Why do people say Zack Snyder doesn’t respect comics?

[DarthSkywalker]

again with the petty insults?

No i did not come here just to argue. Ive already been suspended for a month at another forum and im not trying to get banned again. But go on and report me for being a troll

I can't imagine where this one is going...

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't have to report you. It's kind of a benny of being an admin. So instead, I can do you one better, and give ya the ol' Godzilla boot.

Never has Godzilla struck more fear in the hearts of villains, then when FC unleashes him.

 

[flickchick85]

Note to any potential newbies lurking out there: If you join this site and the first thread you start is an excuse to troll, we don't bother with warnings or temp-bans.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I was fine with the idea of Luthor being a Mark Zuckerberg type. I was even fine when Eisenberg was cast. That wasn't the issue. It was how it was executed on-screen. He's a corny goofball who's actions and motivations don't make sense. He's Mark Beaks from Ducktales, except annoying instead of funny. Zemo, even though different from the comic character, is interesting. He's a regular soldier, ravaged by grief who wants revenge, and using nothing more than his brain and determination manages to do more damage to the Avengers than anyone (until Thanos). All without so much as throwing a punch. That's intriguing.

I haven't read this entire thread yet, so if someone pointed this out already, sorry.

But what you hit on here KR, is what I think a lot of people really mean when they say, "they changed the character". It isn't simply that so many people were upset that they changed Lex. Absolute purist would be if the character wasn't based on their specific interpretation, but that is a very small percentage. So much of this is about the character just not working for people as presented for whatever reason, and they default to the short hand of, "why did they change them", which doesn't really encompass the entirety of the issue, but most people aren't spending time discussing this on a forum in-depth.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Nothing in art is objectively good or bad.

I don't think it's a terrible film personally, putting aside preferences. It's Ang Lee's Hulk bad not Catwoman bad.

Ang Lee’s Hulk is a great comparison actually.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If you watch the UE, you can’t honestly tell me it’s a bad film. There may be certain character moments that you dislike or certain casting decisions, but as a whole, it is pretty objectively good. The theatrical cut was garbage and made no sense. The UE was absolutely incredible.

I have seen the Ultimate Edition of "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice". I will tell you I honestly find it to be an absolutely atrocious film. Not just as a fan of the characters, but as a film unto itself. I findthe characters lifeless and boring, the film to be extremely poorly paced, the film's style and tone to be aggressively abrasive, and the narrative just plain bad. I don't much care if they give a reason for why people think Superman killed a bunch of terrorists. For me that is a paying attention to one tree while ignoring the rest of the forest. A forest full of crap imo. If you disagree, that is fair. But for me it is one of the worst film watching experiences of my life.

 

[Erzengel]

If you watch the UE, you can’t honestly tell me it’s a bad film. There may be certain character moments that you dislike or certain casting decisions, but as a whole, it is pretty objectively good. The theatrical cut was garbage and made no sense. The UE was absolutely incredible.

The UE doesn't add 30 minutes of additional good feelings or action into the movie. It fixes some minor plot issues and expands some narrative themes but it didn't make for a more joyful experience for me.

 

[Rorschach2012]

They would’ve been better off doing Worlds Finest instead of BVS. They should’ve taken inspiration from the animated WF, and focused more on the Bruce/Clark relationship.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They would’ve been better off doing Worlds Finest instead of BVS. They should’ve taken inspiration from the animated WF, and focused more on the Bruce/Clark relationship.

I think they would've been better off with better storytellers in the writing and directing roles. I think they would've been better off with people who understood the characters and what audiences expected from them. I think they would have been better off making the first meeting of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman on the big screen something that wasn't an awful attempt at a "deconstruction". I think they would have been better off making a good film.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Didn't look like trolling to me. Or maybe I'm behind times and now trolling is arguing with people. But what forums are for then if not for this?

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Redd5 is gone,
But his thread lives on!

I think they would've been better off with better storytellers in the writing and directing roles. I think they would've been better off with people who understood the characters and what audiences expected from them. I think they would have been better off making the first meeting of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman on the big screen something that wasn't an awful attempt at a "deconstruction". I think they would have been better off making a good film.

I actually like BvS, but I completely agree, Darth. A story of Batman and Superman at loggerheads would have had far more dramatic weight if we'd had a couple of lead-ins showing how close the Trinity were, how they worked together as a team.

 

[OutOfBoose]

It would be cool if they constructed it first.

 

[Gothamsknight]

Also, while Bale's Batman undoubtedly killed people, he wasn't egregious about doing so. Dent was about to kill a kid so he tackled him and he died. A bomb was about to blow up Gotham so he attacked the vehicle carrying it and Talia died as a result. Etc. These weren't acts of murder or (at least in my opinion) excessive force. He did what he had to do to save people and there was some unavoidable collateral damage. That's completely different than mowing through bad guys like Frank Castle or plotting to assassinate a superhero on the off chance he "might" turn evil one day.

All of this!

Also, I don't see where the UE adds anything substantial to make BVS any less of the crapfest that it is (for me).

 

[Fincher]

It would be cool if they constructed it first.

It's interesting, Redd5 seemed to be suggesting that Batfleck prior to the fall committed to the no-kill code at a level that Nolan's Batman didn't, and that the movie assumed knowledge of his no-kill code on the part of the audience. However, putting aside that I think any version of the story has to stand on its own, the general public only knows the no-kill code as it was handled in Nolan's movies. They're not going to assume that Batman never killed anyone under any circumstances before he lost his way. And after the Martha scene Batfleck still killed. I didn't question him killing a team of criminals who were holding a woman hostage and planning to murder her, but he didn't revert to some state where he never killed, no matter what.

Man of Steel/Batman v Superman at least seemed interested in Superman's policy on not killing (I know it looks like he killed that guy at the beginning of BvS, and how it comes across is ultimately what matters, but that doesn't mean it's what Snyder intended), but it doesn't seem like he's into Batman being strictly against killing, even if he cares about the implications of how far Batman's willing to go.

 

[Erzengel]

I think the issue with Batman killing is in regards to Superman, it wasn't taking a piece off the chess board because one day he may be a threat, it was personal. You had him monologuing the whole way, insulting him before he put his foot on his throat with a spear to kill him intimately. And I know the defense would be, well he had his foot on his throat in TDKR. That was a gesture to show Superman what he was capable of.

 

[OutOfBoose]

It's interesting, Redd5 seemed to be suggesting that Batfleck prior to the fall committed to the no-kill code at a level that Nolan's Batman didn't, and that the movie assumed knowledge of his no-kill code on the part of the audience. However, putting aside that I think any version of the story has to stand on its own, the general public only knows the no-kill code as it was handled in Nolan's movies. They're not going to assume that Batman never killed anyone under any circumstances before he lost his way. And after the Martha scene Batfleck still killed. I didn't question him killing a team of criminals who were holding a woman hostage and planning to murder her, but he didn't revert to some state where he never killed, no matter what.

Man of Steel/Batman v Superman at least seemed interested in Superman's policy on not killing (I know it looks like he killed that guy at the beginning of BvS, and how it comes across is ultimately what matters, but that doesn't mean it's what Snyder intended), but it doesn't seem like he's into Batman being strictly against killing, even if he cares about the implications of how far Batman's willing to go.

If he committed to the no-kill rule the way he does it after he became friends with Superman... I don't think the rule existed at all. Or maybe it had an additional paragraph called "killing by proxy". It stated that if you throw a giant crate into a guy's face and he dies, it doesn't count.

 

[Zarex]

They would’ve been better off doing Worlds Finest instead of BVS. They should’ve taken inspiration from the animated WF, and focused more on the Bruce/Clark relationship.

While I would have MUCH preferred a less bleak picture, Movie Bob and others have suggested the film would have improved greatly if you delete Batman and give his scenes to Lex Luthor. Maybe even recast and put Affleck in a skin cap? Have Lex be the guy strapping on an exo suit to stab an alien after watching his building tumble. Of course that kills the Martha Moment, but I think the film could have survived without it. Then introduce Batman in the post credit scene!

 

[Fincher]

While I would have MUCH preferred a less bleak picture, Movie Bob and others have suggested the film would have improved greatly if you delete Batman and give his scenes to Lex Luthor. Maybe even recast and put Affleck in a skin cap? Have Lex be the guy strapping on an exo suit to stab an alien after watching his building tumble. Of course that kills the Martha Moment, but I think the film could have survived without it. Then introduce Batman in the post credit scene!

I'd have definitely been cool with a Lex who wants to kill Superman because he fears him, and I'd consider no Martha moment an advantage not just in terms of how that played out, but because the movie wouldn't be expecting me to like or ultimately cheer for Lex, just to understand him. Affleck as Lex would work, too. That honestly makes a lot more sense.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

While I would have MUCH preferred a less bleak picture, Movie Bob and others have suggested the film would have improved greatly if you delete Batman and give his scenes to Lex Luthor. Maybe even recast and put Affleck in a skin cap? Have Lex be the guy strapping on an exo suit to stab an alien after watching his building tumble. Of course that kills the Martha Moment, but I think the film could have survived without it. Then introduce Batman in the post credit scene!

What a great film that could've been. It wouldn't surprise me if Terrio was drawing on some post-Crisis Luthor material as he wrote Bruce to begin with.

It's interesting, Redd5 seemed to be suggesting that Batfleck prior to the fall committed to the no-kill code at a level that Nolan's Batman didn't, and that the movie assumed knowledge of his no-kill code on the part of the audience. However, putting aside that I think any version of the story has to stand on its own, the general public only knows the no-kill code as it was handled in Nolan's movies. They're not going to assume that Batman never killed anyone under any circumstances before he lost his way. And after the Martha scene Batfleck still killed. I didn't question him killing a team of criminals who were holding a woman hostage and planning to murder her, but he didn't revert to some state where he never killed, no matter what.

Man of Steel/Batman v Superman at least seemed interested in Superman's policy on not killing (I know it looks like he killed that guy at the beginning of BvS, and how it comes across is ultimately what matters, but that doesn't mean it's what Snyder intended), but it doesn't seem like he's into Batman being strictly against killing, even if he cares about the implications of how far Batman's willing to go.

I'm frankly only reasonably confident Batfleck had a no kill policy to begin with. Snyder's messaging around that is muddled by, again, the fact he clearly thinks Batman killing is aesthetically awesome. For a film so spectacularly overwritten you'd think there'd be a more direct conversation at some point than vague statements about how he's changed.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Didn't look like trolling to me. Or maybe I'm behind times and now trolling is arguing with people. But what forums are for then if not for this?

If you're talking about Redd5, she outed herself as an alt currently serving suspension on her main account.

 

[The Guard]

Reckless care chases are what Batman does. Remember, in BEGINS he crushed a cop car, dropped explosive tire spikes to evade his pursuers and ruined a bunch of people's cable, and then in TDK he’s blowng up peoples cars because the super mobile Batpod apparently wasn’t mobile enough to navigate parked cars. I think it's ok for action scenes to exist in action movies because an action scene needs to happen somewhere.

I also think Snyder gets the character from the comics just fine. He just didn’t show that character in his film, and really, he's not obligated to when he's adapting it; instead, he used what people know to tell a different story than we’ve seen before. He chose to tell a story, knowing full well what Batman should be, and knowing that audiences know what Batman should be, about a man who had been poisoned by his long crusade, and who had fallen morally. We'll see what's presented in the Snyder Cut. I think that might change a few minds, because it was always supposed to be a redemptive story.

Although a good amount of people didn’t want to see that version of the story. And what it boils down to is that a lot of people just didn't want to see Batman that far gone, they want a heroic Batman. They don’t want to see his actions as immoral, even though they often arguably are.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Didn't look like trolling to me. Or maybe I'm behind times and now trolling is arguing with people. But what forums are for then if not for this?

Arguing is fine and our totally rad mods give us all plenty of leash. But if you are going to sign up for this board and make a thread where your express purpose seems to not have a discussion but to tell others how wrong they are for not agreeing with you, that is probably going to get you some side eye from the mods. It will make you come off like a PBU, whether you are or aren't. When one of those mods then gives you a pretty friendly warning about that and you then decide to attack them? Well the assumption that you aren't a PBU probably goes away and so do you.

 

[Limonade]

lol. Wow. Read through this whole post thinking it would go a certain way, and did not disappoint.

I'll tell you when I felt this new guy was going... was when he stated he was 18, studied film, and did not believe film or art was subjective and should be viewed objectively.

Why? Because I was once an 18 year old film student... who also felt that there were diamond absolutes for good and bad movies. LOL

Ah, to be so young and passionate about something.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

While I would have MUCH preferred a less bleak picture, Movie Bob and others have suggested the film would have improved greatly if you delete Batman and give his scenes to Lex Luthor. Maybe even recast and put Affleck in a skin cap? Have Lex be the guy strapping on an exo suit to stab an alien after watching his building tumble. Of course that kills the Martha Moment, but I think the film could have survived without it. Then introduce Batman in the post credit scene!

That would have been really interesting.

 

[jmc]

Honestly, why Snyder is even a topic still is beyond me. At some point the debate over what he did to the DC Universe needs to be put to bed. Yes, I was part of the witchhunt over what he did, and I was also a dick many times towards his defenders which I'm not proud of. At the end of the day we were all looking for the same thing and that was respect for the characters and a lot of it got out of hand. Dragging up old arguments as far as I'm concerned is a pointless exercise, those who love what he did will love it, those like myself who don't never will. The only thing that should be learned from the Snyder era is what not to do, and it's better for all if we simply move on from the past and hope for a better future.