BvS The Zack Snyder Validation Thread (big rant)

[D.P.]

Verbal gymnastics aside, I like Snyder's work. So do many others. That is measurable. The millions he has made for his bosses is measurable.

Do you realistically believe for one second that the execs up at WB (whose entire existence is based around making money) hire the Zack Snyder that you people describe to direct the first onscreen meeting of arguably the most iconic characters in pop culture history? Iconic doesn't even do them justice (no pun). The S and the Bat symbol are immediately recognizable worldwide. Probably on par with the Christian cross. This is a huge deal. You think they don't understand the urgency here?

The same people whom you admit know more than you? Hell, all of us? They have access to all kinds of fancy metrics and statistics. Tracking, focus groups etc. whatever buzz word or piece of data you can think of, they have it. Do you honestly believe that these same execs would take such a gigantic risk with a property of this magnitude? Jonah Hex and GL aside, do you and the other doom and gloom posters on this site truly believe in your heart of hearts that WB is not 100% commited to getting their **** together for this ?

The Snyder Boogieman propaganda that's been running rampant is exactly that: Propaganda. It exists inside of a bubble that isn't representative of the world as a whole. RT and message boards aren't the end-all-be-all. MOS resonated with a ton of people. That's measurable. DCCU was the talk of SDCC. That's measurable.

He's an extremely bankable director. He has an inordinate amount of respect for the source material whether you want to believe it or not. Sometimes, too much respect (if there is such a thing). He will visually bring these characters to life like no one ever has before. His casting is excellent.

I'd say give those who know more than you a chance to make the movie first, then we can talk.

 

[TheNextNolan22]

Pretty much that.

 

[LamboMan]

Mind blown, bruh.

Spoiler

Just doin my job.

I don't think you're trying to start an argument. Truthfully I think no one here is, as we are all adults discussing movies in a genre we like. We should be free to say what we feel and discuss things like this.
That being said, I think we live in a day and age where the "misunderstood genius" is pretty much behind us. The likes of Emily Dickinson and Van Gogh are all but gone, as we live in a time where information and art is so readily available to consume that, in my opinion, no one is going to go undiscovered or unfairly unappreciated for very long. Several people might disagree with me, but that's how I feel on the matter.
In my own personal opinion Snyder is a "sexy, sleek" film maker, and his movies are extremely visually appealing. But he gets so caught up in the aesthetics that he forgets that the story itself should come first. That is why I say he is a lackluster film maker, and he has not improved from that so far (here's to hoping he will). Clearly I'm not alone in this matter.

And your answer is very correct, no sarcasm intended. You are right about the depth and speed of information exposure so there will always be someone who likes something.

And I can see where you are coming from on the Snyder front, but it's just that to me his visuals are some of the best I've ever seen while the stories and characters have as much quality and depth.

I guess what you said is the simplest way of putting it, unless we start getting into the science behind the current zeitgeist and memetics.

 

[Flint Marko]

Verbal gymnastics aside, I like Snyder's work. So do many others. That is measurable. The millions he has made for his bosses is measurable.

It's also measurable that a decent portion of people did not like it. Once again, we are repeating the same things over and over.

Do you realistically believe for one second that the execs up at WB (whose entire existence is based around making money) hire the Zack Snyder that you people describe to direct the first onscreen meeting of arguably the most iconic characters in pop culture history? Iconic doesn't even do them justice (no pun). The S and the Bat symbol are immediately recognizable worldwide. Probably on par with the Christian cross. This is a huge deal. You think they don't understand the urgency here?

The same people whom you admit know more than you? Hell, all of us? They have access to all kinds of fancy metrics and statistics. Tracking, focus groups etc. whatever buzz word or piece of data you can think of, they have it. Do you honestly believe that these same execs would take such a gigantic risk with a property of this magnitude? Jonah Hex and GL aside, do you and the other doom and gloom posters on this site truly believe in your heart of hearts that WB is not 100% commited to getting their **** together for this ?

'
GL and Jonah Hex aside? Those two abominations were made by the same studio that you are placing your unquestioned confidence in. Ignoring those two movies and pretending that only the films you like count is intellectually dishonest. They've had missteps, which show that blind faith might be slightly unwarranted.

The Snyder Boogieman propaganda that's been running rampant is exactly that: Propaganda. It exists inside of a bubble that isn't representative of the world as a whole. RT and message boards aren't the end-all-be-all. MOS resonated with a ton of people. That's measurable. DCCU was the talk of SDCC. That's measurable.

It's also "measurable" that his films haven't quite resonated with people in the past. To many people, his movies are not as well made as they should be. If that weren't the case I don't think we'd be here discussing this right now.
And just because his costumes (which were admittedly pretty) were the talk of a comic book convention means nothing to the final quality of the movie. Remember the hype surrounding Spider-man 3?

He's an extremely bankable director. He has an inordinate amount of respect for the source material whether you want to believe it or not. Sometimes, too much respect (if there is such a thing). He will visually bring these characters to life like no one ever has before. His casting is excellent.

I'd say give those who know more than you a chance to make the movie first, then we can talk.

He already had his chance with several of us, and he failed. The fact that you are bringing up his casting and how thrilling his visuals will be kind of touches on how I feel about his skills as a director.

 

[D.P.]

It's also measurable that a decent portion of people did not like it. Once again, we are repeating the same things over and over.

Agreed. I'll take the high road and stop here.

But why are you in this thread? I'm here to validate Snyder/talk about the things he actually is good at...

 

[Flint Marko]

Just doin my job.



And your answer is very correct, no sarcasm intended. You are right about the depth and speed of information exposure so there will always be someone who likes something.

And I can see where you are coming from on the Snyder front, but it's just that to me his visuals are some of the best I've ever seen while the stories and characters have as much quality and depth.

I guess what you said is the simplest way of putting it, unless we start getting into the science behind the current zeitgeist and memetics.

Even though we don't see eye to eye on his story-telling abilities, I completely agree with your comments about his visual strengths. Very few in hollywood can make a movie as pretty as Snyder. That is one aspect of BvS that I'm looking forward to, as I know it will be a visual feast. I doubt anyone will deny that.

 

[DA_Champion]

That being said, I think we live in a day and age where the "misunderstood genius" is pretty much behind us. The likes of Emily Dickinson and Van Gogh are all but gone, as we live in a time where information and art is so readily available to consume that, in my opinion, no one is going to go undiscovered or unfairly unappreciated for very long. Several people might disagree with me, but that's how I feel on the matter.

That is certainly wrong. There are still misunderstood geniuses regardless of whether Snyder is one.

There will always be misunderstood geniuses as it's an inevitable product of human nature, if there's a prevailing fashion and people go against that fashion they will be lambasted at first, before being accepted. There are strong systems of groupthink within western culture that define the range within which debate and exploration is allowed, and this is true in every field.

It's easy to think up of many examples from the 20th century. How anybody "feels" is irrelevant as the statement is specific and thus is right or wrong.

To pick some recent examples from film, we know that Paul Verhoeven was ridiculed throughout the 1990s as a shallow filmmaker, and he's far more respected now, in part because Starship Troopers has aged really well. We know that Joss Whedon's Buffy script was dismissed when he first emerged on Hollywood, and completely transformed by the people who got a hold of it.

I can also come up with some examples from the sciences but that would be unnecessarily esoteric.

 

[LamboMan]

Even though we don't see eye to eye on his story-telling abilities, I completely agree with your comments about his visual strengths. Very few in hollywood can make a movie as pretty as Snyder. That is one aspect of BvS that I'm looking forward to, as I know it will be a visual feast. I doubt anyone will deny that.

No one will I'm sure. Except if it's desaturated or grainy or uses shaky cam or too much slow motion or not enough, lol. There will always be complaints regardless of what the man does. I'm just talking about the visual aspect though. I'll give you that his stories or characterization may not resonate with everybody.

I'm quite enjoying this banter and fair discussion we all are trying to have here. No one needs to leave, just start looking at things a little more from the other's POV and we all need to do that so that we may find a middle ground upon which we may all finally rest our concerns.

 

[Flint Marko]

Agreed. I'll take the high road and stop here.

But why are you in this thread? I'm here to validate Snyder/talk about the things he actually is good at...

I don't think announcing that you are taking the high road is exactly taking the high road, but no matter.
If you want to have a one-sided, pro-Snyder "discussion" then by all means ignore people like me. However I think variety is the spice of life and that we can all learn more about what we are passionate about by discussing these sort of things, especially people who disagree with us. Note that the skepticism thread is pretty much the exact same as this one, with people coming in and defending him on a regular basis.

That is certainly wrong. There are still misunderstood geniuses regardless of whether Snyder is one.

There will always be misunderstood geniuses as it's an inevitable product of human nature, if there's a prevailing fashion and people go against that fashion they will be lambasted at first, before being accepted. There are strong systems of groupthink within western culture that define the range within which debate and exploration is allowed, and this is true in every field.

It's easy to think up of many examples from the 20th century. How anybody "feels" is irrelevant as the statement is specific and thus is right or wrong.

To pick some recent examples from film, we know that Paul Verhoeven was ridiculed throughout the 1990s as a shallow filmmaker, and he's far more respected now, in part because Starship Troopers has aged really well. We know that Joss Whedon's Buffy script was dismissed when he first emerged on Hollywood, and completely transformed by the people who got a hold of it.

I can also come up with some examples from the sciences but that would be unnecessarily esoteric.

I'm really not interested in debating this topic with you as it is ultimately pedantic and irrelevant to the topic at hand. Do you think Snyder is a misunderstood genius? If so, then feel free to provide some sort of commentary as to why. If not, then let's drop this.

 

[DA_Champion]

Do you think Snyder is a misunderstood genius? If so, then feel free to provide some sort of commentary as to why.

Misunderstood? Yes. A lot of his movies are better than the critical assessment. Part of the difference, I argue, is due to his different storytelling preferences, he doesn't go for happy endings for example, there's always a cost and that's not something people want to see.

Genius? No. Geniuses are rare and people throw that term around too often. It depends on your definition of genius, mine would be one who introduces new ideas, new concepts, new methods that are very good ideas, concepts, and methods. Snyder might a genius for visuals, but that's not what this discussion is about. The only geniuses in CBMs right now or even recently are possibly:

- Christopher Nolan, has made the best movies, and they were a break from what came before. He successfully placed the hero in a contemporary, ordinary world, he also went for a serious tone with high suspense ;
- Joss Whedon, has the best writing track record of them all if you include Buffy, Angel, and Firefly which I do. He has the first female action protagonist (through Buffy) that was popular and of a different style from the Ripley/Connor archetype that is still the most common. The Avengers is the first team-up movie to work and was previously thought to be impossible. X-Men were not true ensemble films and Fantastic Four was not well-regarded;
- Alan Moore and Frank Miller were geniuses in the 1980s;

James Gunn, the Russo Brothers, Matthew Vaughn, Zack Snyder, Jon Favreau, Bryan Singer, etc. are merely competent. They apply a lot of ideas that have already been introduced to the popular consciousness and oftentimes they apply them well. However, I'm not convinced that they create/introduce any new ideas effectively, and even if they do, those are few and far between.

 

[D.P.]

I don't think announcing that you are taking the high road is exactly taking the high road, but no matter.
If you want to have a one-sided, pro-Snyder "discussion" then by all means ignore people like me. However I think variety is the spice of life and that we can all learn more about what we are passionate about by discussing these sort of things, especially people who disagree with us. Note that the skepticism thread is pretty much the exact same as this one, with people coming in and defending him on a regular basis.

So then, you're trolling in retaliation?

 

[LamboMan]

 

[Reiter]

To people who think Zak Snyder is an auteur, or a misunderstood Van Gogh that will be appreciated when he's long gone, can any of you bother to explain to me Sucker Punch?

Because either Snyder fails at telling a story, or it's too deep for me. I dont even think Snyder himself can explain it.

4:05 - 5:05:

[YT]5T2qELzGWqg[/YT]

And let's not even discuss the part where this "feminist" movie has its heroines dressed in male fantasy costumes, taking orders from a man.

 

[D.P.]

Why abandon? I'm trying to understand.

To recap he said the following:

• The same things are being repeated over and over
• He knows and understands that concepts of different threads having different topics, but is intentionally going against that concept/forum etiquette because "it spices up life" or something to that effect
• Implied he was frequenting this thread because Snyder supporters were in the skeptics thread (despite the ratios being overwhelmingly skewed in favor of the the anti Snyder crowd)

So I'm just trying to understand what him and others are hoping to accomplish here? Debate Snyder fans into submission?

To people who think Zak Snyder is an auteur, or a misunderstood Van Gogh that will be appreciated when he's long gone, can any of you bother to explain to me Sucker Punch?

Because either Snyder fails at telling a story, or it's too deep for me. I dont even think Snyder himself can explain it.

4:05 - 5:05:

[YT]5T2qELzGWqg[/YT]

And let's not even discuss the part where this "feminist" movie has its heroines dressed in male fantasy costumes, taking orders from a man.

You don't like the film. Will any explanation truly suffice for you? Or is this more bait?

It's his weakest movie. We get it.

 

[DA_Champion]

To people who think Zak Snyder is an auteur, or a misunderstood Van Gogh that will be appreciated when he's long gone, can any of you bother to explain to me Sucker Punch?

Nobody is comparing Snyder to van Gogh in this thread. What's the point of that incredibly condescending comment? Do you really think that anybody here is so stupid as to equate Snyder with van Gogh, which would imply that he's a top-ten filmmaker of the past 100 years?

Seriously man.

Because either Snyder fails at telling a story, or it's too deep for me. I dont even think Snyder himself can explain it.

4:05 - 5:05:

[YT]5T2qELzGWqg[/YT]

You found a minute of footage where Snyder lacks eloquence in front of a camera. OK.

And let's not even discuss the part where this "feminist" movie has its heroines dressed in male fantasy costumes, taking orders from a man.

Sweet Pea is a traumatised rape victim in the psychiatric institution. As a coping mechanism, she imagines that it's actually a brothel where she actually has some control over her sexuality. It's not a male fantasy costume, it's her attempt to reclaim her sexuality and general agency.

 

[D.P.]

The not so thinly veiled attempts at painting him as a misogynist are cute too.

Gotta try any angle you can I suppose.

 

[LamboMan]

To people who think Zak Snyder is an auteur, or a misunderstood Van Gogh that will be appreciated when he's long gone, can any of you bother to explain to me Sucker Punch?
Because either Snyder fails at telling a story, or it's too deep for me. I dont even think Snyder himself can explain it.
4:05 - 5:05:
[YT]5T2qELzGWqg[/YT]
And let's not even discuss the part where this "feminist" movie has its heroines dressed in male fantasy costumes, taking orders from a man.

I'll just link to my somewhat detailed explanation with articles here >> http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=29442205&postcount=454

Why abandon? I'm trying to understand.

To recap he said the following:

Spoiler

• The same things are being repeated over and over
• He knows and understands that concepts of different threads having different topics, but is intentionally going against that concept/forum etiquette because "it spices up life" or something to that effect
• Implied he was frequenting this thread because Snyder supporters were in the skeptics thread (despite the ratios being overwhelmingly skewed in favor of the the anti Snyder crowd)

So I'm just trying to understand what him and others are hoping to accomplish here? Debate Snyder fans into submission?



You don't like the film. Will any explanation truly suffice for you? Or is this more bait?

It's his weakest movie. We get it.

Sorry man, was just trying to kid around.
I too am a Snyder fan and would very much like to see us all find a middle ground. If someone is saying something I don't like I try to move on or discuss it, but it's meant to be fun or at least interesting right? Once it stops being fun is when the 'abandon thread' gif comes in.

 

[D.P.]

Sorry man, was just trying to kid around.
I too am a Snyder fan and would very much like to see us all find a middle ground. If someone is saying something I don't like I try to move on or discuss it, but it's meant to be fun or at least interesting right? Once it stops being fun is when the 'abandon thread' gif comes in.

All good. Sorry that this is no longer fun for you. That's unfortunate because it should be.

It takes far more energy to be pessimistic and nagative. I'm hopeful and optimistic for what this film can become, so it's still fun for me in that regard. No one or thing can change that.

 

[DA_Champion]

The not so thinly veiled attempts at painting him as a misogynist are cute too.

Gotta try any angle you can I suppose.

It's a standard strategy in politics actually, you take one of your adversaries strengths, and you turn it into a perceived weakness via a barrage of propaganda.

Zack Snyder is actually above average in terms of minority and women characters in his films. To recap:

Dawn of the Dead: made Sarah Polley the lead, which is a change from the original movie. 2 of the top cast members are Black, ;
300: added Queen Gorgo as a character, that was his idea;
Watchmen: Silk Spectre has top billing. Within the movie, she's the one who wants sex, not her boyfriends, and it's not because she's evil, then again that's in the source material ... ;
Legends of the Guardians, have not watched;
Sucker Punch, a critique of the patriarchy;
300: Rise of an Empire, Artemisia, enough said;
Man of Steel, it's hard to name another CBM that doesn't have a T&A shot if its female cast? Does anybody doubt that we would have had T&A shots of Antje Traue, Ayelet Zurer and Amy Adams if James Gunn or Jon Favreau had been the director?

A while back I actually counted, for a few dozen CBMs before I got tired, how many of the top-12 cast members were not white males. MoS had six, that made it the best one (pretty sad), tied with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, though I only counted half of the movies. Both MoS and TWS had 4 white women and 2 black men in their top 12 cast members. Both are exceptional for modern CBMs.

Snyder made Perry White black, he made General Swanwick black (both would be white with most directors), he made Jimmy Olsen a woman, and he gave Martha Kent as much to do as Jonathan Kent.

In contrast, you have directors like Bryan Singer, who take characters named "Pietro" and re-christen them "Peter" and nobody is critical about it.

 

[Reiter]

Nobody is comparing Snyder to van Gogh in this thread.

There have been comments about him being a misunderstood gem. Dont take my VG comment too literally.

What's the point of that incredibly condescending comment?

Sorry, i didnt mean to be condescending. My apologies.

Do you really think that anybody here is so stupid as to equate Snyder with van Gogh, which would imply that he's a top-ten filmmaker of the past 100 years?

Some have said that yes.

You found a minute of footage where Snyder lacks eloquence in front of a camera. OK.

Most of his interviews are like that. But besides that, the guy who made the video made a valid point. So she goes into an imaginary world to cope with her imaginary world?

Sweet Pea is a traumatised rape victim in the psychiatric institution. As a coping mechanism, she imagines that it's actually a brothel where she actually has some control over her sexuality. It's not a male fantasy costume, it's her attempt to reclaim her sexuality and general agency.

Yes, i get that, but going deeper in fantasies, each one made to help her cope with the previous one makes no sense. Just imagine you're in Hawaii sunbathing and be done with it. Why fight giant monsters? There isnt even any symbolism to that.

To me it feels like an attempt to copy Inception and outdo it in the visuals department. Like "you think gunfire is cool? Pfff... watch this."

 

[LamboMan]

All good. Sorry that this is no longer fun for you. That's unfortunate because it should be.

It takes far more energy to be pessimistic and nagative. I'm hopeful and optimistic for what this film can become, so it's still fun for me in that regard. No one or thing can change that.

Wait let me be clear, I'm totally pumped for BVS, JL and whatever else magic is going to come out of Snyder's hands. And I mean it, when I saw MOS I knew Snyder was to be my new favorite director. Earlier it was Peter Jackson and George Lucas.

I'm just not finding this slightly angry argument in threads like these where we all are going back and forth without making any headway in any direction. I guess when BVS arrives it will speak for itself and maybe then people will give Snyder a break which I'm all for. All I want is that both sides find a middle ground. Or maybe I'm hoping for too much, this is the internet lol.

 

[Reiter]

The not so thinly veiled attempts at painting him as a misogynist are cute too.

Gotta try any angle you can I suppose.

I wasnt trying to paint him as a misogynist. What i meant was that while he sets out to tell a feministic story, he loses his focus and falls back to the cliches, like the one of the wise old monk that gives wise advice. The cliche says that this is a wise, old man. Not a woman.

So no, i dont think he is a misogynist. He just lost his focus mid way.

You don't like the film.

I dont mind not liking it. There's plenty of films that i dont like but still respect. This one made no sense.

Will any explanation truly suffice for you? Or is this more bait?

Yes it will suffice. No bait.

It's his weakest movie. We get it.

It's more than that. It's his movie, his baby project, his Memento, Inception, etc. And it's bad.

Nobody is arguing against his visuals. He is one of the best out there. But his storytelling abilities are another matter. Sucker Punch is an important indicator because he didnt have a comic book to give him the story scene by scene. MoS was like that too and many of us have issue with his storytelling there as well.

I'll just link to my somewhat detailed explanation with articles here >> http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=29442205&postcount=454

Thank you for this. To be honest with you, i understand what he was going for, which is exactly what you describe. But the story itself was a mess and the visuals were too overbearing over the actual story. It felt that they were dictating it and not the other way around.

I really like Snyder as a person, i respect his enthusiasm and his eye for visuals and i truly believe that he was trying to give us an All-Star Superman with MoS. But he got lost on the way there and he didnt fully deliver. Like Nolan with Rises for example.

Can Snyder get it together and go from Rises to TDK, or Begins even?

 

[DA_Champion]

There have been comments about him being a misunderstood gem. Dont take my VG comment too literally. Sorry, i didnt mean to be condescending. My apologies. Some have said that yes.

Really? Who compared Snyder to van Gogh?

Most of his interviews are like that.

He's not an eloquent man, he's not confident and self-assertive in interviews. I don't think that's important. He's not running for office.

But besides that, the guy who made the video made a valid point. So she goes into an imaginary world to cope with her imaginary world?
Yes, i get that, but going deeper in fantasies, each one made to help her cope with the previous one makes no sense. Just imagine you're in Hawaii sunbathing and be done with it. Why fighting giant monsters?

Mental patients do sometimes in fact go deeper and deeper into their dream worlds ...

She fights giant monsters because that's how a lot of nerd culture which is now mainstream copes with their problems, by escaping to a world of scifi/fantasy.

To me it feels like an attempt to copy Inception and outdo it in the visuals department. Like "you think gunfire is cool? Pfff... watch this."

How can it be a copy of Inception if it was made at the same time and deals with a totally different theme?

 

[D.P.]

It's a standard strategy in politics actually, you take one of your adversaries strengths, and you turn it into a perceived weakness via a barrage of propaganda.

You're preaching to the choir. I've already picked up on it, I just haven't said anything until now.

It's just really a low level to stoop to.

Wait let me be clear, I'm totally pumped for BVS, JL and whatever else magic is going to come out of Snyder's hands. And I mean it, when I saw MOS I knew Snyder was to be my new favorite director. Earlier it was Peter Jackson and George Lucas.

I'm just not finding this slightly angry argument in threads like these where we all are going back and forth without making any headway in any direction. I guess when BVS arrives it will speak for itself and maybe then people will give Snyder a break which I'm all for. All I want is that both sides find a middle ground. Or maybe I'm hoping for too much, this is the internet lol.

Understood. Speaking for myself, I'm honestly not angry. What I would like is a break from the anti-Snyder mob every once in a while.

Coming here to discuss a film I'm very much looking forward to while people are actively trying to tear down the guy who is making the damn thing is distracting to say the least.

If anything, Zack needs all the support he can get at this juncture. This is the biggest undertaking of his life and none of us could imagine the pressures he is under. Fans should be rallying around him to succeed.

 

[DA_Champion]

FWIW, neither Inception nor Sucker Punch are original in their use of the geek-heaven as dream world plot device. That's been around for a while. It showed up in a season six episode of Smallville, and it shows up in episode # 117 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer "Normal Again".

That plot device has been around for a while. It's what they do with it that varies. Sucker Punch is actually a lot more like Normal Again than it is like Inception. The Smallville episode, in contrast, I suspect was about nothing.