That car chase sequence is not shot in a way to make him terrifying. or not JUST terrifying, it definitely tries to paint it as exciting and badass, which seems to confuse the message.
Superman, meanwhile, is just watching the whole thing play and decides not to do anything besides make some passive aggressive threats and fly off.
"The only Superman stories people want are when he steamrolls over everyone else with a wink and a smile to the camera, what are people supposed to think?"
So if they don't want Snyder's take or something like it, that's all they want?
Where is the current cinematic movie, which is the main thing relevant to this discussion? Those three had theirs in the modern superhero cinema landscape and it worked out fine, why didn't they need to get deconstructed?
Why doesn't Spider-Man who has had a few takes of his own?
What story purpose is there in shooting Jimmy in the face? it's just too self indulgent and comes off as unintentionally hilarious. If he has no use for them, he could just not use them. Comic writers get condemned for doing stuff like this all the time.
Wonder Woman was well received, but there was contention with her "man made it impossible to stand together line" and with good reason. Thankfully it is vague enough that Jenkins can wisely ignore it and work around it. Jenkins and Gadot have been public about their thoughts about that line and how it didn't make sense for Diana's character.
Superman never found answers or had them, and didn't seem like he was poised to ever get them.
yes the the whole thing is so dour that it becomes hysterical.
I have to laugh or else I'll cry