I see once again you have avoided my question.
You said :I'm not avoiding it. I'm ignoring it. Your questions have no relevance to me. I was disputing the silly notion that Snyder isn't responsible for how long the script was. That's it.
I really hate that I have to bring this up but I've just completed watching the first Supergirl season and it really showcases just how easy it is to have compelling arcs and stories for a god-like character. That show tackles the struggles of being a hero and even brings up the same questions that are asked upon Superman in MoS and BvS. The difference between the two interpretations is one is always remembering their hero is suppose to represent something whilst the other is too busy trying to disprove something. Despite its light tone and at times silliness and lame plot devices, from a character perspective Supergirl is a better representation of what can be done with these character concepts.
....Snyder "was just the director"?
You understand that the director is usually the main creative force behind a movie, right? Story, editing, costumes, cinematography, etc. Ultimately filter through him. He helped co write the story. The Russo's cut down Civil War to an acceptable screentime...before they started filming. The Dark Knight Rises script was allegedly massive before Nolan cut it down. So yeah, Snyder can take the blame for making a three hour film in the first place, just as WB can take the blame for approving it.
I've never seen people conjure up so many excuses for a guy who consistently making polarizing product. It's never Snyder's fault for anything, ever, even when he's clearly the common denominator for the mediocre-to-negative reception to most of his films.
You said :
"Snyder can take the blame for making a three hour film in the first place"
And you said that "its not Snyder's fault that the script was 3hrs long", which, by your standards, also implies that making a 3 hr movie is something wrong. So, maybe you should answer your own questions.
Okay mate I'll be honest with you.I'm really curious to know what are your views regarding the question I asked.
Lets say for the sake of the argument,I'm wrong.There you go,I'm wrong.Now look,I dont have any animosity with you,neither will I reply further to continue this argument.Just tell me this :
1.Was it wrong for Snyder to make a 3hr movie?
2.Or is it,that a competent director can cut 30mins off a 3 hr movie and it doesnt make a difference,and its Snyders fault that he couldnt do so?
Look I dont win anything for winning an internet argument.I just want to hear other peoples opinions.And I am really interested in hearing this.Just answer this my friend,I'm really curious to know.I wont bother you further.
I'm glad you've decided to be honest, because it was very clear that your questions had nothing to do with what I was actually arguing.
I think the length of the movie doesn't matter as much as content. The main problem with this film, IMO, is that it's hollow, not that compelling, and overstuffed. If you did a 3 hr TDK-quality movie that focused solely on the conflict/relationship between Batman and Superman, you'd be ok.
Uhhhhhh I just saw on CBM that this was delayed until July 18th??? Can anyone confirm??
i wonder for those that seen it. does it make you like the movie any more if having issues with it, or just something good for existing fans mostly?
i wonder for those that seen it. does it make you like the movie any more if having issues with it, or just something good for existing fans mostly?
Agreed.
and what do you think,considering its true that the UC is lot more coherent and smooth,would this vindicate Snyder of the blame that he is not a good storyteller?Would you be more confident about the Justice League?
I just find it odd here that from what I see in these forums, fans of the movie like the movie, and accept the fact that it didn't jive with others, they would defend the film, but otherwise totally cool with the fact that some people don't like it. While detractors almost seem un-accepting of the fact that some people actually likes this film, and will tear it down to shreds regardless. It feels like they feel almost vindicated that the numbers prove to them that the movie was basically s***, and push those facts on to fans going, "Why do you still like this?! Cinemascore says you're not supposed to!"
I can understand not liking a film, heck I hated IM3, but I didn't stay on that board to rain on people. BvS was released 3 months ago, and yet we're still here talking about the same stuff lol. I would've imagined most of you guys would be in the CW and XMA forums discussing the merits of those films. Yet here you still are. Now we have a UC coming, and about 90% of you who haven't seen it yet come in here bashing it like you have. It's gotten so bad that you guys got the JL speculation thread locked. I mean come on!
I just find it odd here that from what I see in these forums, fans of the movie like the movie, and accept the fact that it didn't jive with others, they would defend the film, but otherwise totally cool with the fact that some people don't like it. While detractors almost seem un-accepting of the fact that some people actually likes this film, and will tear it down to shreds regardless. It feels like they feel almost vindicated that the numbers prove to them that the movie was basically s***, and push those facts on to fans going, "Why do you still like this?! Cinemascore says you're not supposed to!"
I can understand not liking a film, heck I hated IM3, but I didn't stay on that board to rain on people. BvS was released 3 months ago, and yet we're still here talking about the same stuff lol. I would've imagined most of you guys would be in the CW and XMA forums discussing the merits of those films. Yet here you still are. Now we have a UC coming, and about 90% of you who haven't seen it yet come in here bashing it like you have. It's gotten so bad that you guys got the JL speculation thread locked. I mean come on!
Even Jeremy Irons publicly said the movie deserved all the bad reviews. I loved his brutal honesty. I wonder how many others associated with the movie will speak out against it.
He didn't "speak out against it", but stated that it tried to do too much. He's right about that, but he admitted that the BO results were just enough to outweigh the negative critic reviews. He's right about that, too.
He outright said that it deserved poor reviews. I'm not sure what the textbook definition of "speaking out against it" is, but that seems like a good start.
pick me! pick me!I don't care if people like the movie. I take issue with people who live in a bubble who are convinced that Zack Snyder is some misunderstood genius that's so much smarter than Marvel and Nolan and what have you and that people who don't like it just don't "get it."
