BvS The Zack Snyder Validation Thread (big rant)

[LEVITIKUZ]

Giving my 2 cents on Snyder.

I love his passion on his films and how he tries to stick close to the source.

But the only movie I really liked of his was 300. I've seen bits of Watchmen but were bored by it. Sucker Punch was bad. Man of Steel was average. Haven't seen his Owls or Dawn of the Dead film.

I do have confidence in him with Batman V Superman.

 

[Gray Ghost]

You're confusing 'discussion' for 'irate and partisan lambasting' for the most part. There are a number of users that can academically discuss Snyder's gifts/shortcomings without resorting to personal attacks or petty insults, but the bread and butter of conversation surrounding him resembles the tone of conversations about gender equality or peace in the middle east.

So because some take this stuff way too personal means we shouldn't be discussing at all? Might as well close down all comic book related forums then.

If that approach has generated any "interesting" discussion, please show me. I've just seen baiting and hurling of the same points/counter-points over and over again.

Has anybody came away from any of these "interesting" debates feeling smarter? Or came away with their viewpoint on something changed?

Your mileage may vary of course but I find the discussions in this and the Skeptics threads much more interesting than the "Cavill is more ripped than Affleck", "Has Godot put on enough weight yet?", "When do they start filming on location?" nonsense in most of the other threads.

I don't really think feeling smarter or having your opinion be overturned is the point here really. It's just a bunch of people talking about a movie.

No offense but you strike me as somebody who takes this stuff way too seriously and personal. Maybe you should try to avoid negative opinions instead of getting all worked up about them.

 

[Flint Marko]

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.

I can get on board with calling him misunderstood but you're right, referring to him as a genius is a bit much. I disagree with your assessment of Favraeu, Singer, and some of the others as merely competent but that's for another thread.

So then, you're trolling in retaliation?

As far as I can tell I have been polite and respectful, and haven't said any inflammatory comments to spark outrage among anyone here. That's the exact opposite of trolling. We were having an interesting debate, I thought, until you turned it into this.

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?

• What I was specifically saying was being repeated over and over were the amount of people who did/did not like the movie. We were basically having the same tug of war I see around here constantly of, "some people did NOT like the movie!" "Well, some DID like the movie!". That's what was getting repetitive, not necessarily the debate at hand.
• I'm not breaking any forum etiquette. As I said earlier, I think I've been pretty respectful and raised some interesting points thus far that are worth discussing. If you think certain threads should be taped off so people of only one mindset should post, then we clearly have different ideas of what an internet forum should be like.
• I didn't imply that at all. I came here because I saw something interesting being said and I wanted to weigh in. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade here, I'm trying to have a discussion. I don't think I should be lambasted for doing such, because I thought I was being pretty respectful.

This has now become less of a discussion, and more an argument about an argument and I don't want to carry it any further. If you'd like to pick up where we left off on Snyder then we can continue, but if we're just going to keep going down this path I don't want to clutter the thread any further since this isn't really topical.

Your mileage may vary of course but I find the discussions in this and the Skeptics threads much more interesting than the "Cavill is more ripped than Affleck", "Has Godot put on enough weight yet?", "When do they start filming on location?" nonsense in most of the other threads.

I agree. Pretty much every discussion here is repetitive, since we have next to nothing substantial to sink our teeth into (no story info, no teaser, etc). At least this particular one can get interesting at times.

 

[DeadPresident]

I admire the fact that you've elected to remain neutral, but that's one of my main gripes as well.

"Surely you can see that he is a God-awful director?"

Um, no. I enjoy his work? If that's alright with you all.

Well of the films he's done I've seen 300, Watchmen and MoS. I thought 300 was enjoyable, I felt he adapted Watchmen quite well from the graphic novel and I really liked MoS. Is he capable of doing everything? Probably not, but I do like what he generally does. Haven't seen SuckerPunch though, and doubt I will.

There are things he's good at, there are things he's bad at. Chances are he'll do this film justice. Unfortunately I won't be sticking around to listen to all the upbeat folks condemn this movie and retrace why it is going to be a commercial and critical failure and why all those involved with the process aren't fit to call themselves professionals in their fields.

So because some take this stuff way too personal means we shouldn't be discussing at all? Might as well close down all comic book related forums then.

So essentially, some take this stuff way too personal = academically discuss Snyder's gifts/shortcomings without resorting to personal attacks or petty insults.

You've told me what I needed to know, thanks.

 

[Diabo]

What i really don´t understand, and nobody has been able to explain it to me, is why would someone spend so much time and energy discussing something they don´t like? I get that you like to give an opinion about something you don´t like. But to spend so much time repeating yourselves, over and over again? I really don´t understand.

That´s like me dedicating a good amount of my time repeating myself about how bad Justin Bieber. Wouldn´t it be more logic to take that time and invest it in something i enjoy?

To me that´s being a hater. That´s being unable to understand and respect the fact that someone might like something you don´t like. Because you can´t respect that, you put a lot effort into trying to discredit everything those people say, failing to understand that there´s nothing you can do to change their minds.

I honestly can´t imagine myself spending a good amount of my time at TA boards attacking the movie and its director. I think i would be in very a bad position in my life if i started to do that... maybe depressed or crazy...i don´t know...

 

[D.P.]

No offense but you strike me as somebody who takes this stuff way too seriously and personal. Maybe you should try to avoid negative opinions instead of getting all worked up about them.

Too seriously and personal as opposed to who?

All worked up? How?

 

[CGNefarious]

Too seriously and personal as opposed to who?

All worked up? How?

Jesus man, you need to calm down.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Giving my 2 cents on Snyder.

I love his passion on his films and how he tries to stick close to the source.

But the only movie I really liked of his was 300. I've seen bits of Watchmen but were bored by it. Sucker Punch was bad. Man of Steel was average. Haven't seen his Owls or Dawn of the Dead film.

I do have confidence in him with Batman V Superman.

If you like horror movies, check out DotD. A great cast, a solid script (courtesy of James Gunn) and equal parts grim and witty. A fun, satisfying flick that far exceeded expectations.

 

[D.P.]

Jesus man, you need to calm down.

Nice try.

 

[DA_Champion]

What i really don´t understand, and nobody has been able to explain it to me, is why would someone spend so much time and energy discussing something they don´t like? I get that you like to give an opinion about something you don´t like. But to spend so much time repeating yourselves, over and over again? I really don´t understand.

Let's be honest, internet forums are somewhat irrational. We would all be better off spending this time going to the gym more often, reading Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, or cooking better meals. These boards and other boards on most topics are largely a time sink, and given that people will gravitate to the BvS boards because it happens to be the most popular one on the hype.

 

[Diabo]

Let's be honest, internet forums are somewhat irrational. We would all be better off spending this time going to the gym more often, reading Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, or cooking better meals. These boards and other boards on most topics are largely a time sink, and given that people will gravitate to the BvS boards because it happens to be the most popular one on the hype.

I understand. But still, i find a few members of this forum to be really weird, like jmc, the endless, joker, etc. And i say this because they have spent hours and hours and hours and hours of their lives trying to discredit movies they don´t like. And i´m not talking about giving an opinion here and there, but being really repetitive, hateful and dismissive. It´s almost like they patrol these boards in order to make sure nobody validates the stuff they don´t like. You can tell they have a hard time accepting that someone might like something they don´t. And that´s a serious problem.

 

[D.P.]

I just came across this online. Not my math. I figured it would be interesting for those who live and die by RT scores.

I'll be using Rotten Tomatoes since it's the closest thing online to an objective rating system. Only critics' scores will be reported, but that's only due to Rotten Tomatoes making is easier to access them.

• Dawn of the Dead: 75%
• 300: 60%
• Watchmen: 64%
• Legend of the Guardians: 50%
• Sucker Punch: 23%
• Man of Steel: 54%
• Rise of an Empire: 42%

Zack Snyder has a directing mean of 52.6%, with a standard deviation of 16.75%. At first glance, it appears that Batman V Superman would most likely fall between a 35.8% and a 69.3%. But let's take a closer look at what seems to cause the most variance in Snyder's films: The writers. I'll only be taking averages where a screenplay credit is given.

• Dawn of the Dead writer James Gunn mean: 59.75%
• 300 and Sucker Punch writer Zack Snyder mean: 41.5% (This will be ignored as Zack Snyder isn't being given a screenplay credit for Batman V Superman)
• Watchmen writers David Hayter and Alex Tse combined mean: 66.9%
• Legend of the Guardians writers John Orloff and Emil Stern combined mean: 47.5%
• Man of Steel writer David Goyer mean: 46.4%

Zack Snyder, on average, brings writers up by 4.6%, with a standard deviation of 9.3%. Batman V Superman writer Chris Terrio has a screenwriting mean of 80%.

Assuming normal conditions for factors such as actors, producers, editors, which they aren't but that would complicate things beyond what one post could calculate, Batman V Superman's Rotten Tomato score should fall between 75.3% and 93.9%.

 

[slumcat]

"Zack Snyder, on average, brings writers up by 4.6%, with a standard deviation of 9.3%. Batman V Superman writer Chris Terrio has a screenwriting mean of 80%."

Absurd to have a mean for a screenwriter who has a single credit. That gives us no information, it is neither here nor there.

"Assuming normal conditions for factors such as actors, producers, editors, which they aren't but that would complicate things beyond what one post could calculate, Batman V Superman's Rotten Tomato score should fall between 75.3% and 93.9%."

That's certainly absurd. A franchise can't move from rotten to Certified Fresh in one bound. And there is such a thing as critics cred, basically where a director critics love will get better reviews on average and directors which they dislike get worse reviews on average. Snyder is the latter.

Even Super Returns had good reviews. The 3 out of 4 DC films had good reviews (Green Lantern odd man out). In general Superhero movies are the easiest to get 60% on RT, all Marvel movies manage it in their sleep and actually easily approach 80's or 90's. Yet somehow MOS was rotten. That shows that critics really disliked this film. Even a fanboy site like Collider panned the film.

I think at best it can get 74%, at worst it can get around 36%.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I think predicting a movie's RT score two years ahead of time is silly, one way or the other. I mean... come on.

 

[DA_Champion]

"Zack Snyder, on average, brings writers up by 4.6%, with a standard deviation of 9.3%. Batman V Superman writer Chris Terrio has a screenwriting mean of 80%."

Absurd to have a mean for a screenwriter who has a single credit. That gives us no information, it is neither here nor there.

Argo has a score of 96% on Rotten Tomatoes, and they gave Terrio an 80%, so it's not a mean based on one data point.

 

[D.P.]

I think predicting a movie's RT score two years ahead of time is silly, one way or the other. I mean... come on.

I know. The sheer concept of that is hilarious. The math/homework that went into it made it worth posting.

 

[DA_Champion]

I know. The sheer concept of that is hilarious. The math/homework that went into it made it worth posting.

The math/homework for that post could be done in ~15 minutes, it's not a big deal.

I think it was interesting to check out if Snyder raises or lowers his screenwriters average scores. It turns out he raises them by a very marginal amount on average.

 

[D.P.]

The math/homework for that post could be done in ~15 minutes, it's not a big deal.

Even more shocking that some of our more enterprising members haven't attempted it.

 

[Eros]

Zack Snyder is a good director, who has gotten by with casting great actors. MOS was a movie where the actors sold the otherwise clumsy screenplay.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, if there's one thing Snyder has proven, at least to me, it's that he casts his movies well. The MOS casting was spot-on across the board. I thought he did a bang-up job on Watchmen and 300 in that area too. And even though Sucker Punch was awful, it was well-cast. So that's why I'm not too worried about some of the more questionable casting decisions he's made for BvS (Eisenberg, Gadot).

 

[slumcat]

Dear god someone get Snyder a good, tight, focused, screenplay. And then see how the movie turns out. Nothing more overly "deep" or actor dependant, a movie which has kind of a natural pace built into the screenplay and a milieu which allows Snyder's imagination to bloom.

 

[DA_Champion]

Even more shocking that some of our more enterprising members haven't attempted it.

15 minutes if you know what you're doing, most people who post on these boards don't know what a standard deviation is

 

[jmc]

Dear god someone get Snyder a good, tight, focused, screenplay. And then see how the movie turns out. Nothing more overly "deep" or actor dependant, a movie which has kind of a natural pace built into the screenplay and a milieu which allows Snyder's imagination to bloom.

Here's the thing, anyone (and I'm saying this literally) can create something based off another person's idea, even everyone in this forum if given a script and camera could shoot what's in any screenplay if it's laid out to us in lots of detail (with varying forms of competency obviously). The problem is unless you understand the fundamentals of storytelling chances are what you deliver won't do the script justice no matter how great the script is. Conversely you might overlook obvious flaws and weaknesses. All creative mediums have foundations that when applied correctly can turn even horrible ideas into works of art. A great idea is only as good as the artist's understandings of the medium he/she works in.

 

[BatLobster]

His casting is usually very good, though I will say that the one glaring exception for me is Malin Akerman as Silver Spectre. I mean, on paper it wasn't necessarily bad casting but I thought she was horrible and a real weak link in that cast.

 

[DA_Champion]

Matthew Goode has been dismissed as bad casting for Watchmen, I don't remember what the reasoning was.