Justice League Zack Snyder Directing Justice League - Part 6

[random_havoc]

this too.

once u start making a movie about established characters with long histories like superman and batman, people are more rigid in their beliefs on what this or that character is suppose to be like.

As it should be. If you're going to use characters with long histories you need to respect the characters or gtfo

 

[misslane38]

As it should be. If you're going to use characters with long histories you need to respect the characters or gtfo

When those histories are diverse, and there isn't consensus about what constitutes "respect" or what is due for an update/progress, then what you're advocating isn't as cut and dry.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

But it most definitely is not what Snyder has done, that we can say for certain.

 

[misslane38]

But it most definitely is not what Snyder has done, that we can say for certain.

Nah.

 

[random_havoc]

When those histories are diverse, and there isn't consensus about what constitutes "respect" or what is due for an update/progress, then what you're advocating isn't as cut and dry.

I think that Snyder having Jimmy Olson get shot in the first few minutes as a joke for himself shows a pretty distinct lack of respect for a character that's been part of the mythos for nearly a century. Yeah the line is not always concrete, but there are some things that clearly don't fit within it. Batman mercilessly slaughtering a bunch of people in BvS is another example, and Snyder's faltering explanation in an interview "Well, uh, I don't see it as him killing them, it's more he's doing something and they just happen..." you've gotta be kidding me.

 

[Micromind]

I feeel people don't get the reasons why Batman was shown like that, he was not the Batman who is just starting his war on crime with a belief that he can make a positive difference in Gotham, here Batman was already fighting for past 20 (?) years without any noticeable difference, in that period, he has lost Robin, he has become jaded and cynical and after witnessing Zod Vs Superman wreak destruction in Metropolis, he has become frustrated and now is is now almost on verge of break-down, He feels like he is losing control and purpose.

Also, Jimmy Olsen was a under-cover agent, not the real Jimmy Olsen. and yes, his death was used by Snyder for a shock value, at least it achieved that, unlike Coulson's death and Quick Silver's death in Avengers.

 

[random_havoc]

I feeel people don't get the reasons why Batman was shown like that, he was not the Batman who is just starting his war on crime with a belief that he can make a positive difference in Gotham, here Batman was already fighting for past 20 (?) years without any noticeable difference, in that period, he has lost Robin, he has become jaded and cynical and after witnessing Zod Vs Superman wreak destruction in Metropolis, he has become frustrated and now is is now almost on verge of break-down, He feels like he is losing control and purpose.

Also, Jimmy Olsen was a under-cover agent, not the real Jimmy Olsen. and yes, his death was used by Snyder for a shock value, at least it achieved that, unlike Coulson's death and Quick Silver's death in Avengers.

I know exactly what Snyder's sad attempts at justifying Batman slaughtering people are. His inspiration for Batman in the movie is the Dark Knight Returns, and even in that Batman doesn't kill anyone, let alone mass slaughter. It's a prime example of not respecting the decades of the character (and then he's shocked that people rejected it?).

And you say that that Jimmy Olsen was an undercover agent as if that somehow makes it better. That's just one more example of again disrespecting a character that, again, is nearly a century old. Shock value? You think it accomplished that? It was some random character we knew nothing about getting shot, because nothing in the movie even identifies him as Jimmy. I only even knew that Snyder intended it to be him because I saw an article headline after the fact.
On the other hand Coulson is a character with zero comic history beforehand whose death was full of emotion instead of completely empty like what Snyder did. As for Quicksilver, yeah that was pretty lame as was a number of things in Age of Ultron.

 

[Micromind]

This is not a BvS forum so, I will drop the topic now. I will just say, it is a way of telling a story, a divided fan-base not appreciating the movie is fine, it doesn't make his movies as a 'sad attempt' though.

And if Comic book writers are given the creative freedom to write their own version of Batman stories, shouldn't the same be extended to film-makers ?

Comic books are not some Historical or Religious documents that cannot be touched, Those fans taking issues with creative decisions (which by the way are not major deviations either considering that Batman was shown killing in Burton and Nolan movies) are just doing that as since they don't like Snyder as a director they are trying their best to nitpick everything.

 

[misslane38]

I think that Snyder having Jimmy Olson get shot in the first few minutes as a joke for himself shows a pretty distinct lack of respect for a character that's been part of the mythos for nearly a century.

"Jimmy" was more interesting, made more of an impression, and had more to do in Snyder's brief time with the character than countless other incarnations where he's either a joke, a static sidekick, or an exposition monkey. Jimmy Olsen doesn't have a fanbase. The mythology surrounding Jimmy Olsen has reduced him to either a sycophant or damsel-in-distress. He's also a character who was used repeatedly in the Superman canon as some sort of test subject whipping boy for yucks and entertainment. In the character's entire history, he's had maybe a few moments in the spotlight before he was relegated to the sidelines again.

And, you know, Snyder's "Jimmy" wasn't even the real Jimmy. The character who introduced himself as "Jimmy" was an undercover CIA agent (codename: Talon) who spoke a foreign language. He was not a photographer. He did not work for the Daily Planet. He was not truly there to support Lois Lane. Snyder didn't give us the real "Jimmy" in BvS. He had a CIA agent take his name as a pseudonym. He used the "Jimmy" pseudonym for shock value, so the audience would be invested in the character until the truth behind him -- the twist -- was revealed. When I saw the UC of the film with the full "Jimmy" scene, the reveal of the truth was a source of relief not rage.

Yeah the line is not always concrete, but there are some things that clearly don't fit within it. Batman mercilessly slaughtering a bunch of people in BvS is another example, and Snyder's faltering explanation in an interview "Well, uh, I don't see it as him killing them, it's more he's doing something and they just happen..." you've gotta be kidding me.

You must hate the Burton and Nolan versions of Batman, then. Because those versions? Totally kill. Burton's does it...A LOT. And no one calls him out in those films as much as Snyder's film highlights Bruce's fall as atypical and worthy of redress from Alfred and Superman. The Nolan version of Batman is even more of a hypocrite. Nolan establishes his Batman as a hero who will not kill. He refuses to kill a criminal only to turn around and burn a house of criminals to the ground. He saves one man from a fiery death only to see him off to an indifferent death at the end of the film. The Joker taunts Batman about his "no kill" rule only for Batman to go right ahead and kill Dent. Batman kills Talia, too. Bruce even killed Ra's Al Ghul on Gotham this season. At least Snyder is honest about his Batman's cruelty and madness. At least Snyder provides a foundation for him to do better, to still be good.

 

[Micromind]

Spoiler

 

[GothamBat]

 

[Arachnerd]

Are you seriously having yet another BvS discussion in the JL forum?

 

[GothamBat]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

 

[idiot09]

Hell no.

 

[Micromind]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

 

[markjoedelonge]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

Nope, but if there's one thing BVS should have been, it would be a "World's Finest" movie.

 

[kguillou]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

I think both could've been achieved. I think the movie could've retained its tone and layered subtextual style and still been a little bit more palatable for general audiences and fans. Look, I love Zack's style of filmmaking but it is polarizing and it took even a fan like me time to adjust to some decisions he made for both MoS and BvS.

 

[Limonade]

I think both could've been achieved. I think the movie could've retained its tone and layered subtextual style and still been a little bit more palatable for general audiences and fans. Look, I love Zack's style of filmmaking but it is polarizing and it took even a fan like me time to adjust to some decisions he made for both MoS and BvS.

I can agree with that. I do notice the subtle layers in some scenes... but it only frustrates me that the movie, as a whole, just doesn't hold it all together in a tight narrative.

 

[chintai80]

I think both could've been achieved. I think the movie could've retained its tone and layered subtextual style and still been a little bit more palatable for general audiences and fans. Look, I love Zack's style of filmmaking but it is polarizing and it took even a fan like me time to adjust to some decisions he made for both MoS and BvS.

i feel the same.

i think it also depends on your own personal mileage on how loose they can play with source material.

i personally like how different it is from the mainstream versions of the characters, but i get why lot of people don't like it.

 

[Reel-Man]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

No effing way. I don't give a damn about if it's liked by the masses and critics or not. They don't dictated what i should and shouldn't enjoy. I'm an adult and can make up my own mind, thank you very much. The hate is all noise for me.

 

[JOE]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

Must have missed this stuff the first time I saw it.

 

[chintai80]

Question for the BvS lovers here: Would you rather the movie have been less ambitious, complex and layered and not have a dedicated, passionate following for the sake of a widespread "it's a good movie" consensus from everyone and positive critic reviews?

Like, the movie would be a straight forward clash between Batman and Superman where they make friends in the end and face off against a common enemy without the political, social, philosophical and psychological subtext, the subtle visual story-telling, the esoteric stuff ect. in exchange for people agreeing it's good and then just kind of moving on and forgetting about it like with Dr Strange or Civil War?

i liked what we got in the UE.
just wish the final battle would've been better - than the movie probably would've been almost perfect for me.
but that's a common issue i have with most cbms. their 3rd act final battle always falls short for some reason.

 

[Da-Scribe]

I hate Dr. Strange and Civil War with a fiery passion, so I'll pass on Snyder having made or ever making a movie like either of those.

I pray every movie he makes from here on out features Jimmy getting shot in the face as well.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Aye, count me in on #zackshotjimmy

 

[Mr. E Nygma]

I think BvS will still be talked about in 20 years where some of these more commercially successful films will be more/less forgotten. I enjoy both universes but I was surprised how much I hated Thor Ragnorak...it was like one big joke?? Didn’t feel any of the dramatic story points because some quip was soon to follow...shame because the trailers made it look visually genius!