Zack Snyder on his critics: "You're living in an f-ing dreamworld!"

[DochaDocha]

Keep in mind one of the big criticisms of MOS was how the last 1/3 of the movie is one big CGI fight scene where Metropolis gets destroyed. I don’t think people are going to turn their noses up at a Superman movie that doesn’t reduce Metropolis to a crater.

And then when you look at the previous movie, the argument was that there wasn't enough action.

I know, I know, happy mediums and sweet spots, but Superman's seems to be a pretty small target to hit. Either that, or the franchise is in perfect disharmony in which every decision made is met with equal praise and disdain. Yikes.

[Vordan]

And then when you look at the previous movie, the argument was that there wasn't enough action.

I know, I know, happy mediums and sweet spots, but Superman's seems to be a pretty small target to hit. Either that, or the franchise is in perfect disharmony in which every decision made is met with equal praise and disdain. Yikes.

Which is why I’m in favor of Golden Age power levels. It lets Superman go all out against criminals, cops, or the army without totally destroying the city. Something like the issue in Morrison’s run where he breaks out of Area 51 after getting tortured could be a tense high action scene of Supes kicking ass without nuking Metropolis.

[phantom1592]

IMO, Smallville did it very badly because it took so long. One of the most exciting part of the Superman mythos is to see him flying for the first time, even in outer space

Smallville was awesome for a lot of years... and then crashed hard. It was fun when he was young learning his powers... but then when he got to metropolis... was an actual superhero.. working at Daily Planet... fighting bizarre, Doomsday and Brainiac... and still acting like Capes and flights were 'stupid and he'd never do that.... ' It got redundant. Last season I enjoyed, because they knew they were ending and actually made progress again... but there were about 4-5 years that they were just grinding gears to stay static...

If you commit to a planned out series (i.e. not what WB did with Cavill), you can make it happen. The imaginary screenplay I've been fake-writing for the next Superman movie starts out this way.

Ughhh.. no.

STOP planning out 5 movie series!! EACH movie needs to be a stand alone movie that delivers. If it does awesome... than you get a sequel. If not... then it doesnt'. That was the big sin that WB an Snyder committed. Planning out a series that would take 5-10 years to satisfy an audience is stupid. It's trying to tell the future when nobody knows what the audiences will accept. For every harry potter we get, there are a dozen Vampire Assisants and Percy Jacksons... Book series that have a huge following that die at the box office.

Even Lord of the Rings and Back to the future gambled on NEEDING extra movies to tell their story and filmed them at the same time. You just can't risk a box office bomb to get the company to keep funding your 'vision'.

Yeah, "Save my mother" would have sounded more natural. I don't know about you but I don't usually call my mother by her first name. It's instinct to say "Mom". Batman wouldn't know who Martha was. If he said, "Save Martha Kent", then it would make sense. He's telling Batman who he needs to look for and, knowing the name, Batman would quickly find her address, who she was, etc. It would be awesome to believe he knew Batman's mother's name and knew saying it would shock him into some sense and that would mean Superman won the battle of wits. But there was no in character reason for him to call his mother by her first name and only her first name. It was just a freak stroke of luck that the writer has him say for the totally out of story reason that the two mothers have the same name.
.

Clark said " save martha kent" .He just had a boot to his face. so it came out as "save martha ke---".After a couple of times of trying.he let out "save martha" squeak. Which made bruce more angry. That's when lois came in. He can't say "mom" because he doesn't trust batman enough.
He let him go with a warning. To knock off the brutality . Since, he has no footing stand on because he himself is a vigilante who is being scrutinised. He needs to face the law himself as well. Bruce on the otherhand doesn't care for that.

This!

Superman should never refer to Martha Kent as 'mom' when faced with an enemy.... any enemy. Not even a random bystander. There is WAYYYY too much tossing aside secret identities in this franchise. Bruce Wayne doing batman business with Aquaman without his mask... Lois constantly running around yelling 'CLARK!!" every 10 seconds... If Batman hates superman so much for just being SueprmanÂ… he isn't going to save 'Superman's Mom.... but he may save and old woman named Martha....

People like to complain about superheroes 'lying' to their loved ones by keeping that secret... but this is EXACTLY why. They can't handle that burden. Heck, in the Flash series they can't meet a person for 20 minutes without revealing the whole Team Flash identities to them... and they often turn out to be or go evil...

[JAK]

Ughhh.. no.

STOP planning out 5 movie series!! EACH movie needs to be a stand alone movie that delivers. If it does awesome... than you get a sequel. If not... then it doesnt'. That was the big sin that WB an Snyder committed. Planning out a series that would take 5-10 years to satisfy an audience is stupid. It's trying to tell the future when nobody knows what the audiences will accept. For every harry potter we get, there are a dozen Vampire Assisants and Percy Jacksons... Book series that have a huge following that die at the box office.

Even Lord of the Rings and Back to the future gambled on NEEDING extra movies to tell their story and filmed them at the same time. You just can't risk a box office bomb to get the company to keep funding your 'vision'.

If I could make one point/observation: I don't think there's anything wrong with planning an arc of movies... BUT... the first one (especially, if not all of them) should feel like it's own contained story with a satisfying conclusion. Kinda like the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" film - it didn't give an indication whether or not there'd be a sequel and certainly didn't *need* one, but left things where there could certainly *be* one.

That's the key - not making it NEED the arc to succeed, just making a good movie at a time with an overall vision/direction in mind.

[SiegePerilous02]

He isn't just a symbol though. That was pretty much what i said. Snyder showed plenty of the confused man trying to find the truth. Otherwise the contrast won't work.

He isn't a character though, not one who really gets to be anything else but a confused man whom has left audiences cold. If a lot of critics and audiences felt they couldn't connect with him, that means the film failed at its job with a lot of people. There isn't a contrast because everything is bleak. it's contrasting with previous versions of Superman that people are already attached to, but there isn't much work with as far as this version on its own merits is concerned. At least it had some potential that was never realized, and didn't seem to be on a course to be realized. It's just lazy and cheap. It's the same with this version of Bruce, it aims to deconstruct him and bring him to his lowest point. But nobody has a reason to give a **** because we are only just meeting this version of Bruce, all we get is one quick cheap scene where he is nice to a little girl at the beginning and tries to save his dumbass employees who need the boss to tell them the obvious course of action (get to safety during alien 9/11). It just expects the audience to be attached to Batman due to prior versions so this version doesn't have to do any work to make you like him.

As for reception and other things. Again, there isn't much of a metric for that. You say it's divisive and in the same breath say people don't like this superman. How can it be both, man? It just split the audience.

There are solid metrics. As cliche as it is at this point, the RT score is a strong indicator. More damning still is the steep drop off after it's opening weekend. Like it had one of the biggest drops of a superhero film ever, in the 80% range, and Deadpool had better legs. It's pretty clear cut the general audience wasn't enthused by this. And this was giving the DCEU Superman a second chance.

I'm not really contraindicating anything in my statement. I said a lot of people liked him, but a lot of people hated him (or at least the botched story telling he was stuck with), which increased with BvS. Which is why we won't be seeing him again, or Superman again for a while in general.

Again, you saying Snyder's audience not being mainstream Doesn't make it so.As for the ip,i can understand the concern. But, it is done. It got an audience and new/different fanbase. His movies are successful enough financially . WB not knowing what to do with superman cannot be leveled at snyder. Its their own fault. They wouldn't know what to do with the character regardless of snyder movies. Heck! The only reason man of steel was greenlighted is because lawsuit. On top of that, Ip itself also has major problems That hasn't been confronted.

What I say doesn't matter. It's just reality. If his vision was embraced by the mainstream, the studio wouldn't have dropped it like a sack of ****. Affleck and Cavill would still be around. Instead they are gone and nobody seems to care. Meanwhile, Gadot and Mamoa stuck around because they were a hit with a far bigger number of people. Aquaman outperformed the Snyder movies. The new audience he found is not enough to keep the IP thriving. Why else do you think he's been relegated to television while Batman gets another movie?

It's the studio and Snyder's fault. There is enough blame to go around. Snyder however was just being true to himself while catering to the studio's demands; he was the wrong man for the job, but they shouldn't have put so much on him in the first place.

snyder needed to make someone the centre piece. Being the first public hero clark was it. His and both his two fathers struggles aren't just for him But others like him including diana. Moving on is hard. Diana is a pure outsider. She has no reason for helping humanity after steve was gone. Yet she stays and helps in hiding.that tells you something . She just needed something to restore her faith. Clark didn't do it directly. He just happened to mirror steve because of altruism . Again, I was merely pointing out how Superman is the centre of the universe. I wasn't pointing out how Superman did thing for other characters. You said snyder just made him jesus figure. But, that isn't what happened.it was just contrasting expectations and reality.

Being a Jesus figure is all that happened. The movie is filmed with pretentious imagery that doesn't really enrich anything. Batman makes a Kryptonite Spear of Longinus because of symbolism and not due to any in-story logic. These kind of things become more ludicrous when the movie is so serious. Saying he wasn't a Jesus figure but also that he was the center of the universe is a bit contradictory.

Such a major turning point for Wonder Woman's character (the biggest female superhero in the world) should not be happening in a film starring men outside of her narrative. She shouldn't need Superman to inspire her to come out of the shadows, that's not something Wonder Woman fans want.

[JAK]

He isn't a character though, not one who really gets to be anything else but a confused man whom has left audiences cold. If a lot of critics and audiences felt they couldn't connect with him, that means the film failed at its job with a lot of people. There isn't a contrast because everything is bleak. it's contrasting with previous versions of Superman that people are already attached to, but there isn't much work with as far as this version on its own merits is concerned. At least it had some potential that was never realized, and didn't seem to be on a course to be realized. It's just lazy and cheap.

It's funny, when I read this, the first thing I thought of was:

It's the same with this version of Bruce, it aims to deconstruct him and bring him to his lowest point. But nobody has a reason to give a **** because we are only just meeting this version of Bruce, all we get is one quick cheap scene where he is nice to a little girl at the beginning and tries to save his dumbass employees who need the boss to tell them the obvious course of action (get to safety during alien 9/11). It just expects the audience to be attached to Batman due to prior versions so this version doesn't have to do any work to make you like him.

This is one part that I think does sell pretty well, but it has nothing to do with him being Batman - you see him running into the fray and saving people as everything crashes down around him, and a man he's clearly close with dying and there's nothing he can do.. then we learn the girl's parents were in the building. So that's sold well just on basic empathy - one of the reasons Batman, as screwed up as he is, has the audience with him.

When I saw this the first time, I thought "ok, wow, this might be really good." And then the rest of the movie showed up. lol

[manwhohaseverything]

He isn't a character though, not one who really gets to be anything else but a confused man whom has left audiences cold. If a lot of critics and audiences felt they couldn't connect with him, that means the film failed at its job with a lot of people. There isn't a contrast because everything is bleak. it's contrasting with previous versions of Superman that people are already attached to, but there isn't much work with as far as this version on its own merits is concerned. At least it had some potential that was never realized, and didn't seem to be on a course to be realized. It's just lazy and cheap. It's the same with this version of Bruce, it aims to deconstruct him and bring him to his lowest point. But nobody has a reason to give a **** because we are only just meeting this version of Bruce, all we get is one quick cheap scene where he is nice to a little girl at the beginning and tries to save his dumbass employees who need the boss to tell them the obvious course of action (get to safety during alien 9/11). It just expects the audience to be attached to Batman due to prior versions so this version doesn't have to do any work to make you like him.



There are solid metrics. As cliche as it is at this point, the RT score is a strong indicator. More damning still is the steep drop off after it's opening weekend. Like it had one of the biggest drops of a superhero film ever, in the 80% range, and Deadpool had better legs. It's pretty clear cut the general audience wasn't enthused by this. And this was giving the DCEU Superman a second chance.

I'm not really contraindicating anything in my statement. I said a lot of people liked him, but a lot of people hated him (or at least the botched story telling he was stuck with), which increased with BvS. Which is why we won't be seeing him again, or Superman again for a while in general.




What I say doesn't matter. It's just reality. If his vision was embraced by the mainstream, the studio wouldn't have dropped it like a sack of ****. Affleck and Cavill would still be around. Instead they are gone and nobody seems to care. Meanwhile, Gadot and Mamoa stuck around because they were a hit with a far bigger number of people. Aquaman outperformed the Snyder movies. The new audience he found is not enough to keep the IP thriving. Why else do you think he's been relegated to television while Batman gets another movie?

It's the studio and Snyder's fault. There is enough blame to go around. Snyder however was just being true to himself while catering to the studio's demands; he was the wrong man for the job, but they shouldn't have put so much on him in the first place.



Being a Jesus figure is all that happened. The movie is filmed with pretentious imagery that doesn't really enrich anything. Batman makes a Kryptonite Spear of Longinus because of symbolism and not due to any in-story logic. These kind of things become more ludicrous when the movie is so serious. Saying he wasn't a Jesus figure but also that he was the center of the universe is a bit contradictory.

Such a major turning point for Wonder Woman's character (the biggest female superhero in the world) should not be happening in a film starring men outside of her narrative. She shouldn't need Superman to inspire her to come out of the shadows, that's not something Wonder Woman fans want.

To you, he might not have been a character. But, to me he had plenty.if a lot of critics and audiences didn't connect with him that doesn't mean he failed. That just means he didn't connect with them like for instance i couldn't connect with captain marvel. She just wasn't for me.bleak has something to do with what i am talking about How? It's not contrasting with previous versions of the character though. Once again, you are making judgements for everyone. How is that even fair? I respect your opinion but it isn't everyone's.The potential you are talking about is the image of superman you have in your head. How can any superman fulfil it to 100% except the one you yourself create? I won't question your feelings. It isn't up for debate. Neither is it what we were talking about.
If a guy can get something from the characters you hate to write paragraphs. There is something in there.it might not be for me or you. But, it did connect with an audience. That's all i am saying.

Rt? Really? You should have gone for cinema score. Which is way better a metric. Well, with negativity that surrounded it and people's expectations of a safe action comedy instead of something ambitious. It was bound to happen. But, that doesn’t prove that movie doesn't have an audience. Which is what i am arguing for.

Yet, i see people still fighting over the same guy passionately. Not only on the Internet but outside as well. We won't be seeing him again because WB don't know what to do with character regardless of cavill superman. Let me ask you a question. What if snyder adapted morrison's action comics panel to panel ? What if it had the same reaction? I mean, the comic is divisive as well.

Studio has dropped better things 'like sack of ****' than snyder's vision. That's not really an indjcator of anything. Once again, i am not talking about the ip. Ip was in trouble before snyder. So, how is snyder faulty. At the very least it found a new audience because of snyder. So, if you are concerned about the ip. You should be grateful.

How is it Snyder's fault? He made a movie in his taste. How is that his fault? His superman found an audience that adores him and still does.how is that a fault? What's next you blame me and others for liking this guy better than donner superman. You will tell me this guy is 'false', 'bad' and is not real superman. Snyder cut thing is still going on. If it was nothing, it would have died down already.i saw yesterday ryan Reynolds even tweeted about it.

You think someone has to be a jesus figure to be centre of the universe. But, i don't.i mean, Jesus isn't centre of my world. Theotricality is bruce's thing. Bruce wants to prove superman isn't a god. Heck! He sees him as a monster of sorta.what better way than to poke fun by using the spear. That's his standard way of working. "your are not a god. You are not even a man" . That doesn't mean snyder thinks superman is jesus. He doesn't. He just wanted to showcase unrealistic expectations people have of superman. Forgive me, but now i believe it is even applicable to the ip.

Once again, you are using standard comic book and mcu tie in structure. Snyder's movies weren't meant to be that. It's meant to be a long form serialised story telling. So there isn't a wonder woman story or a superman story or a batman story. There is only the story of the verse. The lynchpin of the verse is clark kent just like harry is the lynch pin of his universe.

Look man, from what i gather you are angry at snyder for the perceived damage to the ip. I feel the same way as well. That isn't my point at all.My point is snyder has an audience. We can debate whether its mainstream or not with no conclusion. But, it does exist. Let people who enjoy this superman Enjoy it.

[DochaDocha]

Ughhh.. no.

STOP planning out 5 movie series!! EACH movie needs to be a stand alone movie that delivers. If it does awesome... than you get a sequel. If not... then it doesnt'. That was the big sin that WB an Snyder committed. Planning out a series that would take 5-10 years to satisfy an audience is stupid. It's trying to tell the future when nobody knows what the audiences will accept. For every harry potter we get, there are a dozen Vampire Assisants and Percy Jacksons... Book series that have a huge following that die at the box office.

Even Lord of the Rings and Back to the future gambled on NEEDING extra movies to tell their story and filmed them at the same time. You just can't risk a box office bomb to get the company to keep funding your 'vision'.

You can't go extreme one way or the other. A lot of bad sequel come from standalone movies that did really well that the studios demanded a second, but the story didn't really have anywhere to go but retreading old ground or backpedaling from where the last movie ended. You have to leave room for the story to go someplace in a follow-up. On the other hand, bad serials happen when you leave so much room for the sequel that the first movie seems lacking; I can't think of a more glaring example right now than The Force Awakens when Maz says, "That's a story for another day." No, it's not. Tell us now, it was a question screaming to be answered (and because JJ and Rian didn't work to write a cohesive story, it never was answered...).

Everything is a gamble, and the bigger the risk the bigger the reward.

[manwhohaseverything]

Harry potter had a storyline that expanded multiple movies. Voldemort didn't die in the first movie. If 1st movie failed they would have just ended making movies of harry potter. Plot threads would have just never been followed upon. Snyder had something similar in mind. Like for instance , the incredible hulk never followed up on its loose ends. Make standalone movies. Yeah! That never happens in Hollywood anymore.

[SiegePerilous02]

This is one part that I think does sell pretty well, but it has nothing to do with him being Batman - you see him running into the fray and saving people as everything crashes down around him, and a man he's clearly close with dying and there's nothing he can do.. then we learn the girl's parents were in the building. So that's sold well just on basic empathy - one of the reasons Batman, as screwed up as he is, has the audience with him.

When I saw this the first time, I thought "ok, wow, this might be really good." And then the rest of the movie showed up. lol

The rest of the movie does let it down significantly, which makes it seem kind of a cheap lazy way to get people to like him in hindsight. And I think the film expects the audience to do most of the work, because they like Batman from previous versions. As a self contained work, they are given very little reason to like this one.

I think an arc like this, if it even needs to be done at all, should be done within Batman's own film series where we can actually see his supporting cast react to this. We are given nothing but Alfred in this because if they were ever planning on doing anything with this at all, it was in other films they gambled they would have. And the didn't.

To you, he might not have been a character. But, to me he had plenty.if a lot of critics and audiences didn't connect with him that doesn't mean he failed. That just means he didn't connect with them like for instance i couldn't connect with captain marvel. She just wasn't for me.bleak has something to do with what i am talking about How? It's not contrasting with previous versions of the character though. Once again, you are making judgements for everyone. How is that even fair? I respect your opinion but it isn't everyone's.The potential you are talking about is the image of superman you have in your head. How can any superman fulfil it to 100% except the one you yourself create? I won't question your feelings. It isn't up for debate. Neither is it what we were talking about.

I know it isn't everyone's opinions. The problem is, it is the opinion of the vast majority of the public that this version didn't click for them. it doesn't matter if it has roots in other versions. Fans and audiences don't mind changes to the source material or pulling from other sources if the end result is GOOD. This was not, so it's falling by the wayside. I'm sorry, but it's naive to think otherwise.
We'd be getting more of it if it worked for enough people to warrant there being more.

Rt? Really? You should have gone for cinema score. Which is way better a metric. Well, with negativity that surrounded it and people's expectations of a safe action comedy instead of something ambitious. It was bound to happen. But, that doesn’t prove that movie doesn't have an audience. Which is what i am arguing for.

I'd say the steep second weekend drop at the box office and the fact that friggin Deadpool had better legs than a movie with Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman is close to pretty objective proof that this movie didn't have a big enough audience to last.

Hell, the Boss briefly overtook it at the Box office. That is sad beyond words.

Yet, i see people still fighting over the same guy passionately. Not only on the Internet but outside as well. We won't be seeing him again because WB don't know what to do with character regardless of cavill superman. Let me ask you a question. What if snyder adapted morrison's action comics panel to panel ? What if it had the same reaction? I mean, the comic is divisive as well.

Where have I let WB off the hook or indicated that I have trust in them going forward? This is a mess of their own making. Just because they are smart to drop this vision (not necessarilly Cavill) doesn't mean they are too smart going forward.

And that is a pointless what-if scenario. Snyder doesn't indicate from his work that he'd adapt anything like that. This is the guy who'd rather pull inspiration from TDKR and Watchmen for his superhero films, nothing in Morrison's Action run is as dark as that or the final films. Like he'd probably have T-shirt and jeans Superman kill some dudes and then not explore the ramifications. And kill Vyndktvx in the climax.

Studio has dropped better things 'like sack of ****' than snyder's vision. That's not really an indjcator of anything. Once again, i am not talking about the ip. Ip was in trouble before snyder. So, how is snyder faulty. At the very least it found a new audience because of snyder. So, if you are concerned about the ip. You should be grateful.

The character was in a so-so place before Snyder, and now he is even further back during the biggest cinematic superhero boom ever. The numbers of the new audience are not that big. There is nothing to be grateful for.

How is it Snyder's fault? He made a movie in his taste. How is that his fault? His superman found an audience that adores him and still does.how is that a fault? What's next you blame me and others for liking this guy better than donner superman. You will tell me this guy is 'false', 'bad' and is not real superman. Snyder cut thing is still going on. If it was nothing, it would have died down already.i saw yesterday ryan Reynolds even tweeted about it.

I very clearly said Snyder is staying true to himself, and the STUDIO was wrong to hand it over in the first place.
and I don't entirely trust them to make wise decisions with the character going forward. But going for this take, in the long run, was worse than doing nothing at all.

Once again, you are using standard comic book and mcu tie in structure. Snyder's movies weren't meant to be that. It's meant to be a long form serialised story telling. So there isn't a wonder woman story or a superman story or a batman story. There is only the story of the verse. The lynchpin of the verse is clark kent just like harry is the lynch pin of his universe.

Look man, from what i gather you are angry at snyder for the perceived damage to the ip. I feel the same way as well. That isn't my point at all.My point is snyder has an audience. We can debate whether its mainstream or not with no conclusion. But, it does exist. Let people who enjoy this superman Enjoy it.

Except it's unwise to plan an arc for future films that are not guaranteed to come. And this case, they weren't and didn't happen. Look at Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Shazam. There is room for sequels in all of them, but they have arcs for the characters that conclude within the narrative of the films themselves. Each of them is the hero they will be going forward by the end of the first installment. And all pulled from the comics and had arcs where they learned lessons and struggled. It was just done well in their case because they had better filmmaker's behind the camera. What's more, they are all getting solo sequels, Superman did not and is not currently. Waiting five films for Superman to be Superman is asinine.

And once again, the Harry Potter comparison does not work. It started as a book series, in which the first installment was largely self contained with the option of doing more. And everyone loved it. So an adaptation that respected the source material did well, there was never a chance of it NOT doing well because it did what audiences wanted. Harry wasn't divisive, Cavill Superman was, and instead working out the kinks they just doubled down on all the controversial elements.

[manwhohaseverything]

Because until recently, there was no real frame of reference for showing a flying man in live action. It's relatively simple to do in 2D animation vs. live action. In the latter, there are a lot of details you have to simulate that if you messed up, you get a lot of the uncanny valley effect that ruins the illusion. Personally, I think Man of Steel did it pretty well, and I liked the visual of how his flight might've been some gravity-distorting property.

Yeah! Man of steel jumping sequence were a little too hulk smash for me. Come on, the guys weighs what? 200 pounds. But, flight was awesome. It had some arieal manneurs. I also loved what singer did. The barn jumping sequence and plane rescue were awesome. But, still flight needs work. Siegel and shuster used to make sure superman's movements are shown in panels. It really helps. It creates the vibe like "the amazing spiderman" what is otherwise just spiderman. something like "the marvellous superman".Looking cool helps attract people. It matters . Sam raimi's spiderman blew my mind the first time i saw it as a kid. So the technology has been there for the past two decades.

[manwhohaseverything]

I know it isn't everyone's opinions. The problem is, it is the opinion of the vast majority of the public that this version didn't click for them. it doesn't matter if it has roots in other versions. Fans and audiences don't mind changes to the source material or pulling from other sources if the end result is GOOD. This was not, so it's falling by the wayside. I'm sorry, but it's naive to think otherwise.
We'd be getting more of it if it worked for enough people to warrant there being more.



I'd say the steep second weekend drop at the box office and the fact that friggin Deadpool had better legs than a movie with Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman is close to pretty objective proof that this movie didn't have a big enough audience to last.

Hell, the Boss briefly overtook it at the Box office. That is sad beyond words.



Where have I let WB off the hook or indicated that I have trust in them going forward? This is a mess of their own making. Just because they are smart to drop this vision (not necessarilly Cavill) doesn't mean they are too smart going forward.

And that is a pointless what-if scenario. Snyder doesn't indicate from his work that he'd adapt anything like that. This is the guy who'd rather pull inspiration from TDKR and Watchmen for his superhero films, nothing in Morrison's Action run is as dark as that or the final films. Like he'd probably have T-shirt and jeans Superman kill some dudes and then not explore the ramifications. And kill Vyndktvx in the climax.



The character was in a so-so place before Snyder, and now he is even further back during the biggest cinematic superhero boom ever. The numbers of the new audience are not that big. There is nothing to be grateful for.



I very clearly said Snyder is staying true to himself, and the STUDIO was wrong to hand it over in the first place.
and I don't entirely trust them to make wise decisions with the character going forward. But going for this take, in the long run, was worse than doing nothing at all.



Except it's unwise to plan an arc for future films that are not guaranteed to come. And this case, they weren't and didn't happen. Look at Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Shazam. There is room for sequels in all of them, but they have arcs for the characters that conclude within the narrative of the films themselves. Each of them is the hero they will be going forward by the end of the first installment. And all pulled from the comics and had arcs where they learned lessons and struggled. It was just done well in their case because they had better filmmaker's behind the camera. What's more, they are all getting solo sequels, Superman did not and is not currently. Waiting five films for Superman to be Superman is asinine.

And once again, the Harry Potter comparison does not work. It started as a book series, in which the first installment was largely self contained with the option of doing more. And everyone loved it. So an adaptation that respected the source material did well, there was never a chance of it NOT doing well because it did what audiences wanted. Harry wasn't divisive, Cavill Superman was, and instead working out the kinks they just doubled down on all the controversial elements.

Look dude, snyder has done panel to panel adaptation of stuff. I mean, he had done 300 and watchmen. He can do it. With Superman his approach was different. He amalgamated everything. He even incorporated goldenage guy in some form. Which nobody does anymore. Your assumption that he took something from other source material for superman is completely wrong. Haven't we gone through what his inspirations were in an other thread. Snyder had never made superman wantonly murder without consequences. In fact, snyder makes him face more consequences than most writers do. If you are going to make bvs you will take inspiration from the dark knight returns. It's natural. He took inspiration. Unlike, miller's comic though batman was the antagonist. Superman was the protagonist. Fight was entirely from Clark's pov. Bruce was an a--hole.

Deadpool was phenomenonal movie that was different and had success with everyone with whatbit aimed for. Snyder's didn't. But, that doesn't mean Snyder's vision is merit less.nor does it mean he doesn't have an audience. Again, you don't know that. There isn't a metric to find out if the numbers are miniscule or not. Fans are clearly out there.
You said its Snyder's fault. Snyder can only make movies his way. That's not a fault. If you don't want that don't hire him. I have answered regarding the harry potter thing. He planned story that takes 5 movies. It would have ended if the movies were not successful. It did end. Story was unfinished. Like the incredible hulk.snyder superman did have arcs that concluded within the movie itself. It might have not been for you. But it was clearly there.

[Lokimaru]

Yeah! Man of steel jumping sequence were a little too hulk smash for me. Come on, the guys weighs what? 200 pounds. But, flight was awesome. It had some arieal manneurs. I also loved what singer did. The barn jumping sequence and plane rescue were awesome. But, still flight needs work. Siegel and shuster used to make sure superman's movements are shown in panels. It really helps. It creates the vibe like "the amazing spiderman" what is otherwise just spiderman. something like "the marvellous superman".Looking cool helps attract people. It matters . Sam raimi's spiderman blew my mind the first time i saw it as a kid. So the technology has been there for the past two decades.

Doesn't matter how much he weighs. Terminal velocity plus unbreakable body equal crater in landscape.

[SiegePerilous02]

Look dude, snyder has done panel to panel adaptation of stuff. I mean, he had done 300 and watchmen. He can do it. With Superman his approach was different. He amalgamated everything. He even incorporated goldenage guy in some form. Which nobody does anymore. Your assumption that he took something from other source material for superman is completely wrong. Haven't we gone through what his inspirations were in an other thread. Snyder had never made superman wantonly murder without consequences. In fact, snyder makes him face more consequences than most writers do. If you are going to make bvs you will take inspiration from the dark knight returns. It's natural. He took inspiration. Unlike, miller's comic though batman was the antagonist. Superman was the protagonist. Fight was entirely from Clark's pov. Bruce was an a--hole.

Deadpool was phenomenonal movie that was different and had success with everyone with whatbit aimed for. Snyder's didn't. But, that doesn't mean Snyder's vision is merit less.nor does it mean he doesn't have an audience. Again, you don't know that. There isn't a metric to find out if the numbers are miniscule or not. Fans are clearly out there.
You said its Snyder's fault. Snyder can only make movies his way. That's not a fault. If you don't want that don't hire him. I have answered regarding the harry potter thing. He planned story that takes 5 movies. It would have ended if the movies were not successful. It did end. Story was unfinished. Like the incredible hulk.snyder superman did have arcs that concluded within the movie itself. It might have not been for you. But it was clearly there.

I've said that like five times already.

[manwhohaseverything]

I've said that like five times already.

I know you did. I was reiterating that isn't a fault.