I know it was actually happening, is because of the papers that were flying around the room of Bruce’s cave, right as he was waking up.

            And, before you to try to pick that apart as something nonsensical, Boom Tubes can have a psychological effect on both the person traveling thru it, as well as the person(s) on the other end.

            I completely disagree. The deleted scene at the very least reminds the audience that Lex is gaining knowledge that goes beyond the ancient and forbidden cloning processes of Krypton. Without this scene, we see no real evidence of that, so when he starts spouting off at the end, most of the audience is at a loss as to what he’s talking about.

            Ah yes, because the general audience clearly suffers from ADD, to the point where they will have forgotten that Lex said “teach me everything”, and the next couple of scenes later, when Lex is STILL talking to the computer, and the computer it STILL telling it about Krypton’s history.

            And you say I’m condescending.

            Besides, Lex already had knowledge of the Motherbox, based on the Cyborg scene. All he’s doing, is putting pieces to the puzzle together at this point.

            I’d say this scene still doesn’t do nearly enough, but it is far more important in the context of the narrative of this particular movie than seeing Wonder Woman open files on the future members of the League.

            For someone that claims to understand the nature of these “Cinematic Universe” movies, you sure are ready to suck every bit of fun out of them. We’ve been getting easter eggs and hints about the greater DCU since MOS.

            Not to mention, Marvel has been giving their audience easter eggs since their very first MCU film. But somehow DC isn’t supposed to do this???

            You have to pardon me (or don’t, makes no diff to me) when I place you in the category of the biased DC haters.

    • Hinscher

      I believe this is one of those Age of Ultron goofs. You know the Thor Hot Tub Time Machine.
      In Age of Ultron, they should have kept that scene in tact, or cut it completely. If in tact, shorten the Farmhouse stuff.
      In this movie, they should have cut the dream sequence and kept this in tact.

      For best theater viewing, I think they should have had Bruce start to fall asleep like he did watching it de-encrypt and then straight to Flash scene warning him. Then use this scene showing Darkseid leutenant.

      In the extended you can put in the whole cool dream scene, but for purely stand alone film, it works better imo without it. Just as the Thor Hot tub might help set up future movies, it’s super strange in the movie Ultron.

      • SAMURAI36

        The thing is, BVS was never intended as a stand-alone film. At least, not the “DOJ” part. The “BVS” aspect is a done-in-one. But everything else is clearly prelude.

        • breakerbaker

          Every successful film stands on its own.

          • SAMURAI36

            Transformers 5 stands on its own? That film was successful.

          • breakerbaker

            I wouldn’t know, as I haven’t seen it. I suspect that as a story it isn’t filled with a bunch of holes that its defenders have to resort to make empty promises about how the movie will make sense once you’ve seen half a dozen other movies that follow. So yeah, even assuming it’s a terrible movie (which I do), I’ll bet that movie stands on its own. But I think you understood that I wasn’t talking about financial success.

    • SAMURAI36

      LMAO, that’s soooo ridiculous.

  • JoeyandVero Cortés Colón

    Yep that’s Steppenwolf, general of Darkseid army. For people that know the comic history, we all know that Darkseid sent his foot soldiers to earth to set the stage for his arrival. In comics and in the cartoons and even in smallville, Darkseid always sent Glorious Godfrey and Desaad to earth to give humans their technology (MotherBox,weapons) and recruit them for their world invasion.This explains that scene with Silas Stone the father of Cyborg (Victor Stone) when he says that S.T.A.R Labs found a MotherBox in 1982. So that means that Darkseid foot soldiers have already been on earth.

    Also to address the confusion of how does Lex know about Darkseid, well right after he enters Kara Zor-El ship (Yep that’s not Zod’s ship), the kryptonian robot says to Lex that the ship has records of many other worlds and that apparently includes Apokolips. That’s way I love this movie :) Because I see the amount of dedication to the real history of the DC Universe that Zack has put into this first 2 movie. I can also see why people are lost and don’t understand what they are seeing. But as the movie points out in the first few minutes of the movie “Ignorence is not the same as Innocence” 😉

    • Hinscher

      Ignorence is not the same as Innocence.
      Anyone else feel like that applies to half the reviews/complaints. I’m all for having an honest discussion with one who dislikes the movie, but I feel like I”m spending half my time correcting someone who dislikes it or pointing out how the movie did in fact address that very issue, or tell you flat out what you are asking.
      Apparently DC needs to dumb down their movies.

      • Jimmi

        That’s the problem for critics. DC refuses to dumb down their movies. Instead, they chose to go ahead with the DC comics lore et mythos, which is confusing for critics since they don’t know much about it. I loved the movie, despite some of its flaws, because I understood the references and comic book lore involved. Whereas, most critics don’t know much about the comics and judge purely on what they see, without inferring to some facts from the comics, something that us fans can do, to enjoy the movie. Also, the fans that didn’t like the movie had some preconceived notions as to what they wanted out of the movie and what WB did was to setup future movies, while focusing more or less on Batman and Superman. So, most fans didn’t like that, but I hope that they can appreciate the world that is being built, despite their disinterest in the movie.

        • Daniel

          I mostly agree with you. Where I differ is that viewers really don’t need much prior knowledge of the original comics to understand this movie. Everything you need to understand it is actually right there in the film if you’re paying attention OR it’s foreshadowing something in a future chapter that you’re not supposed to understand yet, only be intrigued by until it’s revealed later.

          Like I’ve said in other forums, DC is playing the long game on this, designing their films so that they’ll play exceptionally well later on when the entire 11 chapter DCEU series is binge watched in a long weekend (which is where these films will have the longest shelf life). This is where I think Marvel falls short since binge re-watching their films is (with few exceptions) kind of a chore (did someone say “Thor”?). Not that the Marvel films aren’t entertaining, but they are very ephemeral and don’t have much lasting power. I think DC is aiming higher than that.

          • Jimmi

            I agree. Everything was there when you watch it, but one showing isnt enough, since there were many scenes deleted from the theatrical cut. Critics and most of the general audience only watch it once and thats why confusion ensues. The deleted scene shown today is proof of how much better of a movie this can be if the deleted scenes are there.

        • JMMagwood

          Some fans, some fans didn’t like it. Most do, from cinemascore, and other sources.

      • JMMagwood

        Full agreement. I’m exhausted with having these arguments with people who just didn’t watch the movie, or didn’t pay attention. The worst are those goofs who determined that these characters must act in ways they’ve determined, or they hated the movie. I’d rather discuss the movie with the many who enjoyed it, instead of poisonous diatribes with those who hated it because of their own odd prejudices.

        • JNAZ

          Absolutely agree. I especially hate the critics who over analyze the movie. “Lex should’ve done this”, “Louis should’ve said this”, “Superman should’ve done this with the spear”, yada yada yada. Critics should give their opinions on the movie, not tell Terrio how to write the script nor Snyder how to direct the film.

      • SA2

        How about we ignore those that still want to hate the movie and talk about what will happen next regarding the universe with or without zack? because the most interesting part right now is the way he sets up the universe. there is so much to talk about instead of keep hating of how bad the movie is. I loved the movie personally. yes, it has many flaws. some scenes didn’t make sense but my point we talk about good stuffs that had been showed to us. come on guys! the past is the past

        • SAMURAI36

          I really wish I could do that. However, I’ve found that stupidity goes viral if left unchecked.

      • JNAZ

        All these critics are so used to the Disney-fied Marvel superhero movies that when they saw DC’s darker, deeper, dramatic tone, they don’t know what to make of it. I love a comparison that I heard from a review podcast the other day (cant remember which one), Marvel movies are “Rush Hour” while DC movies are “Lethal Weapon’.

  • Torhammer

    Yep that is definitely SteppenWolf and man do i hope that we get to see Granny Goodness and the Furies and of lets not forget Kalibak. I luv that DC is staying true to the comics and not sugar coating it. Bring on DarkSeid!

    • Mohd Nazri

      I’m Batman!! 😀

  • jollybrah

    Amazing deleted scene. Both answered and raised more questions about the movie in a good way. I can’t wait to watch the Ultimate edition if the quality of the deleted scenes is at this level.