Zack Snyder Explains Why DC Movies Can't Be Like Marvel Movies

[Midvillian1322]

Snyder retweeted a political ad recently, but it's difficult to say even which party he endorsed among the cringy Snyder-Cult gushing in this article: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...artisan-again/.

Lol I don't even care about the political stuff that article is insane.

[Kirby101]

The National Review is conservative and at times Right Wing. It sounds like Snyder tweeted something in support of BLM in Wisconsin after George Floyd, or anti-Trump. The article accuses him of Trump derangement syndrome. So we have a right wing hack lamenting that his favorite director called out Trump. Boo hoo.

[Will Payton Starman]

I’ve said this before and will say it again, Snyder has “dude bro” mentality where stuff has to be “dark” and “mean” to be “kewl”. It’s why his film making sensibility doesn’t really favor the characters he was marshaling. It’s also why Watchmen (although a well made movie) somewhat re-contextualized the characters of the story (and why some alt-right clowns see Rorsarch as some kind of hero instead of the crazy, paranoid bigot that he was in the graphic novel...but then again, this is the alt right we’re talking about). Ultimately, Snyder is edge lord at its worst but if people like it more power to them.

Wonder Woman holding the severed heads of falling soldiers is as Snyder as it gets. It’s brutal, it’s disgusting but that’s just how Snyder does his superheroes.

And left wingers don't see Ozymandias as being heroic? He killed millions yet you don't insult those who enjoyed that character. Rorschach seemed pretty crazy, paranoid and bigoted to me - and so did Ozymandias. The fact that all of these characters had a sympathetic side only make for better drama.


The main complaint I saw against the film is that it was too faithful to the source material. If you felt Rorschach was too sympathetic, then blame Moore. The film and comic both work so well because they aren't a polemic. Rorschach (conservative), Ozymandias (liberal), and Comedian (anarchist) all are political extremists, willing to kill for what they see as being right - and yet they're all portrayed as sympathetic, rounded-out human beings.

A film and it's fans shouldn't be labeled as alt-right or alt-left because the story contains nuanced characters. If you want polemic, then I'm sure you really enjoyed the V for Vendetta film - that really does hit you over the head with its message.

And no, I'm not a fan of Snyder's DCEU films. His dark "dark and gritty" tonality worked great for Watchmen, but not for Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, etc.

[chicago_bastard]

Whoever complains about Snyder's Watchmen being to faithful to the source material has either never read the comic or didn't understand it. Snyder's take is so far off the line it's not even funny. Just imitating panels without getting the substance of the source material is not a faithful adaptation, it's the adaptation of a superficial director who should have left thought-provoking stuff like Watchmen to more sophisticated filmmakers.

And Snyder clearly made changes to Rorschach's characterization that lead the audience to sympathize with him more than in the comic. The most obvious example for this is that in the comic we never learn if the guy Rorschach kills is really a child kidnapper whereas Snyder makes him confess his crime thus legitimizing Rorschach's murder.

[Will Payton Starman]

You're the only person I know arguing that X1 has aged will, over being setup for better things, in its series or otherwise. Frankly, X2 or Logan would be better examples of more serious movies remaining relevant in the here and now.

Obviously, everyone you know must be in the under thirty age group. Some of us have been watching films for many decades and aren't overly concernd with what the current gen of cool kids thinks.

Singer's X-men was stylish, well cast, and dealt with its difficult socio-political themes in a very thought provoking way. Drama over action and spectacle. Great character arcs, especially for Logan and Rogue. It was relevant, it set up a whole franchise.

It wasn't slavishly trying to recreate the look or any specific storyline of the comic. It wasn't simply setting storylines up for sequels. Unlike most MCU films, it didn't feature characters already established in other film series. Unlike MCU, it didn't feel like it was part of some mega-crossover "Infinity Gauntlet" - type event.

In other words, it felt like a feature film and not a comic book, and that's why the cbr hipsters prefer the MCU. The MCU films are literally comic book arcs on film, complete with all the crossovers from other books and the "event" subplots.

The MCU films are also extremely formulaic. The reason you don't get "oddball" films like Singer's X-men or Superman Returns, Schumacher's Batman Forever, or the Dino De Laurentiis Flash Gordon films is because Hollywood is now run by five mega-corporations.


Where are the ultra stylish MCU films? Where are the MCU films with unconvential narratives? Where are the controversial themes? Everything is filtered through Kevin Feige and The Walt Disney Company. It's a factory, and one that's good at what it does, but it's not about the artist. You are kidding yourself if you think it is.

[The Cool Thatguy]

Whoever complains about Snyder's Watchmen being to faithful to the source material has either never read the comic or didn't understand it. Snyder's take is so far off the line it's not even funny. Just imitating panels without getting the substance of the source material is not a faithful adaptation, it's the adaptation of a superficial director who should have left thought-provoking stuff like Watchmen to more sophisticated filmmakers.

And Snyder clearly made changes to Rorschach's characterization that lead the audience to sympathize with him more than in the comic. The most obvious example for this is that in the comic we never learn if the guy Rorschach kills is really a child kidnapper whereas Snyder makes him confess his crime thus legitimizing Rorschach's murder.

In the comic, Rorschach finds children's garments in a furnace and human bones in the mouth of the dogs. I'd say that's pretty definite.

Though I certainly don't think having Rorschach kill the man with his own hands was an improvement.

[Metro]

WebLurker wrote:

[/QUOTE
You're the only person I know arguing that X1 has aged will, over being setup for better things, in its series or otherwise. Frankly, X2 or Logan would be better examples of more serious movies remaining relevant in the here and now.




Obviously, everyone you know must be in the under thirty age group. Some of us have been watching films for many decades and aren't overly concernd with what the current gen of cool kids thinks.

Singer's X-men was stylish, well cast, and dealt with its difficult socio-political themes in a very thought provoking way. Drama over action and spectacle. Great character arcs, especially for Logan and Rogue. It was relevant, it set up a whole franchise.

It wasn't slavishly trying to recreate the look or any specific storyline of the comic. It wasn't simply setting storylines up for sequels. Unlike most MCU films, it didn't feature characters already established in other film series. Unlike MCU, it didn't feel like it was part of some mega-crossover "Infinity Gauntlet" - type event.

In other words, it felt like a feature film and not a comic book, and that's why the cbr hipsters prefer the MCU. The MCU films are literally comic book arcs on film, complete with all the crossovers from other books and the "event" subplots.

The MCU films are also extremely formulaic. The reason you don't get "oddball" films like Singer's X-men or Superman Returns, Schumacher's Batman Forever, or the Dino De Laurentiis Flash Gordon films is because Hollywood is now run by five mega-corporations.


Where are the ultra stylish MCU films? Where are the MCU films with unconvential narratives? Where are the controversial themes? Everything is filtered through Kevin Feige and The Walt Disney Company. It's a factory, and one that's good at what it does, but it's not about the artist. You are kidding yourself if you think it is.

You lost me when you said Singer's X-Men was stylish.
Because we very clearly didn't watch the same movie

[Castle]

WebLurker wrote:

[/QUOTE
You're the only person I know arguing that X1 has aged will, over being setup for better things, in its series or otherwise. Frankly, X2 or Logan would be better examples of more serious movies remaining relevant in the here and now.

Obviously, everyone you know must be in the under thirty age group. Some of us have been watching films for many decades and aren't overly concernd with what the current gen of cool kids thinks.

Singer's X-men was stylish, well cast, and dealt with its difficult socio-political themes in a very thought provoking way. Drama over action and spectacle. Great character arcs, especially for Logan and Rogue. It was relevant, it set up a whole franchise.

It wasn't slavishly trying to recreate the look or any specific storyline of the comic. It wasn't simply setting storylines up for sequels. Unlike most MCU films, it didn't feature characters already established in other film series. Unlike MCU, it didn't feel like it was part of some mega-crossover "Infinity Gauntlet" - type event..

[/QUOTE]

Honestly that part is what I care most about with X-MEN films and on a bigger scale comic films, So why I appreciate Snyder doing the same in his films. You dont have to like man of steel but one thing is certain, you cannot romanticise superman to the extent as Reeves did in the 70s in 2010s.

However I wont say, Singer first xmen film was greatly stylish. Tim Burton's Batman was greatly stylish. however Singer's X-MEN films were very grounded as a comic film can go with that. a few things I learned about Singer, he was a pure drama director and had never done an action scene before he did xmen, so it makes sense why all his xmen films minus apocalypse were drama and the action scenes in those films felt more like a segment that never went on and on or stopped then resumed. that was his technical style I guess, though with xmen 1 he had no great visual style...yet.

Singer was also terrified of what Batman and Robin did to the genre so he went in the opposite direction with comic films. X-MEN 1 cannot be called a comic film by 2021 comic films standard, not even X-MEN 2 and that film had some classic comic book VFX moments that still looks exceptional in 2021 because Singer saw CGI as a secondary option, if he had the chance to use make up or practical effect as a first option.

What I will say about his film been stylish was it got better with X2 and DOFP almost kind of how Nolan got better doing action scenes. I think Snyder could already do both stylish comic films and action scenes and maybe even drama from the get-go. Watchmen proves this for sure.

[Username taken]

And left wingers don't see Ozymandias as being heroic? He killed millions yet you don't insult those who enjoyed that character. Rorschach seemed pretty crazy, paranoid and bigoted to me - and so did Ozymandias. The fact that all of these characters had a sympathetic side only make for better drama.


The main complaint I saw against the film is that it was too faithful to the source material. If you felt Rorschach was too sympathetic, then blame Moore. The film and comic both work so well because they aren't a polemic. Rorschach (conservative), Ozymandias (liberal), and Comedian (anarchist) all are political extremists, willing to kill for what they see as being right - and yet they're all portrayed as sympathetic, rounded-out human beings.

A film and it's fans shouldn't be labeled as alt-right or alt-left because the story contains nuanced characters. If you want polemic, then I'm sure you really enjoyed the V for Vendetta film - that really does hit you over the head with its message.

And no, I'm not a fan of Snyder's DCEU films. His dark "dark and gritty" tonality worked great for Watchmen, but not for Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, etc.

Snyder’s Watchmen wasn’t faithful to the book though.

He literally changed the entire ending of the book.

[chicago_bastard]

In the comic, Rorschach finds children's garments in a furnace and human bones in the mouth of the dogs. I'd say that's pretty definite.

Though I certainly don't think having Rorschach kill the man with his own hands was an improvement.

These are clear indications but not hard evidence like a confession is. What's also telling is that the police report about Rorschach doesn't call Grice a child murderer or even kidnapper, it just says "Grice, unemployed" whereas another victim of Rorschach is referenced as "wanted multiple rapist", so there's left some ambiguousness.

At best Snyder has turned a subtle indication into a heavyhanded unambiguousness. But guess that's what is to be expected by a filmmaker of his caliber.

[Castle]

[QUOTE]

Snyder’s Watchmen wasn’t faithful to the book though.

He literally changed the entire ending of the book.[/QUOTE]

No comic film is 100% faithful to the book, What many comic fans takes the most issue with, is when a director, writer or studio drastically changes the tone or completely ignores the message of the comics.

Will Payton Starman
Obviously, everyone you know must be in the under thirty age group. Some of us have been watching films for many decades and aren't overly concernd with what the current gen of cool kids thinks.

Gen cool kids are still going to grow up into adulthood and get into the more serious side of comic films. I am not completely faulting some gen cool kids now for liking mostly action comedies, but I do take slight offence when some of them show 100% ignorance of the genre. ​It is strange but true that some kids have never heard of the holocaust or the Tulsa Massacre and some had to learn them from comic films or tv shows. However this is why comics needs or needed other studios like HBO Max or Fox to balance out the kid friendly driven approach of Marvel Studios.

I first saw X-men 1 as a very young kid in Africa and that was my first introduction to the Holocaust. You don't put expiry dates on these kind of comic movies just to try and increase more space for action comedies comic booky films.

[The Cool Thatguy]

These are clear indications but not hard evidence like a confession is. What's also telling is that the police report about Rorschach doesn't call Grice a child murderer or even kidnapper, it just says "Grice, unemployed" whereas another victim of Rorschach is referenced as "wanted multiple rapist", so there's left some ambiguousness.

At best Snyder has turned a subtle indication into a heavyhanded unambiguousness. But guess that's what is to be expected by a filmmaker of his caliber.

Gotta agree on that. The blade to the head was just needlessly bloody.

But Snyder doesn't understand the concept of 'Less is more'.

[green_garnish]

But Snyder doesn't understand the concept of 'Less is more'.

Well, he did change the ending of Watchmen so it didn't end with a stupid skyscraper-eating squid. I'd say his ending was a decent example of less is more, and more appropriate

[WebLurker]

Obviously, everyone you know must be in the under thirty age group. Some of us have been watching films for many decades and aren't overly concernd with what the current gen of cool kids thinks.

I never really cared about what was cool myself; too overrated. (Seriously, I'm an adult writing on a comics forum.)

Singer's X-men was stylish, well cast, and dealt with its difficult socio-political themes in a very thought provoking way. Drama over action and spectacle. Great character arcs, especially for Logan and Rogue. It was relevant, it set up a whole franchise.

Speaking as an almost-30, I do like the movie, but I think it's fair to point out that it wasn't perfect and has been improved upon . I mean, it had some pretty iconic sets (e.g. Cerebro), but also some pretty oddball stuff (Magento's secret base). It may have had a good cast, but everyone not named Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan, and Hugh Jackman were pretty well wasted. Wolverine and Rogue were good, but for every good dynamic, you have some pretty bad ones, too (e.g. the triangle between Cyclops, Jean, and Logan).

It wasn't slavishly trying to recreate the look or any specific storyline of the comic. It wasn't simply setting storylines up for sequels. Unlike most MCU films, it didn't feature characters already established in other film series. Unlike MCU, it didn't feel like it was part of some mega-crossover "Infinity Gauntlet" - type event.

Still, you can see the rough edges. I mean, being self-contained isn't inherently better, just another form of storytelling that can be done well or poorly.

In other words, it felt like a feature film and not a comic book, and that's why the cbr hipsters prefer the MCU. The MCU films are literally comic book arcs on film, complete with all the crossovers from other books and the "event" subplots.

IMHO, there's room for both (heck, the MCU has had its stand-alones that then come back later down the line, so you can do both).

The MCU films are also extremely formulaic.

And yet they have distinct differences and tones.

The reason you don't get "oddball" films like Singer's X-men or Superman Returns, Schumacher's Batman Forever, or the Dino De Laurentiis Flash Gordon films is because Hollywood is now run by five mega-corporations.

A movie about characters you never heard of (chiefly a talking raccoon and tree) in a colorful space opera using '80s music isn't oddball enough?

Where are the ultra stylish MCU films?

Umm, Thor 1 and Ranganrok, Captain America: The First Avenger, Guardians of the Galaxy, Spider-Man: Far From Home?

Where are the MCU films with unconvential narratives?

Umm, Captain America: The Winter Soldier (political thriller within the superhero narrative), (Ant-Man movies (heist genre within the superhero narrative), Doctor Strange (the final climax being about preventing it from ever happening)

Where are the controversial themes?

Umm, Black Panther?

Everything is filtered through Kevin Feige and The Walt Disney Company.

Like how the X-Men movies were through Fox?

It's a factory, and one that's good at what it does, but it's not about the artist. You are kidding yourself if you think it is.

And yet the studio has given directors creative freedom in their projects. Also, something being "commercialized" doesn't mean it can't impact audiences or gain meaning from that. I mean, consider all those old stories about how kids cried when Optimus Prime died in the '80s Transformers movie (a creative decision that was made due to the movie literally being a toy commercial and tying to tell people to stop buying this old toy truck because there were new toys waiting for them in stores).

[Jokerz79]

My issue with Snyder's Watchmen is to look cool he missed the mark on characters.

He did great with Dr. Manhattan and even Rorschach but a big story element to Watchmen is what kind of normal person would become a vigilante.

So my issue is many characters appear superhuman vs normal. In fight scenes he made characters like Comedian, Nite-Owl, and Silk Spectre appear superhuman with their strength and agility. Comedian punches threw a Brick/or marble fire place and doesn't even flinches when he is killed and he was a 60 plus man by then.