Bring your complaints, I will answer them, but 99% of your issues can be countered by one argument, and anyone who has seen the new trailer will know that (unless they're very dumb). Actual discussion will be answered, meme spamming will be ignored.
Executive meddling forcing Snyder to cut out half an hour of plot and character development to make room for Justice League setup. They did this because they want to catch up to the Marvel movies and tried to do in one movie, what Marvel did in 5.
Other urls found in this thread:
collider.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
How about I just thought the dialogue and choreography was shit, you fucking memer?
Opinions =/= movie flaws.
Ben Affleck is hot
why did they release a theatrical version they knew was so flawed it would require another edit to make sense?
the movie is a joyless bore
What's up with the future Batman fight, why was the choreography so bad there but when he fights thugs in the warehouse it was pretty good?
How can you defend a minute of a Piss Jar being portrayed as anything other than comically juvenile in a movie attempting to be a mature and grown-up take on the superhero mythos?
Like I said, because they wanted to catch up to Marvel and not take years doing it. WB made a very poor decision to rush the team movie.
You do realize the future Batman fight is in the future, right? As in, he's older and lacks the resources he used to have. Alfred was remarking he was getting old in BvS, so why do you think an even older Batman would be as physically capable?
Luthor was petty and childish, raised by a psychopath and possessing limitless resources, why were you expecting maturity? You have to realize, that was not Lex, that was his son.
You can thank the Nolanbat movies for that, dark and super serious made money and was critically acclaimed. Once again Batman proves to be a detriment to DC.
Those movie are not as dark as you remember. Realistic yes, but they had quips and humor as well.
"IM NOT WEARING HOCKEY PADS"
"YOU'RE A BIG GUY" "FOR YOU"
"SWEAR TO MEEEEEEEE"
"Sonar? Just like a -" "Submarine, Mr. Wayne. A Submarine."
"SO THATS WHAT THAT FEELS LIKE"
"My father told me not to get into cars with Stange men.." "THIS ISNT A CAR"
>As in, he's older and lacks the resources he used to have.
Batman being old is one thing, punches that don't connect and dudes standing around waiting to get beat on looks bad no matter what
I know, they weren't 100% dark, but can you imagine a Superman movie with the same tone and writing style? It would be shit. That's another of BvS's problems, they tried to adapt a Batman comic into a Superman movie.
Why is Superman still not happy?
>Luthor was petty and childish, raised by a psychopath and possessing limitless resources, why were you expecting maturity?
The issue isn't why Luthor put the piss jar there, that was abundantly clear. The issue is that Snyder and co. thought a piss joke fit tonally with the dark mature movie they were trying to make.
Why does a movie that's trying to pass itself off as ultra-serious and dark have action and writing that's so over-the-top goofy and melodramatic that it's impossible to take seriously?
>punches that didn't connect
>waiting to get beat
I rewatched that scene 10 seconds ago just for you, and that never happened.
Luther's plan to discredit Superman was retarded. A cursory examination of the situation reveals that Superman didn't start the conflict (and certainly didn't shoot anyone) ore even do anything outside of saving an American journalist. Also Louis' subplot of tracing super special unique bullets was pointless filler that could have been removed.
Snyder knew he couldn't do a 3 hour movie. So why didn't he cut it right to fit 2h30 (which is a shitload of time for a blockbuster already)?
It's his fault. The 3 hour cut was always intended for an extended cut to sell more blu-ray copies.
>“It was in there until very recently, so all of it’s finished. It was really just a function of time, to be honest. Because the movie’s long now, long-ish—I don’t think it’s long, but when you get over two and a half hours the studio starts getting nervous. I’m not JamesCameron who’s like ‘No it’s three hours, suck it!’, which is cool by the way. I just wanted to try and get it to a length that is work-able.”
collider.com
If he can't tell a coherent story in a 2h30 long movie, with the right material to do so, then he's still a fucking shitty director.
What was the point of Doomsday?
opinion =/= good movie
>but 99% of your issues can be countered by one argument, and anyone who has seen the new trailer will know that
The film's cinematographer flat out said anyone who hated the theatrical cut will still hate the extended edition, so no, the film won't magically be better because it's now three hours long.
>defending a movie by directing people to an edit that hasn't even come out yet
As a fan of BvS I fully agree with you. The only reason for them not trying to shoot him would be that hes wanted alive but yes there's a few soldiers that just walk to get beat on.
Theres a guy that literally takes two steps them drops to his knee for seemingly no reason other than Batman turned towards him. Now you can say that he was scared of actually facing Batman but that doesn't hit the audience immediately and for the part that it's in just looks odd
The piss in the jar I don't think is made to be funny to the audience nor is it to be a quip to the character it's Lex being a petty bitch amd don't see what's wrong with it.
As for the series tone "clashing" with the action , I don't see a real problem. I think it may just be a matter of taste. How would you fix the action to accommodate for the tone of the movie?
People don't work like that. It's a big mess that will cause people to freak out and either ignore or intentionally hide facts to justify thier position on things. If this actually happened the headline would read in large font SUPERMAN went to a warzone to save the life of a reporting causing a FALLOUT OF CIVILIAN LIVES!
To kill Superman cause Lex wants Superman dead.
was Sup Forums right?
>The piss in the jar I don't think is made to be funny
Well, it is. In fact, if it were intentional, I'd praise Snyder for his masterful comedic direction. It really has a perfect setup, buildup, and punchline, the whole courthouse scene.
See I never saw it as a joke. Luthor was basically mocking her and wanted her to know who killed her.
Just what about the action was goofy to you? As for the writing, again, too much Batwank going on at DC. Try to read the rest of the thread before you post.
>I will now defend this movie
>The movie sucked but it was due to the executives
So, are you defending BvS or what-could-have-been-BvS? Because I can start talking about millions of things this movie did bad and, by your post, I can assume you'll just say "oh, but that's gonna be explained in the DVD version" or "it was the executive producers fault", therefore NOT defending the movie itself as a cinematic production, but defending its potential.
Sorry to say this to you, but the movie was released, and it was bad. Maybe a 6.5/10. You can analize whatever you want outside the movie, start making assumptions, imagine what you think Snyder thought, but that will not change the objective truth: it was bad.
Now, if you really want to talk about the movie itself, I would like to know your opinion on why was Lois Lane such a Deus ex Machina character, always being where she needed to be with no logical explanation, doing stupid shit, and being just a pawn, moving where Snyder wanted her.
And please, I beg you, tell me: why was it necesary to kill Bruce's parents, again, in slow motion, adding very long minutes of useless filler to a movie that had to cut (apparently) big parts of mayor plot due to its long duration? "Introduce the character", its common knowledge what happened to Batman's parents. It's like having to explain that he doesn't have any powers. "It was a cool shot, loyal to the comic". Doesn't compensates the screen time it takes. "It shows us Bruce's mother name was Martha". Again, could've shown it in the graveyard and use those minutes in something more important.
>i dont enjoy this movie therefore its a joyless bore
you sure you're not talking about yourself there?
Anyone have one of these for Green Lantern?
That was never the plan. The plan was to make people think Superman's arrival sparked the violence and caused people to die.
Read the OP. Executive meddling.
Doomsday had two purposes. One, to challenge Superman as a messianic figure, because Luthor's worldview cannot tolerate an all-powerful, all-good force, because no one saved him from Lex. Second, he was Luthor's plan to prepare for Darkseid, because he knew he was coming.
It was only bad because WB couldn't let the writer and director have full control as they should. And that's not an opinion.
I'm not reading all that.
I'm not saying it wasn't bad, I'm saying that it was forced to be bad, and Sup Forums keeps blaming the wrong people.
I should have pointed out that the person who wrote this post and the person who wrote this one are the same and NOT OP. Sorry to hijack the thread OP but one thing lead to another and I fell into the trap of defending this movie>
I see your point and like we're you took that scene I just don't think it was the "haha" humor that whoever complained about it seemed to take it as.
>I'm not reading all that.
I don't blame you.
>People don't work like that. It's a big mess that will cause people to freak out and either ignore or intentionally hide facts to justify thier position on things. If this actually happened the headline would read in large font SUPERMAN went to a warzone to save the life of a reporting causing a FALLOUT OF CIVILIAN LIVES!
While I understand that I wish it had actually been explored. It was brought up three or four times but the actual implications of Superman acting on foreign soil and him trying to defend himself or otherwise deal with accusations from the public could have been interesting. Instead most of the "Superman is bad" attitude came from the MoS fallout that Luther had no part in. It feels really unnecessary and poorly developed.
>I never saw it as a joke. Luthor was basically mocking her and wanted her to know who killed her.
Luthor's reasoning makes sense, it's juvenile nature of a jar of piss that is incongruous with the otherwise mature tone of the film. I guess at this point we just fundamentally disagree about whether or not jars of piss are juvenile.
how do you enjoy pretentious shlock unless your 16?
>...but can you imagine a Superman movie with the same tone and writing style?
Yes. Yes I can.
>It would be shit.
Oh, it was.
Not really, because Luthor was a juvenile character. FOR HIM, it fit.
You're not defending the movie, you're defending Zack Snyder.
Which is irrelevant, since regardless of fault, the movie still sucked. It had way too many contrived situations for the sake of having them instead of putting forth a good movie.
And now, even though most of the problems of the movie is having too much bullshit:
>piss jar
>"Martha" instead of "mom"
>a 4 minute scene of a guy vandalising a statue
>Luthor having a billion and one reasons to hate superman and behaving like the riddler
>too long of a courtroom scene
>finger-print scanners to hold an alien ship that then works on voice-commands despite acknowledging that it's an alien inside the ship and not its native species)
>a plot about a bullet that leads nowhere to the characters
>shit actor direction (almost every actor here is giving one of their least interesting performances, with the exception of Adams and Affleck, I guess).
You're already PREEMPTIVELY defending a version movie that's gonna ADD even more stuff? I get that some of it will provide context, but most of these are bad ideas and implementations regardless of context.
I get that you want it to be a good movie. So did I. But it wasn't. And no amount of BTS excuses makes up for it.
Thank you for making my point. Nolan is the cancer that's killing the DC movies.
I wish, but the only reason someone typed this up is because of how butthurt people recently are at Marvel's success.
>That was never the plan. The plan was to make people think Superman's arrival sparked the violence and caused people to die.
But why was that his plan? Superman already had people mad about MoS and of being some kind of master plan it didn't mean anything to the overall plot other than giving Louis something to eat up screen time doing.
You're assuming the stuff it will add won't fix all that. And the bullet led Lois to Luthor. As for "save Martha" yeah it's slightly odd he wouldn't say mom, but Batman already showed he didn't care to listen, as will be established in the extended cut in Clark's investigation of Batman in Gotham. Hearing his mother's name is what made Batman stop fighting and listen, and when he realized superman cared more for a human life than his own, it eased Batman's paranoia.
No he isn't, it's Warner Bros incompetence and thinking "Batman's tone on everything = Success".
Luthor was Juvenile and it fits with his character.
The movie is not and it idoesn't fit with that. If Deadpool had a similar scene it would be par for the course, hell it would probably be to high-brow. BvS is trying to be a serious mature film and throwing piss jokes in is a bizzare choice.
I have no problems with the Luthor Eisenberg played putting piss on a senators desk before blowing them up but I don't understand why the people involved in making BvS thought that direction fit with the rest of the movie.
To turn public opinion against Superman so he could get what he wanted to make anti-Superman/Darkseid weapons, and again, because he couldn't tolerate the idea of an all good all powerful force. How did you not pick that up the very first time you saw the movie?
>"My father told me not to get into cars with Stange men.." "THIS ISNT A CAR"
Cracks me up everytime
And they think that because of the Nolan movies. I know it's hard to accept that Batman and Nolan are shit and killing DC, but we'll get there together user.
Maybe because I have the ability to enjoy something without constant reassurance from dweebs on image boards that the thing I'm liking is peer approved, you dip
Pretentiousness has nothing to do with it, it's called "having fun" you ought to try it sometime
>inb4 DCcuck
Marvel's movies are fun too, i know big shocker you don't have to suck the cock of one publisher exclusively
>And the bullet led Lois to Luthor
but none of what Louis did matters, all it established was that Louis could do investigative journalism and that Luthor had some involvement with the opening scene. Luthor then just kidnaps her when she's useful for him completely outside of her investigations and nothing she does matters
Because they tried to depict Superman in a realistic world that would react to him in a believable manner. Believe it or not, the Supergirl TV show illustrated this perfectly. Cat Grant told Kara that Superman didn't start off trying to stop natural disasters, he got cats out of trees and stopped little old ladies from getting hit by cars, he paced himself. BvS Superman didn't have that luxury.
But those "wrong people" have precedents. Why would i not blame Snyder if the movie suffers from the same mistakes and unusual stylistic choices that you can find in pretty much all Snyder movies?
Why can't we just have an animated cinematic universe? Get a animated Batman movie in theatres, followed up by Superman, maybe a Green Lantern movie and relaunch the Green Lantern tv show as a tie in to show off Hal Jordan and the rest of the corps. Have a Flash movie, get Wonder Woman introduced in a Justice League movie, have Silas Stone and Star Labs introduced in the Flash movie to help set up Cyborg for later on.
Or all of this is a shit idea and I should stop thinking.
I'm not a company cocksucker, Nolan's films are by far and away the best superhero cinema ever made, the DCEU is stupid and boring and un-fun as you can possibly get.
People were already mad about Superman and none of that plan ended up mattering because he just smuggled the kryptonite in after blowing up a courthouse.
> he couldn't tolerate the idea of an all good all powerful force. How did you not pick that up the very first time you saw the movie?
Oh I know why Luthor hates Superman, he explains his thirteen year old level atheism quite explicitly, his plan is just dumb though
Ehh I That particular part of human knee jerk reaction was left out yeah. But the montage of Superman doing Superman stuff with the different news cast audio playing really hit home for me especially the line that talks about a paradigm shift.
One of my favorite things about DC is how they mostly avoid any current political views or trends and and have the hero focus on things that humanity simply can't deal with or problems that are timelessly human like Superman Peace on Earth did.
So, even though Nolan films are fine and worked well for batman films, it's their faults the execs are greedy morons and try to copy them, not the fault of the execs'?
The defense force for this movie is incredible and I don't really understand it.
Nobody tries to defend Iron Man 2, TASM 2, Thor 2, The Last Stand and other garbage movies like this. Even if some do, they're a very small minority and if people like those movies they usually admit they weren't that good. Why does BvS have so many autists that insist it's a misunderstood masterpiece and the best capeshit of the 21st century? Why can't you say you enjoyed the movie but admit it had flaws and people have legitimate reasons for not liking it? Hell, I liked X-Men Apocalypse but I'll admit it's not a very good movie and I understand why many people trash it.
>"Martha" instead of "mom"
Why that bothers you?
Because if this movie is a failure it means Marvel and everything it stands for has won.
because people are extremely mad that Marvel won.
...
>Marvel and everything it stands for
...properly made movies?
art is subjective, there's no 'proper' way to make it
Yeah, but having a coherent plot would be a start
I just wanted to add for this that Superman is not yet done his multi-movie arc to become that bright symbol of hope. We still have the Justice League movies before we get the more joyful parts to this new Superman trilogy they're going to be making for this new movieverse.
>If he can't tell a coherent story in a 2h30 long movie, with the right material to do so, then he's still a fucking shitty director.
poorly
Because people who hated it will refuse to give it a chance
omfg it was not meant to be funny....
what the fuck is wrong with your synapses?
>stupid and boring and as un-fun as you can get
>Thor exists
Opinion discredited and discarded
Snyder put great effort into creating a universe where Superman can't be happy.
pathetic....
>Sup Forums
>right
>ever
No.
Except for the fact Luthor went to jail at the end.
>"But Doomday"
I could talk my way out of jail based on that. Alien tech, too many unknowns, failsafe made a monster, I didn't create it blah blah blah, the bullet put actual human deaths at Luthor's feet.
unless the new cut removes the ignorant shit that existed in the theatrical cut.... it ain't getting any better...
Snyder can go suck a dick for all I care. He killed Jimmy Olsen.
What other Snyder movies? Name them and their mistakes.
I'm sorry but in terms of filmmaking alone, Marvel has outclassed DC completely.
>Better CGI
>tighter scripts
>interesting character arcs
>better sequel setups
>better practical effects
>stronger casts
>better action set pieces
>coherent film editing
>impressive universe building
>consistent tone
>genuinely funny moments
>better and more believable female characters
>well written villains
>understandable character motivations
the only thing DC might have over them is the Film musical Score.
The rest isn't even a competition.
Except people do defend all the movies you just listed, it's like you can't wrap your mind around somebody liking something you don't
at no point did I mention Marvel.
>Westboro Baptist Church signs repurposed to disparage Superman outside of the courthouse
>Superman walking in all solemnly, but while dressed in full superhero costume
>the senator's slow realization and reaction to the jar of piss
>the long, awkward silence
>a guy suddenly exploding as a punchline
>Superman just standing in the flames looking mildly upset as a cherry on top
Everything about that scene was hilarious.
...
>>well written villains
This is the only thing I disagree with you on.
Not one edit of the old "Slowly I turned" bit with Bats and Dupes.
No, only Begins was any good, the other two were boring and/or simply bad.
You've never heard the term "another nail in the coffin" then?
The last Nolan film was just a money grab, everything about it was poorly executed. And yes, not being able to realize that the same tone does not work for every character is their fault.
Because those were just garbage, BvS was forced to be garbage against the wills of the people actually making it.
And the extended cut will have that.
This.
I'll admit this is a fair point, fans will be fans.
But Nolan's Batman films are the epitome of stupid and boring and un-fun. I am very confused by your comment. You're completely contradictory, BvS was a fun, goofy romp compared to Nolan's trilogy of yawns.
I try not to defend it anymore but I fell in this thread. Most of the complaints brought up in this thread actually seem legit and are asking for a defense while being civil so that helps a lot. If it was the same old man of murder, not enough smiling, than I wouldn't give a shit.
As for why people defend BvS and damn near no one defends Marvel movies. Honestly I think it's cause Superman and Batman mean alot more to people than the characters in those films do. It's not secret that Marvel pushed thier B-listers to the moon and with how they did it alot of people are sick of it.
Maybe if Marvel managed to have a recurring villain you'd be right on that point.
>trusting trailers of a snyder movie
it's like you enjoy bringing pain on yourself
>shits on Nolanbats
>loves BvS
Snyderfags are truly something else.
If they didn't learn the first time around, or the second time, or the third time, or the fourth time, what makes you think
>fifth time's the charm
I can enjoy the movie, but Lex Luthor was the biggest piece of shit i've seen in a movie.
And all the fucking autists making it seem like film was 2deep4u only make me feel ashamed of saying i like it irl.
It will never ever ever EVER be on par with DC's best film of ALL TIME, Batman (1966)
Snyder has better photograpfy. Wich doesn't goes past making cool scenes for trailers.
So, you didn't see the trailer then? Because it specifically addresses many common complaints of why Superman was so harsh with Batman, why people blamed Superman for the shooting in Africa, Clark Kent being an investigative reporter...
>There's a good reason it was shitty.
>Therefore it was not shitty.
I... wait what?
>you bring up SUPER HERO movies without restriction of franchise or publisher
>Thor apparently doesn't count
>Marvel apparently doesn't count
>attempting to rephrase your own post because you're effectively retarded
it's okay son we all have those days, maybe get some fresh air and you'll realize what an idiot you've been
yes, Larry Fong does this very well, only real ugly thing about BvS is Doomsday.