There are times a film appears to hit a buzzsaw of emotions and reactions and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (BvS from here on) has certainly done so.

Like many, when I first heard of the film being made I was excited.  When the first images were released a year or so ago showing an armored Batman on a rooftop and a dark, shadowy Superman floating above him, I was giddy with excitement.

The film’s release was highly anticipated because both Superman and Batman -not to mention Wonder Woman!- are characters who are by now so ingrained in our society and so beloved (for the most part) that its difficult to find someone who a) doesn’t know who the characters are or b) isn’t at least a tiny bit interested in seeing movies featuring them.

As the movie’s release approached, however, it appeared audiences had already taken sides as to how the film was going to be.  There is -and remains- a very vocal group who gave up on the film when they heard Zach Snyder was back in the director’s seat.  Let’s be clear: I can understand those who have sampled Mr. Snyder’s work and don’t like it being suspicious as to whether he can pull off this -or any- film.  If what he’s done before hasn’t appealed to you, its understandable you view any new work with suspicion.

Those who were most vocal in that suspicion -if not were outright hostile- to BvS were also those who didn’t like the film this is a sequel to, 2013’s Zach Snyder directed Man of Steel.

The reaction to Man of Steel was split, to be polite.  Some hated the film outright while others loved it.  Still others liked parts of the film yet one commonality seemed to appear: People were turned off by the amount of destruction presented in that film’s climax.

It was this climax and its apparent cavalier way of showing a large city reduced to rubble that for many was simply too much.  With that much destruction, the loss of human life had to great, and Superman and the characters around him appeared obvious to this loss in the movie’s closing minutes.

To the makers of BvS’ credit, they acknowledged the strong reactions and, in my mind very cleverly, decided to face this head on with this movie.  In fact, not only was their focus on this, but so too were the makers of the upcoming Captain America: Civil War, which to my eyes (now that I’ve seen BvS), appears to be their take on the exact same thing…

So last week BvS was finally released and the critical reaction was -there is no way to sugar coat this- terrible.  Over at rottentomatoes.com, the film opened with a dismal 11% approval rating before climbing to 41% and then settling down (as of today) to a 29% approval among critics.  Audiences, however, give the film a far better 73% approval.

I have to admit, the wave of hostility toward the film and the critical reaction worried me.  With this many critics panning the film, would it turn out to be a bust?

Still, I was eager to see it.  The film’s trailers, for the most part, were enjoyable and I loved the visuals presented.  Like so many others I love the characters of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman and seeing them together in a movie, even if the movie turns out not to be very good, was something I had to do.

Yesterday, at the very earliest showing (9:30 AM!) I did just that.  To my surprise, I wasn’t alone.  Despite the very early hour, the theater was easily 1/2 to 3/4s full.  I sat back and forced my mind into neutral.  I wanted/hoped this film was good even as I feared the critics were right and it would prove to be a big disappointment.

I won’t keep you in suspense any longer: In my opinion, this is a damn good film.

No, BvS isn’t “perfect.”  There is some choppiness to the storytelling which, I suspect, might have to do with the fact this version of the film, which runs a very long two and a half hours, was nonetheless cut down from a 3 plus hour “director’s cut.”  (That version is scheduled for release to home video on July 16 and I for one am eager to see it)

Still, I stand by what I said:  I liked the film quite a bit and can’t help but dispute some of the critics and their negatives.

For instance, BvS opens with a retelling of the Batman “origin” story.  You know the drill, after leaving a movie, Thomas and Martha Wayne, along with a very young Bruce Wayne, are confronted by a mugger.  Thomas and Martha Wayne are killed and young Bruce Wayne is traumatized and this is what “makes” him Batman.

While I can see why people bemoan the retelling of this story, I think they missed why it was retold.  To begin, the retelling is quick, but secondly, and more importantly, it lays down the Batman we know before giving him his second origin story.

For the Batman presented in BvS is very cleverly, very subtlety, not the Batman we are familiar with to this point.

This is a Batman who witnesses and is traumatized by the destruction of Metropolis as presented in Man of Steel.  He personally sees the destruction and the deaths of so many people (many he knows) and this rattles Batman/Bruce Wayne to the point where he becomes, as Alfred (a spot on, absolutely delightful Jeremy Irons) states, “cruel”.

Understand, the Batman we see here is in a fever state.  He’s off his game and very flawed, locked in on the goal of ridding the world of the danger he feels Superman represents.  The more rational Batman we are accustomed to would have realized certain things were occurring and manipulations were being made but because of his rage, this Batman misses them…until it’s almost too late.

I realize I’m talking about subtlety in a film that prides itself in showing “big booms” but its there.

Superman, likewise, is also presented as being in a state of flux.  He is new to this game and also grappling with the destruction caused at the end of Man of Steel.  He knows he saved humanity, but at his core he also realizes salvation came with a steep price.  As much good as he tries to do, will humanity ever fully embrace him and will he always be presented with unintended consequences resulting from his actions?

There has been much scorn heaped upon Jessie Eisenberg’s portrayal of Lex Luthor and, once again, my feelings lie opposite to those who criticize his portrayal.  Then again, I’m one of those weirdos who loved Gene Hackman’s version of Lex Luthor in the first Superman film.  Mr. Hackman presented a man who at times appears to be a buffoon but when all that superficiality is stripped from him he’s revealed to be a deadly beast with very sharp teeth.

This appears to be the philosophy behind Mr. Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor.  While outwardly geeky and, perhaps, a little “out there” at his core this Lex Luthor is a much, much darker version of Bruce Wayne.  Unlike Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent, Lex Luthor is not an orphan.  In fact, he speaks of his father and notes the man was a “monster”.  It is a combination of his father’s cruelty and, if one reads between the lines, the same destruction witnessed at the end of Man of Steel that has driven him very much over the edge.  Like Bruce Wayne, he too is locked in on the idea of destroying Superman for the good of mankind.  Unlike Bruce Wayne, he was always a cruel individual and this has only given him a focus for his evil.

Thus, the set up is there.  Superman is the target and Lex Luthor is the ultimate manipulator, moving pieces/people into place to create a confrontation between Superman and Batman.  And if Batman can’t do the job, Luthor has a backup plan in place…

I’ll stop there and not spoil any more of the film.  However, before I go, let me add one last thing: I loved Gal Gidot’s Wonder Woman.  Though her role within this feature amounted to an extended cameo, her take on the character made me really eager to see her further exploits.  She was cool and mysterious and powerful and, like the best versions of Wonder Woman, absolutely did not shy away from battle.

Though I’m skeptical of this version of the Flash (I love the TV show), I’ll end it with this:

Bring on the Justice League!