"Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice" was probably one of the most anticipated movies of 2016. It was slated to be the DC universe's response to the unprecedented success of the rival Marvel Cinematic Universe. With the groundwork set in the form of Henry Cavil and Ben Affleck as the titular roles, DC was prepped to launch a movie dynasty that would result in the remainder of the Justice League receiving a long anticipated theatrical debut. On the 25^th of March, the film finally hit theaters. And it was terrible.

This is not an opinion held by myself alone; while in the hope of full disclosure, it is my personal opinion in addition to the presiding sentiment. The Rotten Tomatoes’ score reached a depressing low of 33 percent and the audience score was not much better. The box-office reveled in its success despite the consistently abysmal reviews, and why wouldn’t it? Who isn’t going to see a movie that promises we’re going to see two legends of pop culture brawl on a truly grand stage? The film had everything going for it: hype, legacy, fan base, cast (debatably), and all helmed by the man who brought us the indie superhero flick "Watchman" and the truly epic "300" movie. What happened? Who’s to blame? I’m not going to try to point fingers, however, Zack Snyder was most likely the driving force behind the misconceptions about what makes a good movie that plagued this endeavor and significantly at fault. Wow, I tried and immediately failed at not pointing fingers. Zack, this is your fault.

After reading and watching multiple interviews with Mr. Snyder, the aforementioned helmsman of this battleship-sized movie, I am forced to come to the conclusion that he has a fundamental misconception concerning filmmaking. This is not meant to be a witch hunt or a critique of Snyder’s whole career, but with the premiere of this film he has fairly, solidly solidified himself as the symbol of a truly frustrating Hollywood trend. That is, the trend of being more concerned with putting pretty pictures on the screen than concerned with telling a story well.

The diametric quality of "Batman V. Superman" is confusing to some. The complete imbalance between content and presentation is clearer in this film than in most recent blockbusters. I believe it is because while most summer blockbusters are somewhat self-aware in their mindlessness, this movie masquerades its sorry derivative plot as worthwhile content. It is true that every scene is spectacularly lit, framed, and shot, but the arrangement, pacing, and general weaving of multiple story lines is abysmal. Scenes sprint into one another with nary an establishing shot in sight.

Characters are given little motivation and what motivation is forced upon us is unsatisfying at best. The character of Lex Luther is not present in the man who answers to his name, Lois Lane is giving little to nothing to do once again, and the repetitive Superman = Jesus imagery is nearly as stale as communion crackers themselves. For a movie that boasts Superman as half of the action, he commands the majority of screen time and wastes most of it. Ben Affleck’s Batman, however, is very nearly worth the price of admission. Snyder’s epic vision is certainly on the scale deserving the term, but I believe he may have been so unnecessarily preoccupied with ensuring his vision was epic he never stopped to consider what it was a vision of, or if it was even worth envisioning. From this film, I can say for certain I am much more excited for a Ben Affleck-directed Batman than I am for a Zack Snyder-directed Justice League. Like they say, making a mistake once is a chance to learn, making the same mistake over and over again is merely indicative of an unteachable individual.