This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Ben Affleck, left, and Henry Cavill in a scene from "Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice".

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Rated T)
Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Gal Gadot, Jesse Eisenberg
Genre: Action Adventure Fantasy
Dwight's Rating: 2.5 stars

The good news: It's better than my extremely low expectations could have imagined.

The bad news: It's nowhere near as good as it could have been!

That's my take on the heavily promoted new blockbuster "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice".

I went into this movie expecting the worst. Regular readers of this column know I am quite sick-and-tired of the seemingly endless and repetitive parade of comic book-based superhero movies.

Additionally, and most importantly, I was none too thrilled with the thought of two of the greatest superheroes -- supposedly the good guys -- going up against each other. (And we can expect even more of that foolishness in this month's "Captain America: Civil War", with the titular hero and some of the Avengers warring with Iron Man and the rest of the Avengers. Oh joy!)

Thankfully, the reasons for the battle here are reasonably well explained. Other issues, however, are not so effectively resolved. The story is set two years after Superman (Henry Cavill) had a colossal battle with his enemy General Zod from his home planet Krypton. As they are two super-beings with only one weakness (kryptonite), the city of Metropolis is almost completely destroyed in the wake of their fighting.

The loss of life and collateral damage has left many feeling angry and helpless, including crime-fighting billionaire Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck). Convinced that Superman is now a threat to humanity, Batman embarks on a personal vendetta to end his reign on Earth, while the conniving Alexander "Lex" Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) launches his own crusade against the Man of Steel.

"Batman v Superman" is a direct sequel to "Man of Steel", the 2013 film starring Cavill that featured that epic battle that has earned Superman the ire of Batman. That fact alone should give one great pause; for me, "Man of Steel" represents a low point for action films this decade, and one of the very worst in the comic-book superhero genre.

Despite an interesting cameo from Russell Crowe, I struggled through watching that film, and have despised it ever since, primarily because of those depictions of destruction. It is one of the loudest, most violent and ridiculous movies in years, with two beings who cannot feel pain in the human sense, impervious to bullets, missiles, asteroids, or anything, fighting each other for almost all of the nearly two-and-a-half-hour movie. Yes, these are only fictional comic-book characters, but what a waste of time!

Refreshingly, this is one of the major themes in "Batman v Superman". And it's good to know that I was not the only person disgusted by the actions of Superman and his fellow Kryptonians. One wonders now if that it was always part of the plan for "Man of Steel" -- to be a great setup for an epic sequel. Or is "Batman v Superman" just benefitting from convenient hindsight and spin-doctoring.

In an interesting twist, Superman is also concerned about the underhanded methods of "The Batman". What follows is almost James Bond-esque as Wayne/Batman and Clark Kent/Superman investigate each other.

The movie can be divided into three acts. Act one explores this aftermath of the destruction issue, the most fascinating aspect of the whole production. However, this part is indeed low on action, and I suspect it would be considered boring to many fans of the genre. Unfortunately Act two blows any goodwill, and takes on all of usual overused comic book tropes.

There's the silly villain: Jesse Eisenberg ("The Social Network") in one of the least satisfying interpretations of Lex Luthor I've seen. Eisenberg plays Superman's number one human nemesis a bit too close to the late Heath Ledger's amazing Joker from "The Dark Knight".

There's also the dumb fight scene. To say any more would be to reveal too much about the plot. But suffice it to say that with this, "Batman v Superman" becomes as ridiculous as the progenitor, almost as loud and destructive, and this time in both Metropolis and Gotham!

But Act three really takes the cake, though. I had always wondered why this movie was scheduled for release at this time of year, and not the summer -- which would seem like the most natural fit. Well, it seems the Easter weekend release was intentional, and on Good Friday no less.

Again, without spoiling it, the film displays a level of heavy-handedness that some might quite possibly find insulting. (Semi-spoiler alert: did anyone else notice the two "crucifixes" during that scene near the end?)

Others may see "Batman v Superman" as aspiring to a level of deeper introspection than what is usually required of comic-book filmgoers. And there are some very interesting elements and surprises.

But for the most part, it's over-the-top and reaching.

On the positive side, despite the eye rolling, teeth gnashing, and grumblings at news that Ben Affleck would be Batman, Affleck does a reasonably good job as the caped-crusader. He's not the best ever in the role, but certainly not the worst. Cavill is pretty much the same as last time as Superman -- which means, largely devoid of personality.

The introduction of Gal Gadot as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman is interesting. And it's clear we're about to see the launch of DC Comics' version of rival Marvel Comics' successful X-Men franchise.

Unfortunately, the new film is exposing a problem with Superman films in this post-Christopher Reeve era. The Man of Steel has too few weaknesses, and he and his alter ego Clark Kent are far too dull, especially if he's made to share the screen with the darkness of a Batman or the mystery of a Wonder Woman.

That said, "Batman v Superman" makes for a better Superman movie, but a so-so Batman flick. It's much better than "Man of Steel", but miles away from "The Dark Knight" -- still atop the podium for all films of this genre. (Though "Batman v Superman" is much less tedious than "The Dark Knight Rises".)

And you may leave the theater feeling a bit used and like a sucker (no spoilers!). But again, most will breathe a sigh of relief knowing it could have been a whole lot worse.

o Dwight Strachan is the host/producer of " Morning Blend" on Guardian Radio. He is a television producer and writer, and an avid TV history and film buff. Email dwight@nasguard.com and follow him on twitter @morningblend969.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian