DC/WB Films/Worlds (No Spoilers)

[stargazer01]

Yep. These characters have been around since the 1930s and become major pop culture icons across generations. This movie was aware of that and is banking on that strong reputation to sell itself. It was expensive to make, and was marketed as an event because of these two icons meeting on the big screen for the first time ever. Of course people are going to have strong notions of what broadly to expect, and they largely didn't get it. And audiences have embraced new takes before (ex: Tim Burton's Batman after the Adam West show had defined the character), so it's not impossible.

The films were also criticized for screenplays, plot, acting, pacing, characterizations (or lack thereof), etc. only some of which were resolved by the director's cut. It's not all on the audience here.

But this is her husband, and he's suffered a lot of online abuse and OTT criticisms that take it too far. So while this "they just didn't get what they wanted" is tired BS in general, it can't be unexpected coming from her specifically

Yes, so tired. Deborah and her husband should just accept the facts the movies were too divisive for real reasons than just the fans being petty (and it wasn't just the hardcore fans, the masses didn't love them either). They should focus on the new JL cut. But no... At this point, they are not going to change any minds.

[Johnrevenge]

From the characters we know, it's probably Kent Nelson.

Could be an option too, but if he was, Dwayne Johnson would have confirmed it in his twitter, like he did with Hawkman and Cyclone.

So my guess is either Sabbac or Nabu.

[ssupes]

Deborah Snyder defends Batman v Superman from its negative reviews, arguing the film may have fallen victim to preconceived notions by people expecting something different.

by Screen Rant on twitter


I'm so tired.

Dammit, I should've known I shouldn't have gone to a film titled Batman Vs Superman expecting to see batman or superman but instead I should have expected to see the boys, watchmen or squadron supreme instead. Classic mistake, that's how they sucker you in.
Not that there was much to watch of Snyder's superman anyway.

On a more serious note though, it just shows the mindset behind all of this that they weren't going to learn and continue down the depressing rabbit hole until we got to his conclusion that in his mind would show superman to be the greatest hero yet much like "Martha!" being the linchpin of the BVS film it would have failed spectacularly and become nothing more then a meme at best.

What's more depressing is that the Snyder camp is listening to the Snydercut echochamber list of excuses as to why the film wasn't received well, how long before Zack or Deborah says "It's to deep for you marvel fanboys"?

[SiegePerilous02]

Dammit, I should've known I shouldn't have gone to a film titled Batman Vs Superman expecting to see batman or superman but instead I should have expected to see the boys, watchmen or squadron supreme instead. Classic mistake, that's how they sucker you in.
Not that there was much to watch of Snyder's superman anyway.

On a more serious note though, it just shows the mindset behind all of this that they weren't going to learn and continue down the depressing rabbit hole until we got to his conclusion that in his mind would show superman to be the greatest hero yet much like "Martha!" being the linchpin of the BVS film it would have failed spectacularly and become nothing more then a meme at best.

What's more depressing is that the Snyder camp is listening to the Snydercut echochamber list of excuses as to why the film wasn't received well, how long before Zack or Deborah says "It's to deep for you marvel fanboys"?

I definitely wouldn't say they were that bad. I don't think the issue with DCEU Superman or Batman is that they are bad people or borderline villainous like those characters are. Batman's damaged, but some of the actions of his mainstream comic counterpart in the early 2000s were arguably much worse. They are just not developed enough to be engaging or likable.

It's really bad that Antony Starr's Homelander is more charismatic and fun to watch than Cavill's Superman. That doesn't mean the latter should be equated with the former on the villainous scale, it just means he's really flat.

[Agent Z]

Dammit, I should've known I shouldn't have gone to a film titled Batman Vs Superman expecting to see batman or superman but instead I should have expected to see the boys, watchmen or squadron supreme instead. Classic mistake, that's how they sucker you in.
Not that there was much to watch of Snyder's superman anyway.

On a more serious note though, it just shows the mindset behind all of this that they weren't going to learn and continue down the depressing rabbit hole until we got to his conclusion that in his mind would show superman to be the greatest hero yet much like "Martha!" being the linchpin of the BVS film it would have failed spectacularly and become nothing more then a meme at best.

What's more depressing is that the Snyder camp is listening to the Snydercut echochamber list of excuses as to why the film wasn't received well, how long before Zack or Deborah says "It's to deep for you marvel fanboys"?

Seeing someone on this forum complaining about an echochamber is pretty rich. How many different variants if "Snyder sucks" do we get here again?

[Vakanai]

It's less about convincing those here who won't be swayed any which way, but those who are not familiar with the films. Therefore, both sides are trying to get those prospective supporters to get their minds right.

But those prospective supporters don't exist in this thread. Everyone here has seen these movies and made their minds up on them.

[Agent Z]

reading that fans had preconcieved notions about the characters that is why they disliked the movie is unfair. I was one who was rooting for those movies to be successful. As with all DC movies. I went to watch those movies without any prejudice, what I saw I did not like and not because of the take on the characters, but for many other reasons. Millions of non comic readers did the same and they had no prejudice either.
Can't be all those people are wrong. Facts are that at Box office those movies did nothing special and 90% of the people who watched the movie are no comic readers. Its not trying to convince anyone, those are facts. Maybe we forget how WB was criticized for those movies.

So ignore Snyder and focus on films you do like. You've more than made clear your feelings about his films at this point. Supervillains hold grudges for less.

[John Venus]

I would hardly call this place an echo chamber. It's positively tame compared to other parts of the internet.

People are free to praise and criticize Snyder's movies as they see fit. Stop trying to shut down people who don't see things your way, especially when they are being cordial in expressing their dislike for the Snyder films.

[Agent Z]

I would hardly call this place an echo chamber. It's positively tame compared to other parts of the internet.

People are free to praise and criticize Snyder's movies as they see fit. Stop trying to shut down people who don't see things your way, especially when they are being cordial in expressing their dislike for the Snyder films.

The comments I was responding to sure as hell were not cordial. And this thread has been swimming around in the same circles of Snyder conversations for years. Nothing new has been said. Criticism is ine thing but endlessly going back to the same well just gets old. No one here has said anything about the Snyder movies we haven't seen before. Conversations about DC movies and shows at this rate are as obnoxious and toxic as any discussion about Star Wars.

[Triple J]

Yes, so tired. Deborah and her husband should just accept the facts the movies were too divisive for real reasons than just the fans being petty (and it wasn't just the hardcore fans, the masses didn't love them either). They should focus on the new JL cut. But no... At this point, they are not going to change any minds.

Hmm, did she imply fans were being petty?

Here's what she said (from the article: https://screenrant.com/batman-v-supe...nyder-response)

"We’ve had our share of unkind press. Some of it, though... It’s interesting because I think… [Batman v Superman] is the perfect example. 'It’s too dark.' Too dark compared to what? I think that some of the reactions were ‘It’s not funny enough. It’s not the movie I expected it to be.’ And you’re [saying], ‘Is that the movie’s fault or is that your fault for having a preconceived notion of what it should be?’ It was kind of interesting to read things like that. "

All she said was it was interesting to read, not that fans are being petty - with the implication that some criticisms were unkind - I mean, if they think that, sure. Who cares? It's their opinion at the end of the day. Just like we all have opinions regarding Snyder's works. If they don't learn from their own mistakes (whatever the lessons might be), all that would happen is they continue to make movies that don't appeal to general audience (and sooner or later, studios will just stop giving them money).

Few people are going to outright deny their own works and say it's crap (besides, doing that would be insulting all the fans who did like it, especially considering the amount of time/effort some had put into Snyder Cut initiatives).

Anyways, the response to this (within this thread) kinda goes to my earlier point - why do y'all care anyways? It is clear ya don't like Snyder's movies (which is fine btw Nothing right or wrong with that), but wouldn't it be better to move on and not care about what Snyder and his wife thinks? There's always other media to consume

[manwhohaseverything]

Yep. These characters have been around since the 1930s and become major pop culture icons across generations. This movie was aware of that and is banking on that strong reputation to sell itself. It was expensive to make, and was marketed as an event because of these two icons meeting on the big screen for the first time ever. Of course people are going to have strong notions of what broadly to expect, and they largely didn't get it. And audiences have embraced new takes before (ex: Tim Burton's Batman after the Adam West show had defined the character), so it's not impossible.

The films were also criticized for screenplays, plot, acting, pacing, characterizations (or lack thereof), etc. only some of which were resolved by the director's cut. It's not all on the audience here.

But this is her husband, and he's suffered a lot of online abuse and OTT criticisms that take it too far. So while this "they just didn't get what they wanted" is tired BS in general, it can't be unexpected coming from her specifically

I would say,If tim burton's batman was released today.It would most likley get destroyed for batman killing and stuff like that.There was'nt an echo system that can influence like the social media.Things were much more maleable back then.Now,i don't think so.People get filtered stuff without exploration.Just like you said.The OTT criticisms add to the bad vibes regarding these movies.Snyder did nothing with superman that these guys have'nt done,in worst manner.They might have expected some complaints and stuff.A brooding superman-read for tomorrow or earth one.Jesus superman,read anything(especially bronze age onwards.the original take didn't have any btw.The only version that was metaphorical gladiator with nothing).The imagery is made explicit in for tomorrow and donner movies.Superman hiding.Yep!he's been that since inception.Superman killing zod,byrne.Superman causing destriction with his fistycuffs.You(fans) are naive,if you think a guy with the ability to lift a planet fighting his equals doesn't cause any.So,read anything really.Superman going "evil" or being mindcontrolled.Tas used to have a blast with that,read anything after darkknight returns.They might have expect some complaints.But,an entire blowback and this back/forth frenzy?I don't think so.From snyder's persepective,he is making your superman.How would he know you(as in fans) wouldn't recognise him?(I am not gonna go into the complaints like the whole superman doesn't save thing is load of nonsense when faora especially say "For every single life clark saves.I will kill millions".even then he did.The whole point of superman in these movies was focus on the things infront of you).

Like you said,The movie had issues regarding and especially,The editing which didn't make any sense in the theatrical and was jarring for me.On top of that,the movie drag for children and family audiences.But,that is forgivable .He made hodge podge of a movie. big deal.You(fans) are being naive if you think superhero boom has consistently produced something else.How many movies did it take for a logan or darkknight returns?Heck! even winter soldier took dozens for marvel movies.I don't care if lex doesn't act like the sophisticated business man he is in modern times or if lois doesn't say"smallville" hundred times or superman fell in love with jimmy because pink kryptonite.
People think superman and batman are this.

while batman might be that.But,superman devolving into this(a caricature) is a load of nonesense.

[Robanker]

I would say,If tim burton's batman was released today.It would most likley get destroyed for batman killing and stuff like that.There was'nt an echo system that can influence like the social media.Things were much more maleable back then.Now,i don't think so.People get filtered stuff without exploration.Just like you said.The OTT criticisms add to the bad vibes regarding these movies.Snyder did nothing with superman that these guys have'nt done,in worst manner.They might have expected some complaints and stuff.A brooding superman-read for tomorrow or earth one.Jesus superman,read anything(especially bronze age onwards.the original take didn't have any btw.The only version that was metaphorical gladiator with nothing).The imagery is made explicit in for tomorrow and donner movies.Superman hiding.Yep!he's been that since inception.Superman killing zod,byrne.Superman causing destriction with his fistycuffs.You(fans) are naive,if you think a guy with the ability to lift a planet fighting his equals doesn't cause any.So,read anything really.Superman going "evil" or being mindcontrolled.Tas used to have a blast with that,read anything after darkknight returns.They might have expect some complaints.But,an entire blowback and this back/forth frenzy?I don't think so.From snyder's persepective,he is making your superman.How would he know you(as in fans) wouldn't recognise him?(I am not gonna go into the complaints like the whole superman doesn't save thing is load of nonsense when faora especially say "For every single life clark saves.I will kill millions".even then he did.The whole point of superman in these movies was focus on the things infront of you).

Like you said,The movie had issues regarding and especially,The editing which didn't make any sense in the theatrical and was jarring for me.On top of that,the movie drag for children and family audiences.But,that is forgivable .He made hodge podge of a movie. big deal.You(fans) are being naive if you think superhero boom has consistently produced something else.How many movies did it take for a logan or darkknight returns?Heck! even winter soldier took dozens for marvel movies.I don't care if lex doesn't act like the sophisticated business man he is in modern times or if lois doesn't say"smallville" hundred times or superman fell in love with jimmy because pink kryptonite.
People think superman and batman are this.

while batman might be that.But,superman devolving into this(a caricature) is a load of nonesense.

I mean, the video is cheesy but it's arguing "Superman tries to fix a system by getting people to stop making the same mistake, Batman saves them immediately and moves on." It's actually pretty good insofar as talking about each character's worldview. Clark wants the world to change, Bruce wants to fix it in the short-term. But on any given Sunday? Clark is more concerned with how his actions will influence an event and Bruce on how he can save the day and get back on patrol for the next event since Gotham is essentially a city that has two major fires and only one fire team, so to speak.

Yes, both want the alternative (Clark wants to save today as well as Bruce wanting no crime tomorrow) but they tackle a lot of their issues with Clark thinking long game and Bruce immediate. It's very much "do I give a man fish to eat or do I teach him to fish?" For decades, this has been indicative of both characters and one of the ways they're contrasted.

They picked a very cheesy example for Clark, but it's not inherently wrong any more than the times in BTAS where Bruce waved a finger at people. It's not an excellent curation of moments but it is a good example of a difference between how each hero operates.

[Jewel Runner]

Considering that Bruce does more than just beat up people up as Batman, that's a very inaccurate interpretation of him, Bruce puts a lot of money into fixing the city's infrastructure, into programs that help excons get jobs and get out of crime, to depict it as Bruce just stops crimes and doesn't do anything else to help is nothing but wrong

[manwhohaseverything]

I mean, the video is cheesy but it's arguing "Superman tries to fix a system by getting people to stop making the same mistake, Batman saves them immediately and moves on." It's actually pretty good insofar as talking about each character's worldview. Clark wants the world to change, Bruce wants to fix it in the short-term. But on any given Sunday? Clark is more concerned with how his actions will influence an event and Bruce on how he can save the day and get back on patrol for the next event since Gotham is essentially a city that has two major fires and only one fire team, so to speak.

Yes, both want the alternative (Clark wants to save today as well as Bruce wanting no crime tomorrow) but they tackle a lot of their issues with Clark thinking long game and Bruce immediate. It's very much "do I give a man fish to eat or do I teach him to fish?" For decades, this has been indicative of both characters and one of the ways they're contrasted.

They picked a very cheesy example for Clark, but it's not inherently wrong any more than the times in BTAS where Bruce waved a finger at people. It's not an excellent curation of moments but it is a good example of a difference between how each hero operates.

Talk to me when people talk like that in everyday conversation..Then say,clark being portayed like that make sense.He's not a dork because he is contemplative,caustious and introspective.He's dork for absolute lack of essence and fake concern.Clark doesn't fix a damn thing.Also,batman wasn't fixing things.He made fun of the kid's action so that they knock it off.That kid that said,"yes superman".Will more than likely have a feel good moment and do the same mistake again.While,in bruce's case.Those words will ring through his entire life time.I know kids,I have been dumb like that(still am sometimes).Batman forces people to introspect.Superman doesn't.He makes them feel good about their weakness and stupidity.There is also a condescension in superman.Batman lacks that.That condescension is why superman is unrelatable.If clark was really concerned he would be pissed,If he weren't or lacked the capacity to be witty like batman here.Alas,zorro as character is what superman has left behind and batman as a character has embraced.

[HsssH]

I would hardly call this place an echo chamber. It's positively tame compared to other parts of the internet.

People are free to praise and criticize Snyder's movies as they see fit. Stop trying to shut down people who don't see things your way, especially when they are being cordial in expressing their dislike for the Snyder films.

It is not an echo chamber precisely because people are trying to shut down absurd posts like the one where Batman and Superman are compared to Boys.