Why do critics hate him?

Why do critics hate him?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=7p5-14rjWUM
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Because they're nu-males. They just don't understand.

Because now that Michael Bay is actually trying to make something resembling actual movies (failing, but trying), critics need someone new to pick on.

because he's a stupid hack

because he is all style, no substance

>gets booed at San Diego Comicon

Damn that must have made Snyder feel like shit.

I reject your premise, OP. The critics Warner Bros pays off to give positive reviews love him.

Fear.

...

Because he does not give a shit about them and does what he wants to, and creates films that are heads above most made today, inthis age of depravity. he is one of the only filmmakers who has the integrity and vision to do what he wants and to not succumb to bullshit.

BTW Mos, Watchmen, SuckerPunch and BvS are masterpieces,, and DC should STOP EDITING THEIR FUCKING MOVIES and let the directors do their own thing.

They should give Zack full control over every movie in the DCEU. Would have been amazing.

The dream sequences for every character would've been amazing, shame we only saw two.

This, he doesn't deserve a cinematographer as good as he has.

They're scared of all the test.

I would not go so far as to say zack snyder has a style. His cinematographers have a style, but there's no evidence zack has any real input or influence upon them.

HE DIDNT GET BOOED. He just wast cheered.

Correct. He didn't get boo'ed. Because people who boo/heckle are ejected from comicon.

...

>Blackhat 5/5

Not seeing the problem there.

Hey Charles

because he is literally the part of Sup Forums without the sjw.

>you will never get rid of cancer like charles from this board because they bring in all the ad bucks

I'm not charles

Michael Bay has no delusions about what he's doing, he's fully aware he's making retarded action movies for 13 year old boys

Zack Snyder thinks he's some kind of auteur giving credibility to capeshit and thinks depth=huge amounts of hamfisted Jesus imagery

Because he's an objectivist.

When is Jesus imagery deep?

The answer isn't never, so think about it a bit before you reply.

2deep4 them. People think that he has all style and no substance but his style is his substance. It's too subtle for them and when they are told about it latter, they dismiss it because they couldn't see it for himself. Snyder doesn't tell his stories through words but with imagery. When the newer generation grow up they will realize that Snyder was a head of his time. True Capekino.

youtube.com/watch?v=7p5-14rjWUM

I totally agree.

Sorry nigger. If someone has to write a book report to understand your movie then you failed at making a movie.

Snyder is as deep as fucking puddle and if he really wants to make movies with depth and substance, maybe he should stop hiding them under 200 million dollars worth of explode-a-porn.

Blatant metaphors if they even have meaning, overly focused on things that are called back later, and a shit fucking ton of shit that looks like it has meaning, but youre not quite sure what, and when asked about it in interviews he'd respond "i just thought itd look cool"

basically his movies waste your time with meaningless shit.

You ever thought about how shitty it would be if directors pedantically explained every last element of their films and left nothing there for the viewer to interpret?

Not all critics. But it's mostly because he doesn't fit the narrative.

I'd actually be really interested in seeing a indie movie by Snyder.

>movies must be made for my retard attention span

Synder movies are for people who actually like films. you can always watch jackass

Because he was supposed to be a normal music video and TV commercials director but his rat faced women promoted him to a higher job not knowing that he was the embodiment of the word Hack. And it feels bad man

Ever thought about how the reason most directors never explain anything is because what they meant is usually less interesting than what people are coming up with? Especially if they didn't mean much at all and just threw shit together?

or how everyone goes through a phase where everything they encounter must have some deeper meaning and they'll struggle to explain it, even if there is no deeper meaning at all?

That phase would be roughly 30 years in my past at this point, mate. When I spot things, trust me - they're there. Ask me why Batman seeing the building fall in BvS is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of what his character arc represents, or better yet, tell me if you can spot an allegory there.

>Hack
Why is he considered a hack? Doesn't Snyder always achieve what he tries to accomplish?

>DC fan confesses to being 40+ years old
So you're retarded. That's wonderful.

Watch me respond to you with no rancor at all. I'm retired, I have insomnia, and haven't read any comics in roughly 20 years.

Now do try to at least argue like an adult. You'd be amazed at what you can discover from a rational exchange. Hell, you might even learn something in the process.

Or, you can continue to act like a moron. Entirely up to you.

>argue like an adult
>about super hero movies

The target audience is 12-17 year old boys.

christian symbolism in jewywood

And who do you think fables and myths were aimed at? You think there's an expiration date on stories?

I think believing a literal drooling retard is making high art film that just so happens to be cleverly disguised as ultra-high-budget hollywood blockbuster explosion porn is a bit on the "gibbering to yourself in the street while wearing a diaper made of newspaper" side of delusional.

Not him but what about this shit makes you try so hard? It's fucking superhero movies you spaz

OK, this one's for free:

What's the one thing everyone knows about the Batman?

bad movies? sure.

9/11 XD

he doesn't kill people

And? You're on the right track, but dig a little deeper. Over the course of the movie he does all of the following:

>tortures
>engages in, to his mind, justifiable homicide
>lies about the threat of a dirty bomb
>justifies his "war" with Superman based solely off him being alien and off what he *might* do

Sound like anything in particular?

Why are they considered bad?

he doesn't use guns

Not his fault most critics are glasses wearing numales raised by single mothers

Correct. And a lot of fans were reaaaaally not happy about the fact that he was shown doing so,

Now link that with and see if you can find any sort of statement being made there.

He literally used guns in every live action adaptation

he's suppose to be smart

Hes the world's greatest detective.

okay, so you're acting as if hamfisted 9/11 allegory and having batman act as the stand-in for the bush administration is somehow not totally obvious nor stupid.

So how do superman's actions relate to radical islam?

Same guy here, I'm finally starting to doze off, but long story short: his arc is an allegory for post-911 America. If that's what he represents in the film, what does that make Superman? What about Lex?

Food for thought until the next time I can't sleep.

>a disabled guy send back all your pay checks
>he gets a new expensive high-tech wheelchair somehow
>there was a bomb in the wheelchair
>one person who was absent in the court was a sleezy rich guy

Hmm...
Hmmmmm...
HMMMMMMMMMMM...
Nope, I got nothing.

He's not the radical side. He's the silent "good Muslim" community. The message isn't nearly so simple as Bush = bad, Islam dindu nuffin.

He's saying that remaining largely silent and thinking they can just keep on keeping on isn't going to cut it. At some point, they need to step up to the plate and define themselves, and if worse comes to worse, pick up the spear and kill the monster(radical Islam) themselves, otherwise, the ultra-rich will just keep painting them as the boogeyman for their own selfish interests(Lex).

Good night.

Cinematographers just light the shot and choose the stock. Snyder decides camera movement, framing, and blocking.

though i think the point they were trying to make that this batman isn't the smart, rational batman we know.

this was about his anger blinding him and making him do stupid shit including killing

>good night

Dude, you're fucking stupid. You're literally injecting your idiotic political beliefs onto explosion porn made for children.

Why do teenagers hate him?

>there's no evidence [the director] has any real input or influence upon [his cinematographers].

FUCK

If I had to hazard a guess, because hes literally god and all he does is look sad/constipated and mope around.

Deluded middle-aged man. Wearing cape and underwear in midnight to find justice. But those are meant for children so I guess that's okay.

hes superman. what is he supposed to go bar hopping?

Reminder that Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen are objectively great films and nothing can change this objective fact.

>hes not the smart rational batman we know
>until we need him to formulate a plan that would allow him to kill superman, then hes a fucking genius

Inconsistency? In a zack snyder movie? My word.

"People hate what they don't understand." -Martha

notice Sup Forums only has discussions about the filmmaking process of DC movies, never marvel.

that would be like critiqueing a Michael Bay movie

probably because, at the end of the day, most marvel movies are competent when it goes to the very process and execution. whether the plots themselves are good, that's another story.

> "Character in movie said it so it must be true" -user

>"I can't into references" - user

Any time someone tries to say a movie/show is brilliant (and its actually shit), the filmmaking process comes into discussion.

No one tries to say marvel is brilliant.

that's the point, that's what he was angry about,he wasn't looking at the big picture or anything else, his anger had blinded him so that's all he cared about was ending superman. he didn't stop to look or think about anything else.

>footloose and dance-off scene in GOTG

yeah no

but then again, on many occasions we can see batman being smart and totally in control of himself.
the script is just all over the place.

yeah they always say it wasnt suppised to be a serious movie but just a flick, a fun movie.

>I MUST END SUPERMAN
>I'll have him throw me around the abandoned gotham docks for 7 minutes in very specific directions before luring him to the exact place where I've hidden any sort of weapon that can actually harm him

Like I'm saying, belligerent until he somehow needs to know/anticipate the exact trajectories superman will throw him. Not even mentioning the fact superman throws him at all.

just checking something

Goddamnit, he's gonnna look even more disarmingly handsome if he ever goes fully bald. right now his face is sidelined by the hair, but once that goes away people will be stunned by his face.

...

Rogue Gallery

that's it, it's his most popular shtick

Because his movies are self serious,they are not as deep as the 2deep4u cucks make it out to be, everything is pretty much on the audience's face.He and his fans think that he is some kind of auteur.His movies were never ambiguous.But he has a great style I mean if you compare Civil war and BVS visually, BVS definately looks way better than Civil war(In terms of it's epic-ness and iconic sequences).I don't watch capeshits a lot but Marvel does it better because they understand the spirit of comic books(just like Tim burton and Raimi did) and don't sink themselves in too much self-importance.Also,
>unironically discussing capeshits

>But he has a great style
no, his cinematographers have a great style.