Justice League Zack Snyder Directing Justice League - Part 6

[Superchan]

Has Zack Snyder ever said anything coherent or anything that makes sense? This is a serious question, cause every interview I've seen of his, he can't seem to formulate his thoughts or get his point across and he rambles on and on and can't focus on one thing. And he justifies all of his decisions by saying "Wouldn't it be cool if..."

I had that same impression but i think it's just a matter of him having trouble expressing himself eloquently, after all not everyone is Chris Nolan.

Making Lex a clown, making Batman kill by proxy, making Superman die to push him out of the way, not having Batman and Superman talk in their suits, killing Jimmy Olsen off cause it's funny, etc. Dumb decisions after dumb decisions throughout. He was even asked about the Knightmare scene well after BvS came out and he wouldn't even explain it! Why have something in your movie that you're not going to explain!

Yeah his half-a**ed decisions led to the DCEU's near demise but the good news is that he's gone now and we'll (hopefully) never see him near a DC film ever again.
The Jimmy Olsen thing was silly but to be honest I'm not even sure that CIA operative was Jimmy and even if he was Snyder was smart enough to cut the "Im Jimmy Olsen" part out of the movie.
As the nightmare scene, well I get why he didn't want to explain it because it would've been a spoiler for his JL2 movie that now will never happen (thank god!!)

Snyder just does things to be "cool" and have "cool" moments without any depth, purpose or meaning to the story or characters. He's essentially a better and more stylized Michael Bay. I know I'm going to trigger a lot of Snyder fanboys, but just take this all in with an open mind.

I think Snyder aims to be 'deep' with his stuff but ends up missing the whole point hence why his movies have ranged from flops to disappointments for the last 10 years.
I actually think Bay is a much better film maker because atleast he knows he's making rubbish "for 15 yr olds" with his transformers movies, Snyder on the other hand makes rubbish while thinking he's making high art.

 

[misslane38]

Yeah his half-a**ed decisions led to the DCEU's near demise but the good news is that he's gone now and we'll (hopefully) never see him near a DC film ever again.

Half-a**ed? Whether they were good or bad decisions, and I know we disagree about which it is, I don't think it's fair to describe Snyder's decisions this way. He clearly, for good or ill, made these decisions with passion and with intent. He put effort and care into making these films, and whether the result is disliked doesn't change that fact.

I think Snyder aims to be 'deep' with his stuff but ends up missing the whole point hence why his movies have ranged from flops to disappointments for the last 10 years.

What the "whole point" is is subjective, though, isn't it? For some, these characters and this genre should present in one particular way or achieve a specific goal or effect, and for others it can take different forms or achieve that desire effect in an unconventional way. Additionally, something can be genuinely deep, and therefore not just aim at depth but achieve depth, and still not appeal to some people.

In other words, to disparage the conviction involved in Snyder's decision-making or the amount of depth in his work aren't exactly accurate or fair, and ultimately they're unnecessary and irrelevant to making a valid critique of his films. His choices can have conviction and his narrative can have depth and both can still fail to appeal to one's tastes and expectations or to execute standard aspects of storytelling well.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

Come on. I can get some people getting upset about Jason Todd's weapon, but claiming its inclusion makes the film "lose more than half the audience" is ridiculously hyperbolic. Also, although I am very unfamiliar with Jason Todd, I have a hunch that he's not exactly been known to be averse to lethal weaponry or killing. Moreover, Bruce obviously keeps displays of things to remind him of his past -- the good and the bad -- and in JL he has his suit from fighting Superman on display. My hunch is that the Robin suit not only is a reminder of Robin's death, but also potentially of some darkness, not too unlike Bruce's, that caused a schism with Bruce and precipitated his death. Bruce does allude to a general feeling that good guys are turning bad, not keeping their promises. It works fine for me.

I'm gonna use a dirty word for BvS fans but screw it. After MoS BvS needed to be more safe

By more safe I mean that if you can choose between having a Robin with a halberd or having a Robin with... NOT a halberd. Go with not a halberd. Leaving it out doesn't detract from the imagery, but adding it does confuse a lot. A grown man in short shorts swinging a medieval weapon like a madman is just a jarring visual for me. What's with the short shorts anyway? I swear Snyders aesthetic choices are just all over the place for me.

Snyder's Lex Luthor is no different than mad scientist Luthor from the Silver Age or Mark Waid's Luthor in Birthright. Batman has been killing by proxy for decades now (see: Burton and Nolan). Superman and Batman did talk in the suits in BvS, and they talked in their suits in JL. Snyder made a judgment call about how he wanted their first philosophical debate to go down and decided it was more effective and interesting to have it take place while both were "disguised." He didn't kill Jimmy Olsen because he thought it would be fun. He thought it would be fun to kill a fake Jimmy Olsen because the reveal that he was a CIA agent using a pseudonym would provoke a bigger shock in the audience when the twist happened. Snyder wouldn't explain the Knightmare because he likes the fact that people discuss and speculate. He wanted people to think about it, especially in the lead up to JL. It was supposed to be part of an extended two-part JL arc at one point, so giving everything away wouldn't have been prudent.

By more safe I mean going with the version of Lex Luthor that I know they know is the popular one. The one that could easily fit into the DCEU post MoS. I know for a fact that WB/DC is aware of the version of Lex that would play well. But they probably thought "Let's go outside the box" and for me it backfired.

Now this is pure speculation on my part but I don't think anyone, upon being asked in 2013, right after Man of Steel, what kind of Lex they wanted to see, would suggest the version Snyder gave us.

After the initial shock of Eisenberg being cast as Lex kinda wore off people were talking about how they could potentially see it if his Lex was like Eisennerg in that one scene in The Social Network, but all the time.

I'm sure there's a crazy mad scientist version of Lex in the comics or maybe even a stuttering (or whatever that thing is Eisenberg does) version of Lex but I think if WB were being truly honest with themselves they'd know the kind of Lex who's cinematic debut was way overdue.

No one was ready for the Lex we got.

Batman killing like that in a movie that's meant to kickstart a cinematic universe will forever be a grave mistake. The Burton and Nolan films didn't carry this weight. Snyder should've realized this. Look at what they had to do to course correct. A Batman that says stuff like "I don't... not like you" -_-

The Jimmy Olsen thing I don't even know what to say about that. Just another case of "If you don't do it you don't lose anything, you dont confuse anyone. If you DO do it you confuse a big chunk of the audience and it still doesn't add anything other than to Snyders idea of fun." And he just goes and does these things all the friggin' time, without fail.

But we were supposed to be talking about a DC Cinematic Universe by now. Green Lantern, getting hyped about a JL movie or the buildup to a Crisis on infinite Earths movie. Where is our Flash movie and all of that stuff. Look at where we are now, we're... NOT there, we're far from it. This universe is in shambles but it seems like a lot of people are just concerned about Snyder's artistic sensibilities.

 

[heatvision38]

I had that same impression but i think it's just a matter of him having trouble expressing himself eloquently, after all not everyone is Chris Nolan.

I do agree that how Snyder expresses himself in interviews is not always as clear as what is probably in his head. I have no doubt that he thinks at a much deeper visual and conceptual level than what his interviews would suggest. The brain is an interesting thing. Zack is clearly a very visual and symbolic guy; his background, his movies, his history all illustrate this (no pun intended). I wonder if the way his mind works, it's hard for him to put the way he mentally sees things into words. Or maybe he is just a little nervous in interviews and has a lot of energy so it comes out a little differently, I don't know. But I don't agree with those who think he is some kind of dude-bro because he uses words like "cool" and "awesome" a lot. There are different ways one can express him/herself. Some people struggle to say what they want to say verbally but can write extremely well, for example, or are incredible with poetry or song writing. Intelligence shows up in different ways.

 

[misslane38]

I'm gonna use a dirty word for BvS fans but screw it. After MoS BvS needed to be more safe

By more safe I mean that if you can choose between having a Robin with a halberd or having a Robin with... NOT a halberd. Go with not a halberd. Leaving it out doesn't detract from the imagery, but adding it does confuse a lot. A grown man in short shorts swinging a medieval weapon like a madman is just a jarring visual for me. What's with the short shorts anyway? I swear Snyders aesthetic choices are just all over the place for me.

I don't think your average moviegoer gave it one second of thought or consideration. I'm familiar with the comics, including the basics about Batman's Robins, and I still didn't care. The intent of the visual seems to be to shock and confuse: it is supposed to hint at a complex story haunting Bruce in the present. It seems to capture the full scope of what Robin was to Batman. He was a youthful sidekick, a madman's victim, and ultimately a corrupted man. The aesthetics are all over the place because Robin's story went all over the place; Bruce staged his monument to Robin to tell that story. It is a reminder and a warning.

By more safe I mean going with the version of Lex Luthor that I know they know is the popular one. The one that could easily fit into the DCEU post MoS. I know for a fact that WB/DC is aware of the version of Lex that would play well. But they probably thought "Let's go outside the box" and for me it backfired.

Now this is pure speculation on my part but I don't think anyone, upon being asked in 2013, right after Man of Steel, what kind of Lex they wanted to see, would go with the version Snyder gave us.

After the initial shock of Eisenberg being cast as Lex kinda wore off people were talking about how they could potentially see it if his Lex was like Eisennerg in that one scene in The Social Network, but all the time.

I'm sure there's a crazy mad scientist version of Lex in the comics or maybe even a stuttering (or whatever that thing is Eisenberg does) version of Lex but I think if WB were being truly honest with themselves they'd know the kind of Lex who's cinematic debut was way overdue.

No one was ready for the Lex we got.

Yeah, it seems they weren't. But I hardly agree with the idea of playing it safe.

Batman killing like that in a movie that's meant to kickstart a cinematic universe will forever be a grave mistake. The Burton and Nolan films didn't carry this weight. Snyder should've realized this. Look at what they had to do to course correct. A Batman that says stuff like "I don't... not like you" -_-

That's not course correction. That's growth. Snyder's film, in my opinion, had to deconstruct the iconography and contradictions the Burton and Nolan films created. It is because Burton and Nolan toyed with Batman as if there was no weight to their decisions that Snyder had to confront the truth of those incarnations. He took on the excesses and missteps of those storytellers in order to move his Batman away from them. Instead of pretending his Batman wasn't a self-righteous and violent hypocrite, he explored Bruce's PTSD explicitly and had him called on his BS.

The Jimmy Olsen thing I don't even know what to say about that. Just another case of "If you don't do it you don't lose anything, you dont confuse anyone. If you DO do it you confuse a big chunk of the audience and it still doesn't add anything other than to Snyders idea of fun." And he just goes and does these things all the friggin' time, without fail.

The photographer wasn't even named in the theatrical release!!!

But we were supposed to be talking about a DC Cinematic Universe by now. Green Lantern, getting hyped about a JL movie or the buildup to a Crisis on infinite Earths movie. Where is our Flash movie and all of that stuff. Look at where we are now, we're... NOT there, we're far from it. This universe is in shambles but it seems like a lot of people are just concerned about Snyder's artistic sensibilities.

Huh? There was never a Crisis film in the cards. The DCEU is only five years old. It has an Aquaman film in post-production, a new Batman film in the works, a Flash film is likely to film this year or early next year, a New Gods film is in development, and there are two sequels to successful origin films set to film before the end of the year.

There is absolutely no reason to be concerned about Snyder any more. There's no reason to talk about Snyder anymore unless you are actually interested in unpacking his symbolism. If you're worried about the future of the DCEU, then Snyder's symbolism in BvS has no bearing on any such discussion.

 

[Limonade]

Reality check? Easter Eggs will never affect plot or pace, like you claimed, and the need to use these new little tidbits to rehash old BvS criticisms and state obvious facts, like the film performed below expectations and affected what came after, is so transparently petty. Those Easter Eggs, Snyder including them and fans enjoying discussing them, doesn't say anything about the film's quality or its commercial performance. So using them, as some are, to point fingers at Snyder -- as if he the Easter Eggs or Snyder's writing style on social media correlate with the film's overall performance -- is perplexing and pathetic. The movie didn't do well with critics or at the box office. I'm not going to debate that, because it's just a fact.

What I was addressing with Superchan was this idea that Snyder was so busy incorporating easter eggs that he screwed up his movie ("Sadly good 'ol Zack was too busy laying his ester eggs to understand..."). So, let me repeat: reminding fans who are enjoying themselves that something didn't make money isn't going to shut them up or make them believe they shouldn't like what they like. Financial success doesn't always correlate with quality or good storytelling. You'd think those who disliked the movie would move on, but they can't even tolerate a minor and well-meaning discussion of easter eggs to occur -- over two years since the film's release no less -- without airing old and irrelevant grievances. Why? What is so threatening about easter eggs and about the niche group of DCEU and Snyder fans enjoying themselves?

I struggle to find any empathy for all these Snyder fans that agreed, followed, and defended the production team to run a muck with the DC properties that ends in an embarrassing box office run! Yet those people want more of what isn't working! And we are telling them it isn't working. And yet they seem to not care about the repercussions of making a film inaccessible in order to see their superheroes bad-ass, always serious, and characteristically different. There are some who even would rather see the IP run into the ground--than for it to be pleasing for children or older folks of a simpler time.

I want Superman and Batman to last a long time in our culture. But these films are not what the public needs. At least not now. Not when the competition is on fire with a pulse on the public. To think that a Black Panther movie almost matched Zack Snyder's last two movies he directed and completed combined. What does that say about your average movie-goer? And where should our DC superheroes go from here?

And it doesn't help when a sect of the DC fandom is still perceived as picking at the carcasses of very divisive movies, looking for something--anything redeemable. Looking for Fool's Gold.

 

[Superchan]

I struggle to find any empathy for all these Snyder fans that agreed, followed, and defended the production team to run a muck with the DC properties that ends in an embarrassing box office run! Y................................

Agreed, Luckily the majority of us hated most of what Snyder did (still give him credit for Cavill and the MOS suit) and ended up voting with their wallets.
I can understand that alot of DCEU supporters actually like what Snyder did and thus chose to support those movies and that's perfectly fine, but I also believe that alot of people didn't like the DCEU but still supported it just because they felt the need to support DC regardless of quality i.e. they tried to be loyal fans, not realizing that when you support crap you get more of that crap e.g. Pirates of the carribean, Transformers and DCEU.

 

[heatvision38]

I struggle to find any empathy for all these Snyder fans that agreed, followed, and defended the production team to run a muck with the DC properties that ends in an embarrassing box office run! Yet those people want more of what isn't working! And we are telling them it isn't working. And yet they seem to not care about the repercussions of making a film inaccessible in order to see their superheroes bad-ass, always serious, and characteristically different. There are some who even would rather see the IP run into the ground--than for it to be pleasing for children or older folks of a simpler time.

I want Superman and Batman to last a long time in our culture. But these films are not what the public needs. At least not now. Not when the competition is on fire with a pulse on the public. To think that a Black Panther movie almost matched Zack Snyder's last two movies he directed and completed combined. What does that say about your average movie-goer? And where should our DC superheroes go from here?

And it doesn't help when a sect of the DC fandom is still perceived as picking at the carcasses of very divisive movies, looking for something--anything redeemable. Looking for Fool's Gold.

I think this is unfair. While I love what Snyder was going for, I also don't want the opposite or something that might be light and fluffy like some Marvel movies or what we got with JL. I think WW was a good middle ground for those who want the DCEU to have a grittier feel but also have some fun as well. So I don't think it's fair to generalize and say that those who like what Snyder did only want the movies to be like BvS or that we don't care about how others perceive the movies.

 

[kguillou]

It was just nice having an alternative to what the competition was offering, thats all. I think I speak for a lot of us "Snyder fans" when I say it was just nice to have a CBM series that took its subject material a little more seriously, was harder hitting, visually very different from other cbms and asking some interesting and hard questions just like a lot of DC's classic, timeless graphic novels. Variety is the spice of life. I liked that DC was aiming for more adult orientated films while Marvel excelled at the family friendly fare, to me theres absolutely nothing wrong with having both of those flavors co-existing.

I was very much looking forward to Justice League being sort of the "Heavy Metal" alternative to Marvel's Avengers, i did not want it to BE Marvel's Avengers though. Now, I suppose one would make the argument that a "Heavy Metal Avengers" isnt what JL shouldve been in the first place and it shouldve been something to appeal to kids and families and we could have that discussion/debate, but I think in an alternative universe theres a version of Zack's JL that maybe wouldnt have made Avengers numbers but still broke a billion and been successful in its own right while maintaining its unique vibe that it was going for.

 

[random_havoc]

Zack has dyslexia. That's why he sometimes has trouble getting across somethings in interviews etc.

Genuine question here, does dyslexia mess up your thought processes in forming speech? Because to my knowledge it only affects spelling so your comment doesn't make any sense.

 

[Flint Marko]

Genuine question here, does dyslexia mess up your thought processes in forming speech? Because to my knowledge it only affects spelling so your comment doesn't make any sense.

I’m not the best guy to answer as I don’t know much about dyslexia, but my girlfriend of several years has it and she often times has difficulty communicating both in speech and writing. I didn’t know until recently that Snyder also had dyslexia but knowing that now makes a lot of sense as I see a lot of similarities in how they write and sound.

 

[random_havoc]

It was just nice having an alternative to what the competition was offering, thats all. I think I speak for a lot of us "Snyder fans" when I say it was just nice to have a CBM series that took its subject material a little more seriously, was harder hitting, visually very different from other cbms and asking some interesting and hard questions just like a lot of DC's classic, timeless graphic novels. Variety is the spice of life. I liked that DC was aiming for more adult orientated films while Marvel excelled at the family friendly fare, to me theres absolutely nothing wrong with having both of those flavors co-existing.

I was very much looking forward to Justice League being sort of the "Heavy Metal" alternative to Marvel's Avengers, i did not want it to BE Marvel's Avengers though. Now, I suppose one would make the argument that a "Heavy Metal Avengers" isnt what JL shouldve been in the first place and it shouldve been something to appeal to kids and families and we could have that discussion/debate, but I think in an alternative universe theres a version of Zack's JL that maybe wouldnt have made Avengers numbers but still broke a billion and been successful in its own right while maintaining its unique vibe that it was going for.

Ok, right there is where you lose touch with reality. I get wanting a darker tone of films. I can appreciate darker toned CBMs too when they're appropriate for the characters and done well (and obviously you and I just disagree on when those parameters are met).
But Snyder didn't even break a billion when he had Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman all on screen together for the first time. Instead he failed to meet financial expectations for the movie and managed to make a film with some of the most iconic characters in americana that many people completely hated and it won razzies.
Yet somehow you think, even after badly poisoning the well, that if he had been left in charge of Justice League there was some chance it would've made a billion? That's absurd. There was absolutely no chance.

Unless you were just saying in some theoretical alternate universe, then never mind my rant

 

[random_havoc]

I’m not the best guy to answer as I don’t know much about dyslexia, but my girlfriend of several years has it and she often times has difficulty communicating both in speech and writing. I didn’t know until recently that Snyder also had dyslexia but knowing that now makes a lot of sense as I see a lot of similarities in how they write and sound.

Fascinating. Thanks for the information

 

[kguillou]

Ok, right there is where you lose touch with reality. I get wanting a darker tone of films. I can appreciate darker toned CBMs too when they're appropriate for the characters and done well (and obviously you and I just disagree on when those parameters are met).
But Snyder didn't even break a billion when he had Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman all on screen together for the first time. Instead he failed to meet financial expectations for the movie and managed to make a film with some of the most iconic characters in americana that many people completely hated and it won razzies.
Yet somehow you think, even after badly poisoning the well, that if he had been left in charge of Justice League there was some chance it would've made a billion? That's absurd. There was absolutely no chance.

Unless you were just saying in some theoretical alternate universe, then never mind my rant

I should've clarified, what I meant was in a alternative universe Zack, perhaps with the right collaborators and screenwriters coulve made BvS AND JL billion $$ grossers and still had that same tonal vibe he was going for. Again, not Avengers numbers but still successful.

This may sound insane but I think Goyer should've never been substituted with Terrio. For what its worth I obviously personally dug the alternative approach that Terrio took with the story and writing, but for a more crowd pleasing, accessible film i think a comic book guy like Goyer wouldve written a more "World's Finest"-esque script for Zack to shoot. Superheroes werent Terrio's cup of tea and i think it shows in how he wrote them. Goyer for ALL his flaws as a writer at least comes from that world and I think Zack needed someone with more traditionalist sensibilities in terms of writing the characters to reign in his eccentricities.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

I struggle to find any empathy for all these Snyder fans that agreed, followed, and defended the production team to run a muck with the DC properties that ends in an embarrassing box office run! Yet those people want more of what isn't working! And we are telling them it isn't working. And yet they seem to not care about the repercussions of making a film inaccessible in order to see their superheroes bad-ass, always serious, and characteristically different. There are some who even would rather see the IP run into the ground--than for it to be pleasing for children or older folks of a simpler time.

I want Superman and Batman to last a long time in our culture. But these films are not what the public needs. At least not now. Not when the competition is on fire with a pulse on the public. To think that a Black Panther movie almost matched Zack Snyder's last two movies he directed and completed combined. What does that say about your average movie-goer? And where should our DC superheroes go from here?

And it doesn't help when a sect of the DC fandom is still perceived as picking at the carcasses of very divisive movies, looking for something--anything redeemable. Looking for Fool's Gold.

Excellent post.

Found this on another website. Snyders reply on Vero to a person asking him why Wayne Manor was in the state it was in in BvS and Bruce was living in the lakehouse.

"I think his father commissioned the lakehouse as a gift to his mother a place built by her favorite architect and she loved it when Bruce turned 18 he moved in he ordered Wayne Manor be left to decompose"

I just can't with this guy, I'm sorry. So Bruce didn't even ever live in Wayne Manor as an adult? And Alfred just let Wayne Manor go to **** like that?

You just can't convince me that this is the decision of a man who has thought things through thoroughly. And what does he mean "I think"? Either it is or it isn't.

 

[Rwtakawalter]

Excellent post.

Found this on another website. Snyders reply on Vero to a person asking him why Wayne Manor was in the state it was in in BvS and Bruce was living in the lakehouse.

"I think his father commissioned the lakehouse as a gift to his mother a place built by her favorite architect and she loved it when Bruce turned 18 he moved in he ordered Wayne Manor be left to decompose"

I just can't with this guy, I'm sorry. So Bruce didn't even ever live in Wayne Manor as an adult? And Alfred just let Wayne Manor go to **** like that?

You just can't convince me that this is the decision of a man who has thought things through thoroughly. And what does he mean "I think"? Either it is or it isn't.

Exactly. There never was any planning to this cinematic universe and it feels like Snyder's just making up **** as he goes along. Bruce would never just let Wayne manor turn into a ****hole like that.

 

[idiot09]

I struggle to find any empathy for all these Snyder fans that agreed, followed, and defended the production team to run a muck with the DC properties that ends in an embarrassing box office run! Yet those people want more of what isn't working! And we are telling them it isn't working. And yet they seem to not care about the repercussions of making a film inaccessible in order to see their superheroes bad-ass, always serious, and characteristically different. There are some who even would rather see the IP run into the ground--than for it to be pleasing for children or older folks of a simpler time.
.

Its not that complicated. I want a film that I personally derive a lot of entertainment and happiness from. I want to see the characters I love treated with respect. Filmmaking is an art and a craft, and I want to see something that adds value. These things are all subjective ofcourse, and if one gets/wants all these things from a movie, whats wrong in that? I much prefer it to a homogenized 2hr popcorn flicks, just because it brings in more masses. I dont have any support for a commercial entity like WB. I have support for the characters and the filmmakers. I dont care if the DCEU is successful, if it doesnt strive to make great films. Their financial or critical success means jack **** to me. I want great movies. So far 3/5 have satisfied me with their ambition and execution. If more movies do, then great! Its not a competition for me that I have any personal stakes in that I will cry because the "other team" is more popular. I dont give two ****s about that. I just care about the characters and the films. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Edit : And about the Wayne Manor thing....yeah that's what I expected happened. Bruce Wayne moving away from the Manor makes perfect sense to me thematically and character wise. Also this is head-canon stuff. None of this is specified in the film, so it can be changed etc. These are stuff creators think about while designing the story and characters, so it makes sense that Zack is just spitballing, cause these things are not set in stone.

 

[Micromind]

We all know that in JL, Snyder filmed that scene where Alfred and Bruce are discussing how to convert Wayne Manor into JL headquarters, which would have indicated renewed hope for Bruce Wayne.

This was a sign that both Batman and Bruce Wayne had found hope, a new life.

Edit: I think Snyder purposefully refrained from using Wayne Manor in BvS, as The Batman movie's director can have creative freedom to use it as they want to in their story and they won't be bogged down by what was shown in BvS and JL movie.

 

[kguillou]

Its not that complicated. I want a film that I personally derive a lot of entertainment and happiness from. I want to see the characters I love treated with respect. Filmmaking is an art and a craft, and I want to see something that adds value. These things are all subjective ofcourse, and if one gets/wants all these things from a movie, whats wrong in that? I much prefer it to a homogenized 2hr popcorn flicks, just because it brings in more masses. I dont have any support for a commercial entity like WB. I have support for the characters and the filmmakers. I dont care if the DCEU is successful, if it doesnt strive to make great films. Their financial or critical success means jack **** to me. I want great movies. So far 3/5 have satisfied me with their ambition and execution. If more movies do, then great! Its not a competition for me that I have any personal stakes in that I will cry because the "other team" is more popular. I dont give two ****s about that. I just care about the characters and the films. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Edit : And about the Wayne Manor thing....yeah that's what I expected happened. Bruce Wayne moving away from the Manor makes perfect sense to me thematically and character wise. Also this is head-canon stuff. None of this is specified in the film, so it can be changed etc. These are stuff creators think about while designing the story and characters, so it makes sense that Zack is just spitballing, cause these things are not set in stone.

I'm not gonna lie, I want the movies to be successful, just like any movie in general I enjoy, and yet theres a part of me that has grown cynical of this Hollywood system and how they compromise these films that once had an artistic direction attached to them.

For example, look what happened with Burton in 90s with Batman. After people complained about Batman Returns' tone they got rid of him and completely went in the opposite direction ruining Batman for a decade. Look what happened to Sam Raimi, the guy made arguably to this day one of the best superhero films ever made and how did they reward him? By taking Spiderman 3 away from him and forced him to make something he didnt want to make. And in both of my examples, these decisions were made because these were wildly successful films that had now become a part of a committee of producers and execs running the show instead of the director. Before anyone says it, YES, I understand 100% its a business and these IPs are precious to the studio that technically owns them and they technically have to do what they gotta do to appeal to the masses. I think in Burton's case for example, McDonalds withdrew their endorsement deal with the movie because it wasnt kid friendly so obviously the studio felt pressured to make changes. Not unlike what happened with MoS, BvS and JL.

Which is maybe why part of me is happy that DC has remained the underdog on the movie side. It was cool getting to see....something different, something alternative, somethinf elseworld's that normally no studio would dare to do with these IPs and in wake of BvS' reception and JL's failure probably never will again, but it was nice to at least see an attempt to make something against the grain.

 

[Aurakles]

I don't care if films are popular or financially successful, I care about whether I like them. I don't like the fast and the furious films, no matter how financially successful or popular they are, I don't like them.
I don't like DC as if it's a football team that I support no matter what, I like some of their stories and I dislike others, I don't want them churning out product just for the sake of it.

I would prefer one DC film that I liked, over twenty DC films I didn't like, because I'm not supporting a brand, I'm supporting storytelling I enjoy.

So if BVS, a film I liked, killed of a cinematic universe that would have been like fast and the furious (as in successful but I don't like it, not suggesting it be car themed) then I'm fine with that. Because I wouldn’t have liked that universe.

There are plenty of successful franchises I don't like, but obviously I have no interest in them. I'd rather the DCEU not be one of them.
I'm not trying to put down any of those franchises, or say that the DCEU is objectively better than any of them, simply that I don't like them.

So yes, I want more of these films, even if they aren't successful or popular, because those are the films I like. I don't go to the cinema to support the industry, or a company, but to see films I like.

I'm in a minority and pandering to me would be bad for business, so if we're talking about how to make WB the most money, absolutely Snyder was the wrong man for the job. But if we're looking at making films that we enjoy, I'll stand by Snyder, because he made films I enjoy.

Is it realistic to expect people to say, I love these movies, I hope they stop making them?

 

[Consona]

I don't care if films are popular or financially successful, I care about whether I like them. I don't like the fast and the furious films, no matter how financially successful or popular they are, I don't like them.
I don't like DC as if it's a football team that I support no matter what, I like some of their stories and I dislike others, I don't want them churning out product just for the sake of it.

I would prefer one DC film that I liked, over twenty DC films I didn't like, because I'm not supporting a brand, I'm supporting storytelling I enjoy.

So if BVS, a film I liked, killed of a cinematic universe that would have been like fast and the furious (as in successful but I don't like it, not suggesting it be car themed) then I'm fine with that. Because I wouldn’t have liked that universe.

There are plenty of successful franchises I don't like, but obviously I have no interest in them. I'd rather the DCEU not be one of them.
I'm not trying to put down any of those franchises, or say that the DCEU is objectively better than any of them, simply that I don't like them.

So yes, I want more of these films, even if they aren't successful or popular, because those are the films I like. I don't go to the cinema to support the industry, or a company, but to see films I like.

I'm in a minority and pandering to me would be bad for business, so if we're talking about how to make WB the most money, absolutely Snyder was the wrong man for the job. But if we're looking at making films that we enjoy, I'll stand by Snyder, because he made films I enjoy.

Is it realistic to expect people to say, I love these movies, I hope they stop making them?

Are you my lost twin or what? t:

 

[idiot09]

I'm not gonna lie, I want the movies to be successful, just like any movie in general I enjoy, and yet theres a part of me that has grown cynical of this Hollywood system and how they compromise these films that once had an artistic direction attached to them.

Absolutely. For example, I love Blade Runner 2049. But it didnt do well BO wise. But I wouldnt change a thing in it just so the "masses can like it". Its a movie, its a work of art, made by hours of work of many creators. I dont care about hollywood cynicism and second guessing audience tastes to focus group a movie...I would take one ****ing masterpiece over a trilogy of mediocrity.

I don't care if films are popular or financially successful, I care about whether I like them. I don't like the fast and the furious films, no matter how financially successful or popular they are, I don't like them.
I don't like DC as if it's a football team that I support no matter what, I like some of their stories and I dislike others, I don't want them churning out product just for the sake of it.

I would prefer one DC film that I liked, over twenty DC films I didn't like, because I'm not supporting a brand, I'm supporting storytelling I enjoy.

So if BVS, a film I liked, killed of a cinematic universe that would have been like fast and the furious (as in successful but I don't like it, not suggesting it be car themed) then I'm fine with that. Because I wouldn’t have liked that universe.

There are plenty of successful franchises I don't like, but obviously I have no interest in them. I'd rather the DCEU not be one of them.
I'm not trying to put down any of those franchises, or say that the DCEU is objectively better than any of them, simply that I don't like them.

So yes, I want more of these films, even if they aren't successful or popular, because those are the films I like. I don't go to the cinema to support the industry, or a company, but to see films I like.

I'm in a minority and pandering to me would be bad for business, so if we're talking about how to make WB the most money, absolutely Snyder was the wrong man for the job. But if we're looking at making films that we enjoy, I'll stand by Snyder, because he made films I enjoy.

Is it realistic to expect people to say, I love these movies, I hope they stop making them?

Agreed 100%.

 

[Spider-Fan]

In an ideal world, people want a movie they A - Like and B - Others like. It's more fun when people share your enthusiasm, right? But, if it comes down to one or the other, I prefer movies I like. I'll use the example of TDKR. Many people like it. I do not. I have no desires to rewatch it or anything. I am glad people get satisfaction out of that movie, but how does the satisfaction of others help me when I sit down to watch it? It doesn't. Conversely, many hated TLJ. I loved it. Yeah, it sometimes sucks when I get into the same debates in the Star Wars forum all the time, but when I sit down to watch it, I enjoy it. It brings me joy. I prefer to have that joy myself. After all, I only experience life through my own eyes. But again, having both is nice (I'm more of a Marvel guy, so I am spoiled in that regard, LOL).

As for Snyder, I don't think he is dumb. I just think he expresses himself in off putting ways to some and cannot illustrate what is in his head as easily as others. Sometimes I have to ramble for like 10 minutes before I can simplify what I am thinking, as well. It's just how some people are. In my case it's not a dyslexia thing (I don't have any issues like that), it's that my brain moves a mile a minute and it sometimes is hard to get a narrow focus.

 

[Tra-El]

What I liked about Snyder was how his films challenged my sense of taste in how my gut reacted to certain things. The tell all; be all to whether or not you enjoyed a movie is at moments end. For Snyder films, I couldn't pinpoint things. In Man of Steel and BvS, for instance, each viewing of those movies I literally felt my taste changing. My gut felt different every time. I like that feeling of discovering something new with certain films and Zack personally brought that to my experience. One I can appreciate as someone choosing to sit in front of a screen for a few hours getting lost in fantasy land. That's what I look for as a fan of these movies and especially these characters.

Not to bag on films that I was harsh on, but movies like Superman Returns left me with great disappointment to the point of boredom. It felt like I've seen this song and dance before and I couldn't help but push against that. Same with 95% of Marvel films. It felt, to me, like I was watching the same film over and over again. The films are entertaining, mind you, but it left me no pleasure in wanting more after the fact. Justice League left me that way. Instead of ending on a note to explore, they basically went in the most basic cookie-cutter direction where it left the heroes up for the next interpretation as a clean slate. There was no feeling of what's next rather than "that's it?" I hope that sense of wonder can return sooner rather than later. I'll keep my glass half full with the DCEU but the entire JL circumstance up to this point has left the glass with less Koolaid.

It's hard to explain but that's my drift.

 

[Aurakles]

Are you my lost twin or what? t:

Comics and TV have taught me that long lost twins are almost always evil...