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

[Greens]

I don't care who respects what as long as I get a good movie out of it. I thought Man of Steel was that.

 

[Mani-Man]

Makes you wonder if "respecting" something is more important than doing good with the material.
If only people who "respect" something work on it, we probably wouldnt have much to begin with.

Personally i do think Snyder likes comics, the ideas and visuals they present...but he doesnt care much for staying "true" to characters or so.
On this he is like burton, schumacher or Nolan...they all took the base and did their own thing with it.
Every comic book writer tries his own twist on these characters, thats not a crime or so.

Snyder just wants it to be more "Edgy" and wants to be so much deeper and symbolic...which would be neat, but he just doesnt have the talent.
All his movies lack real depth because he has not enough patience for that kind of stuff.
He is all about big scenes, symbolism, which isnt the worst at all.
But at the same time he lacks the talent to make characters feel truly "natural".

I dont find this idea the worst, because i absolutly hate this "grounded" and "realistic" idea that many think comic book movies need to be.
But to me snyders visuals and style isnt there, not when i look at how much fun i had with all the DC movies after JL that give me this comic feeling but also have characters that feel natural to me.

Probably Snyders best trick is to convince people he is a deeper storyteller than he actually is.

The problem comes when people either blindly hate what he does or this almost deranged worshipping of every breath he takes.

 

[Batmannerism]

Makes you wonder if "respecting" something is more important than doing good with the material.
If only people who "respect" something work on it, we probably wouldnt have much to begin with.

Personally i do think Snyder likes comics, the ideas and visuals they present...but he doesnt care much for staying "true" to characters or so.
On this he is like burton, schumacher or Nolan...they all took the base and did their own thing with it.
Every comic book writer tries his own twist on these characters, thats not a crime or so.

Snyder just wants it to be more "Edgy" and wants to be so much deeper and symbolic...which would be neat, but he just doesnt have the talent.
All his movies lack real depth because he has not enough patience for that kind of stuff.
He is all about big scenes, symbolism, which isnt the worst at all.
But at the same time he lacks the talent to make characters feel truly "natural".

I dont find this idea the worst, because i absolutly hate this "grounded" and "realistic" idea that many think comic book movies need to be.
But to me snyders visuals and style isnt there, not when i look at how much fun i had with all the DC movies after JL that give me this comic feeling but also have characters that feel natural to me.

Probably Snyders best trick is to convince people he is a deeper storyteller than he actually is.

The problem comes when people either blindly hate what he does or this almost deranged worshipping of every breath he takes.

I agree with a lot of that. Mostly because he lacks the talent to make his characters feel natural and likeable.

Interestingly, his biggest character successes have to be Leonidas, from 300, and Rorschach.

Leonidas is not a particularly deep character, the "THIS IS SPAR- TA !" scene kind of sums him up, although he does get some good lines. Kind of s perfect character for a Snyder film.

Rorschach is a different story, he's a very complicated character who is both pitiful and repellent and also kind of noble. I feel like somehow Snyder knew he had to stick to the source material and not mess with Rorschach at all - because he's almost exactly as he appears in the comic and his lines are almost word for word. I suppose that is an example of him respecting the character, and it working.

Sadly Watchmen was a box office failure - because its definitely one of Snyder's best films.

If only you could combine his visual approach with better storytelling and better character building.

 

[Superchan]

Probably Snyders best trick is to convince people he is a deeper storyteller than he actually is.

Actually he hasn't, at all! That's why the guy hasn't had a positively reviewed film since 2009 Watchmen or a legit boxoffice hit since 300.
Many fans and critics consider him an artsy Michael Bay and while I don't think that's fair, it is clear that Snyder isn't the right guy to direct superhero films but I think he'd do fine with other comicbook related stuff like Brubaker's Incognito (the main character is called Zack), Moore's Miracleman, Scott Snyder's American vampire and maybe Mark Millar's super-criminals.

 

[Sorath]

What about when and after he decided to execute the alternate universe Zod?



But the law and especially the authorities are not always just and so he shouldn't always be subservient to them, I don't think it's against the character to have him feel that.

With Zod it wasn't that he brood over it. He felt guilt over what he had done. He vowed never to take another life again. Killing Zod did weight on him but it didn't stop him from being that symbol of hope. He didn't push people away and keep the world at arms length. He carried on and carried that guilt and used it as a reminder to never take another life. Yet he continue to be an inspiration of hope. He continue to lead by example.

Sadly that is not the Superman we got in Batman v Superman. They turned Superman in to something he really isn't. Any one who reads Superman comics should be able to realize that Zack Superman is way off from Superman from comics. The whole point of making comic book movies should be to get the character as accurate as you can.

Your right Laws and Authorities can be wrong. They can become corrupt and dangerous even. In those case Superman isn't Subservient to the law. However when the government is asking questions like; Who does Superman Answer to? What gives him the right to make unilateral decisions? these are all fair questions at least I would think so and Superman would think so to. Hell these things Superman in comics has addressed to some degree or another.

If you took Superman from comics and put him in Batman V Superman he would be the first one at Senate hearings wanting to answer those question and discuss the questions. The reason he would is because they are fair question and he would want to be transparent about his actions and motives. That transparency is why in comics they world doesn't fear him. Its because he is first one to explain him self and his actions and motives. He the first one to admit when he is wrong and to apologize. Superman doesn't want the world to fear him. He wants them to accept his help and to embrace his message of hope. He wants them to follow his example and make world a better place. In order for that to happen the world can't fear him. In order to quite those fears he has to earn the public's trust and first step in doing so is to be transparent in his actions and motives.

This is not the same Superman we see in Batman v Superman. We see character that doesn't care what public things. He keeps the world at arms length. He doesn't offer transparency. You look at Christopher Reeves Superman. Right after he saves Lois he comes forward and give Lois an interview; Why? He wanted to be transparent. He knew the world would be afraid and would have questions. So he need to step forward and answer those question and explain who he is and what his motives are. He need to be transparent.

 

[Sorath]

Righty man. Telling me to get out in the real world. No need for those comments please. We're in the same boat. Just relax. Take a breath. Its all cool.
People base box office success on their own calculations but if Snyder was failing as much as people make him out to be on a business side of things then WB wouldn't keep giving him boad loads of money to keep making films. Now after Justice League failed which was Whedons and WB fault anyway he's now been givin more money to finish his Justice League. He must be doing something right to have movie after movie after movie from the same studio. Think about it.

Batman with enough planning can destroy Superman anytime of the week but Superman would definitely destroy Batman without Batman planning or having any gadgets when just one on one with the flick of his finger.

I find that Snyder's Superman has a realistic response to the world with his emotions and actions.
I love Donner's Superman too but Donner's and Snyder's Supermans both give me Something different. I can enjoy both but in different ways.
Yes you do need to listen to Zac because only he can say if he respects Comics or not. Not anybody else based on their opinions. Just him. Not based on Box office or reviews. That's putting words in his mouth.
Also with directors passing on projects has nothing to with Snyder and the final outcome. Man Of Steel just wasnt for them. It happens all the time. You say he probably accepted the gig to save his career. Yeah thats really reaching dude.

Look we are the opposite.
I know you hate Snyder, most of his films and what he did to Superman.
Just like I like Snyder, most his films and enjoyed what he's done with Superman.
As for Batman being a mary sue is far from the truth. Batman fails all the time.
Sorry but box office and reviews are not an indicator of a great or even good film.
Not every film needs Marvel level box office either.

First off just because WB is allowing him to go back and do Justice League doesn't mean he doing it right. If he was truly doing it right then we would be getting a Justice League 2. We would be getting Man of Steel 2. They wouldn't be rebooting Batman yet again. WB has lost faith in Zack. Their allowing him to finish his version of Justice League because enough people are asking for it. It's a great way to bring people to their streaming services.

Your wrong about reviews vs Box office numbers. Man of Steel did really well at the box office well enough for them to move forward with sequel. However the response they saw from the general public was not good. People walked out bored or indifferent to the film. It had great actors most people like Henry as Superman just people couldn't really get in to the story. So WB instead of looking at what they could do to fix it lost faith in it. Decided to try something else.

Enter Batman v Superman which again did well at the theater. Lets be honest it was an automatic win for WB no matter what. It's Batman and Superman on big screen together for the first time ever. So naturally people rushed to the film. It's Star Wars it's going to do well on name value alone. Yet when people walked out of the theater they hated the film. This is reason why the changes where made to Justice League. One of biggest complaints about Batman V Superman was that it was to dark and serious. All the fun was just sucked right out of the film.

Right before Zack dropped out of Justice League there where reports coming out that WB was worried about the direction of Justice League. They didn't want a repeat of Batman v Superman. They where trying to build a franchises not destroy it. Then when Zack kid died and decided to step away from the film WB seized the moment to fix the film. Hence why they brought in Joss. They told him that they wanted him to do with the film. He did exactly what they asked him to do.

Me personally I think Justice League was rough around the edges but I though it was a thousand times better then Man of Steel or Batman v Superman. I think it would been awesome if Joss had been the one to write and direct Justice League from the get go.

The point is public opinion matters. A film can do well and yet the people can still hate the film. There is a reason where not see a Justice League 2 or Man of Steel 2. They lost faith in them. Its reason why Zack won't be asked to direct any more DC films. WB does't have faith in him. The only reason he getting to do Justice League is because there is enough interest in it to warrant it. Other wise they don't have faith in Zack and they shouldn't.

 

[Babillygunn]

@Sorath,

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't care who respects what as long as I get a good movie out of it. I thought Man of Steel was that.

I feel like Man of Steel is a decent enough movie. I could've accepted it more if they went in a more positive, progression direction. Instead, they doubled down on the film's flaws and made it worse. Much worse.

 

[extra skater]

I feel like Man of Steel is a decent enough movie. I could've accepted it more if they went in a more positive, progression direction. Instead, they doubled down on the film's flaws and made it worse. Much worse.

MoS is good to me (although I dislike some details) and, now it's clear (at least to me) it was more a... a Snyderverse and not a DC Extended Universe, I'm more comfortable to appreciate BvS (again, but some details too) and to hope something good for the so-called Snyder Cut.

But can you exemplify what do you mean by a more positive and progression direction? I ask that because I maybe agree with you.

 

[TheVileOne]

MoS is good to me (although I dislike some details) and, now it's clear (at least to me) it was more a... a Snyderverse and not a DC Extended Universe, I'm more comfortable to appreciate BvS (again, but some details too) and to hope something good for the so-called Snyder Cut.

But can you exemplify what do you mean by a more positive and progression direction? I ask that because I maybe agree with you.

I think had they used Man of Steel as a basepoint for having Clark struggle with his place in the world but ultimately accept his role as a hero by the end instead of doubling down with a depressed, mopey and unhappy Superman in the next movie who is constantly criticized and torn down, it could've been decent starting off-point. Clarke struggled, put on the cape, defended Earth and accepts his role as the hero, for better or worse. He made mistakes with Zod but he will learn from them and get better. Instead they focused on the things people didn't like. They accentuated the negatives rather than the positives.

FFS, you have the government putting on a publicity stunt show trial with Superman and Congress when the government already knows Superman wasn't responsible for what happened in Africa and knows Luthor was responsible and has evidence as such.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

100%. I actually liked Man of Steel. It had a lot of issues, but overall I enjoyed it and thought it set things up decently for sequels. The problem was like VileOne said, Snyder doubled-down on the bad parts instead of the parts that worked. Also his worst habits in terms of storytelling came out, when they really didn't in MoS. MoS is a much more focused movie that stays on point. With BvS he got distracted by trying to jump to the next thing that "looked cool" that the story's cohesiveness fell apart.

 

[extra skater]

I think had they used Man of Steel as a basepoint for having Clark struggle with his place in the world but ultimately accept his role as a hero by the end instead of doubling down with a depressed, mopey and unhappy Superman in the next movie who is constantly criticized and torn down, it could've been decent starting off-point. Clarke struggled, put on the cape, defended Earth and accepts his role as the hero, for better or worse. He made mistakes with Zod but he will learn from them and get better. Instead they focused on the things people didn't like. They accentuated the negatives rather than the positives.

FFS, you have the government putting on a publicity stunt show trial with Superman and Congress when the government already knows Superman wasn't responsible for what happened in Africa and knows Luthor was responsible and has evidence as such.

Yes. This.
And I also think they should have shot a Man of Steel 2 before BvS because I didn't really feel that god-like persona of Superman towards the people was genuine.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yes. This.
And I also think they should have shot a Man of Steel 2 before BvS because I didn't really feel that god-like persona of Superman towards the people was genuine.

I would've done both Man of Steel 2 and a solo Batman movie before Batman v Superman. And Batman v Superman wouldn't have had Wonder Woman other than a cameo and no Doomsday.

Batman v Superman basically would've been a loose adaptation of Dini/Timm's World's Finest, NOT f'n Dark Knight Returns and Death of Superman.

Let us get to know and really start believing in these characters and like them before killing them off and just stuffing them all together.

Avengers was the SIXTH movie of the MCU.

 

[extra skater]

I would've done both Man of Steel 2 and a solo Batman movie before Batman v Superman. And Batman v Superman wouldn't have had Wonder Woman other than a cameo and no Doomsday.

Batman v Superman basically would've been a loose adaptation of Dini/Timm's World's Finest, NOT f'n Dark Knight Returns and Death of Superman.

Let us get to know and really start believing in these characters and like them before killing them off and just stuffing them all together.

Avengers was the SIXTH movie of the MCU.

Yeah. It was like BvS was a film took its continuity from comics or from an old cinematic universe. Robin was last seen in late 90s and then you have Bruce pondering on an empty uniform.

 

[Babillygunn]

I would've done both Man of Steel 2 and a solo Batman movie before Batman v Superman. And Batman v Superman wouldn't have had Wonder Woman other than a cameo and no Doomsday.

Batman v Superman basically would've been a loose adaptation of Dini/Timm's World's Finest, NOT f'n Dark Knight Returns and Death of Superman.

Let us get to know and really start believing in these characters and like them before killing them off and just stuffing them all together.

Avengers was the SIXTH movie of the MCU.

Dini/Timm’s World’s Finest was excellent. I love the scene where Clark realizes that Batman knows that he is Superman

 

[Mani-Man]

I would've done both Man of Steel 2 and a solo Batman movie before Batman v Superman. And Batman v Superman wouldn't have had Wonder Woman other than a cameo and no Doomsday.

Batman v Superman basically would've been a loose adaptation of Dini/Timm's World's Finest, NOT f'n Dark Knight Returns and Death of Superman.

Let us get to know and really start believing in these characters and like them before killing them off and just stuffing them all together.

Avengers was the SIXTH movie of the MCU.

I always wonder if that all was snyders plan or if WB said "make a big connected universe and a Justice league movie as fast as possible" and snyder said yes.

This was all so rushed, we barely got used to the MOS universe and world building.
Adding to that a Batman universe, WW etc, trying to do some kind of adaption of some of the most iconic comic book stories...squeezing so much into this one movie...not even better directors could have done that.

WB sat on their hands for such a long time because they had no clue what to do with all those characters, then snyder came in and did...something.
Then suddenly WB wanted everything Marvel worked many years to build up.

 

[STARMAN]

MOS was conceived and filmed with the idea of opening up to the rest of the DC universe but BvS was not originally intended to be the follow-up. The original plan was for a more tradition MOS sequel and gradual build towards Batman and others. It was scrapped after mix reviews and big second week drop-off. WB got cold feet on a Superman trilogy and fast-forwarded to Batman. I assume Snyder was comfortable with that decision and relished the opportunity to get his hands on Batman and the Dark Knight themes.

 

[Brother Jack]

It will always be a shame that what was Superman's story got taken over by Batman and the JL. There was a gigantic missed opportunity to make a trilogy dedicated to Clark, and the character suffered for it.

 

[TheVileOne]

They did Death of Superman in the SECOND MOVIE. Just think about that for a second.

 

[Babillygunn]

They did Death of Superman in the SECOND MOVIE. Just think about that for a second.

They did TDKR in his FIRST MOVIE in this continuity. Think about that.

 

[TheVileOne]

They did TDKR in his FIRST MOVIE in this continuity. Think about that.

I don't like it.

 

[Enriquespy]

Zack fell in love with the idea of "Deconstructed heroes", half understood it, and modelled all his comic book films based on that one thing.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

They did Death of Superman in the SECOND MOVIE. Just think about that for a second.

Iron Man died in what...his tenth movie (counting cameos)?

I think there is a lesson there.

 

[Babillygunn]

I don't like it.

Nor should you. Nor should anyone with a brain want to create an entire universe around TDKR, which works only as a one off stand alone story. Even Frank Miller proved that an expanded universe based on the story leads to a dumpster fire. (see TDKSA, Master Race, All Star Batman and Robin, and The Golden Child)

 

[TheVileOne]

Iron Man died in what...his tenth movie (counting cameos)?

I think there is a lesson there.

Well considering it's a fakeout death, I don't think they needed to wait 10 movies. But they definitely shouldn't have done it in the second.