BvS The Zack Snyder Validation Thread (big rant)

[Sharkboy]

I like it, i can accept that it's another film that Snyder wanted to tell a deeper story just got caught up yet again in his own hyperactive imagination and love for visual storytelling, but it was fun to watch. At this point I'm expecting every film of his to pretty much be like that and it's OK...rather watch that than say something like Kenneth Brannagh's Thor or Johnathan Liebsman's Battle: Los Angeles.

 

[Diabo]

Good idea, except there is no one who actually likes Sucker Punch.

There are plenty of people who liked Sucker Punch. It was just not a critically acclaimed movie. Not every movie is for everyone.

 

[The Question]

There´s nothing phony about it. At the end of the fight Superman seemed more shaken than any of The Avengers at the end of their battle scene. Again, selective memory.

And the 3 last scenes, after the destruction, obviously took place a good amount of time after the battle, that´s why everyone seems recovered. Sometimes a director simply thinks his audience will be smart enough to understand certain obvious things, that´s why they don´t bother to show every single detail.

And i´m pretty sure the consequences of the battle are to be developed in detail during the next movie, that´s why in MOS they didn´t touch that subject. And also, like i said before, we don´t need every god damn action movie ending with ambulances and tv news reports. Quite frankly that´s boring and adds nothing relevant to the story. You don´t need someone to spell to you what happens after something like that. It´s just way too obvious.

It's not about understanding, it's about feeling. The purpose of narrative art is to create an immersive experience. When a film doesn't accurately reflect genuine human emotion, it reveals the artifice of the piece.

Yes, of course I understand intellectually that the scenes after the battle must take place some time long enough enough after the battle for the city and it's citizens to have recovered and moved on. But because it completely slips over the very real and very human emotional process of grieving and rebuilding after a tragedy, it doesn't feel right. It doesn't feel genuine or natural. And it draws attention to to the artifice of the film.

That sort of after the battle recovery stuff isn't there to tell people what logically happens after a disaster, it's there to give the audience an emotionally complete experience.

Narrative isn't about merely imparting a list if facts to the audience. That's what encyclopedias are for.

 

[Flint Marko]

And i´m pretty sure the consequences of the battle are to be developed in detail during the next movie, that´s why in MOS they didn´t touch that subject. And also, like i said before, we don´t need every god damn action movie ending with ambulances and tv news reports. Quite frankly that´s boring and adds nothing relevant to the story. You don´t need someone to spell to you what happens after something like that. It´s just way too obvious.

But something would have been nice. We get over the top, wanton destruction which levels a good portion of Metropolis, Supes snapping Zod's neck, and then immediately it cuts the general and that cringe-worthy "he's kind of hot" line.
No matter what you say, there was no fallout or consequences whatsoever and seeing something, anything acknowledging it, would have been nice.
Instead the film, and Superman, seemingly just move on. They even have a chance to address it later when he shows up later to the Dailey Planet but as far as we see in the film, it's just business as usual.

It's not about understanding, it's about feeling. The purpose of narrative set is to create an immersive experience. When a film doesn't accurately reflect genuine human emotion, it reveals the artifice of the piece.

Yes, of course I understand intellectually that the scenes after the battle must take place some time long enough enough after the battle for the city and it's citizens to have recovered and moved on. But because it completely slips over the very real and very human emotional process of grieving and rebuilding after a tragedy, it doesn't feel right. It doesn't feel genuine or natural. And it draws attention to to the artifice of the film.

That sort of after the battle recovery stuff isn't there to tell people what logically happens after a disaster, it's there to give the audience an emotionally complete experience.

Narrative isn't about merely imparting a list if facts to the audience. That's what encyclopedias are for.

Great post, well said.

 

[Rowsdower!]

There are plenty of people who liked Sucker Punch. It was just not a critically acclaimed movie. Not every movie is for everyone.

I was just joking, man. But I think that, on the whole, it's a generally reviled movie. As it should be.

 

[The Question]

I was just joking, man. But I think that, on the whole, it's a generally reviled movie. As it should be.

Sucker Punch is a twelve year old boy's idea of what feminism is.


Also, it's super boring.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Cool visuals, cool music. It had a great teaser. It really is like a videogame, and I enjoyed it that way.

 

[The Question]

Cool visuals, cool music. It had a great teaser. It really is like a videogame, and I enjoyed it that way.

That is a really awful thing to say about video games.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Sucker Punch is a twelve year old boy's idea of what feminism is.


Also, it's super boring.

Yeah, that's a pretty accurate description. Shame though. I remember thinking the trailers looks so awesome and then I watched it and it was terrible. But then I guess that means Snyder gave it the appropriate title, if nothing else!

 

[I Am The Knight]

That is a really awful thing to say about video games.

I suppose it depends on the game one would compare it to, but probably not the best comparison overall. I enjoyed the fantasy sequences though, I didn't care about the plot, I don't remember much about it, but as a VFX sizzle reel it works like a charm.

 

[Travesty]

I still haven't seen Sucker Punch, but what exactly are you getting at when you say its "a 12 year old boy's idea of what feminism is"? Are you just saying that, cause there's women being "badasses" in it?

 

[The Question]

I still haven't seen Sucker Punch, but what exactly are you getting at when you say its "a 12 year old boy's idea of what feminism is"? Are you just saying that, cause there's women being "badasses" in it?

It's a movie where the male gaze is kicked into overdrive, where the female characters are hyper sexualized doe-eyed lolitas with no real personalities of their own and no real agency, and whose only "empowerment" comes from slaughtering zombie nazis with katanas while wearing fetish gear.

Basically, what you would get if you asked a horny thirteen year old boy to write a story about "strong women."

 

[The Endless]

Wow that is a perfect summery.

 

[Diabo]

It's not about understanding, it's about feeling. The purpose of narrative art is to create an immersive experience. When a film doesn't accurately reflect genuine human emotion, it reveals the artifice of the piece.

I saw plenty of genuine human emotion during the entire film. Especially in that last scene, right before Zod´s death. I mean, what´s more emotional in The Avengers than when Superman cries and screams "STOP" several times?

There isn´t one single moment in The Avengers where i see any of them demonstrating more emotional pain than Superman in that scene. Not one single moment.

There isn´t one single moment in The Avengers where i see any of them being more disturbed by the possibility of someone being hurt than Superman in that scene. And yet, MOS is the "emotionless" movie.

You guys try, try, try, try, but you just don´t have a point. You purposely ignore known facts about the movie in order to trash it.

"Oh, Superman isn´t heroic, he doesn´t care, he doesn´t save"

- Wrong. I´m sorry, you´re wrong. He saves plenty of people during the entire movie. He doesn´t show less care than any other Super Hero in any other Super Hero movie.

"Oh, there is no emotion"

- Wrong. I´m sorry, you´re wrong. We´re shown scenes of Superman being truly disturbed by what´s happening. We´re shown scenes of him caring about people. You´re wrong. I´m sorry.


I think it´s fair to say MOS didn´t achieve its potential and is far from being a perfect movie. But to act like The Avengers, Iron Man, etc, succeed in all those aspects where MOS fails, it´s a pure fallacy. If MOS is an emotionless movie, than The Avengers, Iron Man, Thor and many other SH movies also are. It´s as simple as that.

And BTW, you guys are the true definition of HATERS. It´s ok to have an opinion and to critic a movie you don´t like. But all of you have already done that several times in this forum. You just keep repeating yourselves over and over again, in every single thread where someone says anything positive about Snyder or MOS. It´s like you can´t live with the idea that someone might like MOS, and there´s nothing you can do to change that, and there´s nothing you can do to prove you´re right and they´re wrong. It really bothers you.

You know you´re a hater when you spend a huge amount of time talking about stuff you don´t like, and even repeat yourself about the same thing over and over.

I get why someone would spend a lot of time talking about something they love. But to talk about something they hate? C´mon, people, just move on. I think The Avengers is a pretty weak movie, but you don´t see me spending my time over The Avengers boards attacking the movie. Lol.

 

[Sharkboy]

To be fair, there IS a difference between having emotion in your film, and making your audience CARE.

 

[Gray Ghost]

To be fair, there IS a difference between having emotion in your film, and making your audience CARE.

This. MoS tries really hard to be emotional, I'll give it that. I just don't think it really works most of the time.
I mean I'm sure Pa Kent's death is supposed to make me feel something, I guess. But then it's a really awkwardly written character in the most contrived and over-the-top death scene imaginable and everything emotional about is drowned out by the absurdity of it. I think that's a problem of MoS in general. The movie strains so hard to be big and epic that anything emotional and subtle somehow ends up ringing false.

 

[The Question]

This. MoS tries really hard to be emotional, I'll give it that. I just don't think it really works most of the time.
I mean I'm sure Pa Kent's death is supposed to make me feel something, I guess. But then it's a really awkwardly written character in the most contrived and over-the-top death scene imaginable and everything emotional about is drowned out by the absurdity of it. I think that's a problem of MoS in general. The movie strains so hard to be big and epic that anything emotional and subtle somehow ends up ringing false.

Also, sure, the film has emotional moments, but the emotion isn't consistent throughout the film. It shows up when the filmmaker think they need it and then disappears as soon as they get preoccupied with something else. The film isn't emotionally genuine because the emotion isn't consistent throughout the film. That's what makes it feel phony.

Same with the "Superman doesn't care" thing. Sure, there are points where he talks and acts like cares in the film. But then there are times when he doesn't, and this inconsistency reveals the artifice of the film.

 

[Diabo]

To be fair, there IS a difference between having emotion in your film, and making your audience CARE.

And i didn´t see emotion in TA and i didn´t care. At least MOS made a bigger effort to convey emotion. You can´t claim the characters were numb to the tragedy. You can´t claim they didn´t care or didn´t show emotion. You can´t claim the work isn´t there. Now, if you, as an audience, couldn´t care about it, that´s probably your problem.

And it´s pretty much impossible to make everyone care. Many people rarely feel emotionally envolved in a movie, and i´m one of those people. I can name probably 2 or 3 SH movies that made me care, and no more than that. That doesn´t mean the director did a bad job or the movie is emotionless. It only means i wasn´t that interested in what was happening. And that might be due to many different factors that don´t envolve "bad filmmaking".

Nobody can speak for everyone. Some people cared, some people didn´t care. Millions and millions and millions watched the movie, and we don´t actually have access to the opinions of all those people.

We have access to the opinions of a small percentage of the people who watched the movie. And those aren´t even detailed opinions. Those are just numbers and percentages in a couple of popular sites.

My experience might be very different from other people´s. Everybody has their own experiences. In my experience, i can say that i don´t know one single person in my personal life, out of dozens, who enjoyed TA more than MOS. Not one single person. But i go to RT and most critics prefered TA. So what? Am i supposed to change my opinion because of that?

I just see way too many people acting like if their opinion represented facts. "Oh, it failed to make people care". What people? The people you know? RT critics? You? We have over 6 billion people in the world, you know? To say nobody cared or the movie failed in this or in that is a pretty bold statement.

 

[LamboMan]

Spoiler

And i didn´t see emotion in TA and i didn´t care. At least MOS made a bigger effort to convey emotion. You can´t claim the characters were numb to the tragedy. You can´t claim they didn´t care or didn´t show emotion. You can´t claim the work isn´t there. Now, if you, as an audience, couldn´t care about it, that´s probably your problem.

And it´s pretty much impossible to make everyone care. Many people rarely feel emotionally envolved in a movie, and i´m one of those people. I can name probably 2 or 3 SH movies that made me care, and no more than that. That doesn´t mean the director did a bad job or the movie is emotionless. It only means i wasn´t that interested in what was happening. And that might be due to many different factors that don´t envolve "bad filmmaking".

Nobody can speak for everyone. Some people cared, some people didn't care. Millions and millions and millions watched the movie, and we don´t actually have access to the opinions of all those people.

We have access to the opinions of a small percentage of the people who watched the movie. And those aren't even detailed opinions. Those are just numbers and percentages in a couple of popular sites.

My experience might be very different from other people´s. Everybody has their own experiences. In my experience, i can say that i don´t know one single person in my personal life, out of dozens, who enjoyed TA more than MOS. Not one single person. But i go to RT and most critics preferred TA. So what? Am i supposed to change my opinion because of that?

I just see way too many people acting like if their opinion represented facts. "Oh, it failed to make people care". What people? The people you know? RT critics? You? We have over 6 billion people in the world, you know? To say nobody cared or the movie failed in this or in that is a pretty bold statement.

I get what you're saying Diabo. In my own experience, a few of my friends and I who actually read the comics didn't enjoy TA as much as we did MOS. While we may have seen TA and been in awe of it for a few days at first, it's appeal really broke down upon putting two minutes of thought and discussion into it. We realised it was nothing more than one contrived action scene scene after another with sub par direction, filler 'plot points' and no real themes.

While all the people at my Uni were just going on and on about how 'cool' the movie was, it hit me that these people who have never picked up a comic in their lives are harping on about the wave of superhero movies like TA and TDK and TDKR since it's looked upon as cool to like these films even though the GA knows squat about them. Most of them hadn't even seen CA TFA or Thor 1. RDJ et al had become a fad at that time and people were hailing Nolan's Batman as the perfect portrayal. I'm not saying it's wrong to like a film for what it shows and then move on, but to feign interest and pretend to know all about the characters and claim that it was the best portrayal of them (like many people of the GA did with TA and TDKT) just screams being fake to another degree.

When I saw MOS, I saw it the first time in the theatre with my family and then a second time with friends, and in the former case they liked it and in the latter case they didn't. But the friends I saw it with absolutely loved TA and the Transformers movies and saw no flaws in them, so you can come to your own conclusion as to where their tastes lie. Some other friends of mine liked MOS but their tastes and mine are more alike. So I guess it really depended on person to person, since the whole 'hate' Zack Snyder fad wasn't going on in my country, so the movie was treated like any other.

Now just to be clear, I'm from India and I'm giving you info about the situation of the average urban moviegoer there. I'm in no form claiming to know about the tastes or likes of people from any other country.

 

[Rowsdower!]

One thing that bugs me about the criticisms of MOS was how much people like to reiterate how "joyless" it was and how it was not fun to watch, unlike The Avengers, Captain America, etc. It's like, I can accept that you didn't enjoy it, but can you accept that I did? And it certainly wasn't one of those cases where I watched the whole thing and was constantly saying to myself, "Well, that scene wasn't that bad" or "That line was kinda sorta funny, I guess." Start to finish, I enjoyed the whole movie. I found it to be an emotional, thrilling spectacle. And I feel like people are constantly trying to convince me that I somehow didn't actually enjoy it, lol.

 

[shauner111]

I agree with whoever said that Snyder tried packing the film with emotion, but it didn't deliver. Some of us didn't connect with the attempted emotional scenes, so we didn't end up caring.

Pa Kent's death was a good example. I like Costner but i didnt like Jonathan Kent. He was kind of a dick. Most of what he was saying to Clark didn't make much sense. Jor-El had better advice for Kal, and i think it should have been the other way around. When Jonathan dies, i felt bad for Clark in the last 2 seconds of the scene because of his scream, but i didnt really care that he died because i honestly felt like the guy was a total ****** for trying to get his dog when he could have let his son run to the car, snatch the dog and then take off like a bullet through the cornfields where NOBODY would have seen because of the angle. It was a lazy death scene. I kind of laugh at it with my friends now when we watch it.

"A part of me wanted you to hit that kid but would it have made you feel better?" First of all, i get that he didnt know his strength back then and so he could have killed that kid if he hit him but Pa's question? My answer: Yes, damn straight i would have felt better.

They're trying to make you feel some emotion when Supes and Lois kiss for the first time but it's executed poorly with the cheesiest bit of dialogue in the movie.

You DO feel emotion when Superman kills Zod but it doesn't last long. Zack doesn't let it sit with you, which i think should have been a priority with scene like that. Instead it starts cutting to lighter, fun talk.

 

[D.P.]

One thing that bugs me about the criticisms of MOS was how much people like to reiterate how "joyless" it was and how it was not fun to watch, unlike The Avengers, Captain America, etc. It's like, I can accept that you didn't enjoy it, but can you accept that I did? And it certainly wasn't one of those cases where I watched the whole thing and was constantly saying to myself, "Well, that scene wasn't that bad" or "That line was kinda sorta funny, I guess." Start to finish, I enjoyed the whole movie. I found it to be an emotional, thrilling spectacle. And I feel like people are constantly trying to convince me that I somehow didn't actually enjoy it, lol.

That's exactly what's happening. For every positive thing people try to discuss about Snyder, there's 5 people rushing to tell you why you shouldn't feel that way.

 

[LamboMan]

Spoiler

I agree with whoever said that Snyder tried packing the film with emotion, but it didn't deliver. Some of us didn't connect with the attempted emotional scenes, so we didn't end up caring.

Pa Kent's death was a good example. I like Costner but i didnt like Jonathan Kent. He was kind of a dick. Most of what he was saying to Clark didn't make much sense. Jor-El had better advice for Kal, and i think it should have been the other way around. When Jonathan dies, i felt bad for Clark in the last 2 seconds of the scene because of his scream, but i didnt really care that he died because i honestly felt like the guy was a total ****** for trying to get his dog when he could have let his son run to the car, snatch the dog and then take off like a bullet through the cornfields where NOBODY would have seen because of the angle. It was a lazy death scene. I kind of laugh at it with my friends now when we watch it.

"A part of me wanted you to hit that kid but would it have made you feel better?" First of all, i get that he didnt know his strength back then and so he could have killed that kid if he hit him but Pa's question? My answer: Yes, damn straight i would have felt better.

They're trying to make you feel some emotion when Supes and Lois kiss for the first time but it's executed poorly with the cheesiest bit of dialogue in the movie.

You DO feel emotion when Superman kills Zod but it doesn't last long. Zack doesn't let it sit with you, which i think should have been a priority with scene like that. Instead it starts cutting to lighter, fun talk.

I can't agree on the Pa kent death scene not having any meaningful impact but I will agree that they should have shown the other side of him as the supportive parent, just like in Smallville where he is both over protective and supportive when need be.

The Supes-Lois kiss was good for me and others I know, but I don't think anybody in the audience understood what they mumbled to each other after they kissed. I had to go online after the movie to find out and when I did I realised it wasn't that great, so I'll give you that.

As for your Zod point, I agree and think it was the only flaw in the movie really. As some people on these boards have suggested, there should have been a scene showing Supes regaining his mental strength and going out and helping people out of the rubble or saying something about not killing or something to kind of tie that part off. I cringe at the drone scene and though it's not a bad scene in itself, it would have been better off placed as a mid credits scene or somewhere else.

 

[Tim_Riggins]

MOS "tried" to be emotional? Speak for yourself people, it's probably the most emotional superhero movie for me out there, it's got so much heart, the tornado scene hits me in the gut every single time, it's beautiful stuff, hell, that moment after he kills Zod & Lois gently strokes his head, beauty.

 

[LamboMan]

^^