So glad Zac is directing these films. I don't have anything wrong with him at all. He will bring the fight the only way it should happen on film. Can't think of anyone else that could of done these films. When it comes to superheros I want to see them use their powers and gifts and not stand around talking too much. Never understood how a comic book movie could have too much action. It simply can't. Yes I want quiet character moments but it should have more action than talking scenes. Always.
So glad Zac is directing these films. I don't have anything wrong with him at all. He will bring the fight the only way it should happen on film. Can't think of anyone else that could of done these films. When it comes to superheros I want to see them use their powers and gifts and not stand around talking too much. Never understood how a comic book movie could have too much action. It simply can't. Yes I want quiet character moments but it should have more action than talking scenes. Always.
Yeah, CBM viewers don't want My Dinner with Andre. There's a balance to strike with key elements to any good story, but I agree that the action is the 'center that holds'.
Never thought of it that way, but it's a nice point.
One of the criticisms I had regarding MOS was that I left the cinema feeling flat rather than uplifted. But I have more and more hope that once BvS comes out, and any future viewings of the films can occur TOGETHER as one big story package - that the tone may make sense.
Never thought of it that way, but it's a nice point.
One of the criticisms I had regarding MOS was that I left the cinema feeling flat rather than uplifted. But I have more and more hope that once BvS comes out, and any future viewings of the films can occur TOGETHER as one big story package - that the tone may make sense.
That's the thing! I do think that will be the case.
To a considerable degree MoS has already been 'rehabilitated' as a film by a great many devoted fans (one might say it has achieved something akin to cult status, actually), despite the fact that critics were so unkind to it upon release. It is now the foundational first film of a trilogy, and as such its worldbuilding and the story arcs it sets forth have a different context than it did when initially released as a standalone film.
I'm the same with TDK though. I love that movie but it's not a film I can watch very often as the hopelessness of the entire film, and even in Batmans final "victory" is depressing.
To a considerable degree MoS has already been 'rehabilitated' as a film by a great many devoted fans (one might say it has achieved something akin to cult status, actually), despite the fact that critics were so unkind to it upon release.
That's probably because if it's in home cinema people can fast forward most of the end act Jokes aside, I've not really seen any kind of resurgence in it's popularity; a lots probably because it was out such a long time ago now that most of its detractors don't care enough to comment about it anymore.
Never thought of it that way, but it's a nice point.
One of the criticisms I had regarding MOS was that I left the cinema feeling flat rather than uplifted. But I have more and more hope that once BvS comes out, and any future viewings of the films can occur TOGETHER as one big story package - that the tone may make sense.
I agree about feeling flat after the movie, but in my case, I believe that came from "OK, so Metropolis was flattened, Supes' position with the people is up in the air...what happens now?" If we only knew that that movie was a start of the JL/DCEU, it would've been different perhaps. But now we know, so in retrospect, its a good movie to initiate the discussions that bring us to BvS.
Edit: I still thought it was a good movie. Especially seeing Supes doing what he does best (punch!) and his relationship with Lois, Ma Kent, and people in general was fantastic. I thought Henry did a great job, not just with his looks, but acting as well.
From Terrio's comments, I'd imagine BvS ends on a more somber note with the realization that the 6 or 7 have to join forces to prevent what they have to prevent in JL.
They join forces because they are forced to. That doesn't sound to hopeful. Then in JL, the hope will be evident.
From Terrio's comments, I'd imagine BvS ends on a more somber note with the realization that the 6 or 7 have to join forces to prevent what they have to prevent in JL.
They join forces because they are forced to. That doesn't sound to hopeful. Then in JL, the hope will be evident.
Seeing Snyder's knack for visuals and the Zod fight in MoS makes me wish he'd helm a legit DBZ movie one of these days, when he's done heading DC Films and takes a back seat producer role.
Seeing Snyder's knack for visuals and the Zod fight in MoS makes me wish he'd helm a legit DBZ movie one of these days, when he's done heading DC Films and takes a back seat producer role.
After Snyder is done with the DCCU and gets to make his Jefferson v Washington: Dawn of Liberty movie I want to see him take a crack at a manga adaptation for sure. I'm not sure about it being DBZ though.
Seeing Snyder's knack for visuals and the Zod fight in MoS makes me wish he'd helm a legit DBZ movie one of these days, when he's done heading DC Films and takes a back seat producer role.
2nd- I agree with you TheFlamingCoco. Producers can be a great help or big hindrance, depending on if they are simply a line producer or executive with creative control. If you know your movie history, then you know the Salkins (exec. prods) were the main reason Donner quit (or did they fire him) and he had filmed practically all Superman II. Lester came in and did some rework and had to call the actors back to do voice overs.
Moral is yes...producers make a difference. Luckily Zack's wife is the producer. Because Charles Roven has no clue about this type of genre.
I can certainly understand the desire to see BvS end with a sense of hope, but my hopes for the film aren't that specific. I just want whatever ending we get to have an impact. Regardless of whatever it ends in...hope, devastation, regret...I just want it to have emotion and resonance. The ending of TDK wasn't exactly hopeful, but it put batman's grand act of self-sacrifice on display and left a definite impression on me when I walked out of the theater.
It's interesting to look back on the endings of the two films that Terrio compares with BvS, The Two Towers and The Empire Strikes Back. Both are darker than the other films in their respective trilogies, as Terrio says. ESB is fairly upbeat. But TT not so much.
It's really hard for me to say, because I genuinely did like MoS. But, Idk, I just felt like some things about it could have been better. Like, there is an epic, Best Picture quality Superman origin movie that I can picture, but how could they have changed MoS to bring it to that next level?
I feel like some people hit the nail on the head, they just tried to do too much. It feels like the movie just speedballs right by you, doesn't give you chance to take it in and really care for these characters. I was really happy to get Costner as Johnathon Kent, but I felt like I didn't get the chance to really appreciate his role, for example.
There was some really emotional stuff in MoS, but it was moving so fast, scene to scene, not to mention the non linear narrative, that it was hard to ever really invest in the characters and the dialouge and what they were going through.
I appreciated all the action scenes, but sometimes when there's so much action and spectacle, they're trying to blow you away, that you don't really feel the stakes of the action. Sometimes, with action, less is more.
I feel like they could have trimmed a lot of that action, to give the character development more room to breathe. I love that they are approaching the DC movies similar to a television series, making it all connected in a world that feels cohesive. But if you think about the great series, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game Of Thrones, The Wire, they hold back on the action, which makes it so much more effective when something happens, like Walter White kills somebody, or a sword fight on GoT. If Walter White was constantly blowing people up or getting into gunfights, it would lose so much of it's impact, would feel tedious, but they give you enough time to get really invested in the characters and the stakes of the situation, that you really feel the tension.
Obviously, movies don't have as much time. I think the Lord Of The Rings movies, and The Dark Knight (not so much TDKR) found a good balance between action and drama. I'm hoping BvS is able to find a better balance. Use the action, fights, and spectacle to their advantage, to advance the story they are telling, but not to overpower it. Story first, action second.
"It's really hard for me to say, because I genuinely did like MoS. But, Idk, I just felt like some things about it could have been better. Like, there is an epic, Best Picture quality Superman origin movie that I can picture, but how could they have changed MoS to bring it to that next level?"
Easy..let Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens write the script (LOTR writers).
Or Tim McCanlies, writer of the Iron Giant.
Zack directs pictures like no other in the CBM genre. We should keep him
It's really hard for me to say, because I genuinely did like MoS. But, Idk, I just felt like some things about it could have been better. Like, there is an epic, Best Picture quality Superman origin movie that I can picture, but how could they have changed MoS to bring it to that next level?
I feel like some people hit the nail on the head, they just tried to do too much. It feels like the movie just speedballs right by you, doesn't give you chance to take it in and really care for these characters. I was really happy to get Costner as Johnathon Kent, but I felt like I didn't get the chance to really appreciate his role, for example.
There was some really emotional stuff in MoS, but it was moving so fast, scene to scene, not to mention the non linear narrative, that it was hard to ever really invest in the characters and the dialouge and what they were going through.
I appreciated all the action scenes, but sometimes when there's so much action and spectacle, they're trying to blow you away, that you don't really feel the stakes of the action. Sometimes, with action, less is more.
I feel like they could have trimmed a lot of that action, to give the character development more room to breathe. I love that they are approaching the DC movies similar to a television series, making it all connected in a world that feels cohesive. But if you think about the great series, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game Of Thrones, The Wire, they hold back on the action, which makes it so much more effective when something happens, like Walter White kills somebody, or a sword fight on GoT. If Walter White was constantly blowing people up or getting into gunfights, it would lose so much of it's impact, would feel tedious, but they give you enough time to get really invested in the characters and the stakes of the situation, that you really feel the tension.
Obviously, movies don't have as much time. I think the Lord Of The Rings movies, and The Dark Knight (not so much TDKR) found a good balance between action and drama. I'm hoping BvS is able to find a better balance. Use the action, fights, and spectacle to their advantage, to advance the story they are telling, but not to overpower it. Story first, action second.
I think the notion that MoS 'tries to do too much' is a really good observation, and it's actually one of the first criticisms that I had of the film when I first started re-watching and studying it. But I don't think it is so much the action or fight scenes that causes this.
Rather I think it was the whole Kryptonian backstory and alien invasion plot that made it difficult to allow enough time to tell the story of Clark's character development in an optimally satisfying way. The film shows us Clark's development using a kind of shorthand, in order to instead focus on developing the Kryptonian worldbduilding. I.e., it sacrifices character development to spend time on the larger overarching story themes and worldbuilding. (Btw, because I see it this way I laugh when I read the complaint that MoS suffers from placing 'style over substance'.)
I suspect Snyder takes that risk because he assumes that the Superman origin story is relatively familiar to most viewers. So the film shows us only key moments or glimpses of what makes this Clark/Kal/Superman different than the past versions we have seen.
Here is why Snyder does that, I believe. (FYI, you'll find the following quote by Snyder here):
I never felt like a movie should exist in the real world before, but I feel like Superman should... All the Superman movies that have been made exist in some weird stylized world where everyone's, like, apple pie and Chevrolet and it's... like the American Dream in a weird way... [T]he thing I find interesting is... being able to release the character from that world, where he's been stuck and shackled, and bring him to our world and see what he does.
So there is a reinvention of the myth going on in Man of Steel. Snyder is attempting to bring the character out of that idealized American mythos of 1939 -mid 60s and place him in the world that we inhabit today, with all of our real world's moral complexities and ambiguities--and that is a more tense, harsher, and grayer world. This is a Superman for whom it makes sense for there to be some healthy doubt about how well he can handle all of the pressures facing him. A Superman who therefore may have (healthy!) self-doubts and make mistakes. A hero who is sometimes forced to make choices when there is no ideal or perfect solution to the problem. It is a Superman that reflects our 'real world', and symbolically what it means to be a hero in that real world.
So I think that in order to reinvent the Superman myth in this way, Snyder chose to make this movie more a of 'realistic' feeling science fiction vehicle than it has ever been before. If a character like Superman were to appear on earth today what would that look and feel like? How would the world react to this? As such it becomes a science fiction story about Superman being an extra-terrestrial, and all of the monumental implications that that entails (which we will see developed further in BvS). Humanity's hopes and fears about not being alone in the universe are condensed and merged together in this tale. MoS is an alien invasion story. And of course it is a story about one special alien that identifies with what connects him to our species, and chooses to be our heroic protector.
It may be that the Kryptonian connection to the DCEU will turn out to be pretty large in scope as the film universe develops. We'll see. I will wrap the following in spoiler tags although it is only speculation based on the MoS prequel comic:
The MOS Prequel comic shows that two Kryptonians (Kara Zor-EL and Dev-Em; one of good character, and one evil) arrived on earth 18,000 years ago. And from that we may speculate that they might even have been progenitors of the Amazonians and/or Atlanteans, for example. In the DC comic universe metahumans come from a variety of different planets and other dimensions within the multiverse. Probably not all, but at least some of the 'gods' of the ancient world may have been born of Kryptonian DNA, a la the 'ancient aliens' theory.
In any event, all of this is a hugely ambitious project for a film. MoS's worldbuilding is very much about what it will mean for humanity to discover that ETs/metahumans exist alongside us (the 'ancient aliens' theory, which is a kind of new modern-day mythology that lends itself beautifully to comic book characters). It does result in a sort of truncated depiction of Superman's character development. But I have come to accept this trade-off as acceptable because I love what this film so boldly sets out to do (if the above analysis is mostly correct).
Now, interestingly, despite the fact that the film manages to pack so much content into one film in a truncated way, I still actually kind of like its pacing. I accept that in this case there is a valid need for some shorthand to an already very familiar story. The film is tense throughout, with a steadily increasing sense of foreboding. The tension gradually builds and it literally explodes in the final act when the World Engine is unleashed, and with Superman stopping it and his battle to the death with Zod. I also think that there is something to A Thesis on Man of Steel's analysis that the film subtly encodes a symbolic physical childbirth metaphor throughout the movie, such that we by the end the myth and archetype of Superman get violently and painfully reborn into our modern psyche. That moment of rebirth happens when Superman snaps Zod's neck. It is possible that the pacing to the film could reflect such a 'rebirth of the myth' story.
Anyway, all of these things are so rich to me that I can easily overlook the shortcomings of the film that I see, that I have already listed in earlier posts: Do I wish that more time and attention had been given to learning who Clark/Kal/Superman is at a human emotional level? Sure! (And to getting to know supporting characters better as well.) Do I wish that the film had shown us more moments of human connection, warmth, and relatability? Absolutely! Would I have preferred for the film's color palette to have used natural light, and even slightly saturated color? Yes.
But to so boldly reinvent the Supeman myth, and bring this character into a kind of 'realistic' modern cultural psyche... Especially when we see what kind of immense destructive capabilities... and then responsibilities... metahuman powers carry... I absolutely love what this film is doing. So I am very forgiving about the things that were sacrificed in the story in order to make it happen.
I wish Snyder had a 3 hour or longer director's cut of MoS that might have shown us character development moments that had to be cut. But my guess is that if he had them, such a director's cut would have been released already.
Well said, man, and I feel the exact same way. It's what I loved about Batman Begins, examining that character in a "real world" context. It gave me a lot of confidence in Snyder when I read his quote about these characters being our "modern mythology". I loved 300 because it really felt to me like a story was being told, like in Ancient Sparta, a storyteller was telling the story of the 300, and these images are what appeared in the Spartans imaginations, if that makes any sense.
I like that he still chose to include that classic Superman "American" imagery, the father working on his pickup truck, the kid in the blue jeans and white shirt with the cape (this image really struck me and got me excited in the trailer, because I was that little kid, everywhere I went, I went in my Superman outfit, cape, boots and all. People back in my home town who knew me as a kid still call me "Superman"when they see me) and Zack gets that aspect of the character.
I'm really confidant from what I've seen so far, that he is going to strike that visual balance between the "real world" imagery and the classic Gotham gothic noir imagery that is inspired by the old B&W gangster movies and hard boiled detective movies, Dick Tracy serials, etc.
I think that basically sums up the reason MoS fell flat for so many people. They basically wanted to give us Superman I and II (a combined 4.5 hours of story) in addition to the "how would the world react to an alien?" Concept. And I love all of that stuff. But they felt like they couldn't just give us the origin and the alien idea, or people would find it boring, so they also had to include all the invasion, action, Kryptonian battle stuff. they probably felt pressure to include all these different aspects, being pulled in different directions, that they weren't allowed to tell exactly the story they story they wanted to, a story that should have probably taken two movies.
I bet they realize this, too, and I hope and have confidence that in BvS they will be like "Okay, now we can slow down a little and tell our story" give the characters and themes some time to develop. That's a reason I think it's brilliant to go ahead and start out with a grizzled Batman who has a full history, which they can explore later if they choose, or just allude to. Superman needed a full origin movie to kick start this universe, Batman didn't. MoS was on Fast Forward to get out all of their ideas, while still providing an action packed blockbuster. Like, imagine editing a season of Breaking Bad into one two hour movie. It would probably suck because the audience never gets a chance to really care about the characters and events.
But now, they need to take all those ideas, themes, and characters and explore them, through dialouge and dramatic scenes, and give it a chance to sink in and connect with the audience. And that's where Terrio will play a large part, I think.
Btw, in my perfect world, they would make the DC Mythology into a series or a couple of series like Game Of Thrones (imagine a Gotham City series in the style of BvS meets The Wire about Batman, Gordon, Harvey Dent, Vicki Vale, Bullock, the villains, the punks on the street. It would be incredible!) but that just wouldn't come out on top in terms of profit vs cost.
And going off exactly what you said, I completely agree, I can accept it all too, because they are doing exactly what I would want to see in a DC Universe film. The most important thing is, maybe they truncated or had to fast forward through a lot, but they didn't screw anything up. Nothing was bad or ruined about the dialouge, the visuals, or the characters, as a matter of fact it was all great, as far as I'm concerned, so they set up this world that they can now explore in more detail.
I'm completely willing to accept and admit, although it's unfortunate, that the first Superman film in the DCEU wasn't as great as it could have been, but that doesn't mean that the DCEU as a whole can't be. I'm very optimistic about it. And that's what this thread is all about. Love the actors cast in MoS, love everything I've seen of BvS thus far, was immediately psyched over Affleck, a bit disappointed in Eisenburg, because it didn't fit the image I had in my mind, but now that I get where they are going with it, and how he represents this new breed of young tech entrepreneurs, I think it has possibility to be better than what I had pictured in my head (although Idk, cause Cranston could have made a hell of a Luthor!).
Here's hoping we get to see James Gordon, in some capacity, in this universe, even if it is just through flashbacks, but I'd hope his character gets developed, and I'd like to see a little more of Costner as Pa Kent.
I think me and you feel the exact same way on Man Of Steel and the direction of the DCEU from here.
Thanks for the link to the MoS Thesis, haven't read it yet, I'll check it out.
Edit: "haven't watched it yet", didn't know it was a video
As a casual filmgoer, Watchmen is a 3.5 star movie.
As a PROSPECTIVE DIRECTOR, Watchmen is AMAZING. I can EASILY see know why Ebert chose to give it the full four (and now I think I will, too). It's deep, cinematically expressive, dramatic, artistic, haunting, beautiful and ultimately more redemptive than even the graphic novel. And JEH gives a performance for the ages. It was an easy buy
If BvS is 50 percent as good as Watchmen, we're in for a modern classic.
As a casual filmgoer, Watchmen is a 3.5 star movie.
As a PROSPECTIVE DIRECTOR, Watchmen is AMAZING. I can EASILY see know why Ebert chose to give it the full four (and now I think I will, too). It's deep, cinematically expressive, dramatic, artistic, haunting, beautiful and ultimately more redemptive than even the graphic novel. And JEH gives a performance for the ages. It was an easy buy
If BvS is 50 percent as good as Watchmen, we're in for a modern classic.
As a casual filmgoer, Watchmen is a 3.5 star movie.
As a PROSPECTIVE DIRECTOR, Watchmen is AMAZING. I can EASILY see know why Ebert chose to give it the full four (and now I think I will, too). It's deep, cinematically expressive, dramatic, artistic, haunting, beautiful and ultimately more redemptive than even the graphic novel. And JEH gives a performance for the ages. It was an easy buy
If BvS is 50 percent as good as Watchmen, we're in for a modern classic.
So what you're saying is...Watchmen is at least twice as good as anything considered a modern classic? Not buying, sorry.
I know you love Snyder Coco, and that's great- but Zoddamn you have been taking hyperbole to new heights as of late and I think you know it. From one production professional to an aspiring one...I can assure you that pulling "rank" or going on about what I learned in my film classes has never convinced any of my friends that I'm in the right in any sort of TV/film-related argument. Nor should it. They'll respect my opinion, sure, but it's still just that. An opinion. When you start to step behind the camera, you do gain a new perspective on cinema...it can even be hard to be a regular audience member sometimes because you're deconstructing everything in your head.
Snyder is a director that can certainly be admired, if nothing else but for the visual care he puts into his films. And his filmmaking is probably inspiring you to want to make great things of your own, which is really awesome. But I'm just telling you, trying to pull the "I'm studying film and everything I learn confirms Snyder's greatness!!"...it's not going to impress or convince anybody, because a big part of the cinematic experience is subjective and a film is nothing without an audience.
I'm sorry if that sounded like a lecture, but I feel like I can say this stuff without being too much of an a-hole because I was pretty much in your exact shoes in my late teens/early 20s. How you feel about Snyder now is how I felt about the Wachowskis a decade ago. I was particularly indignant about all the hate (some of which I still feel was a tad excessive) for the Matrix sequels. Eventually you just have to reconcile the fact that something you love didn't work for a lot of people, and that's okay.
You have every right to love what you love, but when you start insinuating that you know better...films are designed to be watched by audiences, period.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Jokes aside, I've not really seen any kind of resurgence in it's popularity; a lots probably because it was out such a long time ago now that most of its detractors don't care enough to comment about it anymore.
movie I want to see him take a crack at a manga adaptation for sure. I'm not sure about it being DBZ though.
