Why do people say Zack Snyder doesn't respect comics?

[NaVi]

Zack Snyder's problem is that he believes that complicated = buno, that's why he complicates things more than necessary. MoS: no flying, no suit, no superman, just clark, everything else remains the same. BvS: a totally novice superman, who has just shown himself to the world, everything else remains the same. This small change, at least to me, would allow me to accept, understand the doubts and fears that he has, towards himself and the world, but also the fear and doubts of the world and of Batman. Because superman can be afraid and doubtful, but not as the basis of his being, which is what we saw in the Zack Snyder movies.

[Pinsir]

The majority keep continuity consistent, not every writer just does whatever they usually gets ignored when a new writer comes aboard or retconned into prior continuity since canon remains a high priority for serial comic books. The popular changes become the new status quo for the next writer.

I'm not really talking about continuity though, rather tone, themes and general writing style. A different author will produce a different story. Grant Morrison's Batman is different than Tom King's and so on.

[Dboi2001]

compressing a lot of this down

First off I acknowledge that the mcu took from 616 as much as 1610 however the ultimates was an alternate universe. Hell Peter Parks acts more like Miles Morales than 616 Peter Parker. Adaptation are never going to be completely accurate especially in a franchise like the mcu or dceu

Zack took a lot of stuff from Bryne’s MoS along with Birthright. I wouldn’t call it an adaptation because it wasn’t trying to be. And you say Smallville Luthor is the most accurate but which version?

Snyder didn’t portray Batman as being awesome he portrayed him as scary and ruthless with his theme or showing the terror in criminals. And the Tumbler causes just as much damage as the Snyder Batmobile. Throughout the movie we see Batman is one who is addicted to alcohol and pills and has nightmares about literal demons. He isn’t a role model

And he did put a tracking device on it as contingency. he went after them because he thought it was a bomb and why take the chance? Besides he had no issue taking out the trucks. Again dude no Batman didn’t knock the car into the gas truck. Regardless Snyder does not portray Batman as particularly heroic or righteous. He is a broken man and an addict

Would it have been nice to see Batman’s early years or prime years yes but we get more than enough clues that things have changed and Bruce is living in denial

How was superman being a hypocrite? and he spelt it pretty clear to Bruce Wayne at Luthor’s party. Gotham is living in fear and civil liberties are being trampled. The closest thing Superman does to vigilantism in BvS is intervene with the dictator from killing Lois

You’re right he wasn’t Batman in BvS You finally got it.. He was post Batman someone who is broken. And at the end of BvS he shows to be more hopeful. What do you think he meant when he told Diana men are still good?

[Steel Inquisitor]

I'm not really talking about continuity though, rather tone, themes and general writing style. A different author will produce a different story. Grant Morrison's Batman is different than Tom King's and so on.

But they're still recognisable as traditional canon Batman, they're not doing Elseworlds versions.

compressing a lot of this down

First off I acknowledge that the mcu took from 616 as much as 1610 however the ultimates was an alternate universe. Hell Peter Parks acts more like Miles Morales than 616 Peter Parker. Adaptation are never going to be completely accurate especially in a franchise like the mcu or dceu

Nah, the only thing he took from Miles was turning Ned into Ganke. But adaptions do have to be close enough to be faithful. Snyder's Batman has more in common with DRK Batman and while that Batman was influential it was not a a canon Batman, and Batman being cynical like that was not only because of Frank Miller.

Zack took a lot of stuff from Bryne’s MoS along with Birthright. I wouldn’t call it an adaptation because it wasn’t trying to be.

What did he take from Byrne?

And you say Smallville Luthor is the most accurate but which version?

Post-Crisis Lex.

Snyder didn’t portray Batman as being awesome he portrayed him as scary and ruthless with his theme or showing the terror in criminals. And the Tumbler causes just as much damage as the Snyder Batmobile.

I disagree. Scary and ruthless, while correct, are also vague descriptions and we’re talking about how he does those things. No, it doesn’t. Nolan’s isn’t driving through large boats or dropping cars on people.

Throughout the movie we see Batman is one who is addicted to alcohol and pills and has nightmares about literal demons. He isn’t a role model

Snyder knows how to make his flawed heroes look awesome in action, and Batman ticks all the boxes on that. His fans love how Batman destroys criminals in B vs S. Batman’s a role model, he has an arc where he progresses into a supposedly better person than he was in B vs S. He’s also given more space in character development than Superman is.

And he did put a tracking device on it as contingency. he went after them because he thought it was a bomb and why take the chance? Besides he had no issue taking out the trucks. Again dude no Batman didn’t knock the car into the gas truck. Regardless Snyder does not portray Batman as particularly heroic or righteous. He is a broken man and an addict

Why would Batman use that as a contingency? Why not just follow them back to base from the start? He stays below their radar and won't risk lives in the process. Because this batman was far too impulsive then Batman should be.

Here is the scene:

being broken is something Snyder likes in his super-heroes, as exemplified by his love for

Snyder goes overboard with that. Batman may be “broken” but he’s more stable than Superman is by B vs S.

Would it have been nice to see Batman’s early years or prime years yes but we get more than enough clues that things have changed and Bruce is living in denial

Anything to show what the status quo was, instead we get almost nothing in a 2 and half hour movie where he’s a main character. There’s barely anything to compare it to, so he becomes the standard batman we know.

How was superman being a hypocrite? and he spelt it pretty clear to Bruce Wayne at Luthor’s party. Gotham is living in fear and civil liberties are being trampled. The closest thing Superman does to vigilantism in BvS is intervene with the dictator from killing Lois

At no point in any of Snyder’s movies does Superman have a code against killing or examines his actions which resulted in people dying or lives being ruined in Man of Steel. He ignores the criminals Batman is fighting in broad daylight, as well.

Those are hardly good reason to justify how he acted against Batman. They’re excuses.

Superman was a vigilante in Man of Steel and B vs S.

Flying someone head first through multiple walls isn’t “intervening,” it’s murder.

You’re right he wasn’t Batman in BvS You finally got it.. He was post Batman someone who is broken. And at the end of BvS he shows to be more hopeful. What do you think he meant when he told Diana men are still good?

Of course it was Batman. Being hopeful is one thing, becoming traditional Batman like B vs S didn’t happen is another thing entirely. There is no transition on screen. One sentence is not all that needs to be shown for that much of a change, it’s like we missed a movie between his next appearance.

[Dboi2001]

Um no MCU Spider-Man is absolutely Miles Morales. Both go to magnet science schools, both are reasonably sociable, neither have any distinct difference between "Spider-Man" and "Miles/Peter" (basically they act the same with the mask on or off) both are incredibly careless with their secret identity, and both idolize and want to live up to expectations of another hero

Post Crisis Luthor? That is 35 years which version? The one where he is essentially a mob boss or the one where he becomes president?

Batman is rarely entirely discreet. He chases down cars in big flashy chases all the time. Better to get the super weapon now instead of waiting to see what Luthor does with it. And this Batman clearly doesn't care about human since to him criminals are just weeds. Pull one out another one takes it place

How is Batman more stable than Superman?

The entirety of BvS is Superman examining his actions to see if he truly was being a real hero. And Superman's issue isn't just killing but Batman working outside the law, acting as judge, jury and in a sense executioner and forcing good people to live in fear. What Batman does is illegal and Superman has always been someone to play by the rules as we see in MoS when he gives himself up to the government to help them in defeating Zod. Also what Luthor was doing was not illegal. He got a grant from the senate to import the kryptonite

The definition of a vigilante is someone who operates outside of a country's law or governance. Superman worked with the US military to defeat the Kryptonians so by definition he was not a vigilante

Superman didn't kill the dictator

What did snyder take from bryne? how about a character struggling with being an outsider or a world that is xenophobic to aliens?

Anything to show what the status quo was, instead we get almost nothing in a 2 and half hour movie where he’s a main character. There’s barely anything to compare it to, so he becomes the standard batman we know.

what do you want another flashback? the opening line of the movie is "there was a time before. There were perfect things. Diamond absolutes." Why else would Snyder put that in the movie? This movie is already long enough and has several flashbacks, callbacks and dreams do we need another flash back showing Batman with Robin?

You obviously have your preference so we'll agree to disagree

[ironman2978]

Um no MCU Spider-Man is absolutely Miles Morales. Both go to magnet science schools, both are reasonably sociable, neither have any distinct difference between "Spider-Man" and "Miles/Peter" (basically they act the same with the mask on or off) both are incredibly careless with their secret identity, and both idolize and want to live up to expectations of another hero

1. Peter in Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon and the Amazing Spider-Man films both went to STEM related magnet schools as well. It wasnÂ’t just a Miles Morales related plot point. It was just modernizing Midtown to fit schools kids goes to today.
2. Peter can be social. Peter main and only friend was Ned for the most part (itÂ’s usually Peter and Ned sitting by themselves in the Cafeteria, the cheerleaders looking at Peter in ridicule for talking about legos with Ned, Flash able to take advantage of Peter not showing up with Spidey causing the whole party to make fun of him). Just like comics Peter who can interact with people especially as he goes to college or Ultimate Peter, despite being social, he largely only has one or two real friends. And Peter does become more confident and talkative as Spider-Man in the MCU, it is just more awkward in comparison to say how Andrew handles the character.
3. Ultimate Peter had several people know his secret identities And that was even a joke shared between Mary Jane and Peter in Ultimate Spider-Man#46 on how many people know his secret identity, not to mention the people who know Peter is Spider-Man in 616).
4. Ultimate Peter said several times he idolized Iron Man (Ultimate Marvel Team-Up#4-5, Ultimate Spider-Man#126, Ultimate Spider-Man# 150-156 where Tony made web shooters for PeterÂ’s 16th birthday)

The MCU Peter is Miles outside of Ganke Ned, Scorpion and the Prowler, always felt like a huge exaggeration to me.

Post Crisis Luthor? That is 35 years which version? The one where he is essentially a mob boss or the one where he becomes president?

Smallville Lex was a combination of different LexÂ’s but seemed most like the Elliot S. Maggin Silver/ Bronze Age Lex with Post Crisis elements (modern version of Clark and Kryptonite being the reason he becomes bald, Clark/his obsession with Superboy/Superman and feeling alienated from Smallville being reason he becomes evil, his entire personality,etc)), while Lionel Luthor was Post Crisis Lex Luthor in everything but name(he resembled Lex Luthor's cloned body before he started deteriorating).

But Smallville Lex did take elements from his Post Crisis counterpart from his multiple marriages, using scientists to help him carry out his plans, becoming president of United States which was a big plot point when Smallville first aired, and specific storylines like him buying out the Daily Planet, his Machiavellian evil businessman attitude, etc so honestly it's fair to say Smallville/MR Lex was a combination of various Luthor with unique/creative differences just like alot of other DC Universe characters on the show.

Batman is rarely entirely discreet. He chases down cars in big flashy chases all the time. Better to get the super weapon now instead of waiting to see what Luthor does with it. And this Batman clearly doesn't care about human since to him criminals are just weeds. Pull one out another one takes it place

How is Batman more stable than Superman?

The entirety of BvS is Superman examining his actions to see if he truly was being a real hero. And Superman's issue isn't just killing but Batman working outside the law, acting as judge, jury and in a sense executioner and forcing good people to live in fear. What Batman does is illegal and Superman has always been someone to play by the rules as we see in MoS when he gives himself up to the government to help them in defeating Zod. Also what Luthor was doing was not illegal. He got a grant from the senate to import the kryptonite

The definition of a vigilante is someone who operates outside of a country's law or governance. Superman worked with the US military to defeat the Kryptonians so by definition he was not a vigilante

Superman didn't kill the dictator

What did snyder take from bryne? how about a character struggling with being an outsider or a world that is xenophobic to aliens?



what do you want another flashback? the opening line of the movie is "there was a time before. There were perfect things. Diamond absolutes." Why else would Snyder put that in the movie? This movie is already long enough and has several flashbacks, callbacks and dreams do we need another flash back showing Batman with Robin?

You obviously have your preference so we'll agree to disagree

IÂ’m not gonna disagree that Snyder didnÂ’t pick or choose specific elements from the comics but honestly I would have rather done a flashback with Robin or more with Robin instead of just the suit. Same with Superman, Snyder does know his comics, but itÂ’s execution that can become controversial especially how Snyder perceived how these characters should be in his take.

I probably am going to rewatch the ultimate edition but it seems while he did work with the military against Zod, based off peopleÂ’s reactions in BVS and the end of MoS, he was operating as a more independent agent and not someone who obeys one group or law.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Um no MCU Spider-Man is absolutely Miles Morales. Both go to magnet science schools, both are reasonably sociable, neither have any distinct difference between "Spider-Man" and "Miles/Peter" (basically they act the same with the mask on or off) both are incredibly careless with their secret identity, and both idolize and want to live up to expectations of another hero

Iron Man did a great job explaining this. Thank you, Iron Man.

Post Crisis Luthor? That is 35 years which version? The one where he is essentially a mob boss or the one where he becomes president?

That's the same person. He's a corrupt corporate executive, like he was in Superman TAS. Iron Man's right that he did have parts from older Superman comics by being from Smalkville, losing his hair from Kryptonite and being Clark's friend before going evil.

Batman is rarely entirely discreet. He chases down cars in big flashy chases all the time. Better to get the super weapon now instead of waiting to see what Luthor does with it. And this Batman clearly doesn't care about human since to him criminals are just weeds. Pull one out another one takes it place

Batman is known for being stealthy, he will attack in the open but not unless he has a choice. He has more to gain from planting a tracker and waiting, that's what it's there for. Especially when this Batman is so bad at collateral damage, and he's not supposed to be obvious to everyone what he's doing, this Batman simply did not care and we never see him value stealth. But these criminals lead to lex, they're not going anywhere that's why they reappear again later on with Martha. Batman's supposed to be patient.

How is Batman more stable than Superman?

He's more well rounded. He lets people in far more, his super-hero "life" is fully intact this Superman is missing large parts of what Superman should be even in his early days, like having a network of people for support.

The entirety of BvS is Superman examining his actions to see if he truly was being a real hero. And Superman's issue isn't just killing but Batman working outside the law, acting as judge, jury and in a sense executioner and forcing good people to live in fear. What Batman does is illegal and Superman has always been someone to play by the rules as we see in MoS when he gives himself up to the government to help them in defeating Zod. Also what Luthor was doing was not illegal. He got a grant from the senate to import the kryptonite

It really didn't. They gave some explanations, partial explanations and ignored things entirely - despite being a long movie it had large gaps in its structure. Superman takes a backseat as a protagonist to Batman. This isn't established, his motives about Superman are questionable at best, obscure at worst. He never goes into this in B vs S, he had many opportunities and fails. Superman's acting illegally, as well. He's not working with or for the government. Superman plays by no rules, and he definitely doesn't go into this in the movie. Surrendering to the government to stop Zod was a gambit, he was playing by ear and his relationship with the military took a long time to become "partners," which was thrown away by him in B vs S. But Superman didn't know what Lex was doing, from how Lex's thugs are acting he had every reason to think they're not trustworthy. He never tells us what he thinks about them, they may as well not exist when he meets Batman. He never talks to Batman about Lex when they first meet, either.

The definition of a vigilante is someone who operates outside of a country's law or governance. Superman worked with the US military to defeat the Kryptonians so by definition he was not a vigilante

If he continued to do this like Superman is supposed to do it'd be less glaring, except he is not an employee like Supergirl is for the DEO or a independent partner which Man of Steel should have been an opportunity to create. He has absolutely no relationship with the military in B vs S, as Superman or Clark Kent.

Superman didn't kill the dictator

In that case Snyder did a bad job communicating this to the audience. In a realistic movie what he did is instant death and unlike other traditional Supermen Cavill's hasn't got the credibility to get away with it from Man of Steel.

What did snyder take from bryne? how about a character struggling with being an outsider or a world that is xenophobic to aliens?

Byrne's Superman still had his life together more than Cavill's did. He was an outsider, but he wasn't alienated from day one from humanity. What Snyder was doing felt more like it came from an X-men movie than Superman. True, but how that relates to Superman himself is complicated. Unlike in Byrne's run Snyder gives humanity far more reasons to be wary than not and he does the bare minimum to counter this. Superman's supposed to talk to ordinary people, and do interviews with the press - this Superman doesn't do this.

what do you want another flashback? the opening line of the movie is "there was a time before. There were perfect things. Diamond absolutes." Why else would Snyder put that in the movie? This movie is already long enough and has several flashbacks, callbacks and dreams do we need another flash back showing Batman with Robin?

Wouldn't hurt, but give us more. He's a director, he should be able to figure this out storytelling is his job. Talking, newspaper clippings, interviews with people who witnessed Batman before this, news footage. Numerous possibilities to explore. Show, not tell. An opening line is fine for poetry about Batman, this is a movie where's a protagonist. Movies are not about hints, hints are for setting up scenes in a movie not doing nothing with them which will go over the audiences heads because they're too vague and subtle as to be meaningless.

[Pinsir]

But they're still recognizable as traditional canon Batman, they're not doing Elseworlds versions.

Elseworld stories are part of Batman canon though.

[Blind Wedjat]

Don't care if Snyder 'gets' comics or not (understanding comics is a subjective thing and so is 'comic book accuracy'). He's never been a good storyteller to me and lacks the talent and ability to see nuance to actually execute his ideas in a compelling fashion.

I'm not some Superman or Batman expert but I've watched enough movies to at least know when a script feels good vs when a script feels poorly put together, or when the themes or a movie don't feel fully realised beyond the conceptual level, or there's a dissonance between what a film is saying vs what it's showing. That's how I see the majority of Snyder's DCEU films.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Elseworld stories are part of Batman canon though.

They're the antithesis of canon.

These were mainstream Batman and Superman storylines which were canon: No Man's Land, Knightfall, Death and Return of Superman, Legacy, Superman: Blue, Emperor Joker.

Elseworlds: Red Son, Gotham by Gaslight, The Doom That Came to Gotham, In Darkest Night, The Dark Side, True Brit.

DKR is the latter, and Batman: Year One is the former. The easiest clue to know if something is canon is if its in the official comic book titles (Superman: Action Comics, Superman, Adventures of Superman, Batman: Detective Comics, Batman, Shadow of the Bat).

[Pinsir]

They're the antithesis of canon.

These were mainstream Batman and Superman storylines which were canon: No Man's Land, Knightfall, Death and Return of Superman, Legacy, Superman: Blue, Emperor Joker.

Elseworlds: Red Son, Gotham by Gaslight, The Doom That Came to Gotham, In Darkest Night, The Dark Side, True Brit.

DKR is the latter, and Batman: Year One is the former. The easiest clue to know if something is canon is if its in the official comic book titles (Superman: Action Comics, Superman, Adventures of Superman, Batman: Detective Comics, Batman, Shadow of the Bat).

I don't know how one can separate DKR from Batman, its so influential and de facto background material fans and creators. If anything, its super canon or even hyper canon.

[manwhohaseverything]

Canon in american comics industry is a myth. Everything is a glorified fanfic.The creators have zilch to do with their creation.

[The Darknight Detective]

Canon in american comics industry is a myth. Everything is a glorified fanfic.The creators have zilch to do with their creation.

IMO, everything happened (though not necessarily on the same Earth) and is just as relevant as anything else. IOW, it's all canon.

[adamTPTK]

Don't care if Snyder 'gets' comics or not (understanding comics is a subjective thing and so is 'comic book accuracy'). He's never been a good storyteller to me and lacks the talent and ability to see nuance to actually execute his ideas in a compelling fashion.

I'm not some Superman or Batman expert but I've watched enough movies to at least know when a script feels good vs when a script feels poorly put together, or when the themes or a movie don't feel fully realised beyond the conceptual level, or there's a dissonance between what a film is saying vs what it's showing. That's how I see the majority of Snyder's DCEU films.

Please do tell what is so dissonant between what's shown and what's saying.

[Dboi2001]

That's the same person. He's a corrupt corporate executive, like he was in Superman TAS. Iron Man's right that he did have parts from older Superman comics by being from Smalkville, losing his hair from Kryptonite and being Clark's friend before going evil.

Only in name. In character and personality they’re different. Mob boss Luthor hates Superman because he foils his schemes while president Luthor hated Superman because he didn’t like seeing an alien more powerful than him

Batman is known for being stealthy, he will attack in the open but not unless he has a choice. He has more to gain from planting a tracker and waiting, that's what it's there for. Especially when this Batman is so bad at collateral damage, and he's not supposed to be obvious to everyone what he's doing, this Batman simply did not care and we never see him value stealth. But these criminals lead to lex, they're not going anywhere that's why they reappear again later on with Martha. Batman's supposed to be patient.

Yeah but when an immediate threat like say a bomb is at play then he attacks immediately. Why would he wait for it to go to some unknown location? For all he knows it is could explode the ends day. Also this Batman isn’t a myth anymore people are quite aware about him. Instead of instilling fear through a myth he instills fear through pain

How about all the tumbler chases in Dark Knight or when he chased Joker down in Burton movies? Or the animated series where he flies an airplane after villains?

It really didn't. They gave some explanations, partial explanations and ignored things entirely - despite being a long movie it had large gaps in its structure. Superman takes a backseat as a protagonist to Batman. This isn't established, his motives about Superman are questionable at best, obscure at worst. He never goes into this in B vs S, he had many opportunities and fails. Superman's acting illegally, as well. He's not working with or for the government. Superman plays by no rules, and he definitely doesn't go into this in the movie. Surrendering to the government to stop Zod was a gambit, he was playing by ear and his relationship with the military took a long time to become "partners," which was thrown away by him in B vs S. But Superman didn't know what Lex was doing, from how Lex's thugs are acting he had every reason to think they're not trustworthy. He never tells us what he thinks about them, they may as well not exist when he meets Batman. He never talks to Batman about Lex when they first meet, either.

Yes it was. It was Superman believing he wasn’t acting like a real hero because people died under his protection. Superman isn’t doing anything illegal. If there is a flood and you are in a boat and you pick someone up who is stranded that isn’t illegal. He isn’t enacting vigilante justice on criminals just responding to natural disasters like floods

Batman’s motivations are unclear? Are you sure? I’d argue Batman was more like the antagonist

If he continued to do this like Superman is supposed to do it'd be less glaring, except he is not an employee like Supergirl is for the DEO or a independent partner which Man of Steel should have been an opportunity to create. He has absolutely no relationship with the military in B vs S, as Superman or Clark Kent.

Then people would say Superman is a government stooge like in TDKR. Superman has rarely worked directly for the government. Also the government wanted to control him and know his identity instead of working with him.

In that case Snyder did a bad job communicating this to the audience. In a realistic movie what he did is instant death and unlike other traditional Supermen Cavill's hasn't got the credibility to get away with it from Man of Steel.

And the mcu is “realistic” yet crossbones, a normal guy, survives a building collapsing on him. Hell Nolan Batman was suppose to be realistic and yet it takes huge leaps of logic

Byrne's Superman still had his life together more than Cavill's did. He was an outsider, but he wasn't alienated from day one from humanity. What Snyder was doing felt more like it came from an X-men movie than Superman. True, but how that relates to Superman himself is complicated. Unlike in Byrne's run Snyder gives humanity far more reasons to be wary than not and he does the bare minimum to counter this. Superman's supposed to talk to ordinary people, and do interviews with the press - this Superman doesn't do this.

What do you mean alienated? And Superman did agree to go to the Supreme Court and give his testimony. And no Superman doesn’t typically do interviews

Wouldn't hurt, but give us more. He's a director, he should be able to figure this out storytelling is his job. Talking, newspaper clippings, interviews with people who witnessed Batman before this, news footage. Numerous possibilities to explore. Show, not tell. An opening line is fine for poetry about Batman, this is a movie where's a protagonist. Movies are not about hints, hints are for setting up scenes in a movie not doing nothing with them which will go over the audiences heads because they're too vague and subtle as to be meaningless.

Again in the ultimate cut we do see how the people of Gotham are afraid of Batman. It makes it clear that Batman is a broken man. We see the Robin suit and Bruce having nightmares. They weren’t vague hints