BvS The Official Zack Snyder Directs Everything Thread - Part 3

[Boom]

Still better than the justification for their fight in Miller's TDKR.

And I'm curious how many people finished reading that comic thinking, "Wow, what a great depiction of Superman!"

 

[FunkMiller]

And I'm curious how many people finished reading that comic thinking, "Wow, what a great Superman!"

I think Superman's characterisation in TDKR is excusable, if only for the fact that Clark wants to see the good in people, and allows himself to become an unwitting pawn of the state, because of a degree of naivety and misplaced trust. It's far from the ideal representation of the character for Superman fans, but it's still head and shoulders above Snyder's take.

 

[Boom]

- Superman is a pawn of the US government.
- The US government is involved in an international military conflict.
- The US government gets Superman involved in said incident.
- A nuclear bomb is launched at the US.
- Superman sets it off in the atmosphere, causing blackouts across the US.
- Batman rallies the Sons of Batman and Gotham's citizens to keep their city afloat during the blackout.
- President: "Hey Superman, go deal with him. He's the bad guy here."
Superman: "Yes, sir!"

Great stuff.

 

[MaceB]

And I'm curious how many people finished reading that comic thinking, "Wow, what a great depiction of Superman!"

I strongly believe it is the best depiction of Superman... and Batman for that matter. Heroes can be flawed... lot more interesting when they are.

There are several instances where Superman has been depicted as the pawn of the government. This makes sense for several reasons:

It's natural that the government would want to control an individual of his abilities. Would it be better to depict Superman 30 years in his career and the government to have simply capitulated to unregulated weapon of mass destruction doing whatever it wants? Of course they'd aim to gain control over him.
Superman has always put his faith in men. He wants to be like them. He trusts the overall goodness of individuals.
Superman has commonly classified himself as an American. It's not unnatural that he'd want to serve like others do. The American Way can be a much more tricky concept than it was in the 30s.
The Boy scouts of America is one of the biggest youth organizations associated with the military, and that's what Superman is - he's a type A personality boy scout.
From a utilitarian perspective, the greatest good for the greatest number would mean limiting vigilantism, so an effort to control and limit vigilantism could be highly justified.

IMO, TDKR was easily the most complex, 3 dimensional, and natural progression for the character. Just because it doesn't fit into this "do good in all circumstances" box that people like to put Superman in, doesn't make it wrong. In fact, the key difference between Batman and Superman is Superman's willingness to put his faith in humanity versus Batman's need for vengeance against the worst of humanity. They'd naturally come into conflict, and they're disagreement over government influence is the most obvious reason why.

 

[MaceB]

I'm getting tired of BvS defenders telling detractors that they didn't watch the film correctly.

It's one of the most interesting things about the film I think, which is that, on the page, it's all there. It's one of those movies where you can find the answers you're looking for. You can interpret it as a work of genius. MOS too.
The disappointing thing about the movie is that these elements were in the film, but never capitalized on in an effective way. I mean... was Lex Luthor a deep character with complex motivations? .... I guess. The dialogue was there to show us why he was the way he was. But did it really make sense? Was it presented in a compelling way? Was Superman's act against Doomsday heroic? Sure.... but did you ever get that swell in your stomach that made you care deeply about that act of heroism? I'd argue, no. Seems like several others agree.
So people can work to like this film if they wish. I think they are fooling themselves if they say it's more enjoyable than other top films in the genre, but whatever.

 

[jmc]

He tried to speak if you watched the film properly.

He could have made him self a couple of tea in between some of the breaks in dialog. He didn't try, it was written as such so he wouldn't say anything because them talking would have prevented the fight from happening.

 

[shauner111]

Can count on one hand the number of good things that has been in the DCEU so far in the whole two movies we've had.

Zimmer's MOS score. The Trinity suits. Batcave. Fights. Casting the supporting characters that surround the lead heroes (not Jesse though).

 

[wnjcwjkk]

I strongly believe it is the best depiction of Superman... and Batman for that matter. Heroes can be flawed... lot more interesting when they are.

There are several instances where Superman has been depicted as the pawn of the government. This makes sense for several reasons:

It's natural that the government would want to control an individual of his abilities. Would it be better to depict Superman 30 years in his career and the government to have simply capitulated to unregulated weapon of mass destruction doing whatever it wants? Of course they'd aim to gain control over him.
Superman has always put his faith in men. He wants to be like them. He trusts the overall goodness of individuals.
Superman has commonly classified himself as an American. It's not unnatural that he'd want to serve like others do. The American Way can be a much more tricky concept than it was in the 30s.
The Boy scouts of America is one of the biggest youth organizations associated with the military, and that's what Superman is - he's a type A personality boy scout.
From a utilitarian perspective, the greatest good for the greatest number would mean limiting vigilantism, so an effort to control and limit vigilantism could be highly justified.

IMO, TDKR was easily the most complex, 3 dimensional, and natural progression for the character. Just because it doesn't fit into this "do good in all circumstances" box that people like to put Superman in, doesn't make it wrong. In fact, the key difference between Batman and Superman is Superman's willingness to put his faith in humanity versus Batman's need for vengeance against the worst of humanity. They'd naturally come into conflict, and they're disagreement over government influence is the most obvious reason why.

Well said, man. Also, Superman would want to gain the trust and faith of the people, and he is a pretty simple, straightforward, salt of the Earth guy. I think it makes perfect sense the government would want to take advantage of that, as they do in so many other cases, shady back room deals, using the image of the flag and the rallying cry of "Freedom, Truth, Justice, The American Way" as a means to manipulate.


Bruce Wayne understands all of this all too well, being an incredibly powerful businessman, he is also extremely intelligent and cynical.

No, it's not the most flattering interpretation of Superman's character, but it is more realistic (as you said, the world today is complicated).

I think if you're going to tell a story that pits Batman and Superman against one another in battle, this is the best way to go about that, outside of some kind of brainwashing scenario.

 

[The Joker]

Zimmer's MOS score. The Trinity suits. Batcave. Fights. Casting the supporting characters that surround the lead heroes (not Jesse though).

I don't get what people liked about the Batcave. All glass and concrete. It didn't look like a Batcave.

 

[Mutato]

Frank Miller's "Superman" is terrible.

Snyder's "Superman" is terrible.

Fire is hot. Water is wet.

 

[sf2]

Snyder worshipper are you?
It's fun to kill jimmy olsen right? And he might thinking on leaving only lois as the sole supporting character of superman in dceu

yes, i am!!! i pray to him every sunday!!! and thanks him for giving us a very special and thoughtful movie.

cheer.

jimmy olsen??? he killed clark kent too.

 

[obredaan]

He could have made him self a couple of tea in between some of the breaks in dialog. He didn't try, it was written as such so he wouldn't say anything because them talking would have prevented the fight from happening.

There's no way around it. Its beyond silly and flimsy that the entire fight relies on Superman not talking. This is compounded by the conclusion of the fight which is resolved over a name being spoken.

 

[Flint Marko]

I don't get what people liked about the Batcave. All glass and concrete. It didn't look like a Batcave.

Overall I think the production design (this obviously excludes everything made on a greenscreen) was pretty spectacular but the Batcave was underwhelming.

 

[X Knight]

the poll is now closed, but I say Sack Snyder.

especially after reading Rebirth.

it's time for Snyder and his bleak, deconstructionist view of heroes to go. Leave that stuff for stories like Watchmen - keep it away from a character like Superman.

Snyder does cool visuals. but I think it's become pretty obvious he's not the right director for a character like Superman.

 

[sf2]

the poll is now closed, but I say Sack Snyder.

especially after reading Rebirth.

it's time for Snyder and his bleak, deconstructionist view of heroes to go. Leave that stuff for stories like Watchmen - keep it away from a character like Superman.

Snyder does cool visuals. but I think it's become pretty obvious he's not the right director for a character like Superman.

maybe let him finish JL1 & 2 first, can we? pls be considerate of those who love this version.
and at the meantime, you guys have the popular marvels movies which everybody loves and so many are coming out... you won't have time to get bored.

 

[X Knight]

maybe let him finish JL1 & 2 first, can we? pls be considerate of those who love this version.
and at the meantime, you guys have the popular marvels movies which everybody loves and so many are coming out... you won't have time to get bored.

I'm willing to see where his JL movies go. And I'm hoping it will lead to Flash soft rebooting everything.

but I definitely don't want Snyder on Superman anymore. and if he still can't get Superman right in JL 1 and 2, then he definitely needs to go.

 

[Marvel Knight]

It's too late for Superman now.

Maybe in a decade or so when they reboot him.

He's basically Snyder-man.


Flash is the best chance for a great breakout character in the DCEU. But they've started him off on the wrong foot with this Knightmare nonsense.

 

[Timebomb]

For anybody who thinks this Superman can be salvaged, I have three words:"Clark is DEAD!". That right there means Superman is damaged goods. Going to have to do some major fudging to fix that little pickle.

 

[Lencho01]

The folks over at /Film hit the nail on the head.

All Superman and Batman have to do is have one clear conversation early in the film, and Lex's plan goes out the window. Had these characters just ****ing talked to each other, there's no movie.

That's how horrible this setup was. It only works when it depicts everyone as reactionary and jumping straight to violence. You see this as early as the prologue with Thomas Wayne. And even Superman, after trying to talk to Batman briefly, continues to throw him through buildings instead of trying to find a nonviolent way to get Batman to listen. Superman most certainly has the capacity to do that. And let's not forget Superman letting criminals escape just so he could threaten Batman earlier in the film.

This movie was the equivalent of a twelve year old smashing Superman and Batman toys together.

The perfect illustration of the concept of both characters fighting, no? So, in that way, the film is a success.

 

[sf2]

The folks over at /Film hit the nail on the head.

All Superman and Batman have to do is have one clear conversation early in the film, and Lex's plan goes out the window. Had these characters just ****ing talked to each other, there's no movie.

That's how horrible this setup was. It only works when it depicts everyone as reactionary and jumping straight to violence. You see this as early as the prologue with Thomas Wayne. And even Superman, after trying to talk to Batman briefly, continues to throw him through buildings instead of trying to find a nonviolent way to get Batman to listen. Superman most certainly has the capacity to do that. And let's not forget Superman letting criminals escape just so he could threaten Batman earlier in the film.

This movie was the equivalent of a twelve year old smashing Superman and Batman toys together.

haha.. they just refused to watch the movie or followed the movie.
bruce knew superman was here doing good deeds...
but he didn't believe he would stay good forever....
"20 years of Gotham, how many good guys left... how many stay that way..."
"He has the power to wipe out the entire human race and if we believe there's even a one percent chance that he is our enemy we have to take it as an absolute certainty."

do they really think that talk can convince and change bruce's mind???

it was the senate bomb that made him decided to hunt superman down.

 

[Micromind]

haha.. they just refused to watch the movie or followed the movie.
bruce knew superman was here doing good deeds...
but he didn't believe he would stay good forever....
"20 years of Gotham, how many good guys left... how many stay that way..."
"He has the power to wipe out the entire human race and if we believe there's even a one percent chance that he is our enemy we have to take it as an absolute certainty."

do they really think that talk can convince and change bruce's mind???

it was the senate bomb that made him decided to hunt superman down.

Not just /Flim people, most of the posters here too say the same thing over and over again, even though that was explained clearly in the movie itself.

No use in correcting them, when they have already developed a flawed understanding of the movie.

The part where two heroes talk and resolve the conflict applies to Civil War though.

 

[Lencho01]

If the word "Martha" can change Bruce's mind so easily, then I don't see how Superman explaining things couldn't.

 

[Seahawksfan]

After thinking a lot about BvS... I really hate that they ruined the death of superman by shoehorning it into the movie. I really want to know why Snyder thought it was necessary to include that. Was reading the comic at Barnes & Noble today... Sucks that we didn't see that depiction on the big screen.

 

[matt47]

After thinking a lot about BvS... I really hate that they ruined the death of superman by shoehorning it into the movie. I really want to know why Snyder thought it was necessary to include that. Was reading the comic at Barnes & Noble today... Sucks that we didn't see that depiction on the big screen.

You wanna know his reasoning? Because he wanted Batman to form the JL.

 

[Lencho01]

Snyder's reasoning for killing Superman...

[YT]3XD-UMLLCGY[/YT]