Would The Zack Snyder Justice League Been Successful?

[Vordan]

The Zack Snyder films have a fanbase because people enjoy them. You just aren't going to see a movement for the #ReleasetheSnyderCut
if they didn't. Maybe the appeal of superhero comics for some is escapism, but that isn't true for the community as a whole.

Not to mention, Zack Snyder's two major influences are Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns, which are often ranked as some of the greatest superhero comics and are very much mainstream. Its strange how a director that clearly demonstrates a greater knowledge of the medium then most people working on superhero films today is so often framed as being anti-comic.

The fact that Snyder thinks Watchman is “how heroes should be” is one of his most profound failings as the DCEU shepherd, and shows that he doesn’t understand the work. Watchman is about how “superheroes” flat out would not work in the “real world”. They’d be mentally ill or far too removed from humanity “realistically”. And Snyder clearly doesn’t understand DKR beyond ripping off its imagery considering he thinks Batman kills throughout that story and tried to use DKR, a story where Batman snaps a gun in half in the climax because he hated them so much, to justify Batman mowing down guys in BvS and JL.

[manwhohaseverything]

The fact that Snyder thinks Watchman is “how heroes should be” is one of his most profound failings as the DCEU shepherd, and shows that he doesn’t understand the work. Watchman is about how “superheroes” flat out would not work in the “real world”. They’d be mentally ill or far too removed from humanity “realistically”. And Snyder clearly doesn’t understand DKR beyond ripping off its imagery considering he thinks Batman kills throughout that story and tried to use DKR, a story where Batman snaps a gun in half in the climax because he hated them so much, to justify Batman mowing down guys in BvS and JL.

Maybe you got it wrong. Maybe he isn't portraying a 'hero', so to speak as in a traditional sense or an ideal. Maybe snyder doesn't want to tell stories about 'heroes'. Why should superman and batman be heroes, always? Even in their origins as pulp characters they weren't much of 'heroes'. Sure, there were swashbuckling guys that did badass stuff. But, i wouldn't consider them heroes like in real world sense.

As for dark knight returns,bruce is so far gone in that story, that there is some ambiguity. He even could convince himself of not killing and not crossing the line. he would break the gun consciously. But, that doesn’t mean he wouldn't use it unconsciously. If i remember correctly, unlike waid, frank miller had no problem with bvs.

As for op's question, Snyder's movie could have very well broken even. It wouldn't have had the bulky budget, mustace nonsense... Etc. It would have had far more cohesive a vision.

[Vordan]

Maybe you got it wrong. Maybe he isn't portraying a 'hero', so to speak as in a traditional sense or an ideal. Maybe snyder doesn't want to tell stories about 'heroes'. Why should superman and batman be heroes, always? Even in their origins as pulp characters they weren't much of 'heroes'. Sure, there were swashbuckling guys that did badass stuff. But, i wouldn't consider them heroes like in real world sense.

As for dark knight returns,bruce is so far gone in that story, that there is some ambiguity. He even could convince himself of not killing and not crossing the line. he would break the gun consciously. But, that doesn’t mean he wouldn't use it unconsciously. If i remember correctly, unlike waid, frank miller had no problem with bvs.

As for op's question, Snyder's movie could have very well broken even. It wouldn't have had the bulky budget, mustace nonsense... Etc. It would have had far more cohesive a vision.

We are clearly meant to view Superman as a straight up hero. Man of Steel ends on one of the most straightforward happy endings in a Snyder film with Superman going to his new Daily Planet job. Snyder and Goyer were taken back by the backlash MoS received, they were not trying to “challenge the audience” with that movie. It was supposed to be a straightforward coming of age story where Clark is Superman at the end. The whole “five movie plan” is frankly bullshit that people spout to try to defend Snyder making Superman act more and more out of character so he could do his dark and edgy take on these characters. There was no “five movie arc” with MoS.

Batman in DKR does not kill, period. He doesn’t kill Joker or Superman, he doesn’t kill the mutant leader, he doesn’t kill at all. Is he a straightforward heroic figure? No he’s clearly mentally unstable and violent but he’s not a murderer. Miller is free to like BvS, I don’t care, but Miller is not the creator he once was and his opinions on Batman don’t hold the same weight with me as they once might have.

The DCEU was not meant to be one man’s “vision” like say Joker. It was meant to be the DC answer to the MCU. It was supposed to be a billion dollar machine that pumped out critics and commercial hits. You were supposed to like and care about these characters. The critics did not like or care about Snyder’s versions of these characters. The general audience did not like or care about Snyder’s versions of these characters, and Snyder only got as far as he did because DC has such a strong in built fanbase thanks to better works like the DCAU. Snyder has his fanbase clearly but they’re not the majority despite the hashtag campaigning. Movies that broke with his vision fared far better critically or commercially.

JL was on track to make less money than BvS, a testament to the damage that movie did to the brand. Snyder’s JL would’ve bombed with the critics, but probably would’ve had a higher profit margin given his reshoots would’ve been less extensive than Whedon’s presumably. It would not have broken a billion and still would’ve been a failure.

[SiegePerilous02]

BvS's Batman is at least a little more honest, or obvious, about the fact that this TDKR-style Batman is not meant to be a hero. So I'd prefer him to TDKR or even some of the post-Crisis versions for just that.

But I kind of hate all of them lol, and putting more of an overly violent Batman out into the world is just a bad idea. Especially for a big mainstream production where you want your heroes to be liked so they continue to follow them. BvS Bruce is just an unlikeable maniac for most of the run time, and the movie is still very confused about its messages. It tries to deconstruct his violence and deal with "realistic" consequences...but still revels in his violence by making his action scenes stylistically cool. That isn't that much better than the Arkham games and comes across as more confused.

Less overly violent Batman in general please. I don't think wanting to like him is too much to ask, but creators keep ramping up how brutal he is either believing it makes him cooler/more heroic or in the attempt to show that he's a villain, and both are just super lame and not as interesting as they think it is.

[Wandering_Wand]

There was no “five movie arc” with MoS.

Jay Oliva himself said there was. For the record, Jay helped storyboard Justice League with Zack. And, in case anyway doesn't know, Jay has directed DC Animated films, so he's not just some schmuck from across the street.

BvS's Batman is at least a little more honest, or obvious, about the fact that this TDKR-style Batman is not meant to be a hero. So I'd prefer him to TDKR or even some of the post-Crisis versions for just that.

But I kind of hate all of them lol, and putting more of an overly violent Batman out into the world is just a bad idea. Especially for a big mainstream production where you want your heroes to be liked so they continue to follow them. BvS Bruce is just an unlikeable maniac for most of the run time, and the movie is still very confused about its messages. It tries to deconstruct his violence and deal with "realistic" consequences...but still revels in his violence by making his action scenes stylistically cool. That isn't that much better than the Arkham games and comes across as more confused.

Less overly violent Batman in general please. I don't think wanting to like him is too much to ask, but creators keep ramping up how brutal he is either believing it makes him cooler/more heroic or in the attempt to show that he's a villain, and both are just super lame and not as interesting as they think it is.

I had a rather long response (not argumentative) to this typed out and didn't save it, then I had an error and couldn't restore the auto-saved content, but it's probably for the best. In short summary, it seems the majority of people would rather have safe and recognizable takes on these characters vs. experimenting with different artistic styles. On one hand, we see the majority wants the former, while the minority craves the latter. We know who wins in that forum because the majority = money.
Deborah Snyder said it best after BvS's reception, and I still vividly recall people calling her names and criticizing her over it, but when looking back it was really the truth: "Fans don't want to see these heroes deconstructed [to the extent they did so]."

[SiegePerilous02]

I had a rather long response (not argumentative) to this typed out and didn't save it, then I had an error and couldn't restore the auto-saved content, but it's probably for the best. In short summary, it seems the majority of people would rather have safe and recognizable takes on these characters vs. experimenting with different artistic styles. On one hand, we see the majority wants the former, while the minority craves the latter. We know who wins in that forum because the majority = money.
Deborah Snyder said it best after BvS's reception, and I still vividly recall people calling her names and criticizing her over it, but when looking back it was really the truth: "Fans don't want to see these heroes deconstructed [to the extent they did so]."

I don't think it's unusual to not want to see it deconstructed. Not only that, it has to work on its own merits. There are plenty of criticisms of Snyder's movies and how they work on their own merits, not just about fans' preconceived notions of the characters.

There can be room for more experimentation. But it's a dumb move to do with such an expensive project that needs to be REALLY successful and click with the audience to make its money back, AND compete with Marvel. It just was not the time or the place before we even get into the quality. Meanwhile, Joker was a smash hit so there is room for deconstruction and experimentation, it just needs to be a good film without the need for an insane budget. Snyder's movies just weren't good, though calling Deborah Snyder names is in poor taste even if I disagree with her.

[Pinsir]

No, narratively they very much are self contained stand alone works. Their inspiring other creators has nothing to do with changing that very clear fact. They weren't designed that way, and using them to launch movies that need to appeal to as broad an audience as possible (especially families and kids) to be profitable is very unwise. Casual audiences don't care about their impact on the comic industry.

But I wasn't saying they were self-contained works, I was saying their influential. They also, aren't self-contained works, Watchmen has prequal stories and sequels now, TDK has sequels by the same author too. I only mentioned Watchmen and TDK because it's influence on Snyder is obvious, but the Killing Joke is of the same vein as those two and its still in DC Comics continuity. I only read a few issues of Doomsday Clock, but from from what I know of it, much of the work is a meta-commentary as to how Watchmen influenced the comics medium as a whole.

[The Darknight Detective]

I don't think it's unusual to not want to see it deconstructed. Not only that, it has to work on its own merits. There are plenty of criticisms of Snyder's movies and how they work on their own merits, not just about fans' preconceived notions of the characters.

It's pretty much the latter overtly or when you read between the lines, though. Which I get, BTW. While I enjoyed what Snyder did, I don't think it was the best way to go commercially. Had I been in charge, I would have taken a JLU-style path instead.

[SiegePerilous02]

But I wasn't saying they were self-contained works, I was saying their influential

But what you said had nothing to do them being self contained or not.

They also, aren't self-contained works, Watchmen has prequal stories and sequels now, TDK has sequels by the same author too. I only mentioned Watchmen and TDK because it's influence on Snyder is obvious, but the Killing Joke is of the same vein as those two and its still in DC Comics continuity. I only read a few issues of Doomsday Clock, but from from what I know of it, much of the work is a meta-commentary as to how Watchmen influenced the comics medium as a whole.

They are still self contained works and evergreen sellers. No sequels or prequels were in sight when they were first created, and they don't mean much to them as works by themselves, especially as they came out long after the fact and have no impact on the stories themselves. TDKSA is much maligned by the fandom by TDKR is still held up as a classic. And Moore has nothing to do with any of the Watchmen sequels. Plus neither of them were initially part of the mainstream universe. And also, them being influential has nothing to do with them being self contained or not. That's not what that means.

And again, using any of these as influence for expensive movies that need to have as broad as possible appeal to make money is very dumb even if the final product is good. Which these are not.

[Cyberstrike]

I absolutely HATE Man of Steel it's the not only a bad Superman movie it's the WORST superhero I've ever seen, and I hate that piece of crap so much that it killed my dream of seeing a Superman/Batman and/or a Justice League live action movie, a dream that I had since 1989. IMHO Snyder's "version" of Justice League would've been a bigger flop than the version that got released.

[married guy]

I absolutely HATE Man of Steel it's the not only a bad Superman movie it's the WORST superhero I've ever seen, and I hate that piece of crap so much that it killed my dream of seeing a Superman/Batman and/or a Justice League live action movie, a dream that I had since 1989. IMHO Snyder's "version" of Justice League would've been a bigger flop than the version that got released.

Yeah. MoS pissed me off quite a bit. I'm sorry, but Superman DOESN'T kill!! He will ALWAYS find another solution.
Zack Snyder obviously has a very different idea of what lies at the core of the Superman character than I do.

[Vampire Savior]

I'm going to have to go with "No", too. What version would be/is worse is a REALLY good question, but I doubt Snyder's version would have been good, based on the other DC films I've seen from him. I know it's a very cliche thing to say, but I don't think he really gets the characters and takes the wrong messages from the comics. He might be better suited to adapting some Warren Ellis Wildstorm stuff, or something like that, but he doesn't have a very good grasp on the DC Universe.

[manwhohaseverything]

We are clearly meant to view Superman as a straight up hero. Man of Steel ends on one of the most straightforward happy endings in a Snyder film with Superman going to his new Daily Planet job. Snyder and Goyer were taken back by the backlash MoS received, they were not trying to “challenge the audience” with that movie. It was supposed to be a straightforward coming of age story where Clark is Superman at the end. The whole “five movie plan” is frankly bullshit that people spout to try to defend Snyder making Superman act more and more out of character so he could do his dark and edgy take on these characters. There was no “five movie arc” with MoS.

Batman in DKR does not kill, period. He doesn’t kill Joker or Superman, he doesn’t kill the mutant leader, he doesn’t kill at all. Is he a straightforward heroic figure? No he’s clearly mentally unstable and violent but he’s not a murderer. Miller is free to like BvS, I don’t care, but Miller is not the creator he once was and his opinions on Batman don’t hold the same weight with me as they once might have.

The DCEU was not meant to be one man’s “vision” like say Joker. It was meant to be the DC answer to the MCU. It was supposed to be a billion dollar machine that pumped out critics and commercial hits. You were supposed to like and care about these characters. The critics did not like or care about Snyder’s versions of these characters. The general audience did not like or care about Snyder’s versions of these characters, and Snyder only got as far as he did because DC has such a strong in built fanbase thanks to better works like the DCAU. Snyder has his fanbase clearly but they’re not the majority despite the hashtag campaigning. Movies that broke with his vision fared far better critically or commercially.

JL was on track to make less money than BvS, a testament to the damage that movie did to the brand. Snyder’s JL would’ve bombed with the critics, but probably would’ve had a higher profit margin given his reshoots would’ve been less extensive than Whedon’s presumably. It would not have broken a billion and still would’ve been a failure.

Having a coming of age story doesn't the character becomes hero in the real world sense.bare in mind, i am not saying clark hasn't done altruistic actions in both movies.but,clark was always portrayed as a simple man with problems.he wasn't giving speeches or leading the masses.Only actions made him a symbol(sometimes controversial) that people latched on to. That too was unintended consequences.Clark was never a leader that took command.He was just a wierd alien guy from kansas.He would have had to grow into that.if that was the end goal.
Making less money doesn't mean a failure. It might be for the suits.but,at the very least it would have had a chance of breaking even.

Yeah!i am not going to put myself above the author of the book.bruce isn't normal in dkr.he is just itching for action.it wouldn't surprise me that he would convince himself that he didn't kill,when he actually did.

[Robanker]

I will say no, and while I'm a vocal detractor of Zack Snyder's vision, I will say that after the critical receptions of all his DC films being lukewarm-to-poor and the disappointing box office results of BvS (which had no excuse not to break a billion off its premise alone), I think the well was just too poisoned outside of some Hail Mary like Gunn throwing it all away and doing something wacky that somehow caught lightning in a bottle; to be succinct, I don't think anything could have reliably pulled the DCEU as a collective out of its tailspin. As a shared universe, the damage was done and Justice League was a clear attempt to cut to the billions Marvel built towards.

Warner Bros is as much to blame as Snyder for the DCEU floundering as a united vision and as a result I just don't think it was ever going to work in the timeframe they wanted.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yeah. MoS pissed me off quite a bit. I'm sorry, but Superman DOESN'T kill!! He will ALWAYS find another solution.
Zack Snyder obviously has a very different idea of what lies at the core of the Superman character than I do.

Tell that to all the version of the character that had.Even byrne post crisis superman has killed.This notion is ridiculous. Generally even the post crisis is like gohan.When push comes to shove he would make choices and take sides.