Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBOmax in 2021!

[Castle]

Your response has nothing to do with mine..

is this relevant on a public forum?

Are you actually paying attention to what's being discussed? Serious question

Definitely I am paying attention.

Its good to see a discussion of all the criticism of Snyder's Man of Steel get debunked point by point. We are doing what the ''professional critics'' should have done.

I am just curious, if you were Superman with Super Strength and lazer beams what would you have done to Zod as he tried to massacre kids and bystanders?

I spoke to the CIA and secret service, they are favouring killing Zod on the spot, its how they deal with terrorists. they kill them on the spot.

This is why I love Snyder and his Superman.

[lowfyr]

This could not be further from the truth. lol.

you are quick to bring up media exposure, but that objectively belongs more with MCU B tier characters and the Disney machine that has pushed them. Batman and Superman were always iconic without even having the media to help them out. The media helps Marvel's B tier characters 10x more.

Batman and Superman have been around mainstream since the 40s and back then there was little mass media, or social media.

You don't think batman was iconic? Did you see the thrill and excitement people got when they announced Micheal Keaton was coming back? Keaton from the 80s and 90s?

Snyder was right about what he said about Thor, let see where Thor's franchise will be in 30-40 years. Does Thor even have a name from himself without the MCU? Batman and Superman don't need DCU or even movies.

The Snyder comments about Thor may seem hurtful to MCU fans but he was far from wrong.

Pushing "B-Characters" is bad than, or as usual with you only with the MCU?

And yes even Batman and Superman need the movies or the merchandise because that is there the money is. Without them comics could end sooner than later.

Finally you do not even try to get stuff like objectively or subjectively right, don't you? Or more accurate you use it how to back your "arguments".

[80sbaby]

is this relevant on a public forum?

Um, yes? You responded to a point I never made and so your response doesn't make sense. This being a public forum is irrelevant to that.

Your second post is also kinda showing you are not, in fact, paying attention.

[lowfyr]

Its obvious at this point, it is about bias agendas.

glasshouse stones, pott kettle and so on. Thanks, I had a good laugh out of you of all people even talking about bias agenda.

[Rev9]

Exactly. BvS didn't do the necessarily character development and worldbuilding to justify not only Batman's new behaviour (because the film states it is new) but why Batman's violent ways are bad and that he needs to change from them. Yet at the same time, it expects the viewer to know who Batman is in detail to understand the character up until that point so it can skip over all that stuff and get to the story it wanted to tell. No one can convince me otherwise that the entire point of BvS and Snyder's take on these characters was simply to say and show that he could do it, and not because he genuinely had a great story to tell from it. And sure, he's within his artistic rights to do that, but he and whoever supports or agrees with him does not get to deflect the criticism by saying we can't bring our preconceived notions into it or "oThEr bAtMeN kIlLeD tOo!" It's lazy and considering I am yet to see or hear a good justification as to why he went that route, I believe what I believe.



I doubt you'll get a reasonable explanation for such contrived writing. People have been criticising this aspect of the fight for years now and I haven't read a single sensisble explanation for it. As someone who isn't really that big of a Batman and Superman fan, it's moments like these (and there are many) that made me dislike BvS even more upon my recent rewatch. I've gotten over the way the characters were adapted but it is just how awful the screenplay is that makes it a truly bad film.

Honestly, what was the point of the Knightmare sequence? What even was it? Why is Wonder Woman in that movie? Why does that movie need a Justice League set up (and pause the entire movie for several minutes to show it)? Why does the film spend several minutes with Clark investigating Batman when it becomes completely irrelevant as to why they fight in the first place? There's way too much going on in that film that every aspect of it gets short-changed.

Exactly. BvS didn't do the necessarily character development and worldbuilding to justify not only Batman's new behaviour (because the film states it is new) but why Batman's violent ways are bad and that he needs to change from them. Yet at the same time, it expects the viewer to know who Batman is in detail to understand the character up until that point so it can skip over all that stuff and get to the story it wanted to tell. No one can convince me otherwise that the entire point of BvS and Snyder's take on these characters was simply to say and show that he could do it, and not because he genuinely had a great story to tell from it. And sure, he's within his artistic rights to do that, but he and whoever supports or agrees with him does not get to deflect the criticism by saying we can't bring our preconceived notions into it or "oThEr bAtMeN kIlLeD tOo!" It's lazy and considering I am yet to see or hear a good justification as to why he went that route, I believe what I believe.



I doubt you'll get a reasonable explanation for such contrived writing. People have been criticising this aspect of the fight for years now and I haven't read a single sensisble explanation for it. As someone who isn't really that big of a Batman and Superman fan, it's moments like these (and there are many) that made me dislike BvS even more upon my recent rewatch. I've gotten over the way the characters were adapted but it is just how awful the screenplay is that makes it a truly bad film.

Honestly, what was the point of the Knightmare sequence? What even was it? Why is Wonder Woman in that movie? Why does that movie need a Justice League set up (and pause the entire movie for several minutes to show it)? Why does the film spend several minutes with Clark investigating Batman when it becomes completely irrelevant as to why they fight in the first place? There's way too much going on in that film that every aspect of it gets short-changed.

"The film is relying on us to bring our preconceived notions and love of these characters in with us to do the heavy lifting of making us care while not doing much itself"

I think that is the big problem for the detractors,maybe it is easier to pay attention when you actually are eager to understand the intricacies of the story. For example so many complaints about the fight happening seem to suggest it came out of nowhere ,when in fact we know by the fight itself Superman and Batman have met for the 3rd time! Sure their encounter was brief both times but is critical in understanding why the fight happened

When Superman comes down He says 'Bruce I was wrong,you have to listen to me,Lex wants to..' leave alone the sonic blast, we are keyed in that Superman now knows Batman is Bruce,how he deduced this we are not told but it may well be he either figured Bruce was the Batman with the eavesdropping or recognising his voice through the modulator he is Superman after all.

Now if you remember how he talked with Bruce,he knows Bruce's feelings towards him are prejudiced 'an alien who could burn the whole place down' so although he is appealing to Bruce to listen he ALREADY knows it's an uphill task. A guy who sarcastically indirectly referred to him as a clown(even though it was a pun intended for the Joker)

Again when he told Batman in costume to 'bury the bat' not only does it mean Superman has to act with more force because of the warning,but also because he is on the clock he has to act fast,he even says he doesn't kill him outright implying he wants to reason with him,but Batman only understands force(fist in the UC)

The fact that Batman asked him 'do you bleed' and perhaps even heard 'you will' with his Superhearing means he knows Bruce is out for blood literally.

All this complaining that they could both just talk it over,and avoid the fight is not backed by in film set up.The events leading up to the fight do show Superman wanted to be reasonable,but from the film itself their interactions do not show that Superman could confidently say 'If I talk to this guy he'll understand'

Follow in movie logic not 'externalised' scripts

[Castle]

Um, yes? You responded to a point I never made and so your response doesn't make sense. This being a public forum is irrelevant to that.

Your second post is also kinda showing you are not, in fact, paying attention.

To extend on some of your response about how superman was portrayed or the martha scene

I think it is time people start listing every superman comic issue to try and argue against what Snyder did.

Pushing "B-Characters" is bad than, or as usual with you only with the MCU?

And yes even Batman and Superman need the movies or the merchandise because that is there the money is. Without them comics could end sooner than later.

Finally you do not even try to get stuff like objectively or subjectively right, don't you? Or more accurate you use it how to back your "arguments".

Pushing B list characters are not bad but A list characters don't require the same the push, this is why they are A list.

And yes even Batman and Superman need the movies or the merchandise because that is there the money is. Without them comics could end sooner than later.

Batman remained an A -list comic book character after Batman and Robin arguably killed every superhero movie, not just batman movies.

Finally you do not even try to get stuff like objectively or subjectively right, don't you? Or more accurate you use it how to back your "arguments".

to be objective is to say Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are the most iconic comic book characters.

to be subjective is to try and argue that is not the case because they are not Marvel characters.

[Steel Inquisitor]

To extend on some of your response about how superman was portrayed or the martha scene

I think it is time people start listing every superman comic issue to try and argue against what Snyder did.

If we did that there would be nothing else in this thread.

Pushing B list characters are not bad but A list characters don't require the same the push, this is why they are A list.

A list characters become A-listers because they get the biggest push because they sell, and with companies they'll put more money into safe characters over less age ones. This is why Batman's had more movies than Superman has.

Batman remained an A -list comic book character after Batman and Robin arguably killed every superhero movie, not just batman movies.

Batman and Robin didn't kill anything except making silly Batman movies.

to be objective is to say Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are the most iconic comic book characters.

to be subjective is to try and argue that is not the case because they are not Marvel characters.

This is how iconic those characters are between each other:


Batman



Superman






Wonder Woman (she'd be much lower without the DCEU)


They're iconic because those companies invest lots of time and money into putting them in movies, comic books, tv shows, cartoons, action figures, and bed covers. The quality of this affects them, as well, Superman has less popular media than Batman does. In comics Batman is able to retain numerous main titles by himself, and maintain high quality for the majority of it with the best artists and writers in the business. That really helps with staying popular. Wonder Woman can't get a solo cartoon, in cartoons her supporting cats and enemies are disposable, the last live action versions had was in the 60's until Gal Gadot and she only is able to keep a sustain ongoing comic title, two if she's lucky.

This isn't solely about Marvel, in the movies there are numerous franchises which started from nothing and became iconic. Star Wars, for example. But not every franchise knocks it right off the park that easily, Trek is iconic but its first tv show had a cult following and was cancelled after 3 seasons and it would be years until it was revived.

[SiegePerilous02]

The dream and the Flash confused me honestly. I get that the start was just a dream (kind of an odd dream, but whatever) but having the Flash show up at that moment made me wonder if Flash was supposed to be connected to the dream somehow. Did he cause it?

Even setting aside the confusion, the dream was completely unneeded narrativly. Batman already wanted to kill Superman. Giving him a dream that shows Superman as evil changes nothing. What exactly is that supposed to show? He wants to kill Superman, then he has a dream and that makes him want to kill Superman slightly more?


I remember hearing a few people wondering if that was supposed to be Ironman showing up. That was not a good design for the Flash and they did a horrible job showing who it was supposed to be.

That whole sequence really should have been first on the chopping block for the theatrical cut when more important scenes did not make it. Like you say, it doesn't change Bruce's motivation at all. He's already in the process of doing it. And he would get more motivation later when Wally blows up (though that is also kind of a stupid scene- Wally didn't notify anybody he wasn't getting the checks? Nobody felt the need to notify Bruce until conveniently right before the explosion?).

The whole stupid Batmobile chase sequence should have been cut too. He put a tracker on the truck, why not just wait until it gets where it's going and sneak in later (lol which he does later anyway off screen)? Why does Superman, who apparently has a problem with Batman, just listen to the whole thing, passive aggressively let the Batmobile crash into him and scold Batman, and then fly off without checking on any of the damage Batman caused?

[SiegePerilous02]

"The film is relying on us to bring our preconceived notions and love of these characters in with us to do the heavy lifting of making us care while not doing much itself"

I think that is the big problem for the detractors,maybe it is easier to pay attention when you actually are eager to understand the intricacies of the story. For example so many complaints about the fight happening seem to suggest it came out of nowhere ,when in fact we know by the fight itself Superman and Batman have met for the 3rd time! Sure their encounter was brief both times but is critical in understanding why the fight happened

When Superman comes down He says 'Bruce I was wrong,you have to listen to me,Lex wants to..' leave alone the sonic blast, we are keyed in that Superman now knows Batman is Bruce,how he deduced this we are not told but it may well be he either figured Bruce was the Batman with the eavesdropping or recognising his voice through the modulator he is Superman after all.

Now if you remember how he talked with Bruce,he knows Bruce's feelings towards him are prejudiced 'an alien who could burn the whole place down' so although he is appealing to Bruce to listen he ALREADY knows it's an uphill task. A guy who sarcastically indirectly referred to him as a clown(even though it was a pun intended for the Joker)

Again when he told Batman in costume to 'bury the bat' not only does it mean Superman has to act with more force because of the warning,but also because he is on the clock he has to act fast,he even says he doesn't kill him outright implying he wants to reason with him,but Batman only understands force(fist in the UC)

The fact that Batman asked him 'do you bleed' and perhaps even heard 'you will' with his Superhearing means he knows Bruce is out for blood literally.

All this complaining that they could both just talk it over,and avoid the fight is not backed by in film set up.The events leading up to the fight do show Superman wanted to be reasonable,but from the film itself their interactions do not show that Superman could confidently say 'If I talk to this guy he'll understand'

Follow in movie logic not 'externalised' scripts

You mean the film's lack of logic?

If Superman is even bothering trying to appeal to him, even on the slim chance he will listen, he has no reason to pussyfoot around the issue especially when the clock is ticking. He just needs to say his mother was kidnapped and he needs help. He just acts like an idiot throwing gasoline onto a fire.

A titular fight needed to happen, logic be damned. Even if the characters had to act like morons to get it to happen.

[Castle]

You mean the film's lack of logic?

If Superman is even bothering trying to appeal to him, even on the slim chance he will listen, he has no reason to pussyfoot around the issue especially when the clock is ticking. He just needs to say his mother was kidnapped and he needs help. He just acts like an idiot throwing gasoline onto a fire.

A titular fight needed to happen, logic be damned. Even if the characters had to act like morons to get it to happen.

Superman did what you said. the very first meeting he had with batman, he went directly to the point.
Batman was the one who cut him off. Superman tried one more time to get his point across, it was batman who was acting out and not listening to what superman was trying to say.

Here is another wrong thing said about the film, that is proven false.

I think it is getting funny that the people who are against Snyder are not even quoting his movies correctly.lol

[SiegePerilous02]

Superman did what you said. the very first meeting he had with batman, he went directly to the point.
Batman was the one who cut him off. Superman tried one more time to get his point across, it was batman who was acting out and not listening to what superman was trying to say.

Here is another wrong thing said about the film, that is proven false.

I think it is getting funny that the people who are against Snyder are not even quoting his movies correctly.lol

Lol you didn't prove anything because you aren't even talking about the same meeting. The very first meeting he just said "the Bat is dead, bury it" and then flies off because apparently he doesn't care about the dead people Batman left in his wake (despite disliking Batman's methods).

At what point during the titular fight does he cut the BS and just say his mother was kidnapped? If he wasn't so busy posturing and shoving Batman around, there were breaks in the fight where he could have just said it. Yeah he was pissed, but his mother's life was on the line and he wasn't in any immediate danger until the Kryptonite (which he knew nothing about) came into play.

Are the people who are for Snyder even quoting his movies correctly?

[80sbaby]

They aren't even quoting the posters in this topic correctly...

[Castle]

Lol you didn't prove anything because you aren't even talking about the same meeting. The very first meeting he just said "the Bat is dead, bury it" and then flies off because apparently he doesn't care about the dead people Batman left in his wake (despite disliking Batman's methods).
?

Superman told Batman, he needed to stop vigilanting since his vigilanting was causing damage. that does not sound like a person who does not care.

Didn't Clark confront Bruce at Lex party of the wrongs Batman was doing to Bruce's annoyance? that does not sound like a person that does not care.

This is in the film

At what point during the titular fight does he cut the BS and just say his mother was kidnapped?

But this is not a plot problem. Remember Civil War? they could have cut the bs of the airport fight and unnecessarily bringing in spiderman for the fun of it. I hope you had the same issue with that movie, since that was worse than what you find wrong with Dawn of justice.

Superman told Batman to stay down, if he wanted it he would be dead already so Superman wanted to stop, he didnt even want to fight. the fight only continued because batman kept on attacking and not just attacking, he stated using kyptonite, Superman at the moment had no choice but to try and bring batman down. that is how most superman fights goes in the comics.he usually holds back and tell others to surrender because he knows how poeerful he is, I must ask, have you read the many of the comics? or maybe watched one of his popular cartoons? that was the same way things went with shazam vs superman in justice league unlimted, its free on youtube to watch and shazam was not using kyptonite like batman in the movie.

They aren't even quoting the posters in this topic correctly...

Please say something else new about the many things Snyder's got wrong about Superman that can easily be disproved with Superman own mythos.

[Blind Wedjat]

"The film is relying on us to bring our preconceived notions and love of these characters in with us to do the heavy lifting of making us care while not doing much itself"

I think that is the big problem for the detractors,maybe it is easier to pay attention when you actually are eager to understand the intricacies of the story. For example so many complaints about the fight happening seem to suggest it came out of nowhere ,when in fact we know by the fight itself Superman and Batman have met for the 3rd time! Sure their encounter was brief both times but is critical in understanding why the fight happened

When Superman comes down He says 'Bruce I was wrong,you have to listen to me,Lex wants to..' leave alone the sonic blast, we are keyed in that Superman now knows Batman is Bruce,how he deduced this we are not told but it may well be he either figured Bruce was the Batman with the eavesdropping or recognising his voice through the modulator he is Superman after all.

Now if you remember how he talked with Bruce,he knows Bruce's feelings towards him are prejudiced 'an alien who could burn the whole place down' so although he is appealing to Bruce to listen he ALREADY knows it's an uphill task. A guy who sarcastically indirectly referred to him as a clown(even though it was a pun intended for the Joker)

Again when he told Batman in costume to 'bury the bat' not only does it mean Superman has to act with more force because of the warning,but also because he is on the clock he has to act fast,he even says he doesn't kill him outright implying he wants to reason with him,but Batman only understands force(fist in the UC)

The fact that Batman asked him 'do you bleed' and perhaps even heard 'you will' with his Superhearing means he knows Bruce is out for blood literally.

All this complaining that they could both just talk it over,and avoid the fight is not backed by in film set up.The events leading up to the fight do show Superman wanted to be reasonable,but from the film itself their interactions do not show that Superman could confidently say 'If I talk to this guy he'll understand'

Follow in movie logic not 'externalised' scripts

A movie's logic comes from its script. How can you separate the two? That's an excuse and it makes no sense to look at a movie in that way.

You've still failed to explain why Superman doesn't try hard enough to tell Batman that both of them have been manipulated into fighting each other and that his mother has been kidnapped, and her life is on a ticking clock. All of this stuff you've written doesn't give an explanation, which I knew it wouldn't.

After all, you yourself just said Superman knows he's actively trying to kill him from past encounters (never mind the fact that Batman's methods in which he's trying to kill him are incredibly nonsensical). Superman arrives at Gotham where Batman is and he's hovering above him. The imagery is obvious: he is a god above Batman who is a man. But beyond that, is it wise to show Superman in that moment as god-like when he is coming to Batman for help? Snyder is a man that thinks deeply about how he wants his films to appear visually, but he sometimes doesn't think about whether those visuals complement what's going on in the plot. At that point, Superman isn't trying to intimidate Batman, so why is he made to look like he is?

I'm going to ignore the fact that Superman doesn't scan the area where a man who's trying to kill him is. His mother has been kidnapped, he's probably panicking and thinking about that more than anything else. Plus he's never shown that kind of tactical prowess in the DCEU so I'll allow it. Why doesn't he say what he has to when he's hovering above Batman? Fine, he thinks it's better to tell him on the ground. And he is about to say something before the sonic cannons and machine guns go off. But why on earth does he stop there? Those weapons didn't stop his ability to communicate. They don't even hurt him. Again, ignoring that Batman's tactics in this fight don't make sense, he never actively tries to say anything when he still has the ability to speak. Instead he vaguely says "You don't understand" to which Batman gets in his face and yells. Again, doesn't say anything pertaining to Lex's machinations and instead shoves him away. Why is he antagonising a man he doesn't want to fight and he knows wants to kill him? Answer that. Even when he's shoved far away, he still doesn't say anything. Then, he shoves Batman up a building and then throws him into the Bat-Signal. Batman is briefly stunned, and instead of Superman to say something again about the fact that his mother has been kidnapped, could die any moment and that the two of them have been manipulated, he issues a threat ("If I wanted it you'd be dead already") to a man who is trying to kill him. And it doesn't stop there too, because he lets Batman bring out a smoke grenade very slowly instead of saying something. It's only when he's been hit with Kryptonite gas that he becomes weak and chokes, and I assume unable to speak properly. But that's his fault for acting like a dumbass brute. Batman's tactics in this fight are so nonsensical that he only introduces what he knows is Superman's weakness after several blows from Superman, any of which if Superman was trying to kill him, would have ended up in his own death. And yet, for someone reason, Superman does not try his best to get Batman to not kill him.

If my mother was kidnapped by a mad man who is forcing me to fight someone, and I have the opportunity to try appealing to that someone while the mad man isn't even watching, then you're damn sure I'd be trying my hardest to make that appeal, instead of intimidating and antagonise the very person that could help me. I do not believe for one second that any sensible person in Superman's shoes would do what he did in that situation, or rather what he failed to do over and over again. But these are fictional characters and they only make sense when a writer writes them to make sense. So to ask me to "follow in movie logic not 'externalised' scripts" is simply telling me to come up with contrived excuses for poor script writing.

It's not that I believe Batman would have listened or stopped if Superman had told him Lex was manipulating both of them and his mother had been kidnapped (although it's debatable considering Batman had an emotional breakdown from hearing the name "Martha"). The guy wanted to kill him by any means necessary (even though how he approaches the fight doesn't show that) and wasn't in the right state of mind. It's that the script does not allow Superman to try hard enough, so that when the fight happens it feels like the only logical conclusion from their encounter and it's heart-breaking to watch it come to that. Instead the script allows the fight to be as contrived as possible just so the fight can happen in the first place.

And it's not even a good fight: it's Superman being a dumb brute and Batman being an equally dumb brute with poor tactics. Batman only gets the upper hand because Superman wasn't trying to kill him (even thought Batman believed otherwise) and he had plot-induced luck.

[Rev9]

Lol you didn't prove anything because you aren't even talking about the same meeting. The very first meeting he just said "the Bat is dead, bury it" and then flies off because apparently he doesn't care about the dead people Batman left in his wake (despite disliking Batman's methods).

At what point during the titular fight does he cut the BS and just say his mother was kidnapped? If he wasn't so busy posturing and shoving Batman around, there were breaks in the fight where he could have just said it. Yeah he was pissed, but his mother's life was on the line and he wasn't in any immediate danger until the Kryptonite (which he knew nothing about) came into play.

Are the people who are for Snyder even quoting his movies correctly?

Wow 'The Bat is dead,bury it' is SOO different from 'Bury the Bat' don't worry I don't need to watch the movie to respond to you.You should know though that is not their first meeting,it is their second (the first is at the Gala hosted by Lex)..pay attention

You mean the film's lack of logic?

If Superman is even bothering trying to appeal to him, even on the slim chance he will listen, he has no reason to pussyfoot around the issue especially when the clock is ticking. He just needs to say his mother was kidnapped and he needs help. He just acts like an idiot throwing gasoline onto a fire.

A titular fight needed to happen, logic be damned. Even if the characters had to act like morons to get it to happen.

Even if he did tell him all you said hovering in the air let us say,on the back of all I've told you do you believe Batman would believe him,hovering there at that point? Bruce still sees him as an alien,whatever Superman would say would not land.Batman was filled with 'piss and vinegar' .It is only when Superman is broken and in the face of death that the appeal lands.It's realistic people are their truest selves in dire situations not just with posturing and pontification.

Look at it another way assuming Bruce even has the time of day to give KAL... After carnage following Superman wherever he went,he shows up and is like:

'My mother needs help Luthor is going to kill her unless I kill you'

You really think Bruce will be like 'oh darn why didn't you say so?' Like Really...To me honestly his reply would be 'So you bring a war here thousands die for no reason and now you have a reason to kill,to save your mum?'

Be objective here in what world would Batman help superman with his own prejudice unresolved? It is ridiculous by detractors of the movie to claim they could talk it out.That would be the worst scripting if they followed that idea.

As I say over and over,follow in film script with an open mind and you'll realise you don't give credit where it is due.Just be honest with yourself