BvS The Zack Snyder Validation Thread (big rant)

[Reiter]

Really? Who compared Snyder to van Gogh?

Nobody. It was a figure of speech. Why are you taking this so literally?

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.

He should at least be able to explain his convoluted movie to the dumbfounded people who dont get it.

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

So you plead the insanity case? That doesnt make the movie make any sense. It jjust says "she's crazy, we dont have to explain anything".

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.

Hm... pretty good explanation.

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

The deeper and deeper into dreams/fantasies is common between the two.

 

[D.P.]

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.

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

Your comment was just one in the sea of many I've seen in the vein of trying to paint him as a sex-crazed misogynist and honestly the most recent example at the time that I could reference. My apologies if I'm off the mark about you in particular.

I've seen him referred to as a honry teenage boy amongst other things. It's low.

I agree. It was his baby project. His chance to step out and show what he can do, and he fell short. He'll get another chance to do an original story and hopefully learn from his mistakes.

 

[DA_Champion]

Nobody. It was a figure of speech. Why are you taking this so literally?

The van Gogh comparison is hyperbole and thus inflammatory.

He should at least be able to explain his convoluted movie to the dumbfounded people who dont get it.

If he's bad in interviews then he's bad in interviews. Some people have a hard time. I know some very intelligent who cannot give a power point presentation if their life depended on it, for example.

So you plead the insanity case? That doesnt make the movie make any sense. It jjust says "she's crazy, we dont have to explain anything".

She is in fact crazy in the movie. The movie explores why she's crazy (the patriarchy), what she does to cope (reclaiming her sexuality and collaborating with other women), and how various means of coping are more effective than others.

The deeper and deeper into dreams/fantasies is common between the two.

The plot device has been around for a while and is original to neither Inception or Sucker Punch, however, they both do something different with it.

I think Inception is Christopher Nolan speaking to us as an artist. He is saying that when an idea takes over his brain, it starts off as a little bud, but then it can't be stopped and it eventually consumes. Obsession is a theme of Nolan's movies, and Nolan is an obsessed man in real life.

 

[Reiter]

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.

To be fair, there are multiple threads about the issue now that contain the dissent and it doesnt spill on the wrongs ones like it used to. So all you have to do is avoid these specific threads.

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.

Well we are all thankful that he is making it, but you cant blame some of us if we wish for a better director, or if some of us werent pleased by his MoS.

These threads cant be a **********.

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.

We are. Because we all want the best movie we can get. But this is a place to discuss and most of us arent impressed by his previous work. He is a very nice guy who has shown that he listens to the fans and he took the comments about MoS seriously and said he was disappointed some didnt like it.

That is good though. He should take the criticism creatively and try to better himself. I remember some guy (one of the typical forum insiders) saying that WB knows about all the Bane jokes from Rises and the corny opening scene. That is good right? That will probably make them more careful the next time around.

 

[D.P.]

Inception was inspired by the anime film Paprika FYI.

 

[Reiter]

Your comment was just one in the sea of many I've seen in the vein of trying to paint him as a sex-crazed misogynist and honestly the most recent example at the time that I could reference. My apologies if I'm off the mark about you in particular.

I've seen him referred to as a honry teenage boy amongst other things. It's low.

I agree. It was his baby project. His chance to step out and show what he can do, and he fell short. He'll get another chance to do an original story and hopefully learn from his mistakes.

It's all good!

 

[Reiter]

T
I think Inception is Christopher Nolan speaking to us as an artist. He is saying that when an idea takes over his brain, it starts off as a little bud, but then it can't be stopped and it eventually consumes. Obsession is a theme of Nolan's movies, and Nolan is an obsessed man in real life.

It was also a masterful way to shoot a film with scenes taking place at the same time. He experimented with the idea during the skyscraper hostage scene in TDK, but in Inception he went all out. It was an amazing showcase of his craft, how he could tell so many stories that took place simultaneously.

Snyder's SP didnt do that and doesnt even come close in technique. Even if it did make sense (to me, i know).

 

[D.P.]

To be fair, there are multiple threads about the issue now that contain the dissent and it doesnt spill on the wrongs ones like it used to. So all you have to do is avoid these specific threads.
Well we are all thankful that he is making it, but you cant blame some of us if we wish for a better director, or if some of us werent pleased by his MoS.

These threads cant be a **********.
We are. Because we all want the best movie we can get. But this is a place to discuss and most of us arent impressed by his previous work. He is a very nice guy who has shown that he listens to the fans and he took the comments about MoS seriously and said he was disappointed some didnt like it.

That is good though. He should take the criticism creatively and try to better himself. I remember some guy (one of the typical forum insiders) saying that WB knows about all the Bane jokes from Rises and the corny opening scene. That is good right? That will probably make them more careful the next time around.

Well, seeing a "validation thread" was actually a breath of fresh air until it got overran with negativity, thus defeating the purpose of the topic. So apparently, it's not as avoidable as you would make it seem. It appears every thread these days devolves into "how can I take pot shots at Snyder today?"

We are all thankful he is making it? I don't know about that one. You can wish for a "better" director, but he is who we have now. And not only that, he is signed on to Justice League as well, which means WB has the ultimate faith in him moving forward. So you are literally stuck with the man regardless of how much you may wish it was someone else.

I don't blame anybody for wanting someone different or not being pleased with MOS. My only issue (if you can even call it that) is the manner in which people go about it. It's like an overly aggressive angry mob trying to drown out any remotely positive or optimistic discussion about the film and it's director. Validation thread? We'll show them!

So no, I'm not asking for a **********. And no, this actually isn't the place discuss not being impressed with his previous work. I doubt that was OP's intention. Hell, I doubt the majority of you even read the OP. Just saw "Zack Snyder" in the thread title and flocked like bees to honey.

There's an entire thread already dedicated to being skeptical of Snyder as a filmmaker, how many do you guys need? It's not like you're presenting any new complaints or ideas about the man. Just saying.

 

[WBwins]

The problem with Zak Snyder taking criticisms is that the criticisms of MOS are contradictory and confusing.I think Snyder should just concentrate on making a great film and ignore Fan complaints.

 

[LamboMan]

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?

No problem! I'm glad you can see what he was trying. To me it succeeded, but to each his own. Funny thing is that I for some reason feel any story more through the visuals and without those visuals the story might not come across as well for me. Same with MOS, I lived the grand story through his visuals. Kind of opposite to what you said, but that's how I feel lol. Guess that's why my favorite kind of movies are these grand scale ones like Star Wars, Matrix series, LOTR and Zack's movies. I think it's because I'm an artist and engineer and so visual input is the strongest influence on my thinking. Interesting isn't it? Since everyone's brains are configured differently everyone will have a different input and processing of that input.

Also, about SP, the only point I'll add is that if you read those articles I had in my post you'll see there are many ways to interpret it than just a man giving orders. He could be seen as God guiding them, or a mentor who's just being represented as an old wise man, but the gender isn't really the focus point of that character. It's more like he's the personification of wisdom in the girls, as a counter balance to their fears or as the father figure they never had, since they always had a mother figure around.

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.

I apologise that I misunderstood your stance.
I would also love nothing more than people giving him a chance and support. Snyder FTW!


As a general point to everybody I'd like to request that we should try discussing the man's work rather than the man himself since it's easy to discredit a person or throw ad-hominems at one. If we take the work for what it is and dissect it rather than the human who can be more easily attacked, the discussion will become much more conclusive since we all will have data and facts to backup our claims and ideas about the work.

 

[Reiter]

Well, seeing a "validation thread" was actually a breath of fresh air until it got overran with negativity, thus defeating the purpose of the topic. So apparently, it's not as avoidable as you would make it seem. It appears every thread these days devolves into "how can I take pot shots at Snyder today?"

But when someone comes out and says "Snyder is good because X, Y, and Z", shouldnt it be ok for others to come and say "X doesnt apply"?

Or maybe not, i dont know. I think there should be no "pro-snyder" and "against snyder" threads. Just a thread about him in general where we discuss what we think.

We are all thankful he is making it? I don't know about that one. You can wish for a "better" director, but he is who we have now. And not only that, he is signed on to Justice League as well, which means WB has the ultimate faith in him moving forward. So you are literally stuck with the man regardless of how much you may wish it was someone else.

I don't blame anybody for wanting someone different or not being pleased with MOS. My only issue (if you can even call it that) is the manner in which people go about it. It's like an overly aggressive angry mob trying to drown out any remotely positive or optimistic discussion about the film and it's director. Validation thread? We'll show them!

There are some posters that are too aggressive (and i know i am often aggressive when i post) but perhaps there's more people that wish for a better director than those who dont, so the latter feel drowned by the negativity of the former?

There's an entire thread already dedicated to being skeptical of Snyder as a filmmaker, how many do you guys need? It's not like you're presenting any news complaints or ideas about the man. Just saying.

Like i said above, i think there should just be one thread. If there's one where only negativity is allowed, and one where only praise is allowed, they'll die after a couple of pages since everyone will be in agreement.

The problem with Zak Snyder taking criticisms is that the criticisms of MOS are contradictory and confusing.I think Snyder should just concentrate on making a great film and ignore Fan complaints.

That's always the case though. So he should look at the most common complaint and ask "why are so many people mentioning this or that?"

 

[LamboMan]

Anyway, good discussion guys. Gotta go now, see you later. This is the first time I've really had deep long discussions on these boards so t'was a good experience!

 

[D.P.]

But when someone comes out and says "Snyder is good because X, Y, and Z", shouldnt it be ok for others to come and say "X doesnt apply"?

Sure. At what point does that become redundant though? Also, how is it productive to argue personal taste ad nauseam? I like what I like. You like what you like. Are you going to discuss me to death so that when the smoke clears, I'll "see the light"? No, that's not how it works.

Snyder is what we have. That's it. None of you can undo that.

This is what you will see more often than not:

1. Good visuals, bad storyteller
   
2. Sucker Punch
   
3. Metropolis destruction

Wash, rinse, and repeat. Paraphrase a little, throw a dash of hyperbole in there, some strawmen - and you're done. I'm sure I'm missing a couple, but are there even original thoughts now? Or just rehashes of the same complaints?

Or maybe not, i dont know. I think there should be no "pro-snyder" and "against snyder" threads. Just a thread about him in general where we discuss what we think.

I didn't make the threads. Stepping back and looking at the state of the forums though, it is probably best that they exist. To establish order if anything. People who have been here longer than me can't even seem to follow the rules though. There's a sticky up top about off-topic posting...

There are some posters that are too aggressive (and i know i am often aggressive when i post) but perhaps there's more people that wish for a better director than those who dont, so the latter feel drowned by the negativity of the former?

No idea. I can't speak to lurkers. It could easily be the reverse. People who are fans of MOS/Snyder but feel so belitted and outnumbered by the overly agressive and vocal posters, that they don't contribute. Who knows.

Like i said above, i think there should just be one thread. If there's one where only negativity is allowed, and one where only praise is allowed, they'll die after a couple of pages since everyone will be in agreement.

Well, that just sounds like an admission that the anti-Snyder posters have made their way here because they need people to argue against, or else it becomes boring. Which is one of the the marks of a troll, lol.

 

[Gray Ghost]

Well, that just sounds like an admission that the anti-Snyder posters have made their way here because they need people to argue against, or else it becomes boring. Which is one of the the marks of a troll, lol.

No, I'm pretty sure it means that to have any sort of interesting discussion, you need to have a variety of opinions. Otherwise, as Reiter pointed out, you have just the same pointless circle-jerk that too many threads devolve into as it is.

 

[Reiter]

No, I'm pretty sure it means that to have any sort of interesting discussion, you need to have a variety of opinions. Otherwise, as Reiter pointed out, you have just the same pointless circle-jerk that too many threads devolve into as it is.

Yes, exactly.

 

[DA_Champion]

It was also a masterful way to shoot a film with scenes taking place at the same time. He experimented with the idea during the skyscraper hostage scene in TDK, but in Inception he went all out. It was an amazing showcase of his craft, how he could tell so many stories that took place simultaneously.

Snyder's SP didnt do that and doesnt even come close in technique. Even if it did make sense (to me, i know).

Christopher Nolan did a great job with the cross-cut climax. I think the climax scene in Inception was like 4 or 5 sequences taking place simultaneously, and he pulled it off smoothly, the tension between the different scenes accumulated, in contrast to how it is in other movies. None of Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy, or Man of Steel worked as well. The tension from the different scenes didn't accumulate, in fact I'd argue they undermined each other.

Snyder's SP didn't do that, but it didn't try to do that, so I don't see the problem? Sucker Punch has a linear narrative with one character, rather than parallel narratives involving multiple characters.

 

[DeadPresident]

No, I'm pretty sure it means that to have any sort of interesting discussion, you need to have a variety of opinions. Otherwise, as Reiter pointed out, you have just the same pointless circle-jerk that too many threads devolve into as it is.

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.

 

[The Endless]

Yea i think the climax to Inception is some of Nolan's best work. Each level of the dream had tension built into it with the race against time before the kick.

 

[The Endless]

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.

From my experience i'd say the people defending Snyder are more hostile. As if criticisms of him as a film maker are personal attacks.

 

[DA_Champion]

From my experience i'd say the people defending Snyder are more hostile. As if criticisms of him as a film maker are personal attacks.

Ensemble criticism:

Hack Snyder is good at visuals but not story, he has the mind of a 12 year old boy, he made of the battle of Thermopylae, one of the most important history, and based it on a comic book. He completely missed the entire point of Watchmen, I want my squid back. Sucker Punch is terrible. Destruction in Metropolis.

 

[The Endless]

2 of those criticisms are valid though

But people who criticise him for 300... what the? And i actually think him getting rid of the cosmic squid and making it so the world believes Dr M turned on them actually works better thematically. Inspired choice actually.

 

[DeadPresident]

From my experience i'd say the people defending Snyder are more hostile. As if criticisms of him as a film maker are personal attacks.

You may very well be right, I avoid both sides like the plague to be honest. For me it boils down to one thing though, which seems to come from the anti-Snyder crowd. And that is that they tend to question pro-Snyder folks as though attacking someone's preferences is like showing somebody why their math problem is wrong. It makes no sense, having the discussion is like each side addressing a door knob, nothing is going to change, there is no point.

Fact is Snyder is an above average film maker, with distinct aptitudes in some areas and distinct shortcomings in others. This means the film will inevitably have a certain tone and aesthetic to it. If people have a problem with that particular tone or aesthetic I can understand it and that's too bad, but running down a list of reasons why A/B/C makes Snyder bad or incapable seems like a massive waste of time.

It is what it is, chances are this film is going to feature good renditions of the majority of the characters, and look good doing so. If it can't feature every little nuance and aspect that hardcore fans have incorporated into their "ideal" iteration of a character that's too bad, and honestly no director on the face of the planet was going to manage it either.

The reason I find anti-Snyder's more annoying is that there seems to be an incessant need to attack the validity of somebody to hold subjective preferences. It's like trying to tell somebody they're objectively or factually wrong for not liking beetroot but eating carrots.

 

[D.P.]

No, I'm pretty sure it means that to have any sort of interesting discussion, you need to have a variety of opinions. Otherwise, as Reiter pointed out, you have just the same pointless circle-jerk that too many threads devolve into as it is.

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?

From my experience i'd say the people defending Snyder are more hostile. As if criticisms of him as a film maker are personal attacks.

All 3 of them?

Ensemble criticism:

Hack Snyder is good at visuals but not story, he has the mind of a 12 year old boy, he made of the battle of Thermopylae, one of the most important history, and based it on a comic book. He completely missed the entire point of Watchmen, I want my squid back. Sucker Punch is terrible. Destruction in Metropolis.

Opinions are facts here.

 

[D.P.]

You may very well be right, I avoid both sides like the plague to be honest. For me it boils down to one thing though, which seems to come from the anti-Snyder crowd. And that is that they tend to question pro-Snyder folks as though attacking someone's preferences is like showing somebody why their math problem is wrong. It makes no sense, having the discussion is like each side addressing a door knob, nothing is going to change, there is no point.

Fact is Snyder is an above average film maker, with distinct aptitudes in some areas and distinct shortcomings in others. This means the film will inevitably have a certain tone and aesthetic to it. If people have a problem with that particular tone or aesthetic I can understand it and that's too bad, but running down a list of reasons why A/B/C makes Snyder bad or incapable seems like a massive waste of time.

It is what it is, chances are this film is going to feature good renditions of the majority of the characters, and look good doing so. If it can't feature every little nuance and aspect that hardcore fans have incorporated into their "ideal" iteration of a character that's too bad, and honestly no director on the face of the planet was going to manage it either.

The reason I find anti-Snyder's more annoying is that there seems to be an incessant need to attack the validity of somebody to hold subjective preferences. It's like trying to tell somebody they're objectively or factually wrong for not liking beetroot but eating carrots.

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.

 

[BatLobster]

The subjective/objective thing is always an issue on this site and the internet in general.

Whenever you call someone on it, the inevitable response is "do I really need to tag an IMO after everything I say?" And it's a valid point, but I think in general we can all make some slight adjustments to out language in these debates to come off as less obstinate and antagonistic. It goes a long way when you make the effort.