Why do Snyderfags hate him?

Why do Snyderfags hate him?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=HUzHgvqh8to
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

"Not muh".

So I watched the two episodes where he appeared
Has he appeared again?

Not yet, but rumours are that he will be back to the season finale.

You have to keep in mind hoe snydercucks work.

When MOS and BvS came out, they were saying:

"nobody can adapt Superman to the modern audiences and be liked, he NEED to be like the one of snyderverse"

Them this Superman showed up, and his amazing reception fucked them over. Same happened with other stuff, you will notice that Snydercucks blame the audience for the reception of the movies, or try to make up scenarios where the entire zeigeist is against them and that they would be better received if things were different.

For example, it is/was common to see them saying things like:

>People wont accept a campy and optimistic super hero movie full of colors!

Them they get fucked over by this Superman and the MCU.

>People dont like it just because it is a serious super hero movie!

When they are suddenly fucked over by LOGAN.

>Y-you dont like it because it is gritty and has death!

Them they are fucked over by Deadpool and Logan again.

>T-they dont like it because it is DC!

Them they get fucked over when Batman Lego is loved by critics.

Oh well I'll watch that
Thanks user

Its also part of the reasons that they act like you can just make super hero movies on just 2 ways:

>The MCU way
>Snyder way

Which just show how patethic and limited they are.

Fox does what DCan't

This sounded better before I typed it out

>Evanposter talks to himself again
Poor Evanposter.

I liked Snyder's movies, and I have no problems with Supergirl's version of the character.

Oh wait, this is another of those threads where you guys make up a strawman group of fans who worship Zack Snyder and hate everything else, then talk about how terrible they are. Right I'll leave you to it.

>you guys
It's just one guy, user. Disney cannot afford more than one intern.
>Right I'll leave you to it.
Me too. I have some red Sonja to read, and many threads about how Marvel is fucking up again.

...

It's not a strawman if they really do show up regularly to post autistic macros and call everyone a Disney shill.

jealousy/sour grapes of dat ass

No idea why they couldn't just do regular superman in the DCEU. I'd be a whole lot more receptive if this was just it's own thing. But this DCEU will probably at least get around 7-10 movies, which means I have to put up with Snyders shitty interpretation of what he thinks makes superman cool.

Snyder had 1 job, which was to set up the DCEU and he fucking took it and bungled it. It's not that hard to get Superman and Batman right. But now, the next wave of DCEU directors/writers have to fix Snyders mistake of an emo superman and a DKR batman.

Snyder fucking killed Superman in the DCEU IN HIS SECOND FUCKING MOVIE. What the fuck kind of garbage is that. He's just an uncreative hack that doesn't know how to write good stories/direct good original stories. That's why his best work is basically just copying a more creative persons work.

I don't get the issue.

The hell are you talking about?

My posts were and You just wish that everyone of your problems could be solved by blaming one person.

Oh man, it is that shitposter who is always posting this gif! Wasnt confirmed that you were making daily bait threads?

Why does the Flash know about him? I'm pretty sure they've never met, and Supergirl only offhandedly mentions him

>something cannot be posted if it has been posted before by the same person and also stops being valid after X amount of uses

Tell me more.

But I don't.

>MCU
>Patrician
>Ever
Pleb.

They do? I thought no one cared about this Superman because he's from Supergirl and no one watch that show except for a bunch of horny nerds that later complain about the feminist agenda on internet

I actually have seem plenty of snyderfags complain about him when he showed up.

>"nobody can adapt Superman to the modern audiences and be liked, he NEED to be like the one of snyderverse"

What in God's name is that supposed to mean? Have you ever heard of reading comprehension?

Spoken like a true contrarian

My post was very simple and straightforward.

I've seen more Sup Forumstards complaining about the actor being "Mexican" despite he's full European

There is a huge overlap between snyderfags and Sup Forumsacks.

Keep in mind, Sup Forums thinks people from Spanish descent aren't white.

It's hard to tell who's memeing and who's being serious on Sup Forums though.

I like both though. I just think CW Superman was kind of bland and has a weird face. Also I wasnt a fan of how much of a dick he was to Metallo.

but it was regular Superman, to the point where people got triggered over recreating a scene from Action Comics #1

It would be "regular superman" if in a regular superman story, metropolis blows up and in the issue 9 of the 2nd arc Superman dies.

When writing a superman story, you can't just go out and make in apocalyptic right off the bat. I mean you can, but I'm going to critique it because the story sucks. The destruction porn took away from superman being superman.

If Squirl girl ever gets a movie, do you think the tone should be dark gritty and a horror movie? Or a lighthearted adventure comedy? It's all about tone, and coming out of a Superman movie I shouldn't feel depressed, that's the exact opposite of how I should exit the movie. The tone of the movie did not fit the general theme of the character.

When screen writers/directors sit down, the first question is what story do we want to tell. What do we want to convey, and they completely missed the ball on it with Man of Steel. It's so obvious that they clearly do not understand the character and why people love him. It's not about Superman fighting the toughest villain, it's not about Superman punching his enemies through clouds and throwing them through buildings. It's about inspiring and having emotional conflicts. Just watch Grant Morrison's interview on Superman

youtube.com/watch?v=HUzHgvqh8to

>It's just one guy, user. Disney cannot afford more than one intern

It's impossible to tell anymore if people who post stuff like this aren't trolling. I really hope they are, though. Someone who really believed this would be so sad.

Your post got deleted? What happened in it?

Nah, that image and your response is Snyder in a nutshell: he can recreate scenes but he doesn't get the character. There are things done in the movie that heroes do but there aren't any heroes. It's why so many people so strongly rejected Snyder's interpretation of the characters.

The very fact that you have to try and convince people otherwise proves the point.

If you aren't trolling and genuinely don't under what Bernardin was getting at, it's kind of a lost cause. You're not going to be able to understand why there were no heroes in this movie and why everyone finds this interpretation of the characters so hollow and wrong.

Never mind the DCEU. It's bullshit that the CW only got Superman for 2 episodes.

I sometimes think it was just to replace the faceless guy in the opening credits.

>The very fact that you have to try and convince people otherwise proves the point.

lol wut?

Are you really saying suggesting that knee jerk reaction is more important than thought and debate?

>Nah, that image and your response is Snyder in a nutshell: he can recreate scenes but he doesn't get the character. There are things done in the movie that heroes do but there aren't any heroes. It's why so many people so strongly rejected Snyder's interpretation of the characters.
In other words "He didn't smile enough"?

I haven't seen any hate myself

I'll never understand people who put Spider-Man 2 over Spider-Man

Because people have differing opinions from you and think it's better?

No, read more carefully.

You're trying to dispel the notion that Bats and Supes in BvS weren't heroic. But why would you have to work to dispel this notion at all? You seem to be aware that this is a fairly widely-held opinion. Why is that? If the movie and characters were obviously heroic there wouldn't be any need to strain to convince everyone. There's no controversy over the heroic nature of characters in other cape movies.

The answer, of course, is that the depiction of the characters in the DCEU didn't connect with most people. It didn't convey heroism to people. You can argue till your face turns blue that they're wrong, but your'e missing the point: you shouldn't have to work so hard. Something went wrong. The audience didn't get whatever the movie was trying to convey. This means the movie didn't do a good job communicating to the audience, or else this impression wouldn't be so widely held.

It's like when people have to write walls of text to explain MARTHA or other plot points that are widely despised. When you find yourself doing that, you should stop and think that whatever was trying to be communicated did not get across. Whatever the intent may have been, the execution clearly didn't connect with the mass majority of people.

He really is.
That's insane.

pic related

Yes, that's part of it. Most people reject a grim, joyless Christ figure who reluctantly deigns to help people. That's not how most people know or want Superman, and so it doesn't connect.

You don't have to take my word for it, you seem well aware that this is a common criticism. You might ask yourself why that is.

I know you're trolling, but I enjoyed the Zizek + image.

The majority of people are not very smart.
And it doesn't even take a genius to figure out BvS. You just have to actually pay attention.

>I know you're trolling
Not at all.

MANLET

At least you tried. I believe it's time to call me a Disney intern, though.

Yet the most vocal people don't seem smart enough to understand that understanding is not the same as liking.

????
You're not being paid, you're just an idiot with his mind made up.

Well okay, you can tell yourself you're part of the tiny, select genius elite who sees the true cape kino. But you might consider wondering why everyone else is having such a hard time seeing the heroism if it's so obvious.

I, I don't even know where to fucking begin.

Just because something is the popular opinion doesn't make it true. Just because you have an emotional teether to that opinion doesn't either. You're appealing to the majority and emotion to support your opinion. Neither of these things make an argument. Just because someone is argueing from outside of the popular thought doesn't mean they are wrong.

What matters is the argument itself. What that image showed above is that within the movie there are several examples of Superman being Superman. Examples that never seem to come up within the circle jerk of why people didn't like the films.

That's fine if you don't, you don't even have to explain yourself. But to make blanket statements about characterization that simply don't match what is in the film, and then to say "well most people just don't see it that way" is fucking retarded.

You just uprooted those goalposts buddy.
You original talking point was
>The audience didn't get whatever the movie was trying to convey.

>What matters is the argument itself. What that image showed above is that within the movie there are several examples of Superman being Superman.
bingo

Please stop baiting.

If you do actually want to engage in discussion, though, try addressing my points instead of doing exactly what you accuse me of.

Either contribute or leave the adults to their discussion.

this guy
said it better than I could.

>you're part of the tiny, select genius elite
Why can't you be bothered to actually engage with WHAT I SAY.
see
>And it doesn't even take a genius to figure out BvS.

God damn you are delusional.

I didn't move the goalposts because I'm not the same user you were talking to before. Contrary to popular believe there's not just one person that Disney hired to say they find Snyder's rendition to be off putting.

Nor do I necessarily think that the goalpost is even moved. The point that other guy was saying is true; if you have to spend 3+ years telling people a guy is likable he probably isn't. People didn't "not understand". We're talking about an emotional response; they didn't find the guy likable, they thought the victories were too pyhrric, that the ends didn't justify the means, that they couldnt' form an emotional attachment to the character or the story etc. Your trying to argue otherwise. You can't. Your feelings aren't theirs, and going "You're dumb for having those feelings" isn't winning you any arguments or hearts or minds.

It's ironic, because a huge facet, if not the entire point of Snyder's Superman in story is that he can't force people to like him no matter how "good" he is, yet here you guys are posting memes and infographs and trying to force (read: berate) people into liking the story for months and months and months.

Maybe you need to do what he did and kill yourselves so we'll see the light. But that seems like it'd be extreme, right?

Snyder bots spend so much time arguing their movie makes sense, that they completely disregard if the movie is any good.

can you refute this
(wasn't my post, but it's an extremely airtight post IMO)

>I, I don't even know where to fucking begin.

That's clear, though I appreciate the effort.

>What matters is the argument itself.

Right, and the argument is whether Superman is heroic in the DCEU movies. Most people don't think so.

> What that image showed above is that within the movie there are several examples of Superman being Superman.

The problem is you're presenting these images without the context of the whole DCEU in which they appear, which is what people are reacting to. Within this context these images do not at all show Superman being Superman, they show a character who is very un-Superman-like occasionally doing things Superman would do.

>But to make blanket statements about characterization that simply don't match what is in the film, and then to say "well most people just don't see it that way" is fucking retarded.

No, it's just the simple truth. You're trying to explain why Superman was heroic in the movie, yet most people disagree. What's "heroic" is a matter of perception, and clearly, even with these examples, people don't perceive him that way. That means the heroism is not being conveyed, other elements beyond these examples are interfering.

It's because you're picking isolated examples rather than looking at the film as whole: its tone, its overall depiction of the characters, etc. THAT'S why people don't find Snyder's Superman heroic, despite having him doing things heroes do.

Whether these characters are heroic or not is entirely a matter of emotion and popular sentiment because what constitutes "heroism" is in the eye of the beholder. These movies clearly do not meet most people's definitions.

>said it better than I could.

Yes, because they're trying and you're just baiting.

>can you refute this

If you could understand the comment, you'd see that they did. The other comment was saying you can't argue feelings and opinion, this comment demonstrates that it is entirely a matter of feeling and opinion.

>(wasn't my post, but it's an extremely airtight post IMO)

That's because you're an idiot.

>That's clear, though I appreciate the effort.
rude desu

No no, there are plenty of walls of text trying to explain how it's actually Kubrick-level true cinema and if you don't get it it's because you can't understand the genius.

>That's because you're an idiot.
rude desu

Trying the old Buzzfeed tactic of spreading content over multiple posts, huh? Here, you get one (You), but just one. Don't get greedy!

Not sure why I have to given that you're addressing the argument at hand to begin with. You guys are trying to use logic and intellect to tackle a problem that was never about logic and intellect. You're arguing the letter of the law when everyone else is arguing the spirit of it.

Not to mention that if we look at it, on paper, on the letter of it, the out of context cherry picking you do ignores the fact that it's all fruit of a poisonous tree, namely that the Earth Snyder presents would actually be better off had Kal El died as an infant and never made it there. I can easily argue that he's not acting heroically so much as he's just cleaning up the mess of his existence.

Yes he stopped Zod, but Zod wouldn't even BE there if not for him sending out a signal.
Yes he stopped the World Engine, but it wouldn't have been turned on if not for the Codex in his blood.
Yes he beat Doomsday, but Doomsday only existed because he littered alien tech and corpses over a civilization that even he knew wasn't' ready for that stuff.
Yes he "redeemed" Batman, but Batman was fucking retired and wasn't doing anything to need to be redeemed from before he showed up.
Yes he'll probably be instrumental in beating Darkseid (even though it already makes no sense) but again, Darkseid was summoned via alien tech that is only there and able to be used because of him.

And most importantly, (and because I know this is going to get brought up eventually and in fact doubt the people that will respond to this will even read this far) yes, while comic book Superman and many other superhero franchises present the paradox of the hero creating his villain, Snyder's version lacks the dual buffers of genre convention and charisma to mitigate those facts. THAT is where the misunderstanding is.

My question is more why is Sup Forums so hostile?

I read comics and like the DCEU.
Shouldn't be a big deal.
I should be able to talk about it without getting lumped in a s a kino poster.

contrarian to a pleb is patrician

If you want to discuss the films with other fans may I suggest /r/dc_cinematic? If that's all you want, to have a discussion with other DCEU fans then coming to Sup Forums isn't the best place to discuss it, because Sup Forums's taste in movies doesn't line up with yours.

Personally I hate the DCEU because they took Superman and turned him into a version I despise, and they made Batman old (even though afleck is still a good batman).

>Not sure why I have to given that you're addressing the argument at hand to begin with. You guys are trying to use logic and intellect to tackle a problem that was never about logic and intellect.

Exactly. I know "autist" gets thrown around a lot but I seriously think these guys are autistic:

"DCEU SUPERMAN IS LIKABLE AND HEROIC!"

"But most people don't find him likable or heroic."

"YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH EMOTION OR POPULAR APPEAL! LET ME TELL YOU HOW PEOPLE SHOULD FEEL ABOUT THESE CHARACTERS!"

I don't think these people can even understand what's going on. Do they really think they're going to use the power of LOGIC to convince people about their feelings?

>Shouldn't be a big deal.

But it should. MoS, and especially BvS, are such valueless garbage that so badly butchered their characters that if you don't immediately recognize that you're just human garbage.

Sorry, if you're a fan of the DCEU you're simply a bad person. You need to kill yourself.

>and they made Batman old (even though afleck is still a good batman).

The age isn't really a problem, it's making him Bat-Punisher who brands those he doesn't kill. As you say, it turned him into an unrecognizable version we despise.

I don't argue that Batman killing people isn't a major problem. But as shitty it is, and as annoying as it will be, it'll get retconned.

You can't retcon Batman's age. You can have flash back movies but are people really going to want that? Does Afleck have what it takes to stick around 10 years the DCEU planned out ahead of it. Having a younger batman this wouldn't be a problem, but with an older one. You're going to run into that problem.

> Right, and the argument is whether Superman is heroic in the DCEU movies.

Ok we have a starting point...

> Most people don't think so.

And you're already fucking it up. APPEALING TO THE MAJORITY IS NOT A FUCKING ARGUMENT!

> Within this context these images do not at all show Superman being Superman, they show a character who is very un-Superman-like occasionally doing things Superman would do.

Ok now we're getting somewhere. Now without fucking appealing to emotion please explain this thought out further. You've laid out a premise. Great! But that's all. There's no argument here just a statement.

You don't believe Snyder's Superman is Superman. Why?

> You're trying to explain why Superman was heroic in the movie, yet most people disagree.

God damn it I thought we went over this. Ok look see this is the problem. You say people just don't get it or like it. But people in this thread claim they do get it and do like it. You point out that having to write essays to explain it some how negates their point, but those essays are being written to explain the fucking point. See the problem with just appealing to popularity? It doesn't tackle the actual argument here.

> Whether these characters are heroic or not is entirely a matter of emotion and popular sentiment because what constitutes "heroism" is in the eye of the beholder. These movies clearly do not meet most people's definitions.

That's great that you want to keep on chiming up the subjectivity of cinema. But it is entirely irrelevant wether or not a movie meets the majority of peoples definitions, interpretations, or appeal. What matters is what is presented.

See here's the thing with subjectivity that gets lost on most people. Just because opinions can vary and the conclusions of arguments each have equal merit doesn't mean they are all grounded in a logical or well thought out form. If you can't explain yourself and have to appeal to emotion and popularity, you might want to rethink shit

>There are people on this board who don't like the capekino that is B v S

C'mon, it's the smartest, deepest superhero movie out there

Or maybe they're asking people to explain their feelings out a bit more than

"I didn't like it"

"Not my Superman"

"Not heroic enough"

"He should smile more".

etc

>And you're already fucking it up. APPEALING TO THE MAJORITY IS NOT A FUCKING ARGUMENT!
Jury nullifcation is a valid defense tactic.

Hell, go to /tg/ and ask them if a DM should let you argue your way out of a charisma stat check. I'd be interested to see how they respond.

Everyone in this thread should be permabanned.

>That's great that you want to keep on chiming up the subjectivity of cinema. But it is entirely irrelevant wether or not a movie meets the majority of peoples definitions, interpretations, or appeal.

It kind of is when you are doing an adaptation, and even if you aren't...the fact that you can't generate the feeling that you intend on the audience shows that you are a bad storyteller.

A good storyteller knows how to make a character sympathetic when he wishes so, or make him tragic when he wishes so. If a person tries to make someone feel "x" for a character, but fails, you failed as a storyteller.

Not the person you are arguing to, by the way.

>all this autism over one movie
You make laugh sometimes, Sup Forums.

>You point out that having to write essays to explain it some how negates their point, but those essays are being written to explain the fucking point
The fundamental problem you have is that you think this is something you can explain. You can't explain charisma into a character.

You keep trying to deceive me, but I'm loyal to Snyder and I will defend what he has to say as well as DC, I admitted long ago that I'm a soldier on this war.

You are probably just a paid Disney intern, or worse, someone that doesn't take sides on the company war, you enable the MCU.

>the fact that you can't generate the feeling that you intend on the audience shows that you are a bad storyteller.

The trouble is that audiences are not one single creature or hive mind that all thinks the same way. Never mind that personal experience ranging from birth to five minutes before viewing can dramatically alter how a person views or experiences a movie.

There are people who had the intended feeling for what was put in front of them. These people exist. It might not have been as wide spread as Snyder or WB might have liked but to invalidate their experiences because the majority felt a different way is just bizarre.

That's the point I'm making here. You can go blue in the face telling me the majority of people didn't like it. That's fine. But it doesn't mean they are right. Doesn't mean Snyder failed to convey what he wanted. Doesn't mean the movie is bad.

Those aspects of a film need further discussion beyond just broad emotional response.

Fucking kek, I can't breathe. To think there are people on this board that take that shit seriously.

But you're still not understanding what the argument even is. Emotion and popularity are what the argument is about.

You're trying to demand people feel differently about these characters. They feel this way because the movie doesn't resonate with them. It doesn't conform with the popular notions of what heroes are.

Most people say they don't see these characters as heroes. This isn't an issue of "logic". It's ridiculous to keep insisting that only logic should be used for a matter of emotional appeal and popular conception. "Heroism" is a matter of emotion and popular conception, there's no rational argument to it, and you won't and can't convince people their identification of characters as heroic is wrong using purely logos.

Sorry, you just have a very childish conception of the world. You'll find things don't break down into neat logical metrics, and you'll be frustrated by it as you are now.

Instead of screaming at people about how they should logically feel, it would be more fruitful to figure out what most people's ideas of heroism are, and why these movies seem to have failed to connect with those.

>I'm a soldier on this war.
Weaponized autism

You are just a shill at this point, why would your opinion be worth anything?

> You can't explain charisma into a character.

But you can explain why you do or don't see it within a character. You can cite examples that demonstrate the areas in which you expected a character to act one way when instead they acted another. You can explain your expectations going in and where something failed or succeeded in meeting those.

You might not be able to make a character likable but if you want your opinion to be worth anything you are expected to explain why you did or didn't like them.

>being that stupid as to fall for bait
wow

>but to invalidate their experiences because the majority felt a different way is just bizarre.

The thing is, this is meanless.

This is a dumb blockbuster made to appeal to people and fans of the character or potential fans. If just a select feel like,you failed.

And if you want to go this subjective, anybody can argue that The Room is in ironically the best movie ever because Tommy Wiseaul think that it is, or that Sonicho is a great comic, because Chris Chan thinks so.

No, I said "to think there are people".

I wasn't talking about him.

I was talking about how there is people like that post.

>That's the point I'm making here. You can go blue in the face telling me the majority of people didn't like it. That's fine. But it doesn't mean they are right.

But you're getting this backwards: you're the one trying to convince everyone else that they're wrong about how they feel. That was the entire start of this "argument", trying to prove "logically" that people are wrong when they say DCEU Superman isn't heroic.

>Doesn't mean Snyder failed to convey what he wanted.

It most certainly does, for the majority of people. You're setting up a strawman: no one is arguing that 100% of the audience will agree on anything. What is being said is the simple fact that clearly most of the audience doesn't find these characters to be heroic, since it's such a common complaint. Snyder therefore failed to convey heroism to most people.

No one is talking about some Platonic Form of Heroism, just that this movie did not effectively convey heroism since most people didn't see it that way. I doubt it was Snyder or WB's intent for most people to have this reaction. Thus they've failed in their communication of their intent.

I have made no fucking claim in this thread about if Superman is likable or heroic.

My entire point has been that I don't give a fuck what the majority thinks and have been trying to get across to you here that if someone can't explain what they found wrong or right about something they saw then they aren't worth talking to about it.

You don't like it! Great! Now why the fuck does that matter when you're not going to explain why?

> Instead of screaming at people about how they should logically feel, it would be more fruitful to figure out what most people's ideas of heroism are

Dude, I fucking said that.

> You don't believe Snyder's Superman is Superman. Why?

>I have made no fucking claim in this thread about if Superman is likable or heroic.

Yes, you did. This all started when someone, maybe you, posted that image as "proof" that people are wrong when they say Snyderman isn't heroic. When it was pointed out that this image can't "prove" anything of the sort, you launched into an autistic crusade wherein you repeatedly demonstrated that you don't understand emotional or popular appeal and think you can logically argue about how people should feel.

The whole point is that most people don't find Snyderman likable or heroic, and you can't "logically" argue about this.

And here you are, and here you will be forever, raging and fuming that people feel the way they do and won't use LOGIC to feel the way you think they should.

> you're the one trying to convince everyone else that they're wrong about how they feel.

Can you quote me to this please? Been very clear here that all I'm asking for is an explanation for their feeling and been very consistent at stating not liking the films is just fine.

> Thus they've failed in their communication of their intent.

So what it is here? Subjective interpretation or objective generalization? I'm confused since you're argueing both of these depending on what tune you need to hit.

Let me just repeat myself. I get that a majority of people have their problems with a wide variety of these films. That's fine. But I'd like to hear why. I have no doubt in my mind that there are some very reasonable, very persuasive, and logically thought out explanations for people's problems.

I am in no way argueing that the divine light of Richard Dawkins Science driven Logic will make someone who didn't like something suddenly like it.

But I want to fucking hear the argument. I don't give a shit what the majority thinks. Majority of people are a brain dead mindless cell of wandering sheep who will say anything to fit in and take comfort in believing they are part of a group. That's not a condemnation or some grandstanding "I'm better than everyone else" because I'll freely say I'm a part of the mindless zombies in this society who'd rather not put effort into thinking about a popcorn flick. But when you walk into a room, and want to share your opinion, do the fucking world a favor and at least have it more thought out then "Well everyone else didn't like it".

These are my post. Now please point out to me where I've said people are wrong for feeling a certain way.