BvS The Zack Snyder Validation Thread (big rant)

[Diabo]

Brilliant post, you've summed up exactly the difference in MoS and Avengers finales. MoS is too busy focusing on the destruction, Avengers focuses on the heroes during destruction

I don´t see how is MOS too busy focusing on destruction.

To have Superman not have to deal with being the hero whilst the insanity is going on will only cause people who hold the character in such a high regard to be turned off. It's an emotional disconnect because the hero isn't actually doing much hero work

Yeah, defeating the guy who wants to destroy the world isn´t hero work at all. He is being paid 10$ an hour to do it. It´s his job. Officially.

And btw, isn´t that the same thing TA do? They fight the enemies during the invasion.

 

[jmc]

I don´t see how is MOS too busy focusing on destruction.

Tell me one moment during which Metropolis is being destroyed where Superman does something other than beat up Zod. Just one heroic dead other than snapping his neck which has no build up to it.

Yeah, defeating the guy who wants to destroy the world isn´t hero work at all. He is being paid 10$ an hour to do it. It´s his job. Officially.

And btw, isn´t that the same thing TA do? They fight the enemies during the invasion.

If it's just about the good guy beating the bad guys that's as paper thin a character arc as you get. Fighting and heroism are two different things. There's a conscious effort by the creative team in Avengers to have the heroes save as many people as they can and prevent the situation from getting worse, I believe Cap even says as such. There's planning and strategy on their part in attempt to minimize damage and save as many people as possible. It shows off the best qualities of each character, it shows Tony Stark can be a team player, it shows Thor is willing to fight along side a lesser being as an equal, it shows what Banner can do when he has control over the Hulk, it shows Cap doing what Cap does best - helping people and leading the show. Superman was given none of that type of treatment during the finale, it was simply about beating up Zod and making it look spectacular, the creative team was too busy trying to make things looks great they neglected to give the last act of the film any meaning. Superman is at his best when he does what he's known for, saving people in peril, and if ever that character trait should have been on show it was during the last act of the film. How many chances were there to intercut scenes of Superman having to save people from falling debris whilst fighting Zod? Or have scenes with Zod intentionally trying to kill civilians? There was no conscious effort to show Superman at his best, it was just about showing Superman at his most powerful, and there is a vast difference between the two.

 

[Lencho01]

The man is living his dream making movies and being paid handsomely for it.

I doubt he really needs validation .

 

[Jekecy]

As far as taking shots at skeptics, at least one Snyder critic came in here saying he didn't understand why people were defending Snyder, and that they must be deluded fanboys who were blind to his faults.

You more than likely misread.

 

[Diabo]

Tell me one moment during which Metropolis is being destroyed where Superman does something other than beat up Zod. Just one heroic dead other than snapping his neck which has no build up to it.

So, trying to stop Zod and the other Kryptonians, who are trying to destroy the planet isn´t enough for you? Saving the planet, by stopping its biggest threat isn´t enough? I´m not quite sure i understand your logic. Hell, i´m not even quite sure there is ANY logic behing ANYTHING you´ve said until now.

And to answer your question, Clark does plenty of heroic thing through the entire movie. He saves Lois two times, he saves a bus full of kids, he saves the soldier, he saves a bunch of guys in the boat. And i´m not even sure if TA actually save more people than Superman. I´d like to make the count actually. And even if they do, is this a contest between who saves more people? Who cares? Who cares if TA have 10 heroic acts and Superman has 8? Why does that make such a big difference to you? Different movies, different circumstances. The point is: Superman was indeed a hero in this movie. I have nothing to complain about, because he was, indeed, a hero.

 

[The Batman]

As far as taking shots at skeptics, at least one Snyder critic came in here saying he didn't understand why people were defending Snyder, and that they must be deluded fanboys who were blind to his faults.

The only guy who has bashed Snyder fans is JMC...who only did it because as soon as he posted his quick opinion of Snyder, he was called a hater. Since then, he's stopped taking shots.

In the past few days, I've seen a Mod had to come into the Skeptics thread to tell a Snyder defender to stop posting in the thread since he keeps complaining about it, and the same Mod having to put another Snyder defender on probation ban because he felt the need to call people "Pathetic". I don't see the same behavior happening in this thread, so I'm wondering exactly what the problem is.

That all said, I would like to see more discussion of Non MOS Snyder films.

 

[hafizbat]

Tell me one moment during which Metropolis is being destroyed where Superman does something other than beat up Zod. Just one heroic dead other than snapping his neck which has no build up to it.



If it's just about the good guy beating the bad guys that's as paper thin a character arc as you get. Fighting and heroism are two different things. There's a conscious effort by the creative team in Avengers to have the heroes save as many people as they can and prevent the situation from getting worse, I believe Cap even says as such. There's planning and strategy on their part in attempt to minimize damage and save as many people as possible. It shows off the best qualities of each character, it shows Tony Stark can be a team player, it shows Thor is willing to fight along side a lesser being as an equal, it shows what Banner can do when he has control over the Hulk, it shows Cap doing what Cap does best - helping people and leading the show. Superman was given none of that type of treatment during the finale, it was simply about beating up Zod and making it look spectacular, the creative team was too busy trying to make things looks great they neglected to give the last act of the film any meaning. Superman is at his best when he does what he's known for, saving people in peril, and if ever that character trait should have been on show it was during the last act of the film. How many chances were there to intercut scenes of Superman having to save people from falling debris whilst fighting Zod? Or have scenes with Zod intentionally trying to kill civilians? There was no conscious effort to show Superman at his best, it was just about showing Superman at his most powerful, and there is a vast difference between the two.

I really think the climax of any film is when the hero truly proves himself, or shows who he actually is. MoS failed miserably at this...Superman, instead of becoming Superman, was turned into a hollow shell with super-powers. He doesn't speak to the audience, neither through his dialogue nor through his actions. There's no connection at all. Snyder completely failed to endear us to this Superman. It really seems to me like the people who truly love this Superman love him because of Cavill's looks, not because of what he actually does as Superman. But what do I know

Anyway, about heroes showing who they really are in the climax, The Avengers is perhaps the most successful example of this, as not only one hero, but several, have great character moments. The finale was basically the ultimate mesh of great characterization and great action.

Captain America- After being challenged and questioned the entire movie (mainly by Tony Stark), and not knowing his own place, he really comes into his own on the battlefield, where he belongs, and takes command when it's truly needed. The scene of him proving himself to the cops of why they should take orders from him, the scene of him saving the civilians (a nice variation from the big destruction going on with Hulk, IM, Thor), and the scene of him giving the team their orders, ending with "Hulk..Smash." All that with a clear emphasis on him saving civilians, keeping the fighting contained, creating a perimeter. All pure Captain America GOLD.

I'd go on about the other Avengers, who also had damn good character arcs, but this post is getting long winded. I think this is enough to get my point across.

 

[jmc]

So, trying to stop Zod and the other Kryptonians, who are trying to destroy the planet isn´t enough for you? Saving the planet, by stopping its biggest threat isn´t enough? I´m not quite sure i understand your logic. Hell, i´m not even quite sure there is ANY logic behing ANYTHING you´ve said until now.

No it's not. Because any good guy can stop a bad guy in a story, what matters is who that hero is, what he stands for, the journey he goes through and what the consequences of his actions are.

And to answer your question, Clark does plenty of heroic thing through the entire movie. He saves Lois two times, he saves a bus full of kids, he saves the soldier, he saves a bunch of guys in the boat. And i´m not even sure if TA actually save more people than Superman. I´d like to make the count actually. And even if they do, is this a contest between who saves more people? Who cares? Who cares if TA have 10 heroic acts and Superman has 8? Why does that make such a big difference to you? Different movies, different circumstances. The point is: Superman was indeed a hero in this movie. I have nothing to complain about, because he was, indeed, a hero.

But he doesn't do them when it matters the most. The only contest here is about characters showing who they are when the time comes, that's what makes a hero a hero. I'm not saying the film doesn't have him do heroic deeds, it does, but it throws those character traits away when it matters the most, when the **** is really hitting the fan. In contrast the Avengers really doesn't show the best qualities of the team until the finale begins, before then they are this disjointed motley crew, but when the time came they gelled and showed us why they were worthy of a hero tag. That's the point about the recklessness of the creative team, they didn't think about showing off Superman at his best, just at his most powerful, it's not enough to say 'Well he's trying to stop the bad guys' or 'It was shown earlier in the film', for a character like Superman the journey has to culminate with him showing us his best qualities in action, in the heat of battle, when he's under the most intense pressure. Without the time given to show off the best qualities of the hero you're left with two people fighting an empty battle.

 

[-Arya-]

Personally, I think it's obnoxious that we simultaneously have a Snyder-hate next door thread and this thread which is acting as an ideological refugee camp for Snyder fanboys. We should just have a single thread where we can discuss Zack Snyder as a filmmaker.

I agree with this. Nolan had a thread like that a while back, so Snyder should have one as well.

 

[hafizbat]

No it's not. Because any good guy can stop a bad guy in a story, what matters is who that hero is, what he stands for, the journey he goes through and what the consequences of his actions are.



But he doesn't do them when it matters the most. The only contest here is about characters showing who they are when the time comes, that's what makes a hero a hero. I'm not saying the film doesn't have him do heroic deeds, it does, but it throws those character traits away when it matters the most, when the **** is really hitting the fan. In contrast the Avengers really doesn't show the best qualities of the team until the finale begins, before then they are this disjointed motley crew, but when the time came they gelled and showed us why they were worthy of a hero tag. That's the point about the recklessness of the creative team, they didn't think about showing off Superman at his best, just at his most powerful, it's not enough to say 'Well he's trying to stop the bad guys' or 'It was shown earlier in the film', for a character like Superman the journey has to culminate with him showing us his best qualities in action, in the heat of battle, when he's under the most intense pressure. Without the time given to show off the best qualities of the hero you're left with two people fighting an empty battle.

Wow, we are on the exact same wavelength. My whole last post was about how heroes show who they really are when it's needed most.

 

[Diabo]

No it's not. Because any good guy can stop a bad guy in a story, what matters is who that hero is, what he stands for, the journey he goes through and what the consequences of his actions are.

I think who he is and what he stands for is pretty explicit in the movie. What part of it didn´t you understand, exactly?

But he doesn't do them when it matters the most. The only contest here is about characters showing who they are when the time comes, that's what makes a hero a hero. I'm not saying the film doesn't have him do heroic deeds, it does, but it throws those character traits away when it matters the most, when the **** is really hitting the fan. In contrast the Avengers really doesn't show the best qualities of the team until the finale begins, before then they are this disjointed motley crew, but when the time came they gelled and showed us why they were worthy of a hero tag. That's the point about the recklessness of the creative team, they didn't think about showing off Superman at his best, just at his most powerful, it's not enough to say 'Well he's trying to stop the bad guys' or 'It was shown earlier in the film', for a character like Superman the journey has to culminate with him showing us his best qualities in action, in the heat of battle, when he's under the most intense pressure. Without the time given to show off the best qualities of the hero you're left with two people fighting an empty battle.

When does it matter the most? I see him saving people when they´re close to die and he happens to be in a position to save them. What else do you wanted him to do? To not fight Zod and instead go act like a fireman saving people from the destruction? Even TA didn´t do that. How many people were they saving while they were fighting aliens and destroying the entire city? I guess you´re only paying attention to what suits you.You aren´t making any sense and you´re not providing any viable solution to the problems you pointed out. You´re basically hating on a SH movie for going in the same exact direction of any other SH movie. Yes, the hero fights the villain and that´s the main focus of ANY SH movie.

 

[hafizbat]

I think who he is and what he stands for is pretty explicit in the movie. What part of it didn´t you understand, exactly?



When does it matter the most? I see him saving people when they´re close to die and he happens to be in a position to save them. What else do you wanted him to do? To not fight Zod and instead go act like a fireman saving people from the destruction? Even TA didn´t do that. How many people were they saving while they were fighting aliens and destroying the entire city? I guess you´re only paying attention to what suits you.You aren´t making any sense and you´re not providing any viable solution to the problems you point out.

It'd be nice if you could drop the hostile attitude.

 

[Jaxon]

I'm pretty sure I saw Supes saving soldiers in the Smallville. When it came to the Zod fight he basically didn't have a choice otherwise Zod was going to fry people like burgers.

 

[Diabo]

I'm pretty sure I saw Supes saving soldiers in the Smallville. When it came to the Zod fight he basically didn't have a choice otherwise Zod was going to fry people like burgers.

Yeah, he saved plenty of people. He saved more people than Captain America, Iron Man, Hulk or Thor in The Avengers.

People talk about "heroes showing who they really are when it's needed most.", but they kind of forget that Superman did exactly that in the movie. What about when he saves the soldiers and the Captain acknowledges that he is not their enemy? Doesn´t that show who Superman is? And how is that any less valuable than the scene between Captain and the police?

People truly have selective memory.

 

[Deserana]

The Avengers did save people. It may never been shown but there are many moments of dialogue with Cap where he tries to direct the officers to get people to safety as well as the building full of people he helps. Plus they said they are going to keep the fight contained and not let it spread. It would have been good to see but the film gives you enough to presume it's happening off camera.

I dont really agree with MoS that Superman is oblivious to the people around him but they dont emphasize it enough. But when you think it in terms of there is numerous people of his own strength and a machine destroying the world PLUS he's not a seasoned fighter then it makes sense stoppiing Zod is the only thing of his mind. If this was 4 Superman films in I would be like Uhhh come on Supes save some people. But Kal was just as thrown back as everyone else was as this was pretty much all new to him.

 

[Batmannerism]

Yeah, I agree with a lot of the stuff in the initial rant.

Particularly that Snyder's style evolves and improves from film to film.

I loved MOS, so I'm very much on team Snyder for B v S DOJ and JL.

However, I disagree with your comments on Nolan, if I read that correctly
you called him a "3rd rate Bryan Singer" .

Dude, Chris Nolan elevated Batman films past the limits of the genre with the Dark Knight. Bryan Singer is the man who made Superman lame, and everything that makes MOS great is the stuff that they left out of Superman Returns.
In terms of Nolan's sci-fi cred, remember that little film called Inception ?
I would say that Bryan Singer is a third rate Christopher Nolan.

Now if I misread your comments, I apologize, but Chris Nolan's contribution to the super-hero film genre cannot be downplayed - and this is reflected in the aesthetic of MOS. Sure Snyder had his hand on the wheel, and did a great job, but it's not hard to spot Nolan's subtle influence.

 

[Deserana]

Also The Avengers was 6 people. Some of them can go out their way. Superman is one guy. It was also his first time in that situation. It showed a side to Superman we havent seen, he cant save everybody. Even though doing what he did saved billions of people.

Yes you could say "Well Goyer shouldn't have written Superman in that position" but you can that about most issues on films anyway.

 

[Diabo]

The Avengers did save people. It may never been shown but there are many moments of dialogue with Cap where he tries to direct the officers to get people to safety as well as the building full of people he helps. Plus they said they are going to keep the fight contained and not let it spread.

I dont really agree with MoS that Superman is oblivious to the people around him but they dont emphasize it enough. But when you think it in terms of there is numerous people of his own strength and a machine destroying the world PLUS he's not a seasoned fighter then it makes sense stoppiing Zod is the only thing of his mind. If this was 4 Superman films in I would be like Uhhh come on Supes save some people. But Kal was just as thrown back as everyone else was as this was pretty much all new to him

They emphasize it in a different way. But we are shown several times that he cares about people and tries to save them. It´s beyond me how people actually complain about this. And it´s beyond me that people actually have the notion that TA saved much more people than Superman.

I can remember at least 9 saving scenes from MOS. Isn´t that enough for you guys? Did TA even had 9 saving scenes? Even if it had, that´s not the point. The point is that we do see Superman saving and caring about people. And we don´t see it any less than in any other SH movie.

 

[Deserana]

They emphasize it in a different way. But we are shown several times that he cares about people and tries to save them. It´s beyond me how people actually complain about this. And it´s beyond me that people actually have the notion that TA saved much more people than Superman.

I can remember at least 7 saving scenes from MOS. Isn´t that enough for you guys? Did TA even had 7 saving scenes? Even if it had, that´s not the point. The point is that we do see Superman saving and caring about people. And we don´t see it any less than in any other SH movie.

I'm not complaining. I love MoS and the "issue" of Superman saving people doesn't make sense to me. I was bringing up points and arguing against them. Superman was shown saving people (The guy from the helicopter, the guy shooting Faora, Saving Lois... twice, the family at the end) but like I said the reason Supes wasnt going out of his way to save people was cause you had to see it from his point of view. All this **** happens out of the blue for him. Fighting Zod and his crew is the equivalent of an average Joe taking on a guy and his crew. It was his first time he isn't gonna look across and think oh noo but move those two to safety. He's thinking Oh crap I better stop this guy before he kills everyone.

 

[-Arya-]

We only got a taste of Superman being who he is when it matters the most in the Smallville fight; where we actually saw him saving people while battling the Kryptonians. It would have been nice if that aspect of his persona was fleshed out in the Metropolis fight, but unfortunately it didn't happen. Here's hoping BvS will offer those opportunities.

 

[Diabo]

We only got a taste of Superman being who he is when it matters the most in the Smallville fight; where we actually saw him saving people while battling the Kryptonians. It would have been nice if that aspect of his persona was fleshed out in the Metropolis fight, but unfortunately it didn't happen. Here's hoping BvS will offer those opportunities.

So, 9 saving scenes wasn´t enough for you? Ok. But if that´s an issue to you, i suppose you have an issue with every single SH movie.

 

[jmc]

I think who he is and what he stands for is pretty explicit in the movie. What part of it didn´t you understand, exactly?



When does it matter the most? I see him saving people when they´re close to die and he happens to be in a position to save them. What else do you wanted him to do? To not fight Zod and instead go act like a fireman saving people from the destruction? Even TA didn´t do that. How many people were they saving while they were fighting aliens and destroying the entire city? I guess you´re only paying attention to what suits you.You aren´t making any sense and you´re not providing any viable solution to the problems you pointed out. You´re basically hating on a SH movie for going in the same exact direction of any other SH movie. Yes, the hero fights the villain and that´s the main focus of ANY SH movie.

No I'm not. I wanted the creative team to show Superman at his best during the climax. Is that really a hard concept to understand? I'm serious, do you actually understand what it is I'm trying to say? I honestly can't spell it out any clearer or in any more depth than I already have. You haven't really counter argued any valid points to the issues I and others have brought up, you're essentially saying him battling the bad guys is enough, and if you feel that way personally that's fine, but you can't honestly say to me you can't see where other people may be coming from given the detailed responses and list of grievances you've been getting.

 

[-Arya-]

So, 9 saving scenes wasn´t enough for you? Ok. But if that´s an issue to you, i suppose you have an issue with every single SH movie.

The quantity of saves are not my issue. Like others have mentioned, I'm discussing the context. I just listed how I thought the Metropolis fight could be improved if we saw a few more scenes where Superman is more cognizant of civilians. It wouldn't take much; all Snyder had to do was show Superman using X-ray vision in one of the buildings - he notices people trapped inside and then goes to rescue them. It isn't a big deal to me if that didn't happen. There is always room for improvement.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Well, my issue with the Metropolis destruction is simply that Supes never seems particularly bothered by what's going on around him. When standing in the DCCU's Ground Zero, I don't think telling a "joke" and kissing the girl is the best thing to do. Is he not the least bit horrified by what's happened? Clark obviously cares about humans, as shown earlier in the film, but there's a weird disconnect in the final minutes of the film. Superman never acknowledges the destruction around him. The loss of life. The movie spends precious time showing us how "human" Clark is via flashbacks, but somehow he is not affected by the destruction? Neither is Lois, apparently, or anyone else, really, now that I think about it. Not sure if that was a conscious decision. I mean, no one really reflects on what happened, bizarrely. It's not just Superman. Literally no one in the movie cares to comment on what just ocurred in Metropolis.

When Superman confronts Zod, there's no anger. He seems to kinda pity the General, actually. He only shows true emotion after he snaps the Zod's neck. So Superman gets pissy (rightfully so) at that guy in the bar, but the death of thousands? Nope, ain't nobody got time to get pissed at that.

Then we cut to the Swanwick scene, and you know the rest.

 

[Steamteck]

The impossibility of gnostic certainty and the metaphysical shackles if solipsism means we will never truly know .

Best reply ever!