I know a lot of Superman fans were pissed when he killed Zod at the end of Man of Steel...

I know a lot of Superman fans were pissed when he killed Zod at the end of Man of Steel. Has their opinion of Snyder softened at all in retrospect, given Batman's massive kill count in BvS? The comparison makes Superman look positively saintly.

No, Snyder laying a small turd in our mouths then following it up a few years later with explosive diarrhea does not improve my opinion of him regarding the former

>itt people that don't read comics

I enjoyed MoS a lot actually. The part with his dad dying was dumb, but I enjoyed the parts that weren't heavy handed jesus symbolism. I honestly thought him killing Zod in the end was handled really well.

BvS sucked absolute and total ass though.

I have no problem with Zod dying or Batman having a kill count because I'm not autistic and they work within the context of the story being told. But most people just want live action Saturday morning cartoons with quips and "fun"

>I enjoyed the parts that weren't heavy handed jesus symbolism.

There is literally one jesus reference in all of MoS, its one single image.

This, frankly

This. I have no problems with different takes on the characters or story elements.

What people don't seem to grasp is that Batman stubbornly adhering to his No-kill-clause, even if it's people who by all means should die. is part of what makes him interesting.
A Batman that kills is just the Punisher if he had more disposable income.

Superman killing Zod is not as big of an issue. But it was handled very poorly and felt unearned, thus souring the experience.

Technically Superman also falls in a cross--like pose.

>Superman fans were pissed when he killed Zod

It's more so that this isn't Superman. When theer are moments for him to stop destruction or civilian fatalities he doesn't cuz he just stands there. I think that's why I don't like this portrayal at all.

And what people don't seem to understand that is, that is the whole point of Batman's story in the movie.

So?
It wasn't exactly a great story.
In fact having a killer-Batman simplified the narrative.
>Huh, we need Batman to want to kill Superman!
>But Batman doesn't kill! We'd need to actually drive him to the edge of reason to get him there. That's hard.
>That's okay, lets just pretend all that already happened and he's basically already killing people on a daily basis.

>they work within the context of the story being told
certainly not within the context of the now established universe in batman's case.
>batman is now fine with killing faceless mooks but the joker is still running loose
>batman's primary motivation is his parents as established in the opening scene of bvs, his traumatic dream sequences involving them, and the martha scene which completely shifts his goals, clearly his parents deaths affected him in a way we are meant to focus very heavily on
>despite this, he is still perfectly fine with killing people, recreating the trauma that he went through with their families, running the risk of creating an evil batman figure bent on revenge and arguably making the situation worse for literally fucking everyone
superman killing zod was whatever, but batman killing people is bullshit in every way
>b-but he's old and doesn't care anymore
fuck you if you make this excuse, it's still shitty writing. if he's old and doesn't care anymore then the joker should be a pile of sludge under the batmobile's tire, and there is no excuse for that kind of monumental oversight besides hot topic merchandise sales.

>It wasn't exactly a great story.
But doesn't make it a bad one. It's also never been done on the big screen before. A Batman that almost an antagonist.
>That's okay, lets just pretend all that already happened and he's basically already killing people on a daily basis.
It happen after the events of Metropolis. That is what that whole opening scene is about.

So if Batman kills people, then why are the Joker and Harley still alive? Especially since the Joker killed Jason Todd in this universe, giving Batman more of a reason to kill this guy.

because the joker and harley quinn make dc mad fucking money. the price of logical and consistent storytelling is not even close to that of hot topic t-shirt sales.

It's also interesting to see an older Batman go through an arc where he becomes almost a supervillain, only to be redeemed at the end.

So you didn't undertand BvS. Thanks for playing.

It never takes long for these threads to turn into "Only plebs don't like these movies, you have to be a smart patrician like me to understand them".

>You just don't GET it
Every DCEU thread. Like clockwork.

That's so easy to explain:
>They were locked up in Arkahm
>They were laying low and not committing crimes
>They were out of Gotham

Batman in BvS largely kills indirectly, via proxy, and usually in self-defense. He wasn't hunting down criminals and executing them one by one on the spot. His methods had become more sadistic and brutal, not just kill kill kill kill.

Not an argument fatboy.

Todd was killed before MoS
Batman doesn't start Killing until after MoS because of all the shit he had to take from 20 years in Gotham and Superman being a "menace" that was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Batman focuses all his time on Superman. Saying that Criminals are not worth his time. And stopping Superman is more important.
Batman stops after BvS.

That's why Joker, Harley and the rest of this villains are still alive.

It's always funny how snyderkeks disregard all the criticism of his movies generally being shit and go "you just h8 because NOT MUH"

talk about ostrich tactics

>>batman's primary motivation is his parents as established in the opening scene of bvs, his traumatic dream sequences involving them, and the martha scene which completely shifts his goals, clearly his parents deaths affected him in a way we are meant to focus very heavily on
>>despite this, he is still perfectly fine with killing people, recreating the trauma that he went through with their families, running the risk of creating an evil batman figure bent on revenge and arguably making the situation worse for literally fucking everyone

That's fucking point, dummy. Batman became a villain. When his parents died he became hero, but along the way he lost sight of his purpose and convictions. With Superman's death he regains them again. The opening scene of Bruce becoming who he meant to be at his parent's funeral is recaptured the same way during Superman's funeral.

>I honestly thought him killing Zod in the end was handled really well.


It was kind of shot considering that his no kill rule was never stabilised or explored before, and thus it didn't had the impact that it could.

Even more stupid because it is never referenced again on BvS, where you think that it would have been a big deal for Clark that he would comment.

But the movie wants a dumb and stoic Superman that barely express himself....so the scene in retrospect is even more of a empty shock value.

But the execution was horrible, really pathetic, and Batman was forced to act like a dumb thug the entire movie for it to "not really" work.

>only to be redeemed at the end
Does that mean he turns himself in and goes to jail?
Because that's where he belong.

I feel sorry for Affleck having to play such a mess of characterization. I'm not surprise that he wants to leave.

Batman being at his lowest is very much the whole point. And the execution to me felt entirely right and appropriate, so I guess just have to agree to disagree. He's angry, slightly suicidal, his PTSD is eating him inside, he feels like his whole life is meaningless and his mission was a failure, etc. All these and more contribute to blinding him from reason and just fuel his erratic behavior and quest to take down Superman.

And of course Luthor was always behind the scenes stoking those fires so that Batman would never stop to think for a second.

That never bothered me, in fact I was pleased to see the killing. Felt like a realistic way to show what would happen when two people at that level of power clashed, and I don't think it was to at odds with Superman as a character.

I had far more problems with the general movie, pacing, hamfisted dialog and messaging. I think the movie in general was poorly done and because of the way it was done, it meant that each DCEU movie seems to be retrospectively clearing up the previous ones mess, rather than setting up the next.

You kinda expect Bruce to visit the Lexcorp employees in intensive care, in old-movie style full body casts, just to illustrate that they didn't really die in those exploding vehicles after all.

Whats your point?

"You may have thought the explosion that threw you out the window of that van an onto that flatbed of mattresses hurt Blatsky, but if you don't tell me what Luthor's real plain is, I will show you real hurt (but not kill you, I don't do that).

>I know a lot of Superman fans were pissed when he killed Zod at the end of Man of Steel.
I wasn't. he's a noob and didn't know fuck what to do. Pa didn't even help him with his powers.

I still think Snyder is an awful director and storyteller. he gets praise for being a visual filmmaker, but honestly he's pretty superficial in that respect. a desktop wallpaper filmmaker.

Goyer has outright admitted that he has no idea what the fuck he is doing, the WB execs just keep mailing him projects and large checks and he rolls with it.

>Batman being at his lowest is very much the whole point.

Frank Miller did it way better on multiple comics.

This just feel like a bad fanfiction.

The worst thing is he can't prove his naysayers wrong with the material he's given, like Ledger and Joker.

Everyone talked shit on him and many will continue to do so.

>Goyer
speaking of that guy, RLM did a re:review of Blade and in there Aidsmoby talks about how in the commentary for the movie, Goyer admits he's good at structure, but shit at everything else. Wesley Snipes had to do his own dialog or something along those lines because Goyer is so fucking incompetent. this guy literally just got carried by Nolan, and by Geoff Johns on that JSA run they had together.

>Frank Miller did it way better on multiple comics.

Not really. Miller has Batman be a bit deranged, even crazy, and all around asshole, but he always portrays Batman still as a hero. Even in DKR Batman was just retired.

BvS Batman is an inch away from being a super villain, and he's very much out of control and a huge hypocrite.

Why didn't Superman just fly upwards while holding Zod?

Fior me, the best part of it is that no matter how hilariously bad a turd Snyder and Goyer produce, there's a few fatboys here on Sup Forums who are gonna carry that weight, and feverishly produce headcanon as evidence that it's premium stuff.

They fiddle while the Director's Cut Extended Universe burns.

I hope Affleck does quit. Since he's synonymous with the DCEU, WB will have no choice but to reboot after JL.

Do it Ben, be an hero

My problem wasn't that Superman killed, it was how it was handled. He twists a man's neck, then the movie cuts to "he's hot" and Superman telling a general that he'll do whatever he wants after just showing how powerful Kryptonians are. It felt like a scene from a different movie.
Also, it happened too early. The reason Superman killing Zod with Kryptonite in the comics worked was because Superman had been established for years and years, even in universe. Him having a moment of desperation has weight when we know that he has always done what he could to avoid extreme measures. This Superman was barely even established, but they toss in him killing his first opponent in a massive graveyard-digging showdown with most of the city gone. The killing part isn't the issue, it's how poorly it was executed.

Also, Batman randomly killing has always been stupid. Yes, he killed when he was first established, but there's a reason it was abondoned fairly early on. It makes no fucking sense why Joker is around when he murdered Thug #738572 for looking at him wrong.

To be honest I'm not sure by what logic would anyone's opinion soften. If anything it just emphasizes that they're both maniacs.

The problem with Snyder's movies is that he films violence with such glee that you just can't ignore it. I can let it slide that Batman killed in Burton movies because the movie doesn't dwell on it and emphasizes other things. With these movies it's like it it's constantly reminding me "LOOK AT ALL THE KILLING!!!" Even if it's not certain that the heroes actually killed someone I immediately assume they did because that's what the movie trained me to do.

Tangentially related, but I do like how DCEU is influencing the Marvel movies though. MoS came out and made it impossible for people to ignore collateral damage, so now every Marvel movie in some way subverts or makes a point about collateral damage. BvS makes it impossible to ignore heroes killing, so now Doctor Strange is ardently anti-killing.

DCEU is pushing Marvel heroes to be better heroes. That's commendable.

I beg to differ. To me, the biggest issue with the movie is how Snyder handled Superman. Snyder's version is literally Jesus, who is inherently good, despite all the circumstances, because that's how his father planned, because that's destiny. He is bullied as a kid, he is criticized and feared by the society, Pa Kent tells him not to use powers even for good, etc, and despite all that struggle, he still keeps doing good and becomes the hero, and even dies for humanity's sins. It's not about a visual reference here and there, it's a about the plot at large. Long story short, he is sent to us, good as he is, from the outside.
Comic book Superman, on the other hand, is defined by his nurture - he is good because that's how he was raised, he helps people because he was taught by Kents that it's the right thing to do. This Superman is the embodiment, the personification of the goodness of humanity.

>Superman killing Zod is not as big of an issue. But it was handled very poorly and felt unearned
How? That was probably the best way to do it. Any other way would have been even worse. But okay, let's see how you would have done it.

I wasn't pissed off that Supes killed Zod, I was pissed off that the scene served no purpose in the story. It was like an emotional climax of a character arc but there was no character arc. Clark started as a guy with grey morals and ended as a guy with grey morals. The only thing that changed in his character is that now he's going to wear a suit during his random acts of heroism.

>not liking fun
what?

Snyder did Superman justice and killing Zod was just a small blemish in the big scheme of things. BvS was a lot more respectful though. But then again, BvS was the best movie ever, a 10/10 masterpiece.

I think it makes perfect sense for the DCEU to base their versions of the most important DC characters on storylines that are either no longer canon, part of alternative universes, or not relevant to the modern incarnation at all

>the DCEU should have been solely based on the New 52 instead of honoring every age in different ways
Glad you weren't in charge.

I heard the Wonder Woman reshoots were mandated by WB to make people like BvS more

rumor has it she kills everybody she meets, without provocation

WB are hoping the two-hour rampage will convince fans that the DCEU is back on track.

...

I heard that Wonder Woman also rapes Ares and does cuck porn with Steve Trevor watching in the corner. I'm a former WB employee by the way. What a mess!

Go cry about it. BvS was the best. Get over it.

Not him, but see

I had less of a problem with killing Zod as some of the dumb stuff that happened in the fight leading up to it. Like Supes calmly hopping over a tanker truck that Zod chucked at him and just letting it blow up in the middle of a city so that he could have a cool looking moment where he's standing in front of the explosion and smirking. It made it look like he didn't really care about saving people, which clashed with the fact that at the end he was willing to kill Zod to save some people.

He was a bit better in BvS though.

>honoring

But nobody likes the DCEU, the current commis and even Lego Batman make fun of it and all the shit that goes there.

>is part of what makes him interesting

It makes him fucking retarded and ruins entire stories, see that stupid Red Hood movie.

>A Batman that kills is just the Punisher if he had more disposable income.
I would like some more Punisher movies, yes.

Well I took it to mean the scene itself, but yeah it should have had more of an emotional impact either immediately, or an allusion to it during the second installment. I don't think he needs a blatant no-kill rule because most people don't kill others, but he did need to say how he was shaken and how he will take steps to never have to kill again or something because of how bad it felt.

That doesn't mean that the DCEU didn't honor the previous and modern incarnations of the characters. It just means that people didn't like it (probably because they don't like comics).

Plus you can poke fun at something without hating it.

No, it just makes me pissed they didnt greenlight the movies as Owlman and Ultraman movies instead.

When I go see a Superman movie, it would be my preference to leave feeling just a bit more hopeful than I did when I arrived. That hasn't been the case with these movies, so my interest in them has waned to nothing.

Not gonna throw shade at those that enjoy them, whatever their reasons, but they're just not what I'm looking for.

I felt a lot more hopeful after BvS though. Sometimes it does feel like the world is garbage, so it's nice to pretend that there are still good people out there as well as people that repent.

Sorry, but comic book fans hate the movie.

Even funnier, is that this universe "honored" the comics, by starting as just a movie rushed to keep the rights away from the family of Superman's creator and give a big "funk you" to them.

Most other movies that tackle on these themes do it better.

BvS is just Batman getting away with murder because he now feels really sorry for it.

The more comics you read, the more you will appreciate BvS. If you've only read Alan Moore then you're not a real "comic book fan." Sorry kid, facts don't lie: comic book fans loved BvS. If you didn't, read more comics until you do. Preferably of more than just one era so you don't fall into "not muh" syndrome, which is the biggest problem of BvS detractors. The version of the character you knew when you were 12 isn't necessarily the best.

This must be bait or a false flag to make snydercucks look like fat nerds that have no idea about what good storytelling is.

>But most people just want live action Saturday morning cartoons with quips and "fun"

You are the type of person that like crap like The Transformers movies because they have a lot of explosions and/or are very similar to your favorite video games; you find them entertaining and enjoyable.

There would be nothing wrong with that expect you denigrate everyone and anyone who disagrees with you with a trite copy pasta response.

My opinion hasn't softened, nor dies it matter because we're gonna be having threads defending it well through 2020.

>If you didn't, read more comics until you do. Preferably of more than just one era so you don't fall into "not muh" syndrome, which is the biggest problem of BvS detractors. The version of the character you knew when you were 12 isn't necessarily the best.

All characters have internal consistencies. If you don't understand that and haven't learned that, reading EVERY single comic book in existence OR about one (or however many specific characters are in your particular wheelhouse) isn't going to teach you anything that you already refuse to learn.

You are basic reading comprehension in all of it's horrible, twisted glory.

You are that person that reads something once, and then sees it repeated and parroted twenty times and considers it factual or doesn't realize the your brain has simply absorbed it and uses it as it's starting point, even if it shouldn't be doing so.

>as just a movie rushed to keep the rights away from the family of Superman's creator and give a big "funk you" to them

The last batch of court rulings, which are final and not appealable, clearly gave the rights to Superman to DC (e.g. Warner Brothers and whomever they end up selling themselves to since they are in that process).

The family had, at one point, established their rights to Superboy and to certain other things, but the court finally ruled that they had sold away those rights AS WELL with later settlements. The only thing DC is obligated to do is something they AGREED to do, which is why anything that even remotely relates to the Superfamily now has that awkward "by special arrangement" tag. The Siegel family also now collects more money that the Shuster heirs.

NONE of which has anything to do with whether or not DC exploits the IP THEY OWN ALL RIGHTS TO by whether or not they make a movie this year, in the next ten years, or refuse to do so for fifty years. The sheer fact that they exploit their IP, which they have continuously done since 1938, takes care of any obligation they have under the copyright laws, which is minimal, to exploit their IP.

You are confusing issues related to Marvel with issues related to the particular rights of the character and IP of Superman.

The killing was the least of those movies' problems.

Not just a noob, a 33 year old noob.