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

[stargazer01]

I saw it more as having a few moments where he became fixated on the fight itself, and stopped thinking about his surroundings

Hence why people saw it as him been reckless sometimes. He was inconstant, he didn't always try to avoid more destruction. It's in the details, imo. I'm not one of those fans who think Clark destroyed the whole city. He was trying to save the world, I just didn't like how he reacted in some specific scenes. I still like MOS a lot, but I have some issues with it. I also have issues with all the Superman movies, though, not just MOS.

The most popular versions of the Kents have acted like this before. And whether or not people have any expectations of Hippolyta does not change the fact that she is the one actively discouraging her daughter from being a hero.

Yes, you are right. It still didn't bother me at all because I had no expectation of how she should be.


Personally, I see Superman as a wonderful, exciting and mostly fun character. He has pathos, but he is an optimistic who believes in a better tomorrow. He has real feelings and desires and a personality and a lot of charm. And he cares about others a lot. He is a superhero who loves and helps and people love him for it. Some totally hate him like Lex Luthor and try to destroy him.

He has the greatest adventures. He also has limits and can't save everybody, not even his own father (not counting the tornado death in MOS). I think modern filmmakers and the WB execs fail to make him more exciting when they don't celebrate who he is and instead try to change him into something else (a more distant and alienated god). Patty Jenkins and James Wan were very successful with WW and Aquaman because they celebrated the best of them, showed their charisma and how fun their adventures can be. The movies also had a lot of heart. Their movies were well made and very entertaining. Superman hasn't had a crowd pleaser movie in 20 years... That is the problem. We don't need A LOT of realism or cynicism. Superman should be great escapism not a reminder that the human race has no hope. He shows us that there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

[Agent Z]

Isn't this hyperbole as well, just coming from the opposite direction?

After all, a lot of the criticism that the DCEU took itself too seriously haven't really been applied to Wonder Woman, which just executed its serious moments in a more competent manner. And the DCAU is a literal cartoon continuity that got seriously dark at times and light/silly in others that was embraced.

It's been applied to the Nolan Batman movies, to Wonder Woman as well (not as often but still), to Titans and even Young Justice.

I mean, have you just not noticed that "realism" tends to be a dirty word among superhero fans these days?

[SiegePerilous02]

It's been applied to the Nolan Batman movies, to Wonder Woman as well (not as often but still), to Titans and even Young Justice.

I mean, have you just not noticed that "realism" tends to be a dirty word among superhero fans these days?

I have, but I don't see why that translates to them wanting something barely more serious than Looney Toons as an alternative, which seems like an equally absurd exaggeration.

When the Nolan movies were new and at their most popular, "realism" was thrown around as to why things form the comics couldn't be put to film, including beloved characters and aesthetics (which, as a visual medium, are important)., Maybe we're seeing a kickback from that? Not everyone values realism with these types of stories, and not everyone can even agree as to what the hell that even means. Sometimes the superhero properties trying to seem more serious/realistic than they are can come across as immature and self conscious in itself. It's not as if any of that makes a story better, and kids are often more mature for being able to roll with it than the adults who cling to this stuff and demand it mature along with them.

Some of the complaints against those works are valid (the most I've seen against YJ is that it is aesthetically dull and that humor is unfunny, not that it's absent, both of which are fair IMO), while some are not.

[Jokerz79]

It's been applied to the Nolan Batman movies, to Wonder Woman as well (not as often but still), to Titans and even Young Justice.

I mean, have you just not noticed that "realism" tends to be a dirty word among superhero fans these days?

Wanting characters taken serious is great but the Zack Snyder version of realism and comic book movies is dumb. He wants to tell the story of Superman in the real world.

Fine here's Superman in the real world the U.S. Government tracks the falling space ship takes him off the Kents and raises him in some Area 51 type place and he becomes Homelander or something in that vein basically.

Batman either Alfred gets him a shrink the moment he mentions the vigilante idea or the cops throw Bats in a padded room.

Nolan was able to do a more realistic Batman because at the end of the day he's a dude in a costume. But it's harder to do with Superpowered heroes especially if you're no going all the way with that idea which honestly doesn't suit Superman IMO.

[Agent Z]

I have, but I don't see why that translates to them wanting something barely more serious than Looney Toons as an alternative, which seems like an equally absurd exaggeration.

When the Nolan movies were new and at their most popular, "realism" was thrown around as to why things form the comics couldn't be put to film, including beloved characters and aesthetics (which, as a visual medium, are important)., Maybe we're seeing a kickback from that? Not everyone values realism with these types of stories, and not everyone can even agree as to what the hell that even means. Sometimes the superhero properties trying to seem more serious/realistic than they are can come across as immature and self conscious in itself. It's not as if any of that makes a story better, and kids are often more mature for being able to roll with it than the adults who cling to this stuff and demand it mature along with them.

Some of the complaints against those works are valid (the most I've seen against YJ is that it is aesthetically dull and that humor is unfunny, not that it's absent, both of which are fair IMO), while some are not.

These complaints aren't coming from kids. They're coming from adults who (often with a considerable degree of sanctimony) love putting down anything they feel "isn't comic book enough" as if they're the authority on what counts as a true adaptation of the source material and to hell with anyone who prefers certain aestheitcs over others and even when they do have adaptations that cater to their specific needs still feel the need to make a stink over something else that is clearly not aimed at them. They aren't any more mature than the people who demand superheroes mature along with them.

[Vordan]

These complaints aren't coming from kids. They're coming from adults who (often with a considerable degree of sanctimony) love putting down anything they feel "isn't comic book enough" as if they're the authority on what counts as a true adaptation of the source material and to hell with anyone who prefers certain aestheitcs over others and even when they do have adaptations that cater to their specific needs still feel the need to make a stink over something else that is clearly not aimed at them. They aren't any more mature than the people who demand superheroes mature along with them.

And these movies aren’t aimed at kids. Snyder wanted to make his super serious and edgy “realistic” Superman for adults. Can’t get mad when adults aren’t impressed with his efforts, especially when the man subscribes to the Michael Bay school of destruction.

[SiegePerilous02]

These complaints aren't coming from kids. They're coming from adults who (often with a considerable degree of sanctimony) love putting down anything they feel "isn't comic book enough" as if they're the authority on what counts as a true adaptation of the source material and to hell with anyone who prefers certain aestheitcs over others and even when they do have adaptations that cater to their specific needs still feel the need to make a stink over something else that is clearly not aimed at them. They aren't any more mature than the people who demand superheroes mature along with them.

Are all of them presenting themselves as an authority or just voicing their opinions as to why it isn't working for them? Doubtless some of them are, but I've seen some valid criticisms of YJ in the show's thread that got some strawman responses about how they didn't like anything serious. Everyone who posts on a place like this can get passionate (perhaps sometimes overly so) about this, they are no different. If the work is successful like the Nolan films or YJ, what does it matter? Let them make noise if they want. Meanwhile, if it fails with even the casual audiences like most of the DCEU up to this point, maybe it has merit?

At the end of the day, saying these fans don't want anything more serious than Looney Toons or want "slapstick" instead of actual substance seems sanctimonious itself and missing some of their points to make a strawman.

[Agent Z]

Are all of them presenting themselves as an authority or just voicing their opinions as to why it isn't working for them?

I've been in enough conversations like that to see the former done far more than the latter. The phrase "ashamed of the source material" or variations of it is tossed around quite often.

[Agent Z]

And these movies aren’t aimed at kids. Snyder wanted to make his super serious and edgy “realistic” Superman for adults. Can’t get mad when adults aren’t impressed with his efforts, especially when the man subscribes to the Michael Bay school of destruction.

1) Wasn't just talking about the Snyder movies. 2) I can get mad at adults who react like children to it like the morons who sent a petition to the White House to get BvS cancelled.

[SiegePerilous02]

I've been in enough conversations like that to see the former done far more than the latter. The phrase "ashamed of the source material" or variations of it is tossed around quite often.

Considering we have the Nolan Bat-films giving Batman a muted costume (we couldn't even clearly see the Bat-symbol, Snyder's DCEU Bat costume is at least superior), Catwoman not being able to be called Catwoman because that would be too silly or something, and Bale declaring that he's chain himself up and not go to work if Robin was in a script, I think the "ashamed of the source material" complaints have some merit with the Nolan films. I don't think they do with WW, Titans or YJ even if I don't really agree with the interpretations of the latter two. They are just coming from a different angle.

Said source material that they want to see represented is also not one note cartoony/goofy either.

[Vordan]

1) Wasn't just talking about the Snyder movies. 2) I can get mad at adults who react like children to it like the morons who sent a petition to the White House to get BvS cancelled.

Those guys are stupid. But how different are those petitioners from these?
5389BD57-9F62-4263-B786-9ABB2F3E3455.jpg

I’ve seen plenty of garbage behavior from the fans of so-called “mature” movies. You talk about comic book fans turning their noses up at works that are “ashamed of their material”? How often have Snyder fans in particular attacked MCU films as being “kiddy, not serious”, etc, etc? And “realistic” is mocked because instead of being a serious examination of the source matter, a lot of these works are actually incredibly stupid and shallow, only offering up hollow edgy meanings like “life is pointless man” that reminds viewers of something a 15 year old would write after their first break up. Snyder takes a lot of heat in particular because he shoves tons of Jesus references in his films in a way that’s less subtle than Donner but is utterly unable to actually make those references mean anything. Why does Batman make a Kryptonite spear? Because Jesus. It’s incredibly hamfisted and stupid, the work of someone desperately trying to use allegory but without a clue of how to pull it off.

Most of the YJ complaints I’ve heard are shipper wars and complaints about how unfunny Weisman’s meme words are. Titans got a ton of heat at first but people came around to it once they saw there was more at work here. Joker is controversial but a lot of people are excited to go see it, including lots of comic book fans I know. Snyder and the recent FoX-Men didn’t flop because people refuse to give “realism” a chance. They flopped because they’re poorly made.

[Agent Z]

Those guys are stupid. But how different are those petitioners from these?
5389BD57-9F62-4263-B786-9ABB2F3E3455.jpg

They aren't. But when it comes to DC, or more specifically their adaptations, it seems any type of attack against them goes because these days they are viewed as justified or just not acknowledged at all because DC is an acceptable target.

And “realistic” is mocked because instead of being a serious examination of the source matter, a lot of these works are actually incredibly stupid and shallow, only offering up hollow edgy meanings like “life is pointless man” that reminds viewers of something a 15 year old would write after their first break up.

Case in point.

[Agent Z]

Considering we have the Nolan Bat-films giving Batman a muted costume (we couldn't even clearly see the Bat-symbol, Snyder's DCEU Bat costume is at least superior), Catwoman not being able to be called Catwoman because that would be too silly or something, and Bale declaring that he's chain himself up and not go to work if Robin was in a script, I think the "ashamed of the source material" complaints have some merit with the Nolan films. I don't think they do with WW, Titans or YJ even if I don't really agree with the interpretations of the latter two. They are just coming from a different angle.

Said source material that they want to see represented is also not one note cartoony/goofy either.

Nolan's movies were still about a billionaire crimefighter in a Bat costume who trained with ninjas, had a British butler, was friends with Jim Gordon and was overall a far more psychologically healthy person than Batman in the comics has been for the past 33 years. Bale is hardly the first person to find Robin a dumb character and let's not forget comic fans once voted to have the character killed off. Catwoman is the only villain in the Nolan movies who didn't use her codename and Nolan is not the only one guilty of this when it comes to comic book movies.

[Vordan]

They aren't. But when it comes to DC, or more specifically their adaptations, it seems any type of attack against goes because these days they are viewed as justified or just not acknowledged at because DC is an acceptable target.



Case in point.

Oh please. Nothing I posted was a personal attack. Snyder’s films being all shock and no substance is a perfectly viable argument and has been made against everyone from Michael Bay to Ridley Scott to George Lucas. Lucas prequels were also full of attempts at “more serious” storytelling with lots of galactic politics featured. And plenty of critics have pointed out the flaws in Lucas’ movies and I’ve read plenty of well written critiques of Snyder’s films that go beyond “OMG he killed my childhood”. If you want to ignore them that’s your business.

[Agent Z]

Oh please. Nothing I posted was a personal attack. Snyder’s films being all shock and no substance is a perfectly viable argument and has been made against everyone from Michael Bay to Ridley Scott to George Lucas. Lucas prequels were also full of attempts at “more serious” storytelling with lots of galactic politics featured. And plenty of critics have pointed out the flaws in Lucas’ movies and I’ve read plenty of well written critiques of Snyder’s films that go beyond “OMG he killed my childhood”. If you want to ignore them that’s your business.

You called the guy's work something a 15 year old would write after their first break up. That isn't personal?