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

[SiegePerilous02]

Jimmy bit might not. Robin bit does have serious impact on bruce's psyche. It made his hunt for superman that much personal. I heard its going to be a plot point in jl as well. There was also a rumours of bruce being killed in the end of the story.So, its not like snyder had trouble kill "head liners".

It doesn't really have a meaningful impact on his psyche. it was a brief scene without any dialogue where Bruce gazes at a ruined costume that really only the fanboys would get but not everyone in the wider audience would pick up on, and was then relying on a future movie that might not have come (and in this case, didn't) to flesh it out. Within the movie itself, it's pretty meaningless because it's not brought up again. The costume itself isn't immediately recognizeable as Robin's if you don't know what we're looking for.

That's kind of the problem, even when you factor in the director's cut, this doesn't function that well as a stand alone movie even within the limited 5 film arc because some of its setups are sloppy. The post-apocalyptic dream/vision of evil Superman and the Flash coming back to warn Bruce just come out of fucking nowhere and was only there to set up something else. But in its own context, it's sloppy and confusing and impenetrable to the casual audience who has no idea what is going on and even some diehard fans. This isn't coherent storytelling.

There is a Youtube film critic named Bob Chipman who opens admits that he's huge Zack Snyder fan and defended some of his earlier work, but felt BvS was one the worst films of a generation and did a lot of harm to Superman and Batman not only as characters, but as pop culture icons. He did a 3 part video essay that runs about 3.5 hours combined pretty much taking Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (both the theatrical and the ultimate cuts) apart.

So pretty much if you want to understand why some people, like me, feel that BvS and Zack Snyder ruined the DCEU, then I would recommend watching it.

I don't even think you need to be a film critic or fanboy to come away thinking it's flawed.

One of my bosses said it was one of the worst things he's ever seen, and he doesn't really have a horse in this race. He likes nerdy stuff, but I don't think comics or the MCU are things he's overly invested in, so there wasn't a huge bias involved the way there might be for the rest of us.

He WAS distressed when i told him Chris Terrio was writing the script of Rise of Skywalker though lol

[manwhohaseverything]

It doesn't really have a meaningful impact on his psyche. it was a brief scene without any dialogue where Bruce gazes at a ruined costume that really only the fanboys would get but not everyone in the wider audience would pick up on, and was then relying on a future movie that might not have come (and in this case, didn't) to flesh it out. Within the movie itself, it's pretty meaningless because it's not brought up again. The costume itself isn't immediately recognizeable as Robin's if you don't know what we're looking for.

How many movie did it take for thanos's infinity gauntlet and gems thing to have a pay off? Also wasn't the adam strange tease something only fanboys can recognise?Bruce asks "20 years in Gotham Alfred, we've seen what promises are worth, how many good guys are left? How many stay that way?". In the context of the story, it is implied that a loved one or partner was lost. His hunt being personal made trigger to stop also one.The guy had to make bruce being the villain of the story make sense, set it up and the change. He needed to set up jl and give superman an arc. The movie was bloated and yet it needed more space. Snyder likes to make long movies. But, studio doesn't.

[Cyberstrike]

I don't even think you need to be a film critic or fanboy to come away thinking it's flawed.

I think saying something is flawed is something anybody can do. Explaining why something is flawed in a way that is amusing and educational is a skill.

[SiegePerilous02]

How many movie did it take for thanos's infinity gauntlet and gems thing to have a pay off? Also wasn't the adam strange tease something only fanboys can recognise?Bruce asks "20 years in Gotham Alfred, we've seen what promises are worth, how many good guys are left? How many stay that way?". In the context of the story, it is implied that a loved one or partner was lost. His hunt being personal made trigger to stop also one.The guy had to make bruce being the villain of the story make sense, set it up and the change. He needed to set up jl and give superman an arc. The movie was bloated and yet it needed more space. Snyder likes to make long movies. But, studio doesn't.

Thanos's gauntlet was set up more coherently, and also relegated to post-credit scenes and not disrupting the fairly straight forward narratives in the early phased MCU films. It's also not that complicated of a plot. It helps that the moves did a better job of getting most people invested in their heroes so they would follow along even if there were missteps.

Yeah Bruce says that...we can't assume the casual audience is going to know what he's talking about. There were debates among fans in places like this on what he was talking about, and if obsessives like us can't come to a unanimous conclusion, how can we expect the wider audience to give enough of a crap to? An implication that a major character in the mythos was killed off offscreen and then not fleshed out is bad storytelling, especially as we are just meeting this version of Bruce and are immediately thrown into "psychotic breakdown" land. We have no reason to care about him and who he's lost because we don't know them. That's a wider issue with this movie, a defense of them is that fanboys should quit whining and be more open to new interpretations and let go of preconceived notions. But it is relying on past versions and built-in love for these characters to do the heavy lifting of making us care about these versions as well while it just farts around and does it's dumb philosophy/symbolism stuff. It's trying to have it both ways, and doesn't succeed. It's not as smart as it thinks it is.

I think saying something is flawed is something anybody can do. Explaining why something is flawed in a way that is amusing and educational is a skill.

Well yeah, definitely agreed on that. But even the casuals can come away with a general intuitive feeling that something isn't right, even if they don't have the skill to articulate it.

This was a case where a lot of critics, casuals and fanboys were more or less on the same page for varied reasons.

[Alan2099]

The first time I saw the movie, I just thought that was another Batman costume that Joker had ruined. It didn't even recognize it as a Robin suit.

Although to be fair, that movie tended to really annoy me, so I wasn't paying the best attention to it either.

[godisawesome]

Sounds like people here have more of a problem with WB than Snyder himself. It's not like the management at the studio couldn't have said "You can do this, but not that!" (as has been the case with other directors for a hundred years).

WB's executives share the blame, but Snyder's not a bystander behind the scenes. He came up with bad decisions, like killing Jimmy and Robin, they just approved them. Snyder himself is part of management.

Studios and their storytellers definitely share blame poor franchise decisions; I’m someone who blames Kathleen Kennedy and LFL’s obsession with Adam Driver and apathy towards John Boyega and Daisy Ridley in part for allowing Rian Johnson to introduce a shallow, toxic romance between Rey and Kylo and kick Finn out of the male lead role, but Johnson still bears much of the blame there as well.

With the Robin thing, it’s maybe a little funky in comparison, because it strikes me as just as ill-conceived... but also somewhat half-hearted in execution. It’s such a small part, even in the Extended Edition, and there was so little done with it, that WB could have easily countermanded his designation of the Robin as Dick Grayson, or come up with something like a Agent Grayson or Red Hood, and it wouldn’t have impacted BvS’s story.

So everything about the decision is still disappointingly bland and needlessly limiting of the franchise... but it’s also not really a fatal error compared to mistakes in the rest of the film, or the Star Wars idea that Kylo Ren is so damn attractive a woman he kind-raped must fall for him.

[hareluyafan1]

I think a better question is "How can anyone think Zack Snyder DOES respect comics?" Here is why he doesn't, in the words of an expert-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XAF...&index=36&t=0s

[Steel Inquisitor]

WB was at the top of the management chain, not Snyder. They could have said no to anything they didn't like. Even if Snyder had it down contractually that he had the last word on everything, it still would have been WB's fault for signing it in the first place.

But Snyder was still management, and was at the top on the production side. What was going in management was more than Snyder having all the power and no power and you're acting as though he had no power. WB is at fault, and so is Snyder. Snyder could have had numerous other ideas but he chose to kill Robin and Jimmy and with B vs S he knew he was working in a shared universe. That's why Wonder Woman's in the movie.

I mean, box office-wise, he's not a DeMille or Spielberg.

And yet he was able to have a vision which heavily impacted the DCEU.

With how Snyder is being spoken about it's like people think he's Daniel Clowes, not a veteran movie director who's claim to fame was "SPARTAAAAAAA!!!!!!"

[The Darknight Detective]

But Snyder was still management, and was at the top on the production side. What was going in management was more than Snyder having all the power and no power and you're acting as though he had no power. WB is at fault, and so is Snyder. Snyder could have had numerous other ideas but he chose to kill Robin and Jimmy and with B vs S he knew he was working in a shared universe. That's why Wonder Woman's in the movie.

Again, Snyder wasn't (or shouldn't have been) the final decision. He wasn't the top rung on the management ladder. His superiors must have been okay with his decisions, so, ultimately, they have to have the biggest part of the "blame" here by a considerable amount.

[qwazer07]

I have not been here a long time, but hearing Dick Grayson is already killed in the DCEU only gives me despair. He was the first of the next generation of superheroes. He carries the hope of that generation as the first sidekick. By killing him, you are removing the legacy he did and inspired as a result. I can not see any reason to remove him than add another shadow in an already dark world.

I want to ask Snyder fans how could you say you love DC and superheroes as a whole when you approve Snyder removing the optimism, hope and love inherent to its core. If I want to watch moral ambiguity, I would watch Watchmen or The Boys. The strength of superheroes have always been in the belief of what is good and that no matter what happens, in the end, good will always vanquish evil. Call me naive or a child; that I should grow up and put on my big boy pants. But is it greater to close one's heart and survive or go on fighting for what is right even if you know it is impossible to win?

Dick Grayson was the embodiment of this. He fought for what is right in every stage of his life. Whether he was Robin, Nightwing, Batman or Agent 37. He never gave up on people even when he was betrayed numerous times. He lead and taught the people around him to be the best of themselves. He taught them the best lessons Batman taught him, the lessons that mattered. He showed everyone what the Batman symbol represent better than Bruce Wayne himself. You know that Ace scene in DCAU, one of the best moments of Batman. That is Dick Grayson everyday since he was Robin until now. Why throw such greatness for a vandalized Robin costume we only saw for a few seconds that casual audience won't even understand the impact of?

[Agent Z]

Dick Grayson being killed off was a plan that never left the cutting room floor. The Robin who died was never mentioned by name in BvS and In Suicide Squad, the Robin who died is stated to be Jason. People are freaking out over something that was never in the damn film.

I have not been here a long time, but hearing Dick Grayson is already killed in the DCEU only gives me despair. He was the first of the next generation of superheroes. He carries the hope of that generation as the first sidekick. By killing him, you are removing the legacy he did and inspired as a result. I can not see any reason to remove him than add another shadow in an already dark world.

I want to ask Snyder fans how could you say you love DC and superheroes as a whole when you approve Snyder removing the optimism, hope and love inherent to its core. If I want to watch moral ambiguity, I would watch Watchmen or The Boys. The strength of superheroes have always been in the belief of what is good and that no matter what happens, in the end, good will always vanquish evil. Call me naive or a child; that I should grow up and put on my big boy pants. But is it greater to close one's heart and survive or go on fighting for what is right even if you know it is impossible to win?

Dick Grayson was the embodiment of this. He fought for what is right in every stage of his life. Whether he was Robin, Nightwing, Batman or Agent 37. He never gave up on people even when he was betrayed numerous times. He lead and taught the people around him to be the best of themselves. He taught them the best lessons Batman taught him, the lessons that mattered. He showed everyone what the Batman symbol represent better than Bruce Wayne himself. You know that Ace scene in DCAU, one of the best moments of Batman. That is Dick Grayson everyday since he was Robin until now. Why throw such greatness for a vandalized Robin costume we only saw for a few seconds that casual audience won't even understand the impact of?

Nothing you said here has anything to do with optimism and hope. Optimistic and hopeful movies have good characters die and Dick Grayson is far from the only heroic character in the DC universe. Liking Snyder's decisions does not mean hating DC heroes; that's a "no true Scotsman" fallacy and is the exact type of toxic fandom gatekeeping that makes being a fan of anything so exhausting. You're free to dislike Snyder's decisions but when you start accusing people who do of not being DC fans, you lose any validity.

[charliehustle415]

Dick Grayson being killed off was a plan that never left the cutting room floor. The Robin who died was never mentioned by name in BvS and In Suicide Squad, the Robin who died is stated to be Jason. People are freaking out over something that was never in the damn film.

From his mouth to your ears.

[SiegePerilous02]

From his mouth to your ears.

Oh joy. A "hint" is all it warrants.

It's only the main reason Bruce has lost his way in BvS and presenting him as a father who lost his son brutally would have gone a long way in making him more sympathetic and provide a deeper reason for Clark to connect with him.

Instead, "Martha!"

Dick Grayson being killed off was a plan that never left the cutting room floor. The Robin who died was never mentioned by name in BvS and In Suicide Squad, the Robin who died is stated to be Jason. People are freaking out over something that was never in the damn film.

But apparently it was going to be further hinted at in JL.

And he and Ayer were not on the same page, this reaffirming that this was kind of a mess early on. And if it didn't get elaborated on much more than a hint, as either Dick or Jason, what is even the point of doing this?

Nothing you said here has anything to do with optimism and hope. Optimistic and hopeful movies have good characters die and Dick Grayson is far from the only heroic character in the DC universe. Liking Snyder's decisions does not mean hating DC heroes; that's a "no true Scotsman" fallacy and is the exact type of toxic fandom gatekeeping that makes being a fan of anything so exhausting. You're free to dislike Snyder's decisions but when you start accusing people who do of not being DC fans, you lose any validity.

I don't really agree with the "not true fan" thing, but on the flip side Snyder's stance of "you're living in a fucking dream world" towards critics and some of his fans echoing the sentiment is equally obnoxious.

As if we need to be told superheroes are fantasy, and that real life can be very hard and unfair. or we don't consume any entertainment beyond superheroes and accept them on their own terms the way we do the superhero genre.

[Agent Z]

Oh joy. A "hint" is all it warrants.

It's only the main reason Bruce has lost his way in BvS and presenting him as a father who lost his son brutally would have gone a long way in making him more sympathetic and provide a deeper reason for Clark to connect with him.

Instead, "Martha!"



But apparently it was going to be further hinted at in JL.

And he and Ayer were not on the same page, this reaffirming that this was kind of a mess early on. And if it didn't get elaborated on much more than a hint, as either Dick or Jason, what is even the point of doing this?



I don't really agree with the "not true fan" thing, but on the flip side Snyder's stance of "you're living in a fucking dream world" towards critics and some of his fans echoing the sentiment is equally obnoxious.

As if we need to be told superheroes are fantasy, and that real life can be very hard and unfair. or we don't consume any entertainment beyond superheroes and accept them on their own terms the way we do the superhero genre.

The superhero genre is not just one thing and has had a variety of stories told in a variety of tones. Yet we've got people in this very thread treating Snyder like he committed a hate crime because his superhero movies aren't colorful enough even though he's stated he has no problem with superhero movies with a lighter tone. And unlike when Snyder says something dumb and is called out on it, we don't get half a dozen articles telling those fans off. Long before the release the Snyder Cut movement was a thing we had people sending a petition to the White House to have him removed from the DCEU. Yet this wasn't worth criticizing for fandom toxicity. Given the level of vitriol Snyder had been putting up with ever since MoS came out, I can't entirely blame him for snapping like that.

[SiegePerilous02]

The superhero genre is not just one thing and has had a variety of stories told in a variety of tones.

Yes, but there are often sub-genres for each type of character and the story that best suits them. You can't always swap out one character for another and expect the same results. That's why they are characters, not action figures to be moved around willy nilly.

I've seen criticisms that Superman isn't a good character because he isn't suited to darker stories (at least not always) and isn't as versatile enough to be made to fit them without being fundamentally changed. And yet, characters like the Punisher, Constantine and the Boys can't be twisted into more straight laced superhero figures to be made to star in more family friendly (if not downright kiddy) fare. And nobody claims they are not worth much as characters because there are limits to how much they can be altered. There seems to be a double standard among certain fans who want things to be "adult" (whatever that means).

Yet we've got people in this very thread treating Snyder like he committed a hate crime because his superhero movies aren't colorful enough even though he's stated he has no problem with superhero movies with a lighter tone. And unlike when Snyder says something dumb and is called out on it, we don't get half a dozen articles telling those fans off. Long before the release the Snyder Cut movement was a thing we had people sending a petition to the White House to have him removed from the DCEU. Yet this wasn't worth criticizing for fandom toxicity. Given the level of vitriol Snyder had been putting up with ever since MoS came out, I can't entirely blame him for snapping like that.

The White House petition was derided as dumb even by most detractors when the films were coming out. Nobody takes that kind of behavior seriously, because why would the White House give a crap about our dumb superhero movies? Everyone on all sides just laughed at how stupid they were. How do you determine that the anti-Snyder fandom toxicity isn't condemned by even some of his critics? Did you keep tabs of what everyone everywhere has said?

The arguments against Snyder's movies do not have anything to do with color. Or at least not all of them do. I think you're conflating all of them to make them sound invalid, which shouldn't be done if we should not also conflate every pro-Snyder argument and elements of fandom with the extreme whackjobs on Twitter who (among other things) hijacked unrelated topics and drove Diane Nelson and Geoff Johns off through similar abuse to what Snyder received.