Zack "Watchmen had heroes killing so you shouldn't be surprised that batman kills" Snyder

It's funny how he sees Watchmen or the DKR as grown up but in fact he's still just an edgy teen

Not really. He just thought that Watchmen, the movie, would have changed the capeshit movies into serious movies, because the story portray the characters and world in a serious manner. Stupid line of thought.

To be fair, there's no fucking way Batman have never killed anyone by accident doing what he does. Even a bad placed kick could have killed a thug.

And by that he thinks he's as influential as the likes of Moore, as in his film would make cbm's more serious like Watchmen did for comics, the guy is such an idiot
That's something you just have to accept with suspension of disbelief, but even so killing someone accidentally because of a poorly placed kick is very, very different to blowing guys up in a truck by shooting it

To be fair, his Batman was brutally raped in prison.

>He just thought that Watchmen, the movie, would have changed the capeshit movies into serious movies
Raimi,X-men and Nolan movies are more serious than his Watchmen movie, came first, were higly praised and made a lot of money.

Watchmen flopped hard, there is no way it influenced anything.

The idea in BvS was that Batman had given up hope of solving the city's crime problem without using violence, and had in general become a cynic. His arc was learning to have hope again because of Superman. The problem isn't the concept, it's that the movie was poorly written.

Probably wanted to stand out from the MCU, figured Zach was as different from the MCU as they come,

>The problem isn't the concept, it's that the movie was poorly written.
It wasn't. Everyone who watches can understand what's going on. Only brainlets have problem because of the lack of exposition.

People do understand it. They understand it’s poorly written

Giving a smart-ass response doesn't make you less of a brainlet for not figuring out something simple.

But Watchmen was a warning against superheroes, and how in reality they would be violent vigilantes and possibly violate people's rights. If you just go on with heroes killing people like in Watchmen you are not learning any of the lessons the story is trying to teach you, but just copying the violence, like you think the whole point of it is edginess being cool. Snyder did not understand Watchmen and he doesn't understand Batman. If you use the edginess of Watchmen you should understand that it's a critique, and so you should not even want to use superheroes beyond that except to criticize the concept. If you ike superheroes, you should want to vindicate them from Moore's critique by making them morally outstanding people, as Batman has usually been. And being good is not less adult. If Batman is really peak human, he can afford to save lives when a police officer couldn't do so safely.

No, more like Zack "Watchmen is a critique on ancient post-Ellsworth tropes that hero doesn't kill because of all kinds deus ex machinas supporting him in his way" Snyder
And he isn't wrong. Batman that occasionally kills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post-Red Hood II retardation, especially current King retardation

Probably vice versa

No he doesn't, he literally says in interview that he doesn't mind and enjoys lighter capeshit like Avengers (which btw also features heroes killing people or aliens).
It's just the way HE sees genre.

>as smart and relevant as Alan Moore
not that it is a hard thing to do, and ironically he actually is. Just look at how MCU Avengers (Civil War included) darkened since Man of Steel came out.
Hell Civil War even was greenlit because of BvS.

it's more like acknowledging ramifications of violence

yep, even Paul Dini realised that and made it in Beautiful People

>blowing guys up in a truck by shooting it
in an attempt to stop him from shooting at your vehicle and kill you

to be fair you are illiterate

>are more serious
no they aren't

It directly influenced Infinity War's Thanos, just like other Zack's capefilms and even Scott Derrickson directly praised it.

Also if you want to talk about influence, Bayformers made more than all of these, and influenced stuff a lot more, hell why Avengers 1 came out the way it did.

Attached: the-cult-batman-kills-again-e1479527593875.jpg (700x765, 128K)

GIving a dumb-ass response doesn’t make BvS any better

Grow up.

Attached: Supes Angry.jpg (1039x1600, 568K)

trips of truth

Can we all agree first that Batman was supposed to be wrong about everything in BvS, because he was one of the many antagonists, and not the protagonist? Because keeping this discussion as if Snyder believed Batman was ever in the right for the things he was doing in BvS is pure-bullshit. Because the movie itself doesn't support that view.

Attached: Batman_Shocked.png (1024x768, 82K)

It's a pretty awful, florid mess of overstuffed ideas, none of which were well-executed.

Can you point out where the story implies Batman's cynical view is wrong because I didn't get that. Didn't he brand Lex at the end for other prisoners to deal with, indicating he still believes in the same harsh justice? And in Justice League he is still using similar arguments about "our enemies aren't worried about morality, so why should we be?" re: resurrecting Superman.

t.edgelord

>none of which were well-executed.
I agree that it was overwrote in parts, but i disagree that it all of it badly executed.

>Didn't he brand Lex at the end for other prisoners to deal with, indicating he still believes in the same harsh justice?
No?
youtube.com/watch?v=eTI_CYrATpo

>Superman has been written out of character to the vast majority of his portrayals a handful of times over the decades, therefore making him a killer is fine.

This. Batman always looks cool, he wins against Superman, and his homicidal ways are what saves Martha.
Never at any points it is shown that his way of doing it is a bad way. If anything, it shows that it is the only good way of doing it.

didn't Alan Moore hate the film?

Alan Moore hates everything.

It's in the eyes of beholder.
If you are boomer that supported Vietnam, or Iraq war then yes Batfleck in BvS is totally "legit". The 1% chance Dick Cheney way of thinking. (if you are not American just copy paste your government and it's military actions, and it's line of who is "good" and who is "bad")
This is what differentiates fiction. One is discussing topic with you, while another just teaching what is wrong and what is right in most simple way.

Also it's not that far from "popular" depiction of Batman in Tower of Babel, or really in every other modern comic book.

My bad, it's been a while since I saw it and I didn't really find it memorable in any way. He was clearly threatening to brand him and doesn't seem to have become morally averse to the act in any way, even though he didn't end up doing it. He also seemed to be threatening that Lex could get assaulted by his contacts inside Arkham.
>I still have some friends there. They're expecting you.

>Batman always looks cool
He looks like a resentful and spiteful little autistic bitch the entire movie.
>he wins against Superman
Which leads to him blaming himself for having a hand in Superman's death.
>and his homicidal ways are what saves Martha.
I'll give you that.
>Never at any points it is shown that his way of doing it is a bad way.
The movie already start with Bruce finding no catharsis or enlightenment despite all his new extremism showing that what he has been doing isn't working.

t.Yea Forumsmblerina that doesn't really read comics, i.e. main reason why we got this market in a state it is
You are a cancer.

the only thing stupid in BvS was how Batman was made to fight Superman. why did his retard friend stay in the building? that was so stupid. and then he, Bruce Wayne, literally just eats up whatever the fuck he sees on TV with that courthouse explosion. he NEVER goes out and investigates Superman.

>He was clearly threatening to brand him and doesn't seem to have become morally averse to the act in any way
And Lex mocks him for it, which angers him. Because he's aware doing it won't help.

>Which leads to him blaming himself for having a hand in Superman's death.
I'll give you that.

Batman is better trained than 99% of all Superheroes on non lethal tactics

If he killed 3 criminals accidentally though his life then Spider-man killed 30

>t. autoimmune

>out of character
Yeah cool.

Attached: 3331733-7569957235-Super.jpg (720x621, 110K)

>Golden Age Superman
This version is not canon since 1947

You're literally just doing what I said, cherrypicking. I could go through and collect countless panels where Superman describes and justifies his aversion to killing if I had the time. Batman used to use guns and kill too, but that's not the great iconic version of him that eventually developed and was built on by countless writers.

>Golden Age

Attached: cpt racist.png (918x381, 750K)

The thing about BvS is that all the characters, from Superman, to Batman, to Wonder Woman, to fucking Lex Luthor, all have their own inner demons that they won't directly face. Instead what they do throughout most of the movie is direct their issues unto someone or something else. I'm not good with explaining shit. It's like this incel situation, where instead of the guy fixing his own shit he blames society for his issues.

So Batman hated Superman wasn't so much because he is Superman, but rather because he hated himself. He felt powerless and irrelevant as a person after "wasting" 20 years of his life in his crusade to change Gotham for the better because Gotham remained unchanged. He couldn't see the outcome of his sacrifice. He felt unfulfilled, delusioned, and angry. That frustrated anger made him feel powerless and small. In fact he could only see the negatives in all that he has done, like Robin's death. So when the Metropolis tragedy that feeling of powerlessness came back full force. So seeing Superman flying around playing a hero and costing other people their lives with his mistakes made he, Bruce, see a part of himself that he hated in Superman. Superman was like he, Batman, but on a bigger scale. So in his desire to make his life work mean something, make his own life matter something, he decided that the only road left was to sacrifice his life trying to kill Superman. This way the world if free of both him and Superman.

But Batman is wrong about everything, of course. He simple lost sight of his purpose in life. Superman's example and sacrifice, which he blame himself for, eventually remind him of the original purpose.
So rewinding back Batman in BvS is just a man blind by insecurities trying to find something to hit in order to feel better about himself.

I watched the video and while he expresses himself like a brodude who suffers autism what he is essentially trying to say is that he knows that Watchmen was made by Alan Moore to address the ugly side of the superhero concept that's ignored by cape comic books, and that he tried to do the same with Watchmen, Superman, and Batman v Superman in relation to other comic book movies. Not out of hate because he loves cape comics books and movies, but because that's what those projects were about.

it's "canon" every time DC media says "Superman was created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster", literally only solid canon.

>cherrypicking
It's not cherrypicking, it's all part of the character in his rich story.
Don't like it? Go fuck yourself and move to some more pc character without rich and diversive history, or stick SOLELY to pre-Crisis Earth 1 Superman comics.
Nobody owes to you or your headcanon anything.

>comic book character in his truest form by this character's creators with 0 affect from editorship

Attached: All-Star Superman Kill.jpg (1041x1600, 294K)

I think you gave this more thought than Snyder ever did.

Look, the character is not gonna be completely consistent over the course of many decades and hundreds of writers. What they should do when making the movies is look at the biggest traits that have been shown in the vast majority of portrayals, and one of those is his aversion to killing.

Reminder that in All-Star Superman there's a moment where Superman is in a prison as Clark Kent to interview Lex Luthor and Parasite frees himself after sensing Superman there, because Parasite is desperate to feed on that enormous source of energy. Superman to better escape the place before outing himself, freezes a bunch of inmates in his way, that are later shown being obliterated by Parasite rampage.

I always found that shit messed up. Superman literally killed those guys to protect his double identity. This is the same comic where Superman states that "there's always another way". Not for those inmates, apparently.

He doesn't "eat" anything.
He sees that someone blew up building because Superman went there, and made logical parallel of what all of this will do with Superman in the future based on his own 20 years experience.
He may be a good guy right now (acting even neutral to the point where he simply stops crime itself, but not people that caused it), but what are guarantees he will stay that way forevere?
That guarantee is when he will get 6 feet under ground, a first direct pre attempted murder, final legacy of Batfleck to the whole world.

Attached: Superman was a beacon of hope, etc.png (1913x797, 2.13M)

I remember seeing a positive review of the movie on RT who's summary basically consisted in
>It's a superhero movie but with tits, blood and blue dicks, what's not to love?

I tried to look it up just for the sake of it. I found something similar although I'm not sure it's the same I'm referring to (there's 16 pages of reviews, i ain't going through all that)

Attached: IMG_20190324_122301.png (1080x204, 54K)

Nah. That's literally the main thrust of the movie.
For example take Wonder Woman. Her role is small, but even she's in the same situation.
Because of what happened during WW1, where she came with the best of intentions to help men put a stop to the great war and eventually managed to despite great costs, only to later see men create WWII leaving her hurt and delusioned, because of it she believed that men were incapable of working with one another as well change for the better. She believed that because she let herself believe that. It's not the true. She could have stuck around and tried harder back then, but instead she decided to hide herself with her pain. That was her inner demon in the movie, which she eventually has to face when she see reports of Batman and Superman, two men that hated one another, help each other fight Doomsday. She could have run there and then, but instead she decides to become Wonder Woman again, this after centuries in hiding, and help out.

Wonder Woman, essentially, instead of fixing her own issues and pain, that had to do more with Steve Trevor's death, blame all of mankind. Just like Batman directed his issues unto Superman, and Superman onto Batman, and Lex Luthor unto Superman back.

>and one of those is his aversion to killing.
That only exists because the publisher wanted to make him palatable to little kids as well milk the comics forever never letting it change too much. So rogues being offed was a big no-no.

The big issue is that by the end of it Lex is behind everything, if Bruce farted it's because Lex planned dor him to do it. The plot development was as satisfying and compelling as a "it was all a dream" ending

All Star Superman and Golden Age Superman are not canon. Is not hard to understand.

There is a version of Spider-Man that is a serial killer, there is a version of Thor that give up being a hero to use drugs all day, there is a version of Mister Fantastic that turned into a supervillain after trying to murder the rest of the f4 and their families.

>vast majority of portrayals, and one of those is his aversion to killing
Pre Crisis Earth 2 Superman killed
Post-Crisis Superman killed
New 52 Superman killed
Pre Crisis Earth 1 (in imaginary stories which is WHTMT as well)
That's majority.

And it's not like Snyder's Superman was happy after killing Zod. So that's also "majority" to "feeling remorse".
Or if he didn't mind anyone's life he wouldn't really trying to reasoning with Batman, and instead woul've straight kill him to save mom.

Wasn't his intention probably.

But a lot of things on All-Star is really a parody on Silver Age, rather than a pure homage.

That was kinda of the point? That if you let your bias and misplaced rage cloud your vision you can be an easy tool for smart people with bad intentions.
I used the incel example for a good reason. If incels that provoke pointless massacres that end with their deaths gave a good look into themselves and tried to fix what REALLY bother them about their lives instead of trying to find an external reason or enemy for their personal problems, they wouldn't end up being influence by all this /pol/ rhetoric that teaches them to open fire on innocent people for the lulz.

Batman was that incel and Lex Luthor was Yea Forums.

>Golden Age Superman are not canon.
It's more canon than any other canon.

>Yo guys, what if Batman was an edgy and pessimistic veteran blinded by death and rage? Wouldn't that be interesting?
>lol jk, he was just too stupid to realize it was all a prank by Mark Zuckerberg

Maybe it was the point, but it was a stupid and unsatisfying point

>those twitter chains
Holy cow, Snyderfags are even more retarded than he is.

To make it more succinct, Lex was feeding people that were already out looking for an enemy, for whatever reason, a target for them to focus all their frustrations.
The thing constantly fucking Lex carefully laid plans in the movie is that most of those people end up waking up to reality before it is too late. Like the black lady, the senator lady, Lois, Superman, Batman, and so on. Leaving him more and more frustrated and unhinged.

Your two points aren't mutually exclusive, but the rest fair.

>That's majority.
You're looking at entire continuities. So if dozens of stories by dozens of writers say no killing, but one writer goes against them all and has him kill for shock value, you'll say he's a killer in that continuity. In most stories by most writers his aversion to killing is a major part of his character. Some writers, much like Snyder, don't understand the character and screw him up.

OP took the quote out of its context. So give them that, at very least.

But Watchmen the movie glorifies it's characters and edginess, it's really not the same thing

>Post-Crisis Superman killed
He killed Zod because the later was going to starve to death stuck in a destroyed earth without powers. And even so it was considered a retarded story at the time

The Doomsday shit? Both passed out while fighting.

Imperiex and Darkseid versions were literally in the last second when earth was about to be vapirized and all other plans failed, plus it was not even his plan.

Also all those deaths happened after he had the no kill rule for several decades, it was an exception to extreme situations not the rule, DCEU Superman had no reason to kill, Zod, he was half beaten to death and Superman was already holding him down, it was a fucking execution war crime style.
DCEU Superman literally started his Superhero career doing war crimes, good job Hack Snyder.

>Golden Age Superman are not canon
It is.
First of all it's THE version by Siegel and Shuster. You, or any disphit at DC will never EVER be able to refute that.

And second even if we talking about purely on merits of current comics it's still canon, especially after Convergence, for how lacking story was it made a point that all of things that were replaced by new52, includng OG Earth 2 or OG Captain Marvel's Earth is "canon" again.

Yes, it's not Superman that is currently in comics by Bendis. So what.

When Richard Donner made his Superman film \S/ wasn't a symbol of Jor-El, neither of Kents died of ordinary heart attack to establish that Clark can't save everyone despite all his powers, and they both were dead when Clark became Superman (from Superboy if on Earth 1, and just from Clark to Superman on Earth 2, i.e. Earth of original Superman)

Not that user, but Superman has killed too many times for him too remain averse to killing. I don't know if that's something DC has done purposely, but it's definitely real. In the big events he's always the one giving the big-baddie the final blow.

You'd be right about Batman, though, because DC has made Batman no kill rule almost into a bad joke with how over the top it has gotten.

>DCEU Superman had no reason to kill, Zod,
Come on, user.

Why is it that 10-year-olds can kill people all day long in Naruto and nobody blinks an eye, but Americans are still freaking out about Man of Murder six years later?

Golden Age Superman is a different character that was the mainstream one for less than 20 years

Current Superman is the mainstream Superman since 1950s, yes he is Silver Age Superman after suffering some minor rectcons and losing his memory.

It doesn't really matter if it's canon for Superman or Batman to kill, if people complain about the BvS portrayal it's because they didn't like the movie, BvS failed to sell that image of the characters. There's a reason if nobody fucking cares about Bat-Keaton killing clowns or Bat-Bale letting Ra's die

Attached: 1535038476428.png (226x205, 127K)

Naruto’s trash, and Superman’s held to a higher standard

Because Naruto ninjas are supposed to be "anti heroes" , one of the main premises of the show is that their "ninja style" needed to change. Naruto wanted to be Hokage to make things less violent.

>There's a reason if nobody fucking cares about Bat-Keaton killing clowns or Bat-Bale letting Ra's die
They do fucking care. Back in the day there was a huge outcry about Burton's Batman. So much that WB fired him from doing the third movie and gave it to Schumacher instead.

And even this fucking death could be considered an accident. One could easily argue that all Batman wanted was to stop Joker from fleeing.

Because Superman and Batman were advertised as much while in Naruto its often the recommended action. Compare to the MCU where they don't make a deal of it so no one else bats an eye.

If Superman didn't try to be hesitant in killing Zod or they came up for a better reason for Batman to not kill Superman other than reminding him that he has a mother(which every criminal he's killed have too), then there wouldn't be as much people annoyed.

Notice that the older Superman and Batman movies didn't make a big deal about sparing so they didn't get called out on it.

Attached: 1506128587412.jpg (499x501, 34K)

>Superman is high quality literature!
Wow, okay.

Well it influenced Sci-fi, Superheroes and Anime in general. Is at least a classic.

Didn’t say that, just held to a higher standard,

> by dozens of writers
Mark Waid
Greg Rucka
writers of Silver-Bronze age pre-Crisis Earth 1 comics (including Siegel) that had
sometimes Grant Morrison

>one writer
Jerry Siegel i.e. guy that CREATED Superman
John Byrne, main architect of post-Crisis
Dan Jurgens (also
Grant Morrison pic above
Joe Kelly pic related
JMS
Geoff Johns
as well as all writers of post-Crisis Supes that HAD to acknowledge that character killed in the past, unless they are hacks and don't care about continuinity, because it's literally in foundation of post-Crisis Supes.

>Some writers, much like Snyder, don't understand the character and screw him up
No, they DO understand character. They just don't do version of it that you prefer. How sad :(
Also Zack was only writer on JL and WW. Just fyi

Attached: Zack Snyder is a hack.jpg (962x1466, 271K)

>a better reason for Batman to not kill Superman other than reminding him that he has a mother(which every criminal he's killed have too)
You guys are so dumb.

Batman Returns had a big critical and BO success, if WB decided to pander to soccer moms doesn't mean it's reception is comparable to BvS. And i never heard of Burton being fired, he produced Forever and was even set to direct the Catwoman spinoff that never happened

read

He was also set to direct Forever. He didn't because of the public outcry and McDonalds not being willing to sell shit with this violent Batman and whatnot. Comic book nerds also cried a lot, including people in the industry.

>Also Zack was only writer on JL and WW. Just fyi
He was the director on JL but not even the main writer on WW. He was not even the second main writer.

>Current Superman is the mainstream Superman since 1950s
Nice schizo headcanon.Don't remember episode when current Superman built super-robots as a kid and they came back at him in adulthood as not-Hankshaw Cyborg Superman
Or the fact that post-Crisis (Crisis at Hand, canon again thanks to Jurgens) and new52 Superman's past recreates wife beater sequence from Action Comics 1
No, current Superman is not Silver Age Superman.
And again, Superman is created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Nobody will change that.

>if SOME people complain

Whedon rewrote most of it.

based kino-god

manchildren and capefags just cant cope

To be honest, Batfleck being framed as the misguided villain of the story is more appropriate and accurate than Nolan wanking off the Bat-ubermench acting like his morally dubious actions were a "necessary evil".

The big difference between the two portrayals is that Snyder goes to the conclusion and doesn't shy away from the ugly implications of unbound vigilantism, while Nolan in the end, for all his examination and deconstruction, dresses it up in a classic aspirational power fantasy. For what it's worth, I vastly prefer the capeshit movies to dodge the issue altogether and present a purely idealistic vision of the characters, akin to Jenkins' Wonder Woman, than Nolan's half-measures.

>(which every criminal he's killed have too)
Superman wasn't kidnapping people, or killing them for money, or killing in general besides Zod

>akin to Jenkins' Wonder Woman
That third act was pure bullshit, though. I wish they had kept the original ending.

>Nolan wanking off the Bat-ubermench acting like his morally dubious actions were a "necessary evil".

Nigga not even Batman in the movie saw himself as a perfect, he literally say more than one that Harvey Dent was the one who could save the city instead of him, that's the whole reason why the took the blame for the murders, because his influence over Gotham wouldn't change shit in the long run but Harvey in the other hand could.

>not even
LMAO

>read
>DCEU Superman had no reason to kill, Zod,
except that Zod would heat vision family
And no, he wasn't beat up, especially not when there is some sort of sun
>DCEU Superman literally started his Superhero career doing war crimes
protecting innocents isn't "war crimes"

Yeah, MoS haters are retards heavy on mental gymnastics, I already get that 6 years ago, thanks user.

The ending didn't change anything, Ares himself said that he didn't started any war, he only wanted to cause a doomsday scenario so humans could end once for all because he didn't want to spend all eternity in a never ending warzone hell.

DKR contradict it.

The problem was one of presentation. The original one was a downer, but sold that concept better. The new one, and what we actually got in the movie, had all the soldiers lay down their weapon and commemorate. Kinda as if killing Ares was the answer to stopping the war.

Didn't Snyder willfully misinterpret the scene in Dark Knight Returns where Batman NONLETHALLY shot a Mutant gangbanger in the shoulder to save a child?

How "heroic" of these superheroes lmao

Well. They all realize their mistake in the end and COME TOGETHER. Isn't that enough?

Attached: ibelieveyou2.gif (1000x793, 259K)

WW literally fucked off FOR AN ENTIRE CENTURY as per Snyder's version of the story, implying she let a shit ton of people die because of WW2 or even other supervillains, all because the man she loved and only knew for a brief amount of time died. That's pretty shitty. Thankfully, Wondy 1984 seems to be ignoring that.

Wait, you're being sarcastic, aren't you?

I don't care about the cinematic universe bullshit. I was talking about BvS. In BvS they tried to explain why there wasn't any mention of Wonder Woman AND give her a reason for staying out of the spotlight. That reason tied with the overall theme of the movie.

And we don't know the plot of WW84. For all we know Wonder Woman might be doing shit only in the hopes of resurrecting Steve Trevor.

>all because the man she loved and only knew for a brief amount of time died.
It was because she tried to stop a big war only for men to create another one right after, leaving her depressed because she had paid a price in the name of peace only for men to go back to warring over power.

The next couple pages have Comissioner Yindel wanting him arrested for ASSAULT

>In BvS they tried to explain why there wasn't any mention of Wonder Woman AND give her a reason for staying out of the spotlight. That reason tied with the overall theme of the movie.
Yes and my point was that it kinda made her a shitty person. This is my problem with Snyder and those who defend them: they literally don't want some of the world's biggest superheroes to actually be superheroic.

>And we don't know the plot of WW84. For all we know Wonder Woman might be doing shit only in the hopes of resurrecting Steve Trevor.
Fuck, I hope not.

>It was because she tried to stop a big war only for men to create another one right after, leaving her depressed because she had paid a price in the name of peace only for men to go back to warring over power.
We don't know that. All we know is that per Snyder's "vision", she fucked off right after WW1.

>We don't know that.
Yes, we know. The movie tells us. BvS doesn't say anything about Steve Trevor because that was still up in the airs. The point was all about how her involved in WWI was fruitless and how she believed it was because of mankind's shitty nature.

>This is my problem with Snyder and those who defend them: they literally don't want some of the world's biggest superheroes to actually be superheroic.
She realize her mistake and go to be Wonder Woman again. You're complaining that Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman were in a bad place during the first half of the movie, completely ignoring how they turn around in the last half.

In that case then why did Batman set out to kill him in the first place?

It has been explained.

>The point was all about how her involved in WWI was fruitless and how she believed it was because of mankind's shitty nature.
That's still a shitty, cynical take on WW. Never having read a WW comic, have I ever thought, "This woman would absolutely give up on humanity, for any sort of reason."

>You're complaining that Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman were in a bad place during the first half of the movie, completely ignoring how they turn around in the last half.
Because I never wanted to see them in a bad place, user. Or at least not like that.

>That's still a shitty, cynical take on WW. Never having read a WW comic, have I ever thought, "This woman would absolutely give up on humanity, for any sort of reason."
Well, if read the comics or even watch the recent animated movies, you'll see that Wonder Woman is more often than not a bloodthirsty ruthless cunt that coverts power.

At least Snyder's Wonder Woman was just a grieving, depressed reclusive that eventually turns around and becomes a hero again.

>Well, if read the comics or even watch the recent animated movies, you'll see that Wonder Woman is more often than not a bloodthirsty ruthless cunt that coverts power.
According to what comics? I've read a bunch, ranging from Rucka's run, Gail Simone's run, Azzarello's nu52 run, Earth One, etc. and that's pretty far from the fucking truth.

Virtually unstoppable guy that may go corrupt that everyone else.
Let's make sure he will never go corrupt one certain way.

Gail Simone's fit the bill. Azzarello was part of the New 52 and other comics from that period and continuity portrayed her that way. Earth One is pretty fucked up, too.

>Gail Simone's fit the bill. Azzarello was part of the New 52 and other comics from that period and continuity portrayed her that way. Earth One is pretty fucked up, too.
That is wrong.

It's like he only looked at the funny pictures without reading the words because they're boring. Even assuming he simply misinterpreted the sequence the comic mentions multiple times that Batman didn't kill anybody, Joker himself is forced into suicide because he knows Batman won't make that last step, again it's like he never freaking read it. And i don't believe him for a second when he painted himself as the hero that had to fight off all the "nerds" in the room that wanted him to make Batman shoot KGBeast in the face

Nah. It's fact. Don't make me post stupid pages from the New 52 or Simone's awful run.

>The problem was one of presentation.
Nah is pretty easy to see the whole thing, they show the war ending, they show that Diana views about ending all wars are naive.

WW1 was already over so WW2 would naturally happen, Ares didn't want that, he wanted to end everything. After his defeat is shown that this conflict ended but Diana knew that new wars were coming.

Wonder Woman conclusion is one of the best of all Superhero movies this decades, was realistic and bittersweet and actually teaches something like the foolishness of chasing utopia or creating bogeymen.

Kill yourself, casual.

>Joker himself is forced into suicide because he knows Batman won't make that last step
You're the one that read DKR, but never paid any fucking attention to the comic. The Joker didn't kill himself, Batman killed him and then started to hallucinate a conversation with the corpse where the "Joker" kill himself. Check the bubbles colors. That's not the Joker speaking back to Batman, but Batman himself.

Do it.

The entire theme of Azzarello's run was love conquering almost everything and WW able to turn almost all of her foes into allies. I don't remember a whole lot of gratuitous violence on her part in that run. And Simone's run didn't have any either, so far as I remember.

In the original ending the soldiers don't turn themselves in and the war continues a bit further to sell the deal better.

So again, why would Batman hesitate the moment he found out Superman had a mother and people who cared for him? Several of the criminals probably had some people who cared for them too and I imagine there'd be one who pleaded with Batman to spare their lives cause they have someone they cared for.

Azzarello's run ended with Wonder Woman tossing the Firs Born back to hell with "tough love" excuse, but that Diana was portrayed as a major fucking cunt in everything else.
Simone's Diana also was a sanctimonious cunt who always behaved as if she knew better than everyone and was a hot-shit.

People forget that Miller's Dark Knight wasn't all grimdark. It was actually really optimistic.
Batman is old, busted, and has failed Gotham on every conceivable level. But he still goes out of his way to spare his enemies and protect the innocent.
Superman is an attack dog of the American government, but only so he can serve his people and his planet. He does every he can to try and stop Bruce without killing him, and even helps him fake his death and go into hiding.

Because he realized that Superman was nothing like him and that he was projecting himself unto Superman. If anything, Superman was more like his father - Thomas Wayne. Just a man trying to protect his loved ones and "bleeding" for it.They even replay the Waynes death to make that connection more obvious.

vero.co/vero-live-broadcast
1:50:00 (somewhere there)

Because Superman is not bad guy. Because Batman realised he was about to off good guy, much like his own father was, based on fear and his own insecurities.
Also all this time he alienised him, but then it's some Earth girl that cares about him and also he has mommy with Earth's sounding name.

Attached: 21-young-michael-douglas.w1200.h630.jpg (1200x630, 112K)

Right, and TKJ ends with Batman strangling Joker to death I'm guessing?

That's a fancanon until you find a source of Miller claiming it officially was his intention, i just tried and couldn't find anything other than a reddit thread speculating like you just did

Why change the bubbles only at that moment?

Still would have been better if there was no Ares and the Germans weren't automatically evil Nazis in 1916

I read that whole thing in Borat's accent

>Azzarello's run ended with Wonder Woman tossing the Firs Born back to hell with "tough love" excuse, but that Diana was portrayed as a major fucking cunt in everything else.
The First Born was also going to kill everyone on Olympus iirc and he had no intention of ever stopping. That's better than just killing him.
>Simone's Diana also was a sanctimonious cunt who always behaved as if she knew better than everyone and was a hot-shit.
I don't remember that at all. I remember her being fairly nice and even a little gentle. It's been years since I've read it though.

>I don't remember that at all. I remember her being fairly nice and even a little gentle. It's been years since I've read it though.
She was a kind that played nice, but came off as a show-off. But that's a problem with Simone's writing. Her female characters are just super-smug about being better people than everyone else.

The way I'm seeing it it's either a visual parallel to the fact that they're in a dark cave or simply the fact that the shaky bubbles are supposed to represent a croaky, pained voice. It's not like Bruce always has those grey bubbles in the comic, they both get them during this straining fight to the death

It's not that the hallucination theory is particularly absurd or unrealistic, I'd simply expect such an affair to get more attention in the writing instead of being only mysteriously hinted so subtly and then everyone forgets about it

You know this story ends with Superman giving up his mantle forever because he's violated his principles, right?

>it's "canon" every time DC media says "Superman was created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster", literally only solid canon.

Yea Forums, you fucking idiots, you should have stopped arguing with him the second he trotted this out. Anyone that says Golden Age Superman is canon Superman is either trolling you or too stupid to be reasoned with.

DKR ends with him still believing that he can't influence the city to be better and that someone with an actual vision would eventually show up.

I feel embarassed for liking Man of Steel after reading this

Golden Age Superman trumps all other Superman. One was created by real people, the other is the product of a corporation.

I'm not saying i hate current Superman or Superman in general, or that i''ve stopped reading Superman comics. Just that the OG Superman will always be more important IMO.

Then he fakes his death, they give him a statue, and everything is great. Batman saved Gotham. Hell, there might be a new Batman. hooray, Batman!

OP is taking the quote out of context.

I read the whole quote, it's even more embarassing

>"When Chris Nolan and I were talking about making Superman, he said to me 'you know, Watchmen is the movie that makes Superman possible'.

>"It's a cool point of view to say 'my heroes are still innocent. My heroes didn't lie to America. My heroes didn't embezzle money from their company.' I'm like "that's cool, but you're living in a f***ing dreamworld."

>Zack: "Watchmen talks about comic books in the same way this talks about comic book movies."

>"There is a definite Alan Moore pedigree that has continued to affect me as I interpret these characters, Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, etc..... he's really good at not really destroying it... this is a guy that loves these characters anyway."

>"I love these characters, but I want to know what makes them tick... if in canon it says 'a character can't do that', that's the first thing I want to do. Like, why not?"

>"In my heart of hearts, I still believe in what Superman stands for. He's not going to f*** you over. His parents raised him right. They did the best they could. They have an alien for a child. He could have murdered them at any time. But he didn't. My hat's off to them."

>"So there's this character, who you do as best you can, but he's confronted by a world that doesn't care about those things. He believes in Truth, Justice, and the American Way... whatever that means."

>"We were watching the Singer version [Superman Returns] and it's on the nose like, it just says it 'truth, justice, and... that other stuff.' Huh? Haha. That can't mean something without the consequences of that reality. Otherwise it's a joke. Then it's that "truth, justice, and that other stuff."

And he brings Alan Moore into it as if Moore would write Superman like him, despite Moore have already written 2 of the best Superman stories ever by honoring what Superman represents, not mocking it

Christ, it's like I'm reading a quote from Vince Russo.

>And he brings Alan Moore into it as if Moore would write Superman like him,
That's not what he implied at all. He's saying what Moore did with Watchmen inspired his own take on Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. He's not saying anything about Moore has done or would do with Superman. You're jumping the gun there.
And the reason he brought Moore was because that panel had just shown the Watchmen movie.

And what's embarrassing about what he's saying? He's just affirming that he wants to see the real consequences behind what these characters represent or do. That's not embarrassing about it.

Sure, if you're of the philosophy that superheroes should remain an innocent and fantastical morality tale instead of being brought down to the nity and gritty reality, you'll of course not like agree with his mentality. But that doesn't mean there's anything terribly wrong with it.

>despite Moore have already written 2 of the best Superman stories ever by honoring what Superman represents, not mocking it
sure

>a whole BvS panel tonight
God, this is going to be such a shitstorm again, can't wait.

Attached: 1553025280927.jpg (531x531, 20K)

And? How does that affects main story's content which is showing what happens when soft Earth 1 Superman gets to put under the story without deus ex machina pulled out in the end.

nice try

i.e.
>I have no arguments except corporate line

yep

He probably parroted the bible in old hebrew, that sure convinced WB.

I kinda agree with Snyder here, but if you take the characters to their logical conclusion on many things you kinda end up breaking them.
Take for example the whole "Truth" thing in regards to Superman. During the last years of the New 52 DC attempted to do what Snyder is talking about here and explore the logical ramifications of that motto. So they had Lois Lane expose to the whole world that Superman = Clark Kent in a misguided attempt to save from being black-mailed by a random villain. Well, guess what? Everyone lost their trust in Superman and Clark Kent. Here was Superman, who had always talked a lot about the importance of truth and made people think that he was always honest and you could trust him. Now everyone just realized that he lived a hidden life for whatever reason. Clark Kent too, he's a investigative reporter, for God's sake, who made his career writing about Superman. Now everyone learns that he was actually Superman himself? How can you trust anything else he wrote about? What about all those moments shared between coworkers?
So Superman went from overnight to the world's most beloved and trusted superhero to the world most hated and distrusted superhero. The Daily Planet, because it has always defended Superman as an editorial, took a big hit to their credibility. They had hired Superman to write hit-pieces on himself! They always defended Superman? Who could believe what they publish anymore?

Eventually DC realized that they had written themselves into a dead-end with that little idea, because how the fuck you come back from that without a major reboot? The Superman and Clark Kent double identity is gone. The Daily Planet as a setting is destroyed. The whole Superman is great thing is gone. What's left? The status quo won't be the same going forward.
So they killed this version of Superman and then later erased his ass. Started all over again and ignored that little story.

That's probably something Snyder would have liked to see.

Attached: super-man-6_da_police.png (883x684, 1.08M)

So superheroes are made of bullshit and if you question what they do or how they work the whole house of cards come undone collapsing under weight of their own bullshit?

yes

>who made his career writing about Superman
that was the case with post-Crisis Supes.

In new52 tho Morrison pretty much reverted that by making Clark reporting on corruption and another boring stuff. I don't remember that him taking interview with himself was the reason that Perry White or Daily Star guy took him.

But also that's the thing. Comics will always reboot themeselves, because they need to keep going on forever, unlike films or even tv shows that usually need something to happen.

Even in comics terms it's stuff where they break stuff (even by INVENTING something, like Clark and Lois relationship ruined super triangle) that gets more remembered, than 500+ of same old stuff.

And it's not like he said that everybody should ALWAYS take characters to their logical conclusion, it's just the way he himself works.

Why didn't Warner Bros. just hand the reins to Dini and Timm? They proved more than capable with the DCAU. Doesn't mean either had to direct, just be in charge of tone, characterization, and general plotting.

also if we talking about OG Superman there was no "Truth, Justice and American Way", nor even "Truth and Justice" (that was originated in Fleischer cartoons), just a guy in the suit, that doesn't even outright calls himself Superman to the people he interacts with, but just here bullies the bully, showing his fancy skills in reparing bridges or destroying shit buildings, and makes Lois from terribly freightened of him to "make me your wife right now you man". He never tells her "I never lie", nor he is very expressive in general.

You will get exactly the same results.

Grow up.

Attached: Batman Kills by Dini.jpg (1600x1230, 464K)

But Dini's run on the Detective was good, and he nailed the portrayal of Batman better than Zack Snyder did in the films. Not sure what you think you're proving here.

Who cares if batman wasted a couple guys? It doesn't detract from the character at all. It's still an interesting character. When I think of batman and his potential I don't think "DOn't kill MUH JOKER" bs. That's low tier comic bs and not an essential part of the character

But bvs version is cooler and better than Dino's portrayal.

>And what's embarrassing about what he's saying?

It's embarrassing because it shows a lack of understanding of Moore's writing or the point he was making with Watchmen. And frankly, if your knowledge of Alan Moore only extends to Watchmen, then you should be embarrassed.

It doesn't show any lacking of understanding. Moore attempted to desconstruct the genre by showing the conclusion to the many tropes.

And why did he do that? Think for a minute. Was it to shit all over comic tropes? To make everything grimdark and "real?" Do YOU even understand Moore?

same question applies to you

Direct quote from Moore:

"There is something about the quality of comics that makes things possible that you couldn't do in any other medium. Things that we did in Watchmen on paper could be frankly horrible or sensationalist or unpleasant if you were to interpret them literally through the medium of cinema. When it's just lines on paper, the reader is in control of the experience – it's a tableau vivant. And that gives it the necessary distance. It's not the same when you're being dragged through it at 24 frames per second."

Also whatever Moore's intentions were it was natural that comics essentially became grittier and edgier, went back to the roots.

And now you've proven to have a lack of understanding of golden age comics. Congratulations, you're retarded!

>There is a definite Alan Moore pedigree that has continued to affect me
It never started affecting you, Zack

Attached: 1499804819647.jpg (246x279, 13K)

You're absolutely right. There were only very few people complaining. The rest absolutely loved it which is why the DCEU is now going very strong and is headlined by Superman and Batman and also why Snyder got an 8 film extension. I'm really excited to see more of Snyder and his amazing portrayals which are loved by many. I hope DC keeps him for years to come.

This quote is about transition between comics and film, not about it's content. Also show me quote (preferebly from 80's) where Moore said that he made Watchmen for sake of showing difference between mediums.
And Wacthmen film is not only adaptation of comics, but also critique of superhero MOVIES, this is why there are way more fight and scenes than in comics (all movies in general have more fighting sequences that drag way longer than in comics) or that they are way more choreographical. This is where brutal bone crushing comes, as opposed to people just getting knocked out by gentle punch.

And moreso how even this quote has anything to do with ?

If you check a lot of Watchmen (the movie) reviews even people that liked it agree that the tone and feel of the story got almost completely altered in the transition from book to movie, even despite how """faithful""" it was

Nice non-argument , Yea Forumsmblerina.

>which is why the DCEU is now going very strong
keep seething

Attached: DCEU is more successful than MCU.jpg (1902x1800, 2.2M)

Savage.

jesuschrist stop defending this pseudo-director pls, theres nothing to gain, everyone just hate his movies, and thats the reason he's no longer in the spotlight

keep seething [2]

where do you get this? inner demons? show where in the movie they talk about that...or is it just another interpretation of the "hidden symbolism" that only snyderfags can see?

>they talk
t. brainlet

Oh yes let's compare the first six movies of Marvel when they were still starting out and started the shared universe trend themselves that so many studios are now trying to copy and the first six DC movies that were created right in the middle of the Superhero boom that was made by Marvel. This is a very fair comparison and shows that DC absolutely beats Marvel! Wow! DC for the win! I'm actually laughing at how nobody wants to watch Infinity War and Endgame anymore because they want Justice League 2 instead. I mean how much did Infinity War make again? Like 150m total? What a joke of a movie. It will obviously be eclipsed by JL 2 and 3 directed by Snyder.

Zack Snyder is just something for Randian narcissists, neckbear pseudo-intellectuals, Indian streetshitters, and incels of every creed and color to jerk off to and pretend they're seeing something nobody else is smart enough to see.

Attached: D2A76AD7637F41E5B0A8D27082622FB1.jpg (577x658, 56K)

This picture is so amazingly idiotic. Like, you people realize JL for example lost money, right? And even if it didn't it still grossed less than any other movie in.The franchise despite being the big event everyone was supposed to look forward to. Yeah, good job, it grossed more money than a fucking Thor movie from 7 years ago, meanwhile that Thor movie carried into a full trilogy and interconnected ensemble movies while JL caused half it's cast to jump ship and the company to abandon the shared universe idea

Even the financially successful SS is getting rebooted with new actors and continuity. This pic brags about money for six movies but only two of them "survived", WW and Aquaman. On the opposite side the only failed experiment is Hulk

Attached: confusedmanholdingquestionmarkonwhitebackground.jpg (1300x866, 74K)

Keep seething [3]

Because his wife was a major player at WB and got him the job

Keep seething [4]

ok, if you insist.

Attached: 1553249310781.jpg (1096x800, 223K)

Yeah they keep seething because Marvel is dead and Snyder is going strong! High five bro!

that's simply innacurate

I like how all anti-Snyder "people" are liars.

uuh you got me there pal, guess im wrong

Attached: 159480_1_56586760e1917.jpg (699x407, 61K)

t. brainlet
Okay. Keep seething though.

ok, keep ctrl+v fag lol

kek why would we seethe when we're winning?keep saying that though maybe if you say it enough it'll make your tears go away. top kek

I understand the plot completely. I've even had pseudo-analytical discussions of it, but the story structure is still garbage, and there's a LOT the film should have just cut out for the sake of cohesion, or having a more focused plot.

Also, I say this every time it's mentioned. Batman being a killer is something that needs to be EARNED. It's basically one of the biggest story arcs you could possible have with that kind of character. If you're going to take Batman from 0 to 100, you don't start him at 80.

I willl rather have a couple of "unsuccessful" movies that have characters in it that I easily recognize from comics, movies and cartoons I watched before, rather than joke Thor without allspeak in neither movie, or Captain "close portal while Stark still in there" America, or cynical Iron Man.

Because you don't lie, or use mental gymnastics when you are "winning". Nor does one project his own insecurities on anyone, like for example carrying about superhero movies so much that you are are starting crying.

Except he didn't start at 80. The idiot tried to take Batman from 0 to 100 and started at 150.

K

>Batman being a killer is something that needs to be EARNED
Because YOU said that?

kek you're the one who can't reply with anything other than seething. And can you point out where the lies and mental gymnastics are or you just gonna say seething again because they don't exist? absolutely top fucking kek

>the lies and mental gymnastics

Come on pajeet gives us an argument.

I would guess it's because Zacky is amicable and charming. No joke, I think him being friendly and being able to convince people of his vision is how he won the the DC producers over.

Because his no kill rule is one of the most recognizable aspects of Batman's characters and is constantly incorporated in some of Batman's most recognizable stories like Under the Red Hood, The Killing Joke, and The Dark Knight Returns (which BvS is heavily based off of).
>B-but those are just basic bitch normie Batman comics, and in my specific elseworld comic, he kills all the time.
Exactly.

Removing his no kill rule immediately diminishes both his character, and the story potential you could have gotten from him breaking it in the first place. You've irreversibly made the character worse without taking advantage of anything the process could have caused, because even if Batman is implied to get better by the end of BvS, YOU CAN'T UNDO MURDER.

Also, if you're going to try and be a pedantic fuck and tell me, "I'm not arguing because of anything you just said, I'm upset that you're implying that you're an authority of comics", let me say in advance I'm not an authority on comics, and when I say something "needs" to happen, I'm not implying that I'm going to walk over to DC headquarters and bitch smack someone if they don't do it. I'm simply discussing how characters should be presented based off of how people expect characters to be presented.

>pajeet
Keep projecting. Maybe one time you will guess it right.

My only post here is this one >Marvel started the trend when Superhero movies weren't blockbusters yet
>They made their first 6 movies with less budget and it grew into an empire
>DC movies actually fucking killed their EU with the exception of Wonder Woman and Aquaman which were actually good
So which one are lies or mental gymnastics there? You want to directly compared the first 6 movies of each without looking at context and you accuse other people of mental gymnastics? Can you actually refute any of that? That's gotta be some meta-mental gymnastics you're doing to accuse someone of something that only you are doing to preserve your mental health. Absolutely top kek at the state of you right now. Thanks so much for this it's so awesomely funny to see Snyder-fags not able to defend this shit and resort to ad hominems to keep their self-esteem from self-destructing.

Not necessarily, the MCU gets away with changing core characteristics and personality traits for their characters all the time.

>this whole mental gymnstics the post where everything i like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything else
Just Yea Forumsmlr in a nutshell, yes, because YOU said so.

>based off of how people
which "people" exactly?
the "just basic bitch normie Batman comics" people
or obscure "OMG BATMAN USES GUNS".

Also Under the Red Hood wasn't even popular until cartoon with same name came out, and it's not even popular because Batman or that he doesn't kill, but because Red Hood and that he is good character, compared to deminished Batman because of no-kill rule went absolute.Even tho it was never the case, hell Batman said it to Jason that it was okay when kill is for self-defence, but thanks to Whinnick's selective memory that's never the case.

>YOU CAN'T UNDO MURDER
you can, because there was none it was all self-defence and manslaughter, murder would be if he killed Supes

>You want to directly compared the first 6 movies of each without looking at context and you accuse other people of mental gymnastics?
Yes.

top kek

>this whole mental gymnstics the post where everything i like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything else
I explicitly told you that I don't believe I'm an authority on comics. This is my opinion based on both the history of the character and the consensus of the film, but you're just ignoring that because you want to have some imaginary high ground that you're attempting to construct for yourself.

>Which "people" exactly?
The general people who read Batman. The people who DC dictate the modern "default" state of the character for. And it's pretty safe to say that the no kill rule is a part of his default state, because most main-line Batman have this rule to some extent. Of course, that isn't to say the default can't change or adapt. Comic characters change all the time. I'm simply implying that this is an adaptation in the wrong direction that only hurts the character's portrayal.

>It's not even popular because Batman or that he doesn't kill, but because Red Hood and that he is good character
Red Hood as a character doesn't work without Batman's no-killing rule. It's one of the central themes behind their conflict as characters, and ignoring that ignores an important element in what makes the character "good". Of course, I don't know you, so maybe him being "Batman with guns" is enough to make him a good character in your eyes, but I assume you're not an edgelord.

>It was all self-defence and manslaughter
Oh great, so you ARE a pedantic fuck then. Who cares about the point of the post if a word synonymous with another word is used instead. Batman gunning down grunts from his jet in "manslaughter", so that makes it a.o.k. :^)

Yes, killing people in self-defense is different from murder. But you don't set people on fire in self-defense. Or brand criminals so they'll raped and murdered in prison in self-defense. This Batman does nothing to make his city safer. He blows shit up in the streets with his tank and murders petty criminals. He spent more time torturing the slavers than he did trying to rescue and reassure the girls in the cage, then he stuck around so he could spook the cops. What purpose did that serve?

Superman is the Symbol of Hope. The movie goes to grest lengths to show us and tell us that.
Wonder Woman is the Symbol of Peace. She fucked off and let the 20th century be filled with the worst wars the world has ever known.
Batman is the Symbol of Justice. He uses the weapons that took his parents away to murder and maim, and the few criminals he does spare he condemns to death inside a broken system.

>The people who DC dictate the modern "default" state of the character for.
Those people love King's run. I don't give a fuck about their retard take.

The ALL comics since Red Hood II invention has absolute no-kill mandate now, no shit. Never debated that. I am talking about old comics.
Snyder's Batman isn't someone with 121312414123114 sidekicks around the world, it's most contained take, with One Robin Dick Greyson that died somewhere in a 20 year old journey, maybe there is Barbara or even some Batwoman, but that's it.

But it's same thing as shitting on MCU for not doing Invaders.

>Batman gunning down grunts from his jet in "manslaughter", so that makes it a.o.k. :^)
it DID, in normal comics before Red Hood II came.
It def. wasn't everytime, it was exceptional, but there was possibility, character was balancing on the edge. Now Scott's Endgame is as far as he can possibly go.

Attached: periodic retardation.jpg (800x1214, 148K)

Are Snyderfags incels?

I think anyone watching Watchmen knew Zack didn't get it when there was that goofy ass fight in the alley where Nite Owl punched some dude's arm backwards.

I hope Shazam outgrosses MoS so bad

>Goyer and Nolan were the captains of the ship.
Might as well have called that ship Titanic 2

He wanted the public to be all "this isn't your daddy's Batman/Superman" but at the same time wanted to subvert expectations which means the way the characters act are only seen as subversive if you have pre-existing knowledge of what Batman and Superman are like as existing comic figures

You can't have this both ways

>But you don't set people on fire in self-defense.
yes you do in a way to cast stream of fire from innocent
>Or brand criminals so they'll raped and murdered in prison in self-defense.
doesn't matter
>This Batman does nothing to make his city safer.
because he can't

>then he stuck around so he could spook the cops.
he was retreaving information

>and let the 20th century be filled with the worst wars the world has ever known
or what, tour around and dismember people to prevent them?
She learned in WW that humanity is shitty.
Also she is with original powerset in normal mode, no flight, not fast enough to go places like Superman (when he found kryptonian suit that helped him absorb sun energy better)

>He uses the weapons that took his parents away to murder and maim,
1. it was never original explanation of his hatred for firearms
2. yes in self defense, so he won't become toast when their machine guns will pierce his armor and blow up his vehicles
>and the few criminals he does spare he condemns to death inside a broken system.
doesn't matter, get fucked, 20 years in Goddamn City
3. what do you expect? giant robot arm that throws batarangs? (like in TMNT 2 2016 ?)

Imagine still defending Snyder when he doesn't even work for the DCEU anymore and the universe is going in a completely opposite and more successful direction.

Just imagine actually doing that

You know it will

You don't have a defense for the branding so you just mutter "doesn't matter?"

Are you actually 12?

Attached: 1526408202005.gif (416x307, 2.58M)

Exactly. His reaction to killing Zod doesn't make sense since he's never shown to have a no kill rule in the first place. He cries about killing this psychopath but doesn't even care about the people who probably died when he took the fight away from the farm into a populated area. What a fucking failure as a hero. Snyder is the same guy who is baffled that people complain about the deaths Superman could have prevented when Star Wars has a higher death count. The idiot actually can't understand that the people were complaining because it was that the HERO had a hand in it and not because of the sheer fucking number. He's a massive idiot.

You don't even have to make it that far, you just need to look at how they tried to make Owl super cool instead of an aging slob

What is it with the DCEU and doing character studies of superheroes in movies?
It's never going to work.
I get that they're trying to seem DEEP but nobody literally wants to see that shit, just superhero tie-ins and events.
Even V for Vendetta was full garbage and cheesy despite its message.

>What is it with the DCEU and doing character studies of superheroes in movies?
Only the two Snyder films were like that. SS was just wanna-be GoTG, WW was a straight action-adventure, JL was just shit, Aquaman was spectacle and Shazam seems to be in the same vein of WW.

It's not the DCEU user it's just Snyder who wants to seem smarter than he really is. This is why WW and AM were actually pretty good and successful.

They're doing it again with that JP Joker film.
No, I just hate it in general, comic book films shouldn't aspire to be deeper than they are.

Ya know. I was going to type out a response, but then I realized: this has nothing to do with the original subject matter of whether Batman killing without an introduction is good or not. So I'm just gonna, not do that, because that's not what I came into this thread for. Interesting point on Red Hood II though, and I will add there's a difference between "balancing on the edge" and doing it casually.

most are fathers already

>They're doing it again with that JP Joker film.
I think the Joker film is a mistake but if I remember correctly, that isn't considered DCEU

imagine being that insecure

Hell, I'll even put it at the same place as that Logan film.
All touchy feely sad tripe.
Disney unironically got everything right with comic book films.

>2.5/4
That counts as a ripe tomato? Yikes.

Reminder that Snyder turned Rorschach from a caricature of Ditko type objectivist heroes to a "badass" edgy antihero because he didn't get the character was making fun of his ideology

Eh, all WB/DC films are auteur films.
I personally like how he directed the films.

>implying it was his screenplay to begin with

God can Snyderfags please leave already? Your faggot idol failed 3 times in a row(and Sucker Punch before that)

Aquaman, Wonder Woman and Shazam all got praised by critics and audience now so you can't Blame WB, you can't blame Whedon, you can't blame Rotten Tomatoes or Disney shills.

Is fucking Snyder fault, he suck.

are you? It doesn't matter to me or to Batman because he isn't one who kills them.
It's like crying about people he (Batman in general) beat up who WILL die way sooner than they were supposed to.

He is shown to have a restrain against physically assault woman harrasser at the bar (unlike Reeve's one btw) or bullies in his school years. He is not violent against living beings that can't take it unless provoked.

>probably
no bodies = never happened, just like Batman in Batman Begins killed no cop in car chase.

Also proof that he doesn't care

>Snyder is the same guy who is baffled that people complain about the deaths Superman could have prevented when Star Wars has a higher death count.
That was a joke that went over your "intellectuals" heads too fucking far.

Also, no this Superman couldn't prevent it. He already pevent what he possibly could.

Snyderfags are in the minority, did you actively just want an echochamber of Snyderbash ITT?

Insecure about what? That I want a film that looks better than MoS to succed

>Eh, all WB/DC films are auteur films.
What the fuck? No they aren't. Nolan and Snyder is not all of DC

>Snyderfags are in the minority,
The problem is that they exist at all imo

>Disney unironically got everything right with comic book films.
said no one who ever read comic books

he simply adapted material, people always liked Rorschach you newfags

>Aquaman
has same critical score as Man of Steel and even lower at audience reception

Also, no fuck off.

>in the minority
objectively wrong

cry more

>that looks better than MoS
except it doesn't

I can agree that he's SUPPOSED to be wrong, but in execution he ends up kind of right.
Superman CAN be made to do bad things if you threaten his mom.

>to do bad things
like what?

Yeah he really showed his restraint when he impaled the guy's truck on that power pole cutting electricity to innocent people and making the insurance and the government pay for the damages to both the truck and public property. Plus it was totally okay to take the fight from an empty field to a crowded area right? As long as he sees no bodies then there are no deaths and endangering those stupid civilians are totally fine and dandy. He really is a hero! I am so inspired!

Snyder's statement was a response to the damage that Superman had a hand in and could have prevented. So pick one.
Snyder decided to joke around by bringing attention to the fact that he has no response to the complaint people had
or
Snyder is an idiot who thought that deaths caused by Superman are ok since the villains from another movie killed a lot more people

Why the fuck would he bring up the criticism anyway if he didn't have a response to it? You're the only one who thought it was a joke.

>he simply adapted material
Not the right way
>people always liked Rorschach you newfags
It's fine to like Rorshach's character but the movie version is a fundamental misunderstanding of him.

Yeah definitely! MOS critical score is way higher you guys! The audience score too! That's why a lot more people watched MOS compared to Aquaman! I mean look at the box office and see that MOS totally destroys Aquaman! Why do you guys think Snyder is in charge of DCs future and James Wan has been fired by DC you idiots?

>"Oh, Batman killed a guy!'--I"m like "Really?" I'm like "wake the f*** up!"....so that's what I'm saying, like, once you've lost your virginity to this f-ing movie [Watchmen] and then you come to me and say something about 'oh, my superhero wouldn't do that" I'm like "Seriously?" I'm like, down the f-ing road on that, know what I mean
Too smart for me

Attached: 13557668_1365850433430682_1838672372168361534_n.jpg (624x960, 147K)

>Everyone says that about "Batman Begins." "Batman's dark." I'm like, "Okay, no, Batman's cool." He gets to go to a Tibetan monastery and be trained by ninjas. Okay? I want to do that. But he doesn't, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that's how that would go.
I'm with you user. Way too smart.

Reminder that his intent was in fact to have Wonder Woman give up on mankind for 100 years because they don't deserve salvation

>6th movie in a franchise did better than 1st
Who would have think!
Nice moving goalpost though. That means BvS is second best in DCEU, based on Your logic.

>cutting electricity to innocent people
yeah, Snyder haters don't even watch movies they shit on youtu.be/waXG0xh9JUc?t=102

Again, bring me photos of dead people in the movie caused by SUPERMAN's hand.

>is a fundamental misunderstanding of him
what aspect?

>6th movie in a franchise did better than 1st
>Who would have think!
That's not how things work

If Batman knows that the criminals he brands will be tortured, raped, and murdered in prison, and he continues to do so, he is a murderer. No self-defense, no collateral damage, he is signing their death warrants. He is sending them to a painful humilating death with his name written on their skin. He wants the whole world to know that these men died because he marked their flesh.

That's not a hero. That's not an anti-hero. That is evil. That is tyranny. And he fears that Superman would use his gifts for tyranny?

Well there's this guy. And wasn't there a guy in a wheelchair because of Superman? Or a little girl crying because her parents died in the wreckage?

Attached: 2019-03-24-13-32-13--1790817516.jpg (351x143, 4K)

Oh yeah you're right I'm totally moving the goalposts. People absolutely love MOS over Aquaman! It's why Superman is the headliner of DC right now and Aquaman is dead. Poor James Wan. I guess he just doesn't have a future in DC unlike Zack Snyder.

So it's just the truck then! That's totally ok fucking up whoever's supposed to pay for that right? And I think you're absolutely right! As long as there are no photos of dead people then SUPERMAN TAKING THE FIGHT FROM A FARM TO A CROWDED AREA ENDANGERING WAY MORE PEOPLE is totally okay! There are no photos people! That's totally what a hero would do! I am just so moved and inspired by his actions! Classic Superman!

No he is not.
He doesn't care, they already made their life choice. 20 years. Not 1, not 3,not 10. No adventures on distant planets, no 923312432 sidekicks that die as fast as they get eventually ressurected.

Yeah, at least here wouldn't be another one like him, but even more unstoppable.

It was because Zod fried the building, and Superman simply couldn't hold top of it, while at the same time keep up with Zod. Choices.

Attached: fight donner.jpg (1041x1600, 493K)

If he thought them unworthy of life, why not just execute them. Not even Punisher marks them as prisonmeat.

Roschach would just kill them.
Ghost Rider would just kill them.
Venom would just kill them.
Thomas Wayne Batman would just kill them.
The only reason you would go to those lengths is because he does care. He wants them to suffer. He is an evil person.

>Oh yeah you're right I'm totally moving the goalposts
Yes you do. It's really tiresome.

this guy has the most punchable face in film industry

running out of arguments I see

He doesn't execute them. He has no control over what other prisoners will do. He is POWERLESS.

The only lenghts he goes is because they are too low to be worthy of his pre attemptive clean murder. Unlike this completely alien guy Kal-El.

No, it's just not rewarding to write anything further.

yeah that usually happens when you have nothing left to say

If Snyder is so smart why does he talk like an idiot and never made a serious film?

You think there will still be Snyder worshipers like 5 years from now when the DCEU is like totally divorced from MoS/BvS darkness?

Oh they'll never go away. They'll keep claiming Snyder would have been successful even with his abysmal track record.

Yes.

Snyder keeps validating his worshippers on Vero. They'll keep championing him until his next flop that he claims is 2deep4u.

I really do hope he adapts THE FOUNTAINHEAD. It'll probably shift their focus away from DC.

Attached: Match made in Heaven.jpg (2000x1000, 233K)

He marks them. He knows they'll be killed if he does it, and he continues to do it. That means he's responsible.

If I remove a stopsign at an elementary school crossing, am I in control of the outcome? No. Am I responsible? Yes?

You're going to great lengths to excuse these deeds that literally any other vaguely good character would decry as monstrous. You say it doesn't matter, that they've made their choices, but Batman is taking their last choice away. The choice to change. To be a better person. Batman doesn't have a no-kill rule because he'll lose control. He believes in human decency, that the worst of us can change. He keeps giving people second chances, not knowing if they'll change, but firm that it's their right to choose.

Tell me why any person who has any code at all, even the slightest bit of humanity would condemn people to a horrible death so much and so often he keeps the brand on his belt.

Imagine having so many director's cuts to "fix" your films that you can make a festival with them

Dude is just a complete autist which helps explain why so many autists match on to him as some kind of genuis.

top kek
although I think it's just a bunch of people who think they're "smart" for getting Snyder

That interview is the cringeist shit I’ve heard in awhile. Like, does Snyder know that Batman and Superman aren’t real? That they’re fictional characters that will do whatever you want them to, because they have no agency of their own? Is he aware that, because it’s fictional, the characters never have to do anything, much less kill? That they could depict massive action scenes without any collateral damage?

Like, Jesus. He’s just an edgy shitlord that can shoot action scenes in a slightly creative way. Bet you twenty bucks he was a diehard Liefeld and Image fan in the nineties.

Matter of fact, why isn’t he directing the Spawn movie? I would legit pay money on opening night to see a Spawn movie made by this idiot.

>I would legit pay money on opening night to see a Spawn movie made by this idiot.

agreed, give snyder all edgelords superheroes, and he will be succesfull at last

This x100.

This is some John Romero shit.

Hey. You be nice. Romero may have made Daikatana, but he still made Doom 1 and 2.

But Jerry Siegel also worked on Silver Age Superman, so technically Silver Age still supersedes Golden Age.

You mean how Superman didn’t kill them, he only got angry because his entire life got turned to shit and he had been literally pushed to the edge. And after he did kill Mxyzptlk, a guy who was unstoppable and was going to kill the entire universe and possibly more for 2 thousand years, he was willingly gonna give up his role as Supes because he felt he went to far. Obviously Alan Moore didn’t get Supes.

It’s Totally comparable to a guy that treats Zods death like he stubbed his toe, and then 10 minutes later is threatening the military to fuck off or he’ll drop planes of them, and then later smashing a normal human through a wall at Mach 4.

Attached: A52F6207-44F7-4E8E-B47F-2CAB3C91BD13.jpg (282x267, 10K)

OG Superman also didn’t fly or have Kryptonite until it was written by other writers. Guess those things aren’t canon to his character anymore, cause Siegel and Shuster didn’t write them.

>JL made less than Iron Man adjusted.
Jesusvwhat a fuckin disaster.

But Batman did kill people, sometimes brutally so like locking KGBeast in a room without food or water so he’d starve to death. Having said that Snyder is still a faggot who doesn’t understand the actual crux of why people took issue with his movie. I didn’t mind BVS but I knew walking out it was going to get panned to hell