re: Zack Snyder-isms: BvS is Man of Steel 2? And More Fun

quote:

---

No preconceived expectations from the general public.

---

This has almost 0 bearing on any character, I don't know why MoS fans constantly bring this up.

And Captain America is nearly the cheesiest major superhero in any comic book. Bringing him to screen was a huge gamble.

quote:

---

Yep, except Joker. Not too risky.

---

The Joker doesn't make this film less risky, because there are 9 other characters no one outside of major comic book nerds or Arrow fans have even heard of, much less know of what they can do.

And I think the value of Joker without Bats is overplayed. SS will have to be pretty great to be successful, I don't think you're going to get a lot of people going to see the film to see the Joker.

quote:

---

This has almost 0 bearing on any character

---

Are you saying that people didn't have expectations that

1. Superman doesn't kill
2. Superman cares more about collateral damage than stopping a bad guy.
3. Pa Kent to be more supportive of Clark's powers
4. Superman to be more colorful

quote:

---

The Joker doesn't make this film less risky, because there are 9 other characters no one outside of major comic book nerds or Arrow fans have even heard of, much less know of what they can do.

And I think the value of Joker without Bats is overplayed. SS will have to be pretty great to be successful, I don't think you're going to get a lot of people going to see the film to see the Joker.

---

He's the original super villain and his last portrayal won an Oscar. Don't give me that Freaux. You know he's going to sell tickets and then some.



ETA: We can go back and forth all day with this shite again. The fact is, Superman is risky right now. He's had two failed attempts. You can say that other movies are more risky, that's fine. Marvel was in a much better position when they released GotG. Their track record is a mile long. WB has to be more selective in what they bring us, IE, You know what hasn't had failed attempts? Joker and Batman.(At least not lately) I don't really know what your deal is with this.

quote:

---

You keep thinking that Superman wasn't extremely successful because of superficial reasons like "Superman wasn't nice enough," or something. That has nothing to do with the overall impression that MoS left behind. It was a bad (read: below average) movie that had no idea what it wanted to be. That's the problem.
We've been through this countless times, Freaux. My statements are not directed at you if you don't feel that one of the reasons Man of Steel failed was because
quote:

quote:

---

"Superman wasn't nice enough," or something.

---

That is the consensus out there whether you agree with it or not. It's one of many issues people had with it.

---

I know they aren't, but you're trying to characterize critiques. Dangerous territory. You're right, however as long as people reduce arguments down to really superficial reasonings, I'll still defend the idea that that approach is wrong. That's constantly shutting down the critique by simplifying arguments to only these terms.

It is an issue, but like I said before, I think most people do a really bad job of actually describing why they don't like something, so they take the easy way out. Funny thing, Superman was fine in the film, he had some missteps that most people wouldn't have liked, but HE was fine. It's the situations around him that didn't help. But like anything, HE is the easy answer.

Secondly, this is mostly apparent here:

quote:

---

No, but the overall reaction is split. "Too dark for Superman", "Superman doesn't kill", "Superman didn't try to save anyone", "Superman was careless", "Pa Kent was an idiot"

---

quote:

---

ETA: There are things about the movie I didn't like. The script, some of the dialogue, some of the story, but overall I loved a lot of things about it.

---

Things like "Pa Kent was an idiot," has everything to do with..... THE SCRIPT. As in his character wasn't logical or consistent. "Too dark" is all about the story (and the cinematography in the literal sense.) But you kind of downplay those things in favor of superficial descriptions to marginalize what other people say and make it easy to disregard. The script, the story, those are real problems for the film that end up creating the specifics of the arguments.

Snyder tends to put his foot in his mouth. I've seen him speak and he can sometimes have trouble getting his thoughts across without a misstep.

His Ant-Man statement is correct. The Superman and Batman characters are on a different level than Ant-Man. He may have gone about it in the wrong way, but he's 100% correct on this. The Ant-Man film was a one-off project that was only on their schedule because it was greenlit prior to Iron Man and any thought of a Marvel movie universe. Even with its success, there are no plans for a sequel. The character is now relegated to being a back-up character in other Marvel films. So, almost literally, it was the flavor of the week (or month, or Summer).

I would defend Snyder as a director but folks in here pretty much have their minds made up about him. For me he's hit and miss. But when he does well we end up with a great film or at least a film that has amazing segments.

I think that the inclusion of Affleck and his ability to have some say in the production, and the addition of Terrio as the writer bode really well for Batman V Superman. I wasn't a fan of Man of Steel, but I'm looking forward to BVS. (Mainly because of Affleck, and the historic significance of THE three iconic superheroes appearing together for the first time.)

quote:

---

I know they aren't, but you're trying to characterize critiques. Dangerous territory.

---

I'm just pointing out things that I've heard and seen countless times. You can point out that the script was bad, and it was. But if Superman would have saved more people, protected the city better, if the movie would have been more colorful, you can still have a shite script. You can still have bad dialogue. You can still have plot holes in the story. These are all individual criticisms. In fact, had Superman been more colorful, careful, whatever, I think people would have looked over some of the other things, like holes, some bad dialogue, etc.

quote:

---

"Too dark" is all about the story

---

The art direction is not ALL about the story in any sense. It's the setting of the story.

quote:

---

As in his character wasn't logical or consistent.

---

He was consistent. He didn't want Clark to use his powers.

It sounds like you're just trying to swing everything into your form of thinking now. It's like you can take anything and say "what it really means is this". Like saying Superman not being more colorful has EVERYTHING to do with the story. C'mon man.

quote:

---

His Ant-Man statement is correct. The Superman and Batman characters are on a different level than Ant-Man. He may have gone about it in the wrong way, but he's 100% correct on this. The Ant-Man film was a one-off project that was only on their schedule because it was greenlit prior to Iron Man and any thought of a Marvel movie universe. Even with its success, there are no plans for a sequel. The character is now relegated to being a back-up character in other Marvel films. So, almost literally, it was the flavor of the week (or month, or Summer).

---

Completely agree. He wasn't disrespecting the film, which I believe he hasn't even seen yet. He was just talking about the character of Ant-Man. But I'll step aside from this discussion, i'm sure it'll turn into a shite show like they always do

quote:

---

His Ant-Man statement is correct. The Superman and Batman characters are on a different level than Ant-Man.

---

Oh of course, that wasn't my point. My point is that DC has Ant-Mans too, and they are going to make those movies as well. We shouldn't be downplaying the smaller, B-Level heroes. They have their place as well.

quote:

---

It'll be promoted using the characters of The Joker, Batman, Harley, as well as it being a Will Smith film.

---

quote:

---

I thought he was relegated to flashbacks and minor minor splashes? Is he assumed to have a big enough role to be used in marketing efforts?

---

They already have. He was in the trailer released after Comic-Con, as well as images of crooks wearing Batman masks. They'd be fools NOT to associate the film with Batman in some way.

People complain when you go with the classic Superman.
People complain when you change him.