After years of waiting, the historic clash between two of the world's most iconic superheroes has made it to the big screen; Zack Snyder's "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice" hit theaters this weekend. But the real question isn't who is the winner, it's does the film live up to the tremendous hype it has gotten since it was announced three years ago?

My answer to that question is definitely a no, but that doesn't mean it was necessarily a horrible film. As it stands, there are a lot of problems with this film, and it fails in the sense that it tries to pack multiple movies into one. There is so much going on that even the two and a half hour runtime feels like it needs an extension. The editing is so quick and sloppy that I found myself getting confused as to what was going on several times throughout. One second, Batman will be in the Batcave preparing for a fight, the next second he's on a building, and all of a sudden Superman is there, right along with him. The absurdly speedy pacing of this film makes it hard to absorb anything, and I left the theater feeling like an over-soaked sponge.

To point out a positive, most of the cinematography was stunning. IMAX made it easy to really appreciate the dark world Snyder has created for his heroes. However, this further continues my argument that Zack Snyder is all style over substance. He can make a movie look pretty, but cannot tell a quality story by any means, and I personally think the upcoming "Justice League" films need to reconsider his inclusion in the growing DCU.

The best of the many rushed plots in the movie surrounds Ben Affleck's ("Argo'") Batman. First of all, I am thrilled with the choice to skip over the majority of Batman's origin story since we've seen that on screen several times already. However, even without backstory, Snyder still tries to smash in a full story about an older and hardened vigilante with a thirst for vengeance against Superman. This could have been so entertaining and intriguing if this storyline became a movie about just Batman vs. Superman, but the cramming of unnecessary and sometimes bizarre extra elements are what dragged this movie down.

The massive destruction of Metropolis at the end of "Man of Steel" was the center of criticism against the film. Snyder does do a great job showing that the excessive damage and lives lost wasn't just to showcase the effects budget, but a serious issue in "Batman vs. Superman" that is a driving point for the question of, "Do we need a Superman?" However, as I said above, this storyline could also have, and should have, been an entirely different movie. This would have been a perfect story for a "Man of Steel 2," which has been announced as not happening as of now. Instead, we get bits and pieces of what could have been an intriguing film about Superman's taking responsibility, and this subplot is unsatisfactory and boring because Gal Gadot ("Furious 6") also really fit into her role as Wonder Woman. Though her screen time is not ample, I was convinced of her ability to play this Amazonian

princess in the time she was give. She is able to demonstrate how powerful and essential she is as a member of the Justice League, and I can't wait to see what else she has to offer to the DCU.

Even though Jesse Eisenberg's ("The Social Network") Lex Luthor left me with a bad taste in my mouth, I see a future in his portrayal of the role. He was way too childish and whimsical from the start, but towards the end, I definitely saw points in which his character can grow into a more brooding and serious villain in future DC movies.

There's a lot more I'd love to criticize, and a few more positive parts, but unlike this film, I'm not going to try and overpack this article. My final thoughts are that this is a movie that people will like, and people will hate. I'm not on either side, but I walked out feeling horrible about some parts and great about others. In the end, I'm still excited to see what DC can do with this universe. I just hope it's better than Snyder's last two attempts.