Warning: Major Spoilers

The highly anticipated “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” has hit theaters, and fans are eagerly waiting to watch bad production decisions be played out in a movie.

Warner Bros.’ (WB) attempt to give Marvel a run for its money with its own cinematic universe of DC Comics vigilantes began with the nauseating “Man of Steel.”

Director Zack Snyder has returned to tell the second part of Superman’s story, with the same mistakes, same boring action and same complete disregard for character motivation.

As it is with most movies, even bad ones, there are still great things to mention.

Despite my mixed reactions, everyone should see this in theater for its visual splendor.

First, the good: Ben Affleck as the new Batman is stunning. Every fanboy in the world became enraged when it was announced that he was going to be cast to play the Caped Crusader in the Warner Bros.’ new universe.

What the fans forgot is that Affleck, unlike Snyder, learned from the mistakes of his early career. Since 2007, Affleck has redefined his place in Hollywood, becoming an acclaimed director and screenwriter and having decent acting chops in movies where he controls the production process.

In “Batman v Superman,” Affleck’s Batman is the only character with a clear purpose and motivation. With this version of Batman, Bruce Wayne has been in the game for 20 years. Affleck delivers the sense that he has seen the very worst of humanity. For this story, he sees the very worst of something beyond humanity — the alien known as Superman.

The fight between the two titans is a lot of fun. Though it is short, it is intense and exciting. It will have you on the edge of your seat, even if the setup to the fight does not make sense.

Gal Gadot, famous for her terrible acting skills in the “Fast and Furious” series, surprisingly gave Wonder Woman the credibility fans have always wanted. Wonder Woman as a character works perfectly in this movie. Much to the film’s advantage, Gadot is given very little dialogue and is really there just to play Wonder Woman and not much else.

The other good element of “Batman v Superman” is the visuals. Snyder as a director creates gorgeous scenarios and knows how to use props, unusual angles and lightning to his advantage. Insignificant things speak a thousand words in all of his shots. Unfortunately, even with all the visuals, there is very little substance behind it.

Next, the bad: The crew behind this collection of Superman movies still does not understand how to write a Superman movie. In both “Batman v. Superman” and “Man of Steel,” Superman comes off as an arrogant brat who really does not care for the world around him unless he happens to be in the neighborhood.

Even in the moments when Snyder attempts to show Superman as a hero, it is shot in such a heavy, brooding way that it is uninspiring. Superman is supposed to be the yang to the ying of Batman.

He is supposed to say corny dialogue like, “Hold it there, criminal!” or “Justice will always prevail!”

Sure, Superman can have depth, he might even lose a few battles, but his character has to be above certain things like, “I really don’t care what people think,” or “There really is no good in the world.” These lines cripple the film, but Henry Cavill delivers them as best as he can, to the point that audiences just think it is a different version of Superman.

The same can be said about Batman. While it is true that the original version of the character in the ’40s used guns and often killed his criminals, comic books since then have created an ideological dilemma around him. It is good that Batman sees Superman as a threat to humanity, but when Batman ends up killing people with no disregard for the lives he is meant to be saving, a disservice is being done to the character we all know and love. He also becomes a hypocrite within his own narrative.

Another thing that is bad are the supporting characters. Lois Lane, played by Amy Adams, is again shoehorned in here for no reason. Her character becomes involved in situations around Superman, for no other point besides she knows who Superman really is. Adams does the best with what she’s given to perform, but her character is a throw-away.

Jessie Eisenberg plays Lex Luthor in “Batman v. Superman,” the arch-enemy of Superman, who dreams of taking down gods and demons from the skies. Eisenberg still clings to that zany, eccentric angle of acting and it comes off as strange and laughable.

Luthor as a character has to be collected, in control of his emotions and words and have an ultimate goal. Snyder reported over the weekend that actor Bryan Cranston was considered for the role and WB proved again that missed opportunities cost them a quality film.

Aside from Batman and Wonder Woman, there is very little depth presented to the characters other than a vague threat of the world being destroyed. Everything builds up to the point that Superman is put on trial for his part in destroying Metropolis and it completely ruins his character that has been so loved for decades by fans.

With ‘Batman v Superman,’ humanity comes to a point of wanting to exile Superman, rather than being universally inspired by his presence. All everyone has to say to Superman is, “No thanks, we don’t need you destroying our planet,” and that should never be an option in a Superman movie.

The editing and pacing of this movie is atrocious. “Batman v Superman” offers a thousand opportunities to give these characters depth, but fails at almost every turn. Just when a reason is to be given as to why characters are acting the way they are, the story cuts to something completely unrelated and fails to answer numerous questions. When a film makes the audience go “Huh?” or “What?” it is usually not a good sign.

I understand wanting to be non-linear in telling a visual narrative, but a theme or a question is supposed to ignite an elongated sequence that answers that question or justifies that theme. None of that is here in this movie. Characters just pose a problem with no resolution. Even with the illusion of saving the day, “Batman v Superman” leaves Metropolis in the same place as “Man of Steel” did. The city is entirely leveled, and there is nothing to be excited about for the future of DC films.

The final nail in the coffin is the forced setup for the Justice League movie. Unlike Marvel, WB does not understand pacing a franchise. “The Avengers” was such a successful movie because the films that preceded it explained one character in one film at a time.

So many components of the DC Universe are shoved into this movie and it results in a bloated mess. You have the introduction and complete story of Batman, Superman dealing with Metropolis wanting to put him in prison, Wonder Woman coming to play, Lex Luthor doing childish things, a callback to General Zod from “Man of Steel,” questions about gods versus humans and the introduction of the Justice League all packed into a two and a half hour headache.

“Batman v Superman” should have been about Batman and Superman. What we get instead is a jigsaw puzzle that is put into its basic rectangular shape, but none of the individual pieces are properly aligned.

Share