It was Snyder's idea to have Superman kill Zod, so he bought into Goyer's take hook, line, and sinker. And neither Goyer nor Nolan were around for BVS, and Superman was still portrayed terribly, so Snyder deserves all the crap he gets.
Pretty much this, and I've probably got a sketchy history of Snyder-praising now.
I do think he's brilliant in moments (often visual ones) but I think he allows too much bad material in to be a truly good director. And he seems to have a "edgy kewl" mentality that barely works with Batman and definitely doesn't work for Superman.
MOS did have Goyer elements, and Justice League was half-reshot by Whedon, but BVS is totally his.
At best, it's a misguided art movie, an expression of the nightmarish ramifications of crime-fighting and hero worship-with Malick-esque handheld camerawork.
At worst, it's an accidental parody of everything comic fans hate about Frank Miller's revision, complete with murderous, illogical Batman-the AllStar incarnation would have a field day with Martha! Batfleck.
And the thing tying both aspects together is a camp villain, which somehow makes the narrative feel worse than it is.
I might have given it 6-7 out of ten, but at best, it's a 5. Factoring "accuracy" (there will always be a wonky comic to justify an off characterization) it would most certainly be rotten.
Brad Bird made The Iron Giant. He also made Tommorowland. Bad films happen to even the best of directors.
But with Snyder, I feel like his improvements are changes in visual aesthetic, rather than narrative.
Superman's not realistic enough-"shakey cam, got it!"
Batman V Superman- "Artistic editing and slow-motion-got it!"
And I've only seen the trailers for Justice League, but it feels like "More camp-got it!"
When in reality, the answers lie all along in the reaction of both fans and non-fans. "Too dark" is a generic complaint that generally conveys frustration with a lack of warmhearted pathos to the approaches of certain characters.
"Not exciting enough" may range from a simple thing from not providing enough suspense "beats" or worse yet, not creating good character arcs for audiences to suspend their built-in "boredom.
"No color"-Well, light and grade with skin-tones in mind. The other tones will follow, especially if the costumes are bright to begin with.
"Too much plot" generally means incoherent. Try to figure what your story is about in terms of characterization and individual choice, and build the plot around it. Don't throw in "and then this happens" because it's cool, generally speaking. Because audiences can pick up on these things.
"Bad villain." Villains are hard to get right, because too much sympathy makes it hard to root for the hero, and not enough can make the antagonist one dimensional.
Even dark villains like Ledger's Joker have a certain internal logic- his is proving the extent of human cruelty. Even going so far as his own victimization as evidence and justification for his "tests".
People will say things that are shallow and wrong (MOS Superman didn't SAVE enough people-I'm pretty sure the planet doesn't count :P). It's the directors, screenwriters AND producers' job to read between the lines of what they really mean.
I think Snyder's contribution to the genre was significant in Watchmen. But there was nothing to show that he had the type of flexibility to take on the DCU..and a jillion complaints of the idealogical disconnect between the graphic novel and the film.
I have no more words now. I wanted to support a director who attracts controversy for literally everything he does..but instead of moving on he seems to double down in some ways. It's really sad, because I feel if he scaled back, tackled a few different low-budget genres, and diversified his approach he could be a good director in a kind of shallow "Guy Richie" kinda way.
