@@ger5504 even if it is low profile they started out in 2012 they started out just a year before the dceu. So how the hell did they get to build a proper universe but the dceu don't.
@@thomaspanditfan2435 well that's a good question then. I like z.s movies but I think he was one of the mistakes why dceu did not sucess. Arrowverse even if it got low rating and bad critics they kept building that universe constantly.
Warner Bros. has owned the film rights to every DC Comics character and franchise since 1969. They had FOUR DECADES to establish a cinematic universe before Marvel Studios could, and they chose to wait until after their competition had already taken the initiative and cornered the market.
exactly and marvel did that even without owing their most iconic characters the x-men and fantastic 4 like they created a dynasty without those characters imagine what they're gonna do now that they own the fox characters and wb couldn't do anything even though they own the whole DC roster
Well said. I think they didn't choose to wait but were just uninspired / didn't care at all. Aside from casually making money off of the characters in few movies. Basically they never thought about it. Until Marvel did the shared cinematic storylines. Now they're in panic racing the MCU without even having established their cinematic universe nor a decent adaptation yet. Sure things started to get decent with Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam but... Hahaha. Businessmen got fucked by real passionate creators. It would be awesome to see DCEU into the right direction in the future but I hate how they're trying to keep up with MCU by taking shortcuts and underestimating the audience and fans. In the modern world where feedback is instantly heard, doing big things half-assed to make fast profit is suicide for the studio.
@@drtirthadas they still have have avengers, thanos and Spiderman and loki bro but you are right X-men and fantastic four are also important characters
Kevin Feige made Captain America cool ‘n’ inspirational… and Thor warm ‘n’ relatable. Zack Snyder made Batman a hot-headed maniac… and Superman a cold-hearted Objectivist.
@@tomthibodeau992 Lol you sound like such a moron it's the fans fault that Ben turned into alcoholic it's our fault that Zack can't get Superman and Batman right, it's our fault that his movies sucked so much ass that he got fired midway I'm not saying WB did the right thing but all of his movies underperformed at the box office and are divisive at best so keep crying sweetheart 😘
@@tomthibodeau992 Everything can be interesting if done right but Snyder was never capable of doing anything right. He fails miserably at simple story telling
So here's the breakdown of all the things done wrong in the DCEU: 1. Superman & Lois Lane's rushed relationship 2. No solo movie for Ben Affleck's Batman preceding BvS/Justice League 3. A terrible origin story for Superman (in my opinion) in MoS 4. First Wonder Woman film not released before BvS 5. BvS happening SO early in the DCEU's lifespan 6. Casting Jessie Eisenberg as Lex Luthor 7. Hiring Joss Whedon as a last-minute stand-in for Zack Snyder on Justice League 8. Aquaman film not released before Justice League 9. Has no one to oversee the long-term story of the DCEU (like Kevin Feige is to the MCU) 10. Shoehorning in Doomsday so early in the DCEU's lifespan 11. No solo films for the Flash & Cyborg before Justice League 12. The tons of nightmare (Darkseid) foreshadowing in BvS 13. Shoehorning in the Suicide Squad so early in the DCEU's lifespan. 14. Not taking cues from the DCAU (DC animated TV shows).
The only one I'll give them a pass on is 7. Snyder had a legitimate life reason for not being able to complete the direction on Justice League (He had to bury his child, no one should have to do that, it's a tragedy when such things happen), and Whedon's stock was pretty high at the time, given the success of Avengers.
Do you know what a good movie is, they were challenging they characters, did you really want 2 captain America's because that's what everyone would have said.
This is the same DCEU that introduced Justice League and killed Superman in their second movie. It’d be like the MCU introducing The Avengers and killing Captain America in their second film.
Agreed. Wisecrack is completely off. The problem isn't that "Snyder went dark and gritty with the universe" as wisecrack's poor straw man argument would mislead uninformed people to believe. For proof that dark and gritty works well with these characters/universe, look no further than DC's latest animated R rated release Justice League Dark: Apokolips War. This has to be one of the best superhero stories I've seen with compelling character arcs and plotlines where the narrative feels like it has real stakes. Like you said, the problem is that WB was rushing out undeveloped characters and poorly crafted storylines, interrupting Snyder's real vision and trying to cash in on 'the marvel money' and play catch up to them. Sadly, wisecrack completely failed to understand this and is instead advocating for the same exact mistake 16:00 "Wonder Woman/Aqua man/Shazaam all have lighter playful tones therefore they are doing better" (they really had the nerve to show clips from that dogshit Harley Quin movie). This is not true and part of the problem. DC shouldn't be trying to copy another studios tired old "fun" 'vanilla' formula. They should make their own unique vision, and this has aleady been done very well in the DC animated films. "batman never kills"..."Superman kills too many people when fighting with Zod"...these are all untrue flawed straw man arguments that detractors of the DC movies like to mindlessly regurgitate (including wisecrack). Batman has killed people in many previous iterations previous to Snyder's film. Superman in man of steel actually saved the entire planet from being terraformed. Anyone who thinks superman should be able to prevent every single death and know exactly how to fight a brand new enemy/force that presents an unprecedented challenge to superman without causing any destruction is absurd. Plus, I believe the point of man of steel was about a more realistic/grounded perspective of 'becoming superman' giving him more humanistic qualities to make him relatable, not 'already being superman and having experience to know exactly how to go about being superman'. This wisecrack video was absolutely painful to listen to.
It's a shame when you get people who don't read a lot of comics STARTING OFF with TDKR, thinking that they are reading "the highest rated Batman book" and they come away thinking that's just how Batman is supposed to be; never getting that's it a subversion. It's like watching Scream as your first horror movie.
Snyder's whole point was to show a broken down Batman who lost any semblence of sanity when he saw Metropolis destroyed. That's why he kills thugs now and Alfred even brings up "new rules?"
Christopher Marabella I get why a lot of ppl like Snyder but imo this is the big picture. I wouldn’t want a dystopian series to be the main series of the franchise. I would still want to see it on the big screen, but I wouldn’t want it to be the main series. Sure I would like to see an injustice movie but I don’t want to see it labelled as “Batman vs Superman”. Cuz it’s not the normal Batman nor Superman. It’s like introducing the Batman who laughs and calling it the normal Batman. Just doesn’t make sense at all
Imagine a ship trying to sail across the ocean with: A) No captain. B) No sense of direction. C) No clearly defined destination. That is the DCEU in a nutshell.
Close, but I’d say there was a captain, except that he was obsessed with traveling through the Bermuda Triangle to try and catch Moby Dick. The crew should’ve mutinied long before he sailed us halfway across choppy oceans
Everyone compares the MCU to the DCEU, but what I could never understand why the DCEU was done so wrong while the DC Animated Movie Universe was done so well! #ApokolipsWar
Well most of the current animated movies are a lot more standalone, but another big element is that their core purpose is to just adapt specific stories with no need to worry about tying them into anything else. The DCEU was built with the idea of creating a distinct continuity. And since the executives didn't know anything about comics beyond their sales figures, when creators talked about their plans to draw inspiration from two graphics novels with very high sales figures, they were willing to just trust them without looking too far into the details.
I may be in the minority but I would love some 3D animated DC movies. Animation can be much more stylized and can deliver more fantastical concepts without the break in immersion that live action can have if one small thing doesn’t look believably in a real world aspect
@@kah0326 Well 3d has it's own feel that's a little different from both 2d animation and Live Action. At which point it comes down to the skill of the full teams of writers, animators, directors, etc to pick the right story, and animate it to best take advantage of 3d's strengths.
I thought you were talking about DCAU, as in the animated Timmverse shows. If they were the case I'd have totally agreed. The movie universe on the other hand, is hardly much better than the live action counterparts. Sure some of them work in a passable level, handful are even genuinely good. But most of them are cheap popcorn flicks that fall into the same category of mistakes, especially the aspect of connected universe which just does more harm than good (unless your favorite character is Damian Wayne). Like the recent adaptations of Death of Superman or Batman Hush. The former was meh at best and while the latter is no Killing Joke movie, just fails to depict what made it's comic counterpart impactful.
Watching this just makes appreciate Iron Man 1 even more, hell I even missed the end credits scene with Nick Fury when I first saw it back in 2008. The DCEU actively tried to rush a franchise with a edgelord at the helm.
The only reason why tony stark became ironman was because a bomb with his name on it was about to blow up his fucking face off! Lived as a dick died as a dick.
That dick who no superpower saved the Universe with the snap of his fingers, saved more innocent life in Afghanistan greater than military force could and created a new element with some lasers and a wrench. You’ve never been so wrong in your entire life.
Max Pawa iron man had a character ark, where he becomes vulnerable and yinsen shows what his impact on the world is. yinsen dies and it makes Tony realize that before he himself dies he has the ability to do some good, instead of creating weapons of mass destruction. Man of Steel had nothing like that. Supermans adopted father died and it changed him by saying that he shouldn’t be a superhero. Doesn’t make sense at all. Don’t know what ur spouting on about but ur probably one of those shallow DCEU fans who like grit with a fake front of depth
@@BennettLee8888Tony stark Lived as a dick and died as a dick, you looking for something that arent there! The only reason he became ironman was because his face was about to blow off by a bomb with his name on it! And thank god he fucking die! he was always a useless character IMO. Being a super hero is no about saving everybody!
Max Pawa “Being a superhero is no about saving everybody!” I’m assuming English probably isn’t your native language but surely even you can see that sentence sounds stupid when you read it back. Iron Man is cool, why do think he’s a dick?
The biggest mistake was rushing to connect them. They should have taken their time, built up each hero with at least one movie, then had them come together for some cataclysmic event.
Yes. I liked the dream sequences in Batman vs Superman with the desert and Parademons. It looked so good and I wish, there was a full movie about that, when Superman is awaken and with that style. But instead we got the Justice League, with an evil Superman for just 5 minutes and also horrible colors and designs. Batman should not kill but the rest was really good, and Superman was too depressed and destroyed cities and then they made in Justice League everyone joking. And why a teamup when there where no movies with the members before? Just stupid.They say they want to copy the MCU but they only made the teamup movies and not the universe.
But the previous film was boring and meaningless anyway. So unlike Marvel which can entertain along the way, Man of Steel was just a stupid film where the most interesting talking point was that Clark hadn't shaved for 4 days or something. It would have been even worse if they took time over nothing to get to nothing. But hey, maybe if they committed to it, they would have found something interesting. Although just watch Iron Man compared to Man of Steel. It's night and day. It's a good movie that happens to be about a superhero, Man of Steel is a Superman movie that's boring and pointless. Only to be followed by more boring nothingness. Whereas Avengers tried something really interesting, especially with Thanos being framed as the protagonist. That's true grittiness, because it makes you question morality. Batman for instance, wasn't gritty, he was just a douchebag with no personality, like a bouncer who decides he doesn't like you and won't let you in the club and brands you with a bat symbol... I think I got muddled somewhere in that analogy?
Clive Doe I’m actually glad that they’re not talking that approach now, because what you’re describing is just the MCU, and the MCU is great for what it is, but it’s impossible to have superhero movies that are actually high quality films with deeper themes and a clear directorial vision with Marvel’s formula. Logan and Daredevil is the closest Marvel’s ever gotten, and one was the last dying breath of a franchise, and the other was cancelled for financial reasons, and won’t be coming back because it’s too dark and violent. DC is in a very interesting spot on the other hand, with them abandoning the whole cinematic universe thing to focus on individual films, and giving full control to the directors, and with that comes the possibility for greatness. I know this isn’t the desire of everyone, but I personally want comic book movies to be taken seriously; I feel like there’s so much untapped potential in some of these characters (especially Batman) to make a true masterpiece of a film, and I think that’s the direction they might be going down.
True. And it clearly contradict their excuse on superman's character developments, i.e. how could the world miss superman when he wasn't THAT superman. And that happens in the ending of BvS, so no snyder cut bs.
The real mistake is they hired Snyder to shape the entire DCEU... How do u make someone who barely knows anything about DC the head of DCEU... This is what they shouldve done... 1.Hire a Kevin Feige... But theres no Kevin Feige, you might say... Simple solution... 1.Hire a council to manage everything like Feige does... This council should include Geoff Johns, Scott Snyder and a third writer(Screenwriter of preference who is NOT CHRIS TERRIO) 2.Hire DIRECTORS THAT LOVE DC!!! That bleed DC!! 3.Focus on trilogies BEFORE connecting the movies(With hints within the movies of course) 4.MAKE SURE THE CONTINUITY IS RESPECTED!!
Now that I watched this, I understand that we could've had a very interesting cinematic universe dedicated to a deep exploration of the psychological and social consequences of a world where super heroes and super villains exist, and what are they symbolic of in the real world... but the concept failed and was poorly executed, so it won't be explored ever, and that's the real lost.
Avengers Civil War played around with those ideas. More in a corporate/legality type of fashion, which was still interesting, but not in the same way that this could have been. The Dark Knight Trilogy also genuinely questions morality and the psychology of it's villains and protagonists. So it's not like we are without that. The problem DC has is that the Marvel films weren't just 'first to the cinematic universe' idea, they actually pulled it off. I think a lot of people don't give Marvel enough credit. Most of the films are entertainment first, but there are a lot of really good films that, at the very least, don't become sloppy boring messes with zero character development like the DC films. And Marvel even managed to create a coherent story arc throughout all of those films. It's pretty impressive.
Curiously, despite all it's flaws, the DCEU intended to show how the existence of these characters would affect the world better than the MCU. Marvel has better movies, but beyond lip service, we don't see how the Avengers affect the world. Stark technology is only applied for superheroes, not normal people. Thousands of people watched two green giants and NY didn't reacted. The whole world knows now that aliens and the Nordic gods are real and apparently everyone is still christian or muslim. Captain America ( living legend from WWII) can run at Washington D.C. and it doesn't turns into a Rocky training montage. BvS was awful but tried to cover the implications of having a superpowerful alien living among us.
@@lacrartezorok4975 "the DCEU intended to show how the existence of these characters would affect the world better than the MCU" actually, no To quote Jay Excl It's not that those movies are surface-level It's your comprehension of them that is surface-level
The rush to build a franchise is why it failed on the business side, but even taken singularly, they weren't good movies. Or at least, they were poor adaptations of the commonly-accepted forms of those characters.
Marvel had five solo movies by the time they got to team up. DC just missed the boat, I mean back in 2008 the Dark Knight was good so DC were blissfully unaware that they should’ve been prepping for a movie franchise.
@@mufradr Huh that’s weird, I swore he spelt “preoccupation” wrong but he obviously hasn’t edited his comment. Welp rip me, for looking extremely stupid and going blind I guess.
I’d argue that the visuals _are_ the story. He crafts his stories with heavy amounts of symbolism, visual gags, Easter eggs, and innuendos to the point that the spoken words are secondary or tertiary to the point of the film. He’s like the anti Tarantino.
People often say George Lucas needed people to challenge his filmmaking choices but I think Zack Snyder far more embodies this issue. He has exceptional talent but he often sacrifices deeper character conceptualization and story development in favor of great visuals. He struggles when restraint is the better option and typically overcompensates with bombastic visuals.
But it looks pretty, doesn't it? That's all that matters. And one of the worst of cinematic sins is committed: a senseless overuse of slow motion. It is hard to appreciate a movie when your eyes are rolling all the way back to your brain every 10 minutes.
They asked too much too soon, additionally Snyder does have good subtext, but he's problematic on macro storyline issues. That's why any single scene Snyder makes can look great, but when you watch a whole story it has issues.
Long duk dong He does have a point, Zack’s movies are visually stunning, and there are some good themes, it’s just the execution of those themes that doesn’t work at all a lot of the time
The big difference between Marvel and DC is this: Marvel: can make the audience resonate, connect with and feel for the death of one ant out of trillion others. Yes an actual ant. DC: Can’t even make the death of their most iconic Superhero (Superman) feel impactful in any way.
That's because it takes heart to make characters real. DC is into 12 year old cool fan boy stuff. Superman and Batman can't be allowed to be vulnerable, not really. No one cared about Superman - and when he died no one believed it. And to prove them right - they brought him back during the end credit scene. They punked out. As long as DCU is working with Snyder they will keep making the same mistakes.
Summer Tyme this comment is riddled with flaws. But I guess people hate what they don’t understand. You hate on Snyder yet you don’t even know that if it weren’t for him you wouldn’t of had endgame or infinity war as well as your previous cival war. So try and show a little respect
@@tomsiebert155 Oh piss off. It doesn't take a genius to figure the cheesy reference that Snyder included in the movie. Still symbolism does not equal quality
@@tomsiebert155But we do understand what Snyder was doing, and hated it. Symbolism is not depth, iconography is nor storytelling, and "Martha" is how you solve a difference in philosophy. Also, Civil War, Infinity War, and Endgame were on going to happen with or without the DCEU.
To be fair though, I think people are waaay too forgiving of some aspects of the MCU in comparison. Look at one of the main flaws of Man of Steel, "Superman fails the test and ends up killing the bad guy without trying to find an alternative despite his power". In a movie that wants to be an origin story and leaves a lot of room for improvement for the protagonist. Now, how does the MCU conclude and achieve its main character's arc ? "Tony Stark kills the bad guy and genocides a whole alien species without trying to find an alternative despite his *absolute* power". Somehow, the MCU ends on an utterly cynical note, ruining the whole moral development of Iron Man by reducing his choice to a murderous "an eye for an eye" mentality, which is far, far worse than the detached jerk he was at the very beginning.
Blizaros well an eye for an eye mentality makes sense sometimes and according to Dr strange who observed a shitload of timelines, wiping off thanos and his army was the best choice
I pretty much stated this all the way back when the movies were coming out that Zach was too concerned with the Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen and had too little understanding of the source material he was attempting to adapt. His fundamental misunderstanding of Superman and what he represents immediately cast a shadow on the extended universe before it even began.
Zack Snyder does understand what Superman represents. He just questions how easy it is to represent those things in the modern political climate. In a time when truth and justice are perceived as ambiguous and subjective, it's hard to stand for truth and justice, and there's inevitably going to be significant backlash for doing so. In a world overcome with fear and anxiety, it's certainly possible to inspire hope (and the films make it clear that he DOES inspire hope in many people), but any attempts to do so will be met with skepticism and distrust. On top of that, Superman has to struggle with the dichotomy between the old-fashioned notion of self-sacrifice and the more modern concern with self-care. In the end, he still stands for everything he has always stood for, but we get a glimpse into how emotionally draining it is to stand for those things in the present day, where negativity comes from all angles.
Zack is dyslexic. Im not making fun, he rlly is. I think that explains why he said Batman kills in TDKReturns when he absolutely does not. He even breaks a gun in his hands calling it a cowards weapon. This also explains why he cant wrap his head around Superman. He can do great Heavy Metal magazine looking movies. His BVS film looks like Superman/Batman filtered through Heavy Metal which is pretty rad if it was not a universe nd just a stand alone set of films
I think Marvel had to do that because they were dealing with lesser-known characters, where as Warner Brothers thought that their DC characters were untouchable and could make money in their sleep. I guess they had to find out the hard way that I coherent story is of great worth.
Snyder's Superman is still that archetype imo. He didn't fail his final test. He's just not omnipotent, meaning he can't save everyone, and recognises that murder is the right thing to do in some very rare instances (like when a superpowerful being won't stop for anything to destroy an entire planet).
@@danethenice You have a very odd archetype of superman.... I recommend reading the Superman comic "What's so funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way?". It's about a group of superhumans who feel that arresting criminals is pointless and kill them instead. Even after these superhumans nearly kill him, Superman responds "I fight for truth and justice and hope, even when the world sucks. Getting angry is easy. Killing is easy. Even if you think a world without violence and misery is a dream, I'll fight until that dream comes true, or until I die. And I'll do it my own way." Superman is the archetype of "A good man with godlike power who uses it for the good of humanity". He doesn't sacrifice his morals to solve problems. Snyder wanted a superman that kills, and made contrived writing to force a situation like that. He never kills Luthor. He never kills Darkseid. He never kills brainiac. He never kills Zod.
3:04 You missed the opportunity to say: Batman in the other hand made himself who he is, through drive, will, persistence and a small loan of a million dollars.
Theres a JL animated movie called Justice League: War, that is a pretty simple introduction to the characters, and has the exact same plot of the snyder/whedon movie. But done much better.
@@Davidsworldtravels Still I'd take that Darkseid over the Steppenwolf that we got in the JL film. Also, keep in mind that the animated film was like 79 minutes long instead of the 2+ hours that the Justice League was. That additional run time could have been used to flesh out Darkseid more. The point it, they introduced the heroes, established their characters, motivations, and powers quickly, and made the experience fun.
RansomeStoddard I think they missed the characterization of the heroes and darkseid. Comics darkseid is a brilliant strategist. But I understand your point about how short it was. The best version was from the justice league unlimited animated series
@@Davidsworldtravels True, but for that they had many episodes to develop those characters. But I guess that's the point. DC needed to take their time and develop the characters for their live action universe.
*Marvel*: let’s make standalone movies about individual characters so that audiences can get to invest in them and then we’ll release a team up film. *DC*: let’s rush our universe and give audiences a justice league movie before making solo movies and let’s assume audiences are familiar with our characters.
I disagree the justice league cartoon was great green arrow as a liberal question as a extreme libertarian captain atam as a patriot. Didn't need there backstory they were all interesting quiqe character
Daragh O'kane The important part is “Cartoon” the JL cartoon had good writers and enough episodes to flesh out their characters. The Question has plenty of episodes, Green Arrow always voices his opinion, and - while one note - Captain Atom had an impact on the story.
It’s amazing how Warner Bros did that. Anyone here watch HISHE? Bats and Supes are exceedingly better as a duo, more likable, and entertaining in an amateur cartoon. LOL
@@leonardchurch814 it also felt more realistic everyone felt like a real person. I do think they dropped the ball on the end. It would be cool if president lex declared the league an enemy of the state. I mean hawkgirl allowed an invasion. And question tried to assassinate him he would have justification. And superman would be in such a moral delema should we turn hakwgirl in to be executed or go to war with the government. But I know that was supposed to be final season. The movie on the other hand suck the bad guys are just irrational evil and not enough to be entertaining
The Dark Knight Returns is a landmark comic that works on so many layers. It's a shame so many people take the wrong message from it, leading many to denounce it as edgy garbage nowadays.
It's not that people think tDKR is edgy garbage, it's that a lot of edgy garbage was created in its wake. Also, you can't lead off with a deconstruction - it has worked out for modern cinematic Batman only because the iconography of 60s era TV/classic comics Batman is so deeply ingrained in the public consciousness. Maybe for Superman it could've worked as a off-brand standalone (a la "Joker"), but not as the lynchpin of a straightforward JL adaptation. If Supes doesn't even know why he's busting his hump saving people, and the world doesn't want him, that character+universe will never lead naturally to a Justice League. Just on the face of it, it makes no sense. If he wanted to make a DKR+Injustice offshoot, riffing on these themes, well go ahead, but don't call it Justice League, and don't sink a ton of DC's future into it.
@@mandisaw I am not disputing that. Using a story about a broken man ruminating on his mortality and legacy to springboard a series of fun, family oriented blockbusters is QUITE FUCKING INSANE. Edgelord Zack Synder glorified the comic's violence and grit, but gentrified the anti establishment themes. It is a shame that to the wider public, Batman v Superman will be their closest exposure to The Dark Knight Returns.
I believe a separate video should be made about what happened behind the scenes of the DCEU and the influence The MCU and their fans had over DC and WB.
Snyder missed the point. Of everything he's ever read. The Watchmen film is a textbook example of how you can be faithful to the form of an original work without capturing it.
I remeber watching Watchmen as a teenager and thinking the film was amazing. I then went on to read the comic and realied just how bad of a director Snyder was
I sooooo agree! I had super long debates with my friends at the time saying it was just a boring missing of the point. And none of them agreed. Even the over the top fighting scenes made zero sense because most of the heroes were just proficient fighters, but ultimately real humans, not with super powers. It was just glammed up. Didn't it even ruin the twist at the end totally missing the ENTIRE moral purpose of the plot? Omg it pissed me off so much after loving the book and people thinking it was just a random collection of fight scenes that were fun. Just make a different film instead of mess up a genuinely impressive visual novel or whatever people call it!
I whole heartedly disagree and I'm not sure why. I read the book immediately before I went to the movie and I read it immediately after. I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, I just don't understand the hate for the film. If someone would explain it a bit to me, I'd be grateful.
Answer: The same thing that went wrong with the Rey/Disney Star Wars Trilogy; they didn't properly think through the entire story of the films/switched up the crew working on the films so the main films failed while the stand alone were decent.
One was because the studio wanted to ride off success of someone’s else and kept interfering with the artists visions, which lead to their universe being all disjointed and rushed out to compete with its competitor while the other was because the studio threw away the outlines of what could’ve been a great trilogy and instead messed up the franchise with identity politics, cheap nostalgia and lack of vision and planning.
Accept they did, at least snyder, his wife and the writers did Suicide squad was supposed to fight against paradeamons and the new threat of steppenwolf in the original finale Its very clear that ww was originally supposed to be closer to the plot of the motherboxes Everything changed the moment bvs came out, as they cut down the movie so the pacing is all over the place and put the lex+steppenwolf on the internet instead of in the movie itself.
@@SaurianStudios1207 >kept interfering with the artists visions There were reports that there was little interference actually and Snyder did what he wanted, so MoS is what he decided to do. He was rushed, true, because studio wanted a movie soon ,but that's it. Same with BvS - he was asked to add Batman to increase appeal to watchers, but then liked it some much that Batman's role grew and grew. Interference happened in Justice League, but it happened at later stages ans it seems that noone vetted the script because first there were hastry changes after BvS bad reception, then big reshoots were done and the movie was still bad, and then Wheadon was asked to do rewrites and reshoots. And he was likely asked to do 2 hour movie and not a longer one - look at and JL run time. So it's mostly a disaster of Snyder's own incompetent creation
"I kinda came to the conclusion also that they couldn't really talk in their suits, um, with any credibility..." "... more than 4 or 5 lines and you start to notice, like wait, these are two guys ... one guys dressed up like a bat and the other has a big red 'S' on his chest, and they're being super serious about how mad they are at each other..." Quoted from an interview with Zack Snyder. Why was he put in charge of the DC movies?
You literally just established the Iron Man of your universe then kill him off in the second film of your franchise, then call that character development?
Lucky ASMR to be fair in the comics dc heroes die a lot and get resurrected, Superman dying to doomsday is like a classic storyline. But i do agree the doomsday vs Superman was crammed in that movie very poorly
It also diluted the impact of seeing Superman die. When they killed him off in the comics back in the 90's, he'd had about 60 years of adventures to make us care about him. In BvS he only got to be Superman for about 2 years before he died, so no one felt anything when he got impaled to death.
You can thank marvel for that. Because of them, we couldn't get single focused, story/character driven films. Instead we got the mess that we got, and Marvel saturated the market so much that they basically killed the genre.
@@questioneverything1639 That doesn't make sense to me. Yes, Marvel flooded the market with films that integrated with each other to the point that you could argue that they were all just one giant movie that you needed to watch from it's absolute beginning to understand it while Marvel runs away with all the money; but how does that explain DC deciding they wanted all the money too but without any of the work needed to manufacture it so they just plopped all their major heroes into a melting pot and expect that the over mixing of incompatible characters in incompatible settings would make them huge profits? It's kind of like blaming lemmings jumping off a cliff on the first lemming just because he was the first one to come up with the idea. Then again we, the audience, are just as much to blame because we were the ones who bought all the movies in the first place.
@@white0thunderwhite0thunder71 The Hollywood industry focuses on what the audience goes for. People bought into the mcu. So, Hollywood started creating more cinematic universes. For example universal monsters universe, spidey universe, DCEU, etc. So yes, marvel and it's audience had a huge part in the death of proper films being released and getting attention.
@@white0thunderwhite0thunder71 th-cam.com/video/LlekzeLA79g/w-d-xo.html Go to the 43:50 point mark of the video or just take the whole video in its entirety to see what I'm talking about.
Snyder's DC movies were so mean-spirited and overall cynical. Every decision he made seemed to intentionally miss the point of what makes these characters so beloved. I have such distain for his DCEU films that it's tainted my opinion of his previous work. He's a skilled director, but his personal philosophies seem to clash very completely with my own.
Noy Telinú He likes The Fountainhead for its critique on how artists are made to conform and he thinks it’s crazy in a weird way. He doesn’t really care about Ayn Rand or her philosophy at all.
Zack and Warner thought violence and edginess made Dark Knight great but they missed the point that it was just substnace and maturity. For direct inspiration they should have looked at the Animated Universe
13:46 - This is where you hit the nail on the head. I remember seeing BvS in the cinema and I could feel the unease in the room, this feeling of no one being able to "get" into what they were watching. And this is why - Snyder wasn't trying to communicate with his audience, he was making a Batman/Superman story just for himself. I think that's what will ultimately stay with me from Man of Steel and BvS, this self-indulgent, gritty brand of film-making which is, ultimately, hollow and insipid.
Is that a bad thing? Filmmaking is a form of art and people make art for themselves all the time. It isn't egotistical to create something you enjoy. I think it's much more egotistical to expect creators to always cater to you.
It pissed me off when I read an interview and he said that he had Batman kill in the movie because he killed in The Dark Knight Returns which is wildly inaccurate. At best you can say on only one occasion that it was ambiguous whether he killed someone or not. Even Frank Miller said many years ago that he purposely left that scene ambiguous to weather Batman killed or not. To have Snyder come out and say that Batman killed in that, definitively is ridiculous and asinine.
For some reason people LOVE to take shots at the DCEU. But let someone say one negative thing about the MCU and the stans will come running to defend against even obvious MCU flaws. And Thor the Dark World wasn't the MCU's only mistake. There are many others, big and small.
I kinda feel silly saying this, but really the DCEU fans started it. From what I saw, the MCU vs DCEU jabs were largely just in good fun. It wasn't until BvS came out that shit hit the fan. So many critics and moviegoers disliked the movie, and they had/have a legitimate right to do so. It was DCEU fans who came out in droves with the infamous bullshit theory of "Disney is paying off critics to hate DC movies", and when the term "shill" really started getting thrown around.
@@DooodOfLife Tho you might agree, BvS has a lot of issues but doesn't deserve such low rating maybe Suicide Squad cuz it was really lame, but damn 27% that's too much
@@skullquarry Shazam! was released in the United States by Warner Bros. Pictures in RealD 3D, Dolby Cinema, IMAX 3D, 4DX and ScreenX on April 5, 2019. The film grossed over $366 million worldwide, making it a box office success. Birds of Prey has grossed $84.2 million in the United States and Canada, and $117.7 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $201.9 million.[3][4] According to Variety, the film needed to gross $250-300 million worldwide in order to break even.[2] You are kinda right? But certainly not as sucked ass as you think thou.
@@skullquarry they made that box office money thanks to the snyder movies tarnishing the brand. People associate DC movies with a bad time at the cinema thanks to snyder, so obviously (even if the movie is good) theyre not gonna show up
I wouldn’t reply to Sachin Grey. They’ve posted on other comments berating anyone who doesn’t like Snyder’s movies, even if it’s only an opinion. They’re obviously the worst type of fan
On point, because Snyder didn't tap into any of the social-political elements that made Watchman and Dark Night Returns, genuinely subversive and insightful.
They probably wouldn't let him really put the actual politics of DKR in the movie, because that thing is one of the most divisive comics nowadays. He took the tone and lots of dialogue and some plot elements out of it, but I'm betting the studio was probably like, "Pump the brakes, Zacky! Going full Libertarian is a good way to alienate a large portion of our potential audience! Let's not put everything from the comic into the movie."
@@Cursed_Mark Oh, he totally does, but he also deserves at least a little praise for the good elements in that film too. Most of the problems in BvS started with the script, but the way Snyder had that movie unfold definitely deserved criticism. The only good fight scene Snyder has ever shot was the Batman fight scene in the warehouse. The fight scene in Batman's dream sequence/time travel vision thing was poorly choreographed and lame. Also the painfully obvious product placement in both Man of Steel and BvS is bad. (I'm convinced the entire budget of Man of Steel was contributed by Denny's and Sears! XD And of course Bruce Wayne doesn't drive a Lamborghini or a Mercedes; naw, he drives a Jeep! XD)
@@wrestlinganime4life288 He is, and it might have worked if Superman was the naive company man that he was in DKR, to provide a contrast. Instead, it's just two dour brooding heroes having a punch-up in the rain.
I’ll be honest, I haven’t read any of the comics mention or otherwise. But I still love Man of Steel because it shows struggle. Clark spent his entire life in the closet, he’s never really used his powers which makes it believable to me that his first battle was messy and a failure. I’m a Power Ranger fan as well and one criticism I always hear from others is “how do they know how to do everything?” I.e. their weapons and zords. Why isn’t the same logics applied to superheroes, especially Superman? Diana spent her life fighting which is why she hit the ground running when she left the island. Her only flaws were not being versed in man’s world. Henry Cavill was a great actor to portray Superman as well.
I get what you're saying, but I feel like even on your first day on the job you should know not to punch another Kryptonian THROUGH a skyscraper since it's probably going to collapse and crush a bunch of flimsy humans. Despite that I actually DO like a lot of Man of Steel - Henry Cavill is a fantastic Superman and Michael Shannon is absolutely riveting as Zod. But the one thing I HATED was Jonathan Kent's death. A heart attack (like in the comics) is such a perfect metaphor to show Clark that no matter how powerful he becomes, he will never be able to save EVERYBODY. Why would you change that to Jonathan CHOOSING to die just so Clark wouldn't reveal himself? It goes against everything Superman stands for, putting the wellbeing of others above his own. I find it impossible to believe that if there was even a chance that Clark could have saved his dad he would do it in a heartbeat, regardless of how much it might screw up his life. Not to mention, I feel like Clark could have run out there, grabbed his dad, flown him away once they were obscured by the tornado, and then just told everyone they got lucky and were thrown clear by the wind. Haha
@@sipalingindonesia Yeah, but that's my point - If there was even a one in a million chance that Clark could save his dad he would absolutely go for it, even if it meant he was GUARANTEED to expose his powers to the entire world and lose any hope of a normal life forever.
seriously these two comics destroyed the whole comic medium. after the debut of these two comics, literally everyone in the planet wanted to make a comic based in a dark gritty grime reality, where everyone is asshole and the protagonist is also a anti-hero.. who is apparently going from some psychological trauma and questioning his own morality.. this idea has been at least used trillion times now, sometimes they use this just as a excuse to make something dark. I mean like seriously, I wonder how the comic industry would be today, if these two comics wouldn't be exist
“You see where you’re going? Now let’s worry about how you get there.” -Hawkeye They focused too much on their destination and didn’t care enough about the journey.
@@jasonbarkley4586 I just thought it was a funny thing to say since he was dead for awhile in the ground. Though I don't remember if they had sex prior to that statement.
And now they’re distancing themselves from his vision. Batman’s getting rebooted, Man of Steel isn’t getting a sequel, and Justice League isn’t getting a Snyder Cut.
Vladimir Manosalvas IG: TheVladMan It’s necessary. His vision affects the image of Batman and Superman so bad. I think that’s why an animated Death of Superman was released 2 years after BvS
Live action and animated TV shows are different from movies. WB/DC were jealous of the financial success enjoyed by the MCU, so they rushed to create their own, as evidenced by a premature team up (Justice League) made before all the heroes were properly introduced via their own individual films. They also picked Snyder to oversee their DCCU, but he was the wrong person for the job and already had his hands full (some would say he was swamped) portraying Superman and Batman.
In that regard, WB thinks that audiences are stupid and wonder why there's two versions of characters around. That's why they killed off Deadshot in Arrow before the Suicide Squad movie came out, and why he came back as a hallucination after it bombed.
They didnt try to copy marvel, The first movies in the DCU series were dark themed from the beginning complete opposite of marvel. After the failure of the Snyder era they're now changing tone to copy marvel.
@@achronos178 they weren't talking about copying Marvel tonal wise in they mean the movies by me bvs was there Civil War suicide squad was obviously Guardians of the Galaxy even their humour (which made everthing so overdramatic tried lighting it up with a tasteless joke) was similar to Marvel and the way that we're building up there Universe to Justice League was exactly like Marvel. (it was just rushed)
I think of it like this: As an artist, if I make a portrait of someone, and there's an infinite amount of detail, colors, shapes that make it "pretty" but there's no soul or heart in the eyes, it just doesn't have the impact that it should when looking at the picture of a loved one through the eyes of an artist. An artist knows this and would rather give the portrait life than just simply eye candy. This is where Zach Snyder I feel dropped the ball. He went for the dark, grim and "pretty" but forgot to put soul and heart into a story that would resonate with both a casual movie-goer and a fan of the genre.
Simple Zach Snyder’s post apocalyptic, nightmarish world with a murdering batman was a route that didn’t appeal to the wider audience and then when WB tried to interfere with justice league to make it another avengers the whole thing ended up a tonal mess.
@retsaM innavoiG I agree with the first part of your comment and some aspects of your second one where you said the murder side was not addressed very well I don't think it would have given it a pass I think they would have understood if they showed Robin being beaten up with a crowbar. Detective side is not the only thing missing he's also not intelligent.
They shouldn’t have tried building a universe on around Zack “All Surface, No Substance” Snyder. Visually, his movies are great but they’re about as deep as Barbie’s Dream House hot tub. The rush to catch up to Marvel was detrimental and I’m sick of Batman movies based off TDKR. There are so many other great stories to reference
@@night6724 Marvel's substance is repetitive to the point of being, sure, probably due to being hobbled by Disney. But Snyder's work lack substance in the sense that it has no internal logic, says nothing new or substantial about anything, and no plot that an audience can stay awake through.
@@catatoblob8598 to the MCU credit they at least know how to write characters. I wanted the dceu Superman to saying inspiring speech like Captain America.. Guess I'm too naive and stupid
@@wrestlinganime4life288 I grew up reading DC comics, largely due to their amazing animated series. The DCU has a lot of critically acclaimed stories with deep messages. Snyder clearly enjoys these stories, but his failure to adapt them into watchable movies suggests that he can only see the surface of these stories without understanding what gives them substance. Snyder's superman can't make an inspiring speech like Captain America because Snyder doesn't understand or respect superman. His Superheroes are out of character and excessively villainous because he doesn't really understand superheroes. He has great visuals, but really not a great choice for writing a mainstream, or even a subversive film about superheroes, because he doesn't connect with the fundamental concept of the stories he's being tasked to tell.
@@catatoblob8598 He's obsession with Watchmen and The Dark Knight returns is quite boring. Those comics do not represent the best of DC.. I'm not saying you can't try, but just because you can that does not you should. The famous World cardboard of Superman highlights how frustrated Superman is. That's why I find hard to believe he would go mad because Lois is dead cough Injustice cough
Me neither. Given the directions and decisions, even with the recent solo movies that were decent, it'd be almost a decade before the DCEU can stand on its own feet.
The Superman story „What's So Funny About Truth, Justice & the American Way?“ is a great take on the differences between the moral driven Superman and the new, grim kind of superheroes of the dark age...
Well those fan are as retarded as their idol. They were only able to see the surface level detail from scene to scene. However, they never realized that those “symbolism” are fragmented moment that does not help contribute to the whole storyline.
@@mahanubhavs9980 On a broad enough spectrum, every movie falls into some category of mediocre. It is also a comic book based Zack Snyder directed movie that raked in cash, is the point....
Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice should’ve had the movie just focus on the two characters coming into conflict because of their different ideologies. Lex Luthor would still be the villain of the film pulling the strings behind the heroes conflict but no Doomsday, no Wonder Woman, and no Jesse Eisenberg. The real film should’ve starred Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Henry Cavill as Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman, Amy Adams as Lois Lane, James McAvoy as Lex Luthor, Diane Lane as Martha Kent, Laurence Fishburne as Perry White, Holly Hunter as Senator June Finch, Tao Okamoto as Mercy Graves, Callan Mulvey as KG Beast, and Jeremy Irons as Alfred Pennyworth.
that is what they claim ... but he only keeps saying tha tSnyder's uses surface level material... they don't really tell us why. I get the themes just like in Watchmen. What made BvS confusing is the Luthor plans that distracts us from understanding Clark and Bruce's points of view.
Snyder doesn't miss the deeper message at all. He just spends a lot of time questioning it (perhaps too much time) before ultimately affirming it. He takes a dialectical approach to the underlying philosophy of the comics. He presents the source material's thesis, offers an antithesis based on real-world examples, and then modifies the original thesis into a synthesis: a version of the comic book viewpoint that better accounts for the problems posed by real life. In doing so, he inevitably makes the heroes look a little bad before reaffirming what makes them so good.
This. People talk and analyse films and go too deep when the only reason is that the people at WB just wanted to cash money asap and didnt care for anything else.
@@tarnishedpose The reason we keep talking/analyzing though is that DC/Warner Bros was well-positioned to do just what their greedy overlords were asking for. We already know quite well who Batman, Superman, even to some degree the Flash and Wonder Woman are. You need some setup to kind of orient us (which time period, are there aliens, which Flash are we using LOL), but beyond that, you're free to skip over a lot of establishing stuff - no real need for origin movies. WB also has some of the best directors, writers, producers, actors, and crew, all of whom will put as much effort into Pluto Nash as they did Lord of the Rings. So the fact that they took literal box office gold and turned it into shite is worth examining.
Destroying the characters with it i think that is not something you should be happy with. Only the biggest fanboys somehow keep defending the movie. Because of the cool fightingscenes. 😔
If I want bright, colorful and fun I’d watch marvel. The directors cut of BvS was actually really good, and gave you more to think about then most other superhero movies.
Maverick ssb4 thank you! Idk why everyone, including wisecrack are obsessed with knocking DC for “being too dark” when the shit marvel puts out is EASILY mediocre excluding some movies....like if you’re a cornball that likes predictable films I guess marvel is your thing.
Hey, I haven't seen the director's cut of BvS, does it explain why Batman is casually murdering criminals or why he's got a weird Dick Cheney mentality about Superman (i.e. His line about "If there's even a 1% chance Superman could turn evil then I absolutely have to murder him right now!")? Also, does it address Superman's weird behaviour after the massacre in the opening scene? Like, he's accused of killing all those people, why doesn't he hold a press conference and say "Did you notice that all the bodies are riddled with bullets...? Does it seem like I would need a gun if I really wanted to kill all those guys.....?" I'm not being facetious (well, not ENTIRELY), I'm seriously asking because if it makes all the insane Batman characterisation make sense then I'll definitely give it a watch! :D
@@LoganBluth to answer your question or part of it, with regard to batman killing and wanting superman dead, his motives/reasons are made clear from his interactions with alfred. You can see he views people as potential "bad guys" if you will. He has seen too many people go bad or change from being good to something else entirely and has seen what those type of people are capable of. Now someone who views the world like that for regular humans or even meta humans in the case of his rogues gallery, it would be easy to understand how much of a threat they see superman as considering his god-like abilities and how there is little to no chance anyone has to stop him as bruce/batman sees him as just another person waiting to go bad only that this time the person in question can wipe out every single person on the planet with relative ease. If you didn't already know that this version of batman is a worn down world weary one, as that was like one of the biggest things they said about him as a character even before the movie came out, then it clearly shows that you like movies that will spoon feed you information in the form of unnecessary exposition like if alfred were to say "Master wayne, you need to stop killing and branding bad guys, robin's death was not your fault. not everyone is bad so you need to find hope in people and be better" all the time he was on screen. I'm not making fun of you or your taste in movies and if you didn't get that the movie addressed some of your questions even in the theatrical cut then you should watch the director's cut, if you are indeed a fan then I believe you will enjoy it as some development and plot points were removed but as for batman killing and wanting superman dead I believe it was on the table even though I haven't seen the theatrical version in ages. :)
Joel Mutshaeni Ah, okay. See I figured there would be some better explanation in the Director’s Cut for Batman becoming a guy who just casually murders pretty much every criminal he sees than simply “He’s worn down so much that he just kills people now.” So what you’re basically saying is he’s “Batman In Name Only”. I mean I could almost understand if Batman had been pushed so far that he IS willing to kill, but only in EXTREME cases (like Superman, who like you said is such a MASSIVE potential threat). But I just can’t enjoy a depiction of Batman who murders every random thug he comes across (unless of course it’s some sort Elseworlds story in which Batman has become utterly irredeemable). Never mind, I’ll give the directors cut a miss. I’m sure you’ll say I just can’t handle movies that don’t spoon feed everything to me (while also INSISTING that you don’t mean to insult me whatsoever, for which I must commend you for employing such a very mature and not at all obnoxious style of discourse). To this I say I’m happy for you to believe about me whatever pleases you. You’ve certainly told me everything I need to know about you. 😘
Flashpoint will most likely retcon Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad and Justice League. There’s no plans for these movies to get a sequel, and there’s no plans to release the Snyder Cut. Gunn has confirmed that The Suicide Squad will be a total reboot, not a direct sequel.
Just by Hell, I’d only keep Wonder Woman and trash everything else that’s apart of the DCEU. Just give me more movies like Joker and The Batman, and I’ll be happiest DC fan of all time!
@@TheVladMan. I'm not exactly up to date with all the news, is flashpoint a thing? i heard there was some drama with flash actor and how it could be cancelled but i'm not sure. But those are certainly movies that i will not miss
@@thebatman8815 trash the entire DCEU and stick to independent movies(as in these are not connected at all, like Joker and the next The Batman). If anything works... a trilogy doesnt so bad. Ask Nolan...
Knightfall182 Superman isn’t that great of a box office draw, so that might by why they’re distancing themselves from him. The last four major movies with him - Superman Returns, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Justice League - all underperformed financially.
While Returns and Batman Year one are great, Miller himself lost his way with The Dark Knight Strikes Again and more importantly All-Star Batman and Robin. Plus, Miller totally screwed over Dick Grayson and the less spoken about ASBAR, the better
I think we are in the "batman & Robin" phase again. After messing around with archetypes and after seing what birds of prey had to offer we'll have to wait a while before superhero movies get to be good again... Frankly even Marvel is going down in quality in my opinión and what l've seen from what will be the new batman film doesn't strike me as WB learning anything from past mistakes.
@retsaM innavoiG Honestly, my opinion. But if you want the long answer, I think Marvel is slowly falling into the money and political propaganda trap. Latetly their movies are about an agenda first and a story second, take what they do: usually all their character movies have the same plot, it's more obvious every time and is because they have to, HAVE TO hit those political agenda points, damned be the script with which they do it. They started with a great idea about characters that build a universe but now they focus on "well, this will be the first female lead movie or the first black lead movie or the first whatever", and act like those things have never happened before and get credit like crazy because that's how Hollywood works. They wanted to give black panther an oscar, and yeah is a good movie and all but come on, is not original at all and is not even comparable with the dark knight and that movie didn't even get nominated back then, I mean is another subject but it ilustrates the point. Then there is the thing they did to spider-man... they straight conned us. Dead is the base from which that character stud. They have the nerve to say this won't be an origin story yet they give us a three movie origin for the character and still is not even close to be spider-man proper. They replaced uncle ben with Tony, which no matter how many easter eggs they put in their movies it doesn't have the same value. Their visual effects are mediocre at best, compared to the artistic efforts put in by the team behind the raimi movies (which are not perfect, no I'm not a raimi fanboy). Over all, they are very few the times where a marvel movie has moved me and is sad bacause I'm a huge fan of their characters but if you ask me, their strategy has been basically to turn all of their very diverse and unique characters from the comics into a version of Spider-Man (they are all snapy and quick-witted) and then turn Spider-Man into Iron-man jr. I remember my heart beating at the ferris scnene in TDK, my eyes getting teary with aunt May's speech, my joy at the last swing in Spider-Man 2, my smile when Superman looked at the camera at the end and smiled back to me, and by far I remember when heroes inspired me and others instead of acting like completely incompetent people. Marvel has had those moments too. Avengers, winter soldier, iron-man, etc. But they end up being just that, moments. In the other examples those moments were part of a bigger idea behind the entire movie, is called theme. And you can't have the same theme in all your movies about different characters and expect me to believe that you (marvel) are dedicating the same amount of passion and care to these projects. Recently IN MY OPINION, they haven't. No wonder they are making movies about the vilains now (which is even worse from DC). All of these is excluding the Daredevil, Punisher and Jessica Jones series which I think have been Marvel at its best.
Thank you! Nobody seems willing to admit, how much of a bad decision the appointment of Zack snyder was. He was the one that fucked it up, before WB made it even worse.
@@StevenZephyc He was also restricted by likely studio mandate to make a movie short - look at JL runtime. It's idiocy to make a group movie that has 120 minutes runtime, even solo character movies are usually longer, of course you produce a jumbled mess out of it.
The fact they could’ve build up to Doomsday instead of rushing things and actually have a meaningful superman death then, it sucks, especially knowing the MCU has nailed it in making a cohesive cinematic universe. Iron Man’s death and Steve’s fulfillment of getting his dance made the whole world weep, meanwhile we have superman dying in one movie and coming back alive in the next
Snyder is a visionary filmmaker. The worst parts of BvS were evidently from studio meddling, and the ultimate edition is genuinely fantastic. Although Snyder evidently had too much fun with certain violent elements, the core ideas in the movie are profound and moving. The world deserves to see the snyder cut.
I personally love the grit in Batman v Superman, but it’s kind of a dead end, you can’t separate a hero from his moral superiority, or at least his effort to strive towards it.
That movie was too dark to the point people couldn't have fun with it. you can have a dark movie but there was to be little bits of light-heartedness or small personal intimate moments.
@@MrGregory777 You're technically both right. IH is 100% MCU, but it was released through Universal. The Hulk cannot have another stand alone film unless it's through Universal.
I have a love-hate relationship with DC. My 3 favorite superhero movies of all time in no particular order are Watchman, The Dark Knight and Joker... but my most hated superhero movies are Suicide Squad, Batman v Superman and Batman and Robin. It's not a very healthy relationship.
It's impressive how people dont get it. Super needs time to handle his abilities, on MOS, he had nothing time, every fight is grounded on the lack of ability of ground control end focus. And, in bvs, he was put on a place that is cleary references on our age. A hero can't be unanimous, if he is, the people in charge of power changes that. You all supposed to watch a dam funny superhero movie, but forgot to watch a movie that gone further.
I have been studying BvS obsessively ever since it came out four years ago because, for me, it wasn’t enough that I didn’t like it, I had to understand why - why did most people hate it while a select few hailed it as a masterpiece? What was the X factor? And after reading many, many articles and think-pieces from both sides of the argument, I believe I’ve finally figured it out. I believe the answer is twofold: its attempt at realism, and Zack Snyder’s philosophies when it comes to storytelling. It’s obvious that Mr. Snyder has a very unique taste when it comes to filmmaking and craft stories, and he’s very unapologetic about it despite how divisive it can be. The only film he’s ever directed that has garnered mainstream recognition for him was 300, and I’m willing to bet it was for reasons he didn’t intend. All other works he’s been involved in have seemingly been destined for cult followings - Watchmen, Sucker Punch, Dawn of the Dead, The Guardians of Ga’Hoole, Man of Steel, etc. - all of this is to illustrate he’s, at his heart, niche creator. He himself admitted more than once that the "mainstream has never interested" him. Despite that, he continues to try his hand in these ventures that more-or-less ‘’requires‘’ mainstream recognition in order to be successful. This is a bad equation. Mainly because he doesn’t make movies ... he makes poetry. He makes very complex visual fairytales where dialogue is either secondary or tertiary to the point of the story. You could watch his movies with the sound off and you’d probably get a ‘’better’’ understanding of what’s going than you would otherwise. Taking that into consideration, it’s easier to see where BvS went wrong, especially in its regards to realism because that movie is NOT realistic. Not even close (see here for more information: tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/IdiotPlot/DCExtendedUniverse). However, it is metaphorically realistic. That’s an important distinction. It has more in common with ancient hero-myths or epic poetry in its scale, in that things seemingly happen without warning or build-up and you’re not supposed to question it. It functions on right-brain thinking and you’re just supposed to suspend your left-brain logic in order to appreciate the larger meta-narrative, which some people are just prodigiously attuned to. This is not how movies have evolved to work over the last decade or so because of the internet. Best exemplified by TH-cam series like Honest Trailer or CinemaSins, where they will point out any and all flaws when and where they can find them. I once read you could never make “RAIDER OF THE LOST ARC” now because the day it would be released, thousands of articles would be written pointing out how the hero had no real effect on the plot; if Indiana Jones had done literally nothing, then the Nazis would have opened the Arc and all died. Of course the point of the movie isn’t if Indy can stop the Nazis, it’s about whether the cynical Dr. Jones can put his faith in the “magic hocus-pocus “ he scoffed at in the beginning, but that wouldn’t matter to audiences these days. Everyone would be criticizing it for having a story with no real consequences. This is all to say that Zack Snyder’s tenure as the de-facto architect of the DC film franchise was destined to fail because his artistic philosophies just don’t work for tent pole blockbusters anymore. The mainstream demands tighter plotting and deeper characterization than what he wants to do, so maybe it’s for the best that he has moved back into his comfort-zone with his low-risk zombie-heist film (even though zombies have been done to death and undeath at this point). Although, I hope he hasn’t completely given up on superheroes just yet, because I think he’s the perfect man to direct the rumored MCU adaptation of the SQUADRON SUPREME, which is shockingly identical to BvS.
Absolutely spot on. You can apply that same mentality Synder had with the dcau to Watchmen. A lot of people miss that he didn't understand the original text because he pretty much apes the plot of the book. But certain stylistic, design changes contradict what Watchmen was saying. He got the surface meaning but not the deeper meaning
It's possible that he actually does understand Watchmen, he just doesn't care. He was drawn to the material because he likes bad heroes, blood and guts, bombastic overkill. The rest doesn't matter to him.
Not facts! Snyder was a scapegoat. The truth was that the studio execs wanted to instantly have a marvel universe and pushed for it. (a cash grab.) Because of this it became too much too soon. Snyder had a long term plan and he was overridden by the studio micromanaging everything and the Superman vs Batman movie was a mess caused by the execs. When they finally released the ultimate edition which was closer to Zack Snyder's vision the fans who saw it said it was better than theatrical cut (not perfect but better). Then the Justice League movie came out and bombed. That movie was greatly changed from Snyder's vision (and was Josh Whedon's mess.) They also cut out all references to Darkseid and let that plot line fade into oblivion. Everyone said Zack Snyder's vision was too dark but they went too far the other way. What many of the younger fans don't understand is that for decades Marvel was the serious comic company read by older kids and college students. DC was for the kiddies. That's why they had the crisis reboot in1985 and why they hired John Byrne to reboot Superman. His book sales were so poor they felt that they needed to "Marvelize" Superman. Look at the horrendous JLA NBC specials, the ridiculous Cathy Lee Crosby Wonder Woman movie and the silly Superman musical. No one took DC seriously! Even Linda Carter's WW series and Christopher Reeve's Superman movies had their share of silly baggage. As of 1989 the best super hero franchise's in tv and movies were the second Superman movie,the first Tim Burton Batman movie and the Incredible Hulk tv series all of which had darker tone or more formidable villians . That's why Snyder felt he had to have a darker vision for our heroes. That's why he chose to pattern his Batman after the comic book Dark Knight Returns Batman. That's why so many fans want to see the Snyder cut of Justice League.(If it exists.). Snyder had a vision but never was allowed to carry it out. It was the movie studio execs (and tv network show runners) that were (and are) messing with our heroes as they always have done.
@@LSOK38 you definitely have some good points about Snyder he did have a vision for the dceu but WB screwed him over because they want to play catch-up marvel. although everybody knows he's not a good Storyteller he can't make it coherent and his character development is messy or underdeveloped. He's mostly good with visuals and action scenes and translating Page by Page other comic book that's it.
@@LSOK38 wow text but ok. I disagree. Snyder was the problem from the beginning. MoS was 100% his own vision and this movie has so many problems in storytelling, character development missuse of allegories etc. The movie itself is already a dumpsterfire and I dont talk about the neck snap of Zod or the 9/11 depiction but the problem of thematical flip floping between nature vs nurture that even Jor-El symbolises both instead of free will vs Zod deterministic genetics, the problem of missunderstanding that Superman is not Jesus but Moses, that in the story it should be the struggle of Clark making his decision between his kryptonien father hand the promess to his earthly father is taken away by the arrivel of Zod which then in return makes the sacrifice of Kent meaningless in a way, the changing from a altruistic symbol of Superman to an cynic Ayn Rand objectivist even though his nature would be good (schoolbus) which again takes away the human connection of the core superman that normaly gets installed by his human connection of his parants which then violates again a compationat scene of Clark in the school by the speech of Clark about saving the children and these are not even all problems. This movie shows already that Snyder is not capable of telling a story that is in character development, storystructure, thematic coherence etc. Which is exactly the problem Snyder is criticed for he goes for spectical over substance. He is like a bad student that uses scientific words cause they sound cool but is unable to grasp the correct meaning and uses them not in the right relation to each othere. Snyder was the biggest mistake they made and afterwards they tryied everything to correct it but without knowing what the really want which keeps being WB moto.
As far as MoS, I hoped that the death of Zod at Kal's hands was going to be a lesson for him, if it had been thought of. A lesson for taking a massive threat away from populated areas to protect innocents. Something he probably wouldn't consider because he had never dealt with those with almost a zealot level of belief.
Wonder woman - Steve ,Sam ,Charlie chief, Etta candy Aquaman- vulko ,mera ,attlana ,orm,tom Shazam - Freddie ,Choi ,Darla ,Mary ,Pedro These 3 movies are character diven bvs man of steel overely on spectacles and end up feeling like expensive cosplays than a cohesive movie Both bvs and mos have way better supporting characters only Jeremy irons Alfred, Russel crowe jor El and fishburnes Perry are worth watching the rest wasted or no impact
Personally, I think it's a ridiculous notion that "all shared cinematic universes should have to first have a bunch of inter-connected solo films before bringing them all together for a team-up movie". Imagine applying that logic to some of our most cherished classics...I mean, should every Ghostbuster have had a solo movie first before "just throwing them all in there together"? Does that mean it was "rushed"? How about the Ninja Turtles? Or Ocean's 11? Or the Seven Samurai? Ad infinitum. It's downright preposterous to forcibly apply one specific structure to every single movie that has more than one or two main characters. Also, the whole idea of DC "trying to catch up to Marvel" isn't close to being accurate either, especially considering that DC had major commercial success with their comic books, serials, tv shows, cartoons, and, yes, *movies* way before Marvel ever even found their footing. Keep in mind back in the 60's and 70's, Marvel was barely able to put out poorly animated (and voiced) cartoons in an attempt to match the success of DC's Superfriends. At that time, they were also barely able to fund their first few attempts at film with all their cheesy, made-for-tv movies like Captain America and the legendary Fantastic Four made-for-tv movie. While DC was churning out game changers like Donner's Superman and Burton's Batman, Marvel was putting out stuff like the notoriously corny and awkward Howard The Duck movie. So while I am aware that Marvel is now wildly successful thanks to Disney's financial backing and insane promotion, let's not forget that DC was the first to do so and literally paved the way for this age of superhero movies we currently live in.
No, I completely agree that Snyder missed the point. From the Watchmen onwards I've felt that he was superficial in his research. I feel though, that he gets the brunt of the ire when David S Goyer deserves some too.
I don't actually dislike Thor: The Dark World, but it is my least favourite of the Thor trilogy. But what you seem to be saying is: 1-Zack Synder is edgy/gritty just for the sake of it, which I agree with. AND 2-Zack Synder forgot the essence of what made the original characters he "adapted" who they are, which I don't think I know quite enough about DC comics to agree or disagree with.
Well as an avid reader of superman, he absolutely lost the core of that character. I remember in the cinema when they began quoting all star superman, I was so pissed. It was like someone had killed your best friend, and was now puppetering there corpse around as it was the real deal. If you want a true superman origin, check out John Byrnes man of steel or Supeman for all seasons. Birthright too is a solid book. And the comic kingdom come is the anti dc cinematic universe book.
One man and a studio is to blame for the mess of the DCEU. Zack Snyder directed The Dark Knight returns in the second film of the DCEU and The Death of Superman in his second movie. Batman vs Superman should’ve never happened.
I think it could have happened, but not as the 2nd movie of their Universe, if we look at the MCU movies like Civil War happened after 8 years of building their Universe, at first they did the Iron Man trilogy, then 2 movies on Captain America, Thor and The Avengers, that's why it works to see them on e against the other, while with BvS is the complete opposite, that movie did what it did with only one movie behind, that's why it felt so heavy, if they would have done more movies and then BvS it would've been much better.
@@EN_02 exactly it was stupid to do BVS and do a Justice League movie after that. How were they gonna do a Justice League movie without Superman? Superman was barely in the movie. He should’ve had a much bigger role.
Tbh, someone made a really good argument about how that scene would have worked. If in movie they showed that batman doesn't kill human then after knowing that superman has a mother and he is human just like him and others he would realise what he was going to do.
Probably the worst failing in my eyes is that Snyder wanted to deconstruct without the initial buildup. From the get-go he establishes that someone's success lead to another's defeat.
I honestly think Snyder is getting too much blame for the issues. You can clearly see Nolan's influence in Man of Steel and the studio forced Snyder to make BvS into an intro for the Justice League... now, I know what I'm saying isn't fact, but I feel that Man of Steel's Superman wasn't supposed to be Superman YET.. think about it... he had NO experience, never had a single fight in his life and all of the sudden has to fight for his life and protect his home planet... There was way too much studio intervention and way too many things that the studio itself wanted... and Snyder would probably not blame the studios unless if he never wants another job again...
It's funny to take a shot at Thor: The Second Thor in a video that is about the failings of movies that are far, far worse. It puts things in perspective. Like sure, it's probably in just about everyone's bottom 3 Marvel films, but it's still way better than Batman v Superman or Justice League.
It's funny how everyone thinks Thor 2 is the worst MCU movie. When in reality, they pushed the acutal worst MCU movie, The Incredible Hulk, out of their memories.
One of the great problems is that Superman, the shining beacon of hope, truth, justice, and the good in the world is reduced to a somewhat dark interpretation of himself. If I was a wealthy man who had the rights to these DC characters, I would hire a filmmaker to create a more optimistic and positive Superman movie rather than the failure Man of Steel was!
Man of steel ? failure? ok you can say you didn't like the movie or hated the movie It is not failure -coz most of the people dosnt share your opinion mr.
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! "Synder decided..." ??? How can you answer the question in the title without even MENTIONING all the corporate greed and executive interference and mandates??
@@escapefromtibet2530 Pretty sure Wisecrack went deeper into it in the What Went Wrong Batman v Superman video. Snyder really wants to make an Ayn Rand movie but no studio backed him as of yet .
@@escapefromtibet2530 He most likely is, otherwise his obsession with adapting The Fountainhead and the creeping of Randian ideology in his superhero movies would be...confusing
Marvel: "Lets take our time to introduce the characters over a 10 year arch"
DC: "Fuck it, we'll do it in a year"
Wb*
I mean, the arrowverse was able to do something similar in 8 years. Is that a success?
@@thomaspanditfan2435 arrowverse is low profile series. We are talking about the big screen universe storyline
@@ger5504 even if it is low profile they started out in 2012 they started out just a year before the dceu. So how the hell did they get to build a proper universe but the dceu don't.
@@thomaspanditfan2435 well that's a good question then.
I like z.s movies but I think he was one of the mistakes why dceu did not sucess.
Arrowverse even if it got low rating and bad critics they kept building that universe constantly.
Warner Bros. has owned the film rights to every DC Comics character and franchise since 1969. They had FOUR DECADES to establish a cinematic universe before Marvel Studios could, and they chose to wait until after their competition had already taken the initiative and cornered the market.
exactly and marvel did that even without owing their most iconic characters the x-men and fantastic 4 like they created a dynasty without those characters imagine what they're gonna do now that they own the fox characters and wb couldn't do anything even though they own the whole DC roster
Well said. I think they didn't choose to wait but were just uninspired / didn't care at all. Aside from casually making money off of the characters in few movies. Basically they never thought about it. Until Marvel did the shared cinematic storylines. Now they're in panic racing the MCU without even having established their cinematic universe nor a decent adaptation yet. Sure things started to get decent with Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam but... Hahaha. Businessmen got fucked by real passionate creators. It would be awesome to see DCEU into the right direction in the future but I hate how they're trying to keep up with MCU by taking shortcuts and underestimating the audience and fans. In the modern world where feedback is instantly heard, doing big things half-assed to make fast profit is suicide for the studio.
@@drtirthadas they still have have avengers, thanos and Spiderman and loki bro but you are right X-men and fantastic four are also important characters
@@srijibdas4828 tbf nobody gave a shit about the avengers before the movies marvels face were spiderman fantastic4 and xmen
wait a minute, 1969?
N O I C E
Kevin Feige made Captain America cool ‘n’ inspirational… and Thor warm ‘n’ relatable.
Zack Snyder made Batman a hot-headed maniac… and Superman a cold-hearted Objectivist.
ok....
how is that a bad thing? it results in more interesting stories if done right
@@tomthibodeau992 Which Zack didn't do
@@ridge825 thats cuz you idiot dc haters trashed bvs and we cant get a batfleck solo film now
@@tomthibodeau992 Lol you sound like such a moron it's the fans fault that Ben turned into alcoholic it's our fault that Zack can't get Superman and Batman right, it's our fault that his movies sucked so much ass that he got fired midway I'm not saying WB did the right thing but all of his movies underperformed at the box office and are divisive at best so keep crying sweetheart 😘
@@tomthibodeau992 Everything can be interesting if done right but Snyder was never capable of doing anything right. He fails miserably at simple story telling
So here's the breakdown of all the things done wrong in the DCEU:
1. Superman & Lois Lane's rushed relationship
2. No solo movie for Ben Affleck's Batman preceding BvS/Justice League
3. A terrible origin story for Superman (in my opinion) in MoS
4. First Wonder Woman film not released before BvS
5. BvS happening SO early in the DCEU's lifespan
6. Casting Jessie Eisenberg as Lex Luthor
7. Hiring Joss Whedon as a last-minute stand-in for Zack Snyder on Justice League
8. Aquaman film not released before Justice League
9. Has no one to oversee the long-term story of the DCEU (like Kevin Feige is to the MCU)
10. Shoehorning in Doomsday so early in the DCEU's lifespan
11. No solo films for the Flash & Cyborg before Justice League
12. The tons of nightmare (Darkseid) foreshadowing in BvS
13. Shoehorning in the Suicide Squad so early in the DCEU's lifespan.
14. Not taking cues from the DCAU (DC animated TV shows).
9. their man was zach snyder, however his daughter suicided (rip) and joss whedon took over to create the next avengers installment
The only one I'll give them a pass on is 7. Snyder had a legitimate life reason for not being able to complete the direction on Justice League (He had to bury his child, no one should have to do that, it's a tragedy when such things happen), and Whedon's stock was pretty high at the time, given the success of Avengers.
They were so focused on setting up a shared universe as quickly as possible that they forgot to make good movies first.
Do you know what a good movie is, they were challenging they characters, did you really want 2 captain America's because that's what everyone would have said.
@@gamecitysavior2910 Batman v Superman is a terrible movie.
@@Leeso54 said the guy that came to the video
This is the same DCEU that introduced Justice League and killed Superman in their second movie. It’d be like the MCU introducing The Avengers and killing Captain America in their second film.
Agreed. Wisecrack is completely off. The problem isn't that "Snyder went dark and gritty with the universe" as wisecrack's poor straw man argument would mislead uninformed people to believe. For proof that dark and gritty works well with these characters/universe, look no further than DC's latest animated R rated release Justice League Dark: Apokolips War. This has to be one of the best superhero stories I've seen with compelling character arcs and plotlines where the narrative feels like it has real stakes.
Like you said, the problem is that WB was rushing out undeveloped characters and poorly crafted storylines, interrupting Snyder's real vision and trying to cash in on 'the marvel money' and play catch up to them. Sadly, wisecrack completely failed to understand this and is instead advocating for the same exact mistake 16:00 "Wonder Woman/Aqua man/Shazaam all have lighter playful tones therefore they are doing better" (they really had the nerve to show clips from that dogshit Harley Quin movie). This is not true and part of the problem. DC shouldn't be trying to copy another studios tired old "fun" 'vanilla' formula. They should make their own unique vision, and this has aleady been done very well in the DC animated films.
"batman never kills"..."Superman kills too many people when fighting with Zod"...these are all untrue flawed straw man arguments that detractors of the DC movies like to mindlessly regurgitate (including wisecrack). Batman has killed people in many previous iterations previous to Snyder's film. Superman in man of steel actually saved the entire planet from being terraformed. Anyone who thinks superman should be able to prevent every single death and know exactly how to fight a brand new enemy/force that presents an unprecedented challenge to superman without causing any destruction is absurd. Plus, I believe the point of man of steel was about a more realistic/grounded perspective of 'becoming superman' giving him more humanistic qualities to make him relatable, not 'already being superman and having experience to know exactly how to go about being superman'. This wisecrack video was absolutely painful to listen to.
It's a shame when you get people who don't read a lot of comics STARTING OFF with TDKR, thinking that they are reading "the highest rated Batman book" and they come away thinking that's just how Batman is supposed to be; never getting that's it a subversion. It's like watching Scream as your first horror movie.
Snyder's whole point was to show a broken down Batman who lost any semblence of sanity when he saw Metropolis destroyed. That's why he kills thugs now and Alfred even brings up "new rules?"
Christopher Marabella I get why a lot of ppl like Snyder but imo this is the big picture. I wouldn’t want a dystopian series to be the main series of the franchise. I would still want to see it on the big screen, but I wouldn’t want it to be the main series. Sure I would like to see an injustice movie but I don’t want to see it labelled as “Batman vs Superman”. Cuz it’s not the normal Batman nor Superman. It’s like introducing the Batman who laughs and calling it the normal Batman. Just doesn’t make sense at all
"Watching Scream as your first horror movie". That's a perfect analogy
@@christophermarabella5683 Not even in Frank Miller he killed criminals
@@christophermarabella5683 why didn't he kill Joker?
Imagine a ship trying to sail across the ocean with:
A) No captain.
B) No sense of direction.
C) No clearly defined destination.
That is the DCEU in a nutshell.
Close, but I’d say there was a captain, except that he was obsessed with traveling through the Bermuda Triangle to try and catch Moby Dick. The crew should’ve mutinied long before he sailed us halfway across choppy oceans
*oh how I wish I were in charge of DC films long ago, I wouldn’t have been old enough but I would’ve given everyone the movies that DC deserves*
There was a captain but he didn't make enough money to finish the voyage.
There should be a captain on this somewhere!
You forgot "no rudder".
Everyone compares the MCU to the DCEU, but what I could never understand why the DCEU was done so wrong while the DC Animated Movie Universe was done so well! #ApokolipsWar
Intelligence, Discernment, and Creativity.
Well most of the current animated movies are a lot more standalone, but another big element is that their core purpose is to just adapt specific stories with no need to worry about tying them into anything else. The DCEU was built with the idea of creating a distinct continuity. And since the executives didn't know anything about comics beyond their sales figures, when creators talked about their plans to draw inspiration from two graphics novels with very high sales figures, they were willing to just trust them without looking too far into the details.
I may be in the minority but I would love some 3D animated DC movies. Animation can be much more stylized and can deliver more fantastical concepts without the break in immersion that live action can have if one small thing doesn’t look believably in a real world aspect
@@kah0326 Well 3d has it's own feel that's a little different from both 2d animation and Live Action. At which point it comes down to the skill of the full teams of writers, animators, directors, etc to pick the right story, and animate it to best take advantage of 3d's strengths.
I thought you were talking about DCAU, as in the animated Timmverse shows. If they were the case I'd have totally agreed.
The movie universe on the other hand, is hardly much better than the live action counterparts. Sure some of them work in a passable level, handful are even genuinely good. But most of them are cheap popcorn flicks that fall into the same category of mistakes, especially the aspect of connected universe which just does more harm than good (unless your favorite character is Damian Wayne).
Like the recent adaptations of Death of Superman or Batman Hush. The former was meh at best and while the latter is no Killing Joke movie, just fails to depict what made it's comic counterpart impactful.
Watching this just makes appreciate Iron Man 1 even more, hell I even missed the end credits scene with Nick Fury when I first saw it back in 2008. The DCEU actively tried to rush a franchise with a edgelord at the helm.
The only reason why tony stark became ironman was because a bomb with his name on it was about to blow up his fucking face off! Lived as a dick died as a dick.
That dick who no superpower saved the Universe with the snap of his fingers, saved more innocent life in Afghanistan greater than military force could and created a new element with some lasers and a wrench.
You’ve never been so wrong in your entire life.
Max Pawa iron man had a character ark, where he becomes vulnerable and yinsen shows what his impact on the world is. yinsen dies and it makes Tony realize that before he himself dies he has the ability to do some good, instead of creating weapons of mass destruction. Man of Steel had nothing like that. Supermans adopted father died and it changed him by saying that he shouldn’t be a superhero. Doesn’t make sense at all. Don’t know what ur spouting on about but ur probably one of those shallow DCEU fans who like grit with a fake front of depth
@@BennettLee8888Tony stark Lived as a dick and died as a dick, you looking for something that arent there! The only reason he became ironman was because his face was about to blow off by a bomb with his name on it! And thank god he fucking die! he was always a useless character IMO. Being a super hero is no about saving everybody!
Max Pawa “Being a superhero is no about saving everybody!” I’m assuming English probably isn’t your native language but surely even you can see that sentence sounds stupid when you read it back.
Iron Man is cool, why do think he’s a dick?
The biggest mistake was rushing to connect them.
They should have taken their time, built up each hero with at least one movie, then had them come together for some cataclysmic event.
Yes. I liked the dream sequences in Batman vs Superman with the desert and Parademons. It looked so good and I wish, there was a full movie about that, when Superman is awaken and with that style. But instead we got the Justice League, with an evil Superman for just 5 minutes and also horrible colors and designs. Batman should not kill but the rest was really good, and Superman was too depressed and destroyed cities and then they made in Justice League everyone joking. And why a teamup when there where no movies with the members before? Just stupid.They say they want to copy the MCU but they only made the teamup movies and not the universe.
But the previous film was boring and meaningless anyway. So unlike Marvel which can entertain along the way, Man of Steel was just a stupid film where the most interesting talking point was that Clark hadn't shaved for 4 days or something. It would have been even worse if they took time over nothing to get to nothing.
But hey, maybe if they committed to it, they would have found something interesting. Although just watch Iron Man compared to Man of Steel. It's night and day. It's a good movie that happens to be about a superhero, Man of Steel is a Superman movie that's boring and pointless. Only to be followed by more boring nothingness. Whereas Avengers tried something really interesting, especially with Thanos being framed as the protagonist. That's true grittiness, because it makes you question morality. Batman for instance, wasn't gritty, he was just a douchebag with no personality, like a bouncer who decides he doesn't like you and won't let you in the club and brands you with a bat symbol... I think I got muddled somewhere in that analogy?
Clive Doe I’m actually glad that they’re not talking that approach now, because what you’re describing is just the MCU, and the MCU is great for what it is, but it’s impossible to have superhero movies that are actually high quality films with deeper themes and a clear directorial vision with Marvel’s formula. Logan and Daredevil is the closest Marvel’s ever gotten, and one was the last dying breath of a franchise, and the other was cancelled for financial reasons, and won’t be coming back because it’s too dark and violent. DC is in a very interesting spot on the other hand, with them abandoning the whole cinematic universe thing to focus on individual films, and giving full control to the directors, and with that comes the possibility for greatness. I know this isn’t the desire of everyone, but I personally want comic book movies to be taken seriously; I feel like there’s so much untapped potential in some of these characters (especially Batman) to make a true masterpiece of a film, and I think that’s the direction they might be going down.
True. And it clearly contradict their excuse on superman's character developments, i.e. how could the world miss superman when he wasn't THAT superman. And that happens in the ending of BvS, so no snyder cut bs.
The real mistake is they hired Snyder to shape the entire DCEU... How do u make someone who barely knows anything about DC the head of DCEU...
This is what they shouldve done...
1.Hire a Kevin Feige... But theres no Kevin Feige, you might say... Simple solution...
1.Hire a council to manage everything like Feige does...
This council should include Geoff Johns, Scott Snyder and a third writer(Screenwriter of preference who is NOT CHRIS TERRIO)
2.Hire DIRECTORS THAT LOVE DC!!! That bleed DC!!
3.Focus on trilogies BEFORE connecting the movies(With hints within the movies of course)
4.MAKE SURE THE CONTINUITY IS RESPECTED!!
Now that I watched this, I understand that we could've had a very interesting cinematic universe dedicated to a deep exploration of the psychological and social consequences of a world where super heroes and super villains exist, and what are they symbolic of in the real world... but the concept failed and was poorly executed, so it won't be explored ever, and that's the real lost.
Avengers Civil War played around with those ideas. More in a corporate/legality type of fashion, which was still interesting, but not in the same way that this could have been. The Dark Knight Trilogy also genuinely questions morality and the psychology of it's villains and protagonists. So it's not like we are without that. The problem DC has is that the Marvel films weren't just 'first to the cinematic universe' idea, they actually pulled it off. I think a lot of people don't give Marvel enough credit. Most of the films are entertainment first, but there are a lot of really good films that, at the very least, don't become sloppy boring messes with zero character development like the DC films. And Marvel even managed to create a coherent story arc throughout all of those films. It's pretty impressive.
I don't think these deep dives into heavier themes lend themselves to a whole connected universe
Curiously, despite all it's flaws, the DCEU intended to show how the existence of these characters would affect the world better than the MCU.
Marvel has better movies, but beyond lip service, we don't see how the Avengers affect the world. Stark technology is only applied for superheroes, not normal people. Thousands of people watched two green giants and NY didn't reacted. The whole world knows now that aliens and the Nordic gods are real and apparently everyone is still christian or muslim. Captain America ( living legend from WWII) can run at Washington D.C. and it doesn't turns into a Rocky training montage.
BvS was awful but tried to cover the implications of having a superpowerful alien living among us.
@@lacrartezorok4975 "the DCEU intended to show how the existence of these characters would affect the world better than the MCU" actually, no
To quote Jay Excl
It's not that those movies are surface-level
It's your comprehension of them that is surface-level
If you want to see those consequences watch The Boys series
"What if Superman broke bad?"
"The Boys"
Born bad
That show is waay better than this Snyder movie
Why is that a surprise he's constantly a villian nowadays
Sigh evil superman makes me sad.
@@darinrf331 i hate joss Whedon i hope he never touch dc again now mavel can talk shit all they want
Let's be serious it can all be explained in this simple sentence:
TOO MUCH ,TOO SOON
Edit: thanks for 1k likes guys first time ever
Mbasa Kosani not really. Spider man into the spider verse rolled out perfectly. They have a whole team of spin offs, and they can do another team up.
Too much, too soon, AND poorly executed pieces of shit.
Too much batman killing...
mrhypnagogia and Superman killing
@@SmithMrCorona And for the MCU is a big pile of shit and they made pile of money coz of all the many shit heads livin'.
I feel that rushing to try and catch up with Marvel was a contributing issue to the DCEU, but your points about the nihilistic grit are also valid.
I imagine some execs wanted to ride the wave of superhero popularity and make money instead of actually making good movies.
@@MrJellyton Yeah, it's just to fishy to me that Batman v Superman came out so close to Captain America: Civil War...
@@user-DullardBones not to mention JL release the same times with Thor Ragnarok, man, talk about embarrassing defeat.
The rush to build a franchise is why it failed on the business side, but even taken singularly, they weren't good movies. Or at least, they were poor adaptations of the commonly-accepted forms of those characters.
Marvel had five solo movies by the time they got to team up. DC just missed the boat, I mean back in 2008 the Dark Knight was good so DC were blissfully unaware that they should’ve been prepping for a movie franchise.
Keyword: preoccupation with the dark surface rather than the intellectual core! Thank you.
@@Tabol-kw1ml you don't have vocabulary
@@mufradr Huh that’s weird, I swore he spelt “preoccupation” wrong but he obviously hasn’t edited his comment. Welp rip me, for looking extremely stupid and going blind I guess.
Cyborg Superman also had sex with Lois Lane & Jimmy Olsen I heard
my thoughts too. the DCEU's dark focus belongs in the 90s where it should have stayed
Snyder’s problem is that he tells stories in service of visuals instead of visuals in service of a story.
I’d argue that the visuals _are_ the story. He crafts his stories with heavy amounts of symbolism, visual gags, Easter eggs, and innuendos to the point that the spoken words are secondary or tertiary to the point of the film. He’s like the anti Tarantino.
@@sinjinreed2091 exactly!! Glad someone gets it.
Isn't that more a writing problem than a directorial problem
But film is a visual medium though🤷🏾♂️
@@sinjinreed2091 There is still no coherent story, either told by visuals or by words
People often say George Lucas needed people to challenge his filmmaking choices but I think Zack Snyder far more embodies this issue. He has exceptional talent but he often sacrifices deeper character conceptualization and story development in favor of great visuals. He struggles when restraint is the better option and typically overcompensates with bombastic visuals.
But it looks pretty, doesn't it? That's all that matters. And one of the worst of cinematic sins is committed: a senseless overuse of slow motion. It is hard to appreciate a movie when your eyes are rolling all the way back to your brain every 10 minutes.
They asked too much too soon, additionally Snyder does have good subtext, but he's problematic on macro storyline issues.
That's why any single scene Snyder makes can look great, but when you watch a whole story it has issues.
Snyder is a lot better of a cinematographer than he is a director, imo.
Long duk dong He does have a point, Zack’s movies are visually stunning, and there are some good themes, it’s just the execution of those themes that doesn’t work at all a lot of the time
So the Michael Bay of CGI
The big difference between Marvel and DC is this:
Marvel: can make the audience resonate, connect with and feel for the death of one ant out of trillion others. Yes an actual ant.
DC: Can’t even make the death of their most iconic Superhero (Superman) feel impactful in any way.
That's because it takes heart to make characters real. DC is into 12 year old cool fan boy stuff. Superman and Batman can't be allowed to be vulnerable, not really.
No one cared about Superman - and when he died no one believed it. And to prove them right - they brought him back during the end credit scene. They punked out. As long as DCU is working with Snyder they will keep making the same mistakes.
Summer Tyme this comment is riddled with flaws. But I guess people hate what they don’t understand. You hate on Snyder yet you don’t even know that if it weren’t for him you wouldn’t of had endgame or infinity war as well as your previous cival war. So try and show a little respect
@@tomsiebert155 Oh piss off.
It doesn't take a genius to figure the cheesy reference that Snyder included in the movie.
Still symbolism does not equal quality
@@tomsiebert155But we do understand what Snyder was doing, and hated it. Symbolism is not depth, iconography is nor storytelling, and "Martha" is how you solve a difference in philosophy. Also, Civil War, Infinity War, and Endgame were on going to happen with or without the DCEU.
ElvenRaptor 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Typical
gamora: did he do it?
wisecrack: yes
gamora: what went wrong?
wisecrack: everything
It was the only way.
@@YEOsCanal this is the way
Noooiiiccee
To be fair though, I think people are waaay too forgiving of some aspects of the MCU in comparison. Look at one of the main flaws of Man of Steel, "Superman fails the test and ends up killing the bad guy without trying to find an alternative despite his power". In a movie that wants to be an origin story and leaves a lot of room for improvement for the protagonist.
Now, how does the MCU conclude and achieve its main character's arc ? "Tony Stark kills the bad guy and genocides a whole alien species without trying to find an alternative despite his *absolute* power". Somehow, the MCU ends on an utterly cynical note, ruining the whole moral development of Iron Man by reducing his choice to a murderous "an eye for an eye" mentality, which is far, far worse than the detached jerk he was at the very beginning.
Blizaros well an eye for an eye mentality makes sense sometimes and according to Dr strange who observed a shitload of timelines, wiping off thanos and his army was the best choice
I pretty much stated this all the way back when the movies were coming out that Zach was too concerned with the Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen and had too little understanding of the source material he was attempting to adapt. His fundamental misunderstanding of Superman and what he represents immediately cast a shadow on the extended universe before it even began.
You don’t watch the video at all do you ?
@@boiboiboi1419 I watched the entirety of the video. What does my opinion have to do with that at all either way?
Zack Snyder does understand what Superman represents. He just questions how easy it is to represent those things in the modern political climate. In a time when truth and justice are perceived as ambiguous and subjective, it's hard to stand for truth and justice, and there's inevitably going to be significant backlash for doing so. In a world overcome with fear and anxiety, it's certainly possible to inspire hope (and the films make it clear that he DOES inspire hope in many people), but any attempts to do so will be met with skepticism and distrust. On top of that, Superman has to struggle with the dichotomy between the old-fashioned notion of self-sacrifice and the more modern concern with self-care. In the end, he still stands for everything he has always stood for, but we get a glimpse into how emotionally draining it is to stand for those things in the present day, where negativity comes from all angles.
Zack is dyslexic. Im not making fun, he rlly is. I think that explains why he said Batman kills in TDKReturns when he absolutely does not. He even breaks a gun in his hands calling it a cowards weapon. This also explains why he cant wrap his head around Superman. He can do great Heavy Metal magazine looking movies. His BVS film looks like Superman/Batman filtered through Heavy Metal which is pretty rad if it was not a universe nd just a stand alone set of films
Cool buddy.
This guy got a great voice for explaining shit, makes everything sound simple
Four minutes in and a better summary of the characters than the entire DCEU.
Exactly bro. I want his voice for my radio
yes, an absolutely great team of writers and Jared's voice really sells the confidence of their research.
So, the next JL movie will be rebooted, "THE Justice League: THE Dawn of Justice".
Now that would be a badass Justice League subtitle
You forgot "THE movie" at the end
2 Dawn 2 Justice
At this point just reboot everything and make a jsa movie
The League of Justice
"Batman made himself who he is. Through drive, will, persistence and a small loan of a million dollars."
Marvel: Lets dig deep to build strong foundations for the tallest scyscraper ever.
DC: Srew it, lets start from the last 10 floors.
I think Marvel had to do that because they were dealing with lesser-known characters, where as Warner Brothers thought that their DC characters were untouchable and could make money in their sleep. I guess they had to find out the hard way that I coherent story is of great worth.
@SlyiLaMusic "muh dc films"
Yeah but Marvel FAILED big time with Captain Marvel. They should either remove her movie from being Canon or kill her off.
Πες τα, ρε αδερφέ! Είσαι και σύντροφος πράσινος!
@SlyiLaMusic Lol you sound like the guy who eats the meal, licks the plate clean, then complains about how horrible the meal was.
@11:22 "You can't introduce a definitive archetype and deconstruct that archetype simultaneously."
Thank you!
Snyder's Superman is still that archetype imo. He didn't fail his final test. He's just not omnipotent, meaning he can't save everyone, and recognises that murder is the right thing to do in some very rare instances (like when a superpowerful being won't stop for anything to destroy an entire planet).
@@danethenice no he's not still that same archetype because he would not have let his father died otherwise.
@@danethenice You have a very odd archetype of superman.... I recommend reading the Superman comic "What's so funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way?". It's about a group of superhumans who feel that arresting criminals is pointless and kill them instead. Even after these superhumans nearly kill him, Superman responds "I fight for truth and justice and hope, even when the world sucks. Getting angry is easy. Killing is easy. Even if you think a world without violence and misery is a dream, I'll fight until that dream comes true, or until I die. And I'll do it my own way."
Superman is the archetype of "A good man with godlike power who uses it for the good of humanity". He doesn't sacrifice his morals to solve problems. Snyder wanted a superman that kills, and made contrived writing to force a situation like that. He never kills Luthor. He never kills Darkseid. He never kills brainiac. He never kills Zod.
3:04 You missed the opportunity to say: Batman in the other hand made himself who he is, through drive, will, persistence and a small loan of a million dollars.
Theres a JL animated movie called Justice League: War, that is a pretty simple introduction to the characters, and has the exact same plot of the snyder/whedon movie. But done much better.
The only problem is that you don't care about any of the characters because they're written as an unlikeable morons or overconfident idiots
DC marvel Fanboy yea even darkseid just seems like a big dumb monster. It barely even has a 'plot'
@@Davidsworldtravels Still I'd take that Darkseid over the Steppenwolf that we got in the JL film. Also, keep in mind that the animated film was like 79 minutes long instead of the 2+ hours that the Justice League was. That additional run time could have been used to flesh out Darkseid more. The point it, they introduced the heroes, established their characters, motivations, and powers quickly, and made the experience fun.
RansomeStoddard I think they missed the characterization of the heroes and darkseid. Comics darkseid is a brilliant strategist. But I understand your point about how short it was. The best version was from the justice league unlimited animated series
@@Davidsworldtravels True, but for that they had many episodes to develop those characters. But I guess that's the point. DC needed to take their time and develop the characters for their live action universe.
*Marvel*: let’s make standalone movies about individual characters so that audiences can get to invest in them and then we’ll release a team up film.
*DC*: let’s rush our universe and give audiences a justice league movie before making solo movies and let’s assume audiences are familiar with our characters.
I disagree the justice league cartoon was great green arrow as a liberal question as a extreme libertarian captain atam as a patriot. Didn't need there backstory they were all interesting quiqe character
Daragh O'kane The important part is “Cartoon” the JL cartoon had good writers and enough episodes to flesh out their characters. The Question has plenty of episodes, Green Arrow always voices his opinion, and - while one note - Captain Atom had an impact on the story.
Also let‘s make sure that the first couple of movies are absolutely terrible
It’s amazing how Warner Bros did that.
Anyone here watch HISHE? Bats and Supes are exceedingly better as a duo, more likable, and entertaining in an amateur cartoon. LOL
@@leonardchurch814 it also felt more realistic everyone felt like a real person. I do think they dropped the ball on the end. It would be cool if president lex declared the league an enemy of the state. I mean hawkgirl allowed an invasion. And question tried to assassinate him he would have justification. And superman would be in such a moral delema should we turn hakwgirl in to be executed or go to war with the government. But I know that was supposed to be final season. The movie on the other hand suck the bad guys are just irrational evil and not enough to be entertaining
When zack Snyder says the best comics ever are watchmen and DKR, what he means is that those are the only two he’s ever closely read
lol no he references alot of other comics
The Dark Knight Returns is a landmark comic that works on so many layers. It's a shame so many people take the wrong message from it, leading many to denounce it as edgy garbage nowadays.
It's not that people think tDKR is edgy garbage, it's that a lot of edgy garbage was created in its wake. Also, you can't lead off with a deconstruction - it has worked out for modern cinematic Batman only because the iconography of 60s era TV/classic comics Batman is so deeply ingrained in the public consciousness. Maybe for Superman it could've worked as a off-brand standalone (a la "Joker"), but not as the lynchpin of a straightforward JL adaptation. If Supes doesn't even know why he's busting his hump saving people, and the world doesn't want him, that character+universe will never lead naturally to a Justice League. Just on the face of it, it makes no sense.
If he wanted to make a DKR+Injustice offshoot, riffing on these themes, well go ahead, but don't call it Justice League, and don't sink a ton of DC's future into it.
@@mandisaw I am not disputing that. Using a story about a broken man ruminating on his mortality and legacy to springboard a series of fun, family oriented blockbusters is QUITE FUCKING INSANE. Edgelord Zack Synder glorified the comic's violence and grit, but gentrified the anti establishment themes. It is a shame that to the wider public, Batman v Superman will be their closest exposure to The Dark Knight Returns.
I believe a separate video should be made about what happened behind the scenes of the DCEU and the influence The MCU and their fans had over DC and WB.
I second this. It would be interesting to see just how much Warner Bros and DC was going through from the beginning.
The Dark and gritty can't substitute a good caracter development.
Christian Bale was the best Batman for this generation
Dark and gritty only works with batman.
@@yurichtube1162 And even Batman has moments of levity
Snyder missed the point. Of everything he's ever read. The Watchmen film is a textbook example of how you can be faithful to the form of an original work without capturing it.
lynxminx4 yes!! 👏
AMEN
I remeber watching Watchmen as a teenager and thinking the film was amazing. I then went on to read the comic and realied just how bad of a director Snyder was
I sooooo agree! I had super long debates with my friends at the time saying it was just a boring missing of the point. And none of them agreed. Even the over the top fighting scenes made zero sense because most of the heroes were just proficient fighters, but ultimately real humans, not with super powers. It was just glammed up. Didn't it even ruin the twist at the end totally missing the ENTIRE moral purpose of the plot? Omg it pissed me off so much after loving the book and people thinking it was just a random collection of fight scenes that were fun. Just make a different film instead of mess up a genuinely impressive visual novel or whatever people call it!
I whole heartedly disagree and I'm not sure why. I read the book immediately before I went to the movie and I read it immediately after. I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, I just don't understand the hate for the film. If someone would explain it a bit to me, I'd be grateful.
Answer: The same thing that went wrong with the Rey/Disney Star Wars Trilogy; they didn't properly think through the entire story of the films/switched up the crew working on the films so the main films failed while the stand alone were decent.
One was because the studio wanted to ride off success of someone’s else and kept interfering with the artists visions, which lead to their universe being all disjointed and rushed out to compete with its competitor while the other was because the studio threw away the outlines of what could’ve been a great trilogy and instead messed up the franchise with identity politics, cheap nostalgia and lack of vision and planning.
Jesse, what up man.
Accept they did, at least snyder, his wife and the writers did
Suicide squad was supposed to fight against paradeamons and the new threat of steppenwolf in the original finale
Its very clear that ww was originally supposed to be closer to the plot of the motherboxes
Everything changed the moment bvs came out, as they cut down the movie so the pacing is all over the place and put the lex+steppenwolf on the internet instead of in the movie itself.
@@SaurianStudios1207 >kept interfering with the artists visions
There were reports that there was little interference actually and Snyder did what he wanted, so MoS is what he decided to do. He was rushed, true, because studio wanted a movie soon ,but that's it. Same with BvS - he was asked to add Batman to increase appeal to watchers, but then liked it some much that Batman's role grew and grew.
Interference happened in Justice League, but it happened at later stages ans it seems that noone vetted the script because first there were hastry changes after BvS bad reception, then big reshoots were done and the movie was still bad, and then Wheadon was asked to do rewrites and reshoots. And he was likely asked to do 2 hour movie and not a longer one - look at and JL run time.
So it's mostly a disaster of Snyder's own incompetent creation
"I kinda came to the conclusion also that they couldn't really talk in their suits, um, with any credibility..."
"... more than 4 or 5 lines and you start to notice, like wait, these are two guys ... one guys dressed up like a bat and the other has a big red 'S' on his chest, and they're being super serious about how mad they are at each other..."
Quoted from an interview with Zack Snyder. Why was he put in charge of the DC movies?
@It'sMrMagicPlayer It's funny bc you don't know who really is the batman or Superman...
"What went wrong?"
Everything. Everything went wrong.
Ricardo Daniel Zapata Carreón But now it’s starting to finally go right! Minus Birds of Prey, Aquaman and Shazam (in my opinion)
You literally just established the Iron Man of your universe then kill him off in the second film of your franchise, then call that character development?
Lucky ASMR to be fair in the comics dc heroes die a lot and get resurrected, Superman dying to doomsday is like a classic storyline. But i do agree the doomsday vs Superman was crammed in that movie very poorly
It also diluted the impact of seeing Superman die. When they killed him off in the comics back in the 90's, he'd had about 60 years of adventures to make us care about him. In BvS he only got to be Superman for about 2 years before he died, so no one felt anything when he got impaled to death.
I mean, he developed into a corpse, so that's something, I guess.
@@terryqiu17 ok, but pushing that story line in the second movie makes less than no sense.
"The Narrator" yeah true
I just wish we’d gotten a straight up The Dark Knight Returns movie.
We got a few decades to wait for that one thanks to Snyder.
You can thank marvel for that. Because of them, we couldn't get single focused, story/character driven films. Instead we got the mess that we got, and Marvel saturated the market so much that they basically killed the genre.
@@questioneverything1639 That doesn't make sense to me. Yes, Marvel flooded the market with films that integrated with each other to the point that you could argue that they were all just one giant movie that you needed to watch from it's absolute beginning to understand it while Marvel runs away with all the money; but how does that explain DC deciding they wanted all the money too but without any of the work needed to manufacture it so they just plopped all their major heroes into a melting pot and expect that the over mixing of incompatible characters in incompatible settings would make them huge profits? It's kind of like blaming lemmings jumping off a cliff on the first lemming just because he was the first one to come up with the idea. Then again we, the audience, are just as much to blame because we were the ones who bought all the movies in the first place.
@@white0thunderwhite0thunder71
The Hollywood industry focuses on what the audience goes for. People bought into the mcu. So, Hollywood started creating more cinematic universes. For example universal monsters universe, spidey universe, DCEU, etc. So yes, marvel and it's audience had a huge part in the death of proper films being released and getting attention.
@@white0thunderwhite0thunder71
th-cam.com/video/LlekzeLA79g/w-d-xo.html
Go to the 43:50 point mark of the video or just take the whole video in its entirety to see what I'm talking about.
Snyder's DC movies were so mean-spirited and overall cynical. Every decision he made seemed to intentionally miss the point of what makes these characters so beloved. I have such distain for his DCEU films that it's tainted my opinion of his previous work. He's a skilled director, but his personal philosophies seem to clash very completely with my own.
He is a fan of Ayn Rand. Of course he did that. The worst person to make superhero films.
@@noytelinu I heard he wanted to adapt Ayn Rand's novel The Fountainhead, it's a passion project for him lol
Noy Telinú He likes The Fountainhead for its critique on how artists are made to conform and he thinks it’s crazy in a weird way. He doesn’t really care about Ayn Rand or her philosophy at all.
Overall cynical? So I guess you didn’t watch the ending to Bvs then?
@@ygracias4865 the ending seems more like a patch than an honest representation of his ideas
Zack and Warner thought violence and edginess made Dark Knight great but they missed the point that it was just substnace and maturity. For direct inspiration they should have looked at the Animated Universe
Except that the dark knight isn't edgy... Zack Snyder is...
They literally coulda take the animated movie : Justice League War and made it live action and like 30 minutes longer
13:46 - This is where you hit the nail on the head. I remember seeing BvS in the cinema and I could feel the unease in the room, this feeling of no one being able to "get" into what they were watching. And this is why - Snyder wasn't trying to communicate with his audience, he was making a Batman/Superman story just for himself. I think that's what will ultimately stay with me from Man of Steel and BvS, this self-indulgent, gritty brand of film-making which is, ultimately, hollow and insipid.
WanderingPropeller the funny thing is, in an interview, Zack literally said he makes movie for himself. That’s how egoistic he is.
WanderingPropeller did you see the ultimate edition?
Is that a bad thing? Filmmaking is a form of art and people make art for themselves all the time. It isn't egotistical to create something you enjoy. I think it's much more egotistical to expect creators to always cater to you.
@@luciusnguyen2449 That's not at all what he said, you moron.
It pissed me off when I read an interview and he said that he had Batman kill in the movie because he killed in The Dark Knight Returns which is wildly inaccurate. At best you can say on only one occasion that it was ambiguous whether he killed someone or not. Even Frank Miller said many years ago that he purposely left that scene ambiguous to weather Batman killed or not. To have Snyder come out and say that Batman killed in that, definitively is ridiculous and asinine.
As soon as he said "traced to two comics" I knew what was coming...
TH-cam's favourite dead horse: The DCEU.
It's the Snyder Cut people who have kept that trend going, for better and for worse.
For some reason people LOVE to take shots at the DCEU. But let someone say one negative thing about the MCU and the stans will come running to defend against even obvious MCU flaws. And Thor the Dark World wasn't the MCU's only mistake. There are many others, big and small.
I kinda feel silly saying this, but really the DCEU fans started it. From what I saw, the MCU vs DCEU jabs were largely just in good fun. It wasn't until BvS came out that shit hit the fan. So many critics and moviegoers disliked the movie, and they had/have a legitimate right to do so. It was DCEU fans who came out in droves with the infamous bullshit theory of "Disney is paying off critics to hate DC movies", and when the term "shill" really started getting thrown around.
@@DooodOfLife Tho you might agree, BvS has a lot of issues but doesn't deserve such low rating maybe Suicide Squad cuz it was really lame, but damn 27% that's too much
Fuck BATMAN FUCK BATMAN FUCK BATMAN FUCK BATMAN FUCK BATMAN FUCK BATMAN SUPERMAN IS THE BEST
This perfectly encapsulates what was fundamentally wrong with Snyder’s work. All grim but no actual substance. DC has been far better without him.
Shazam and BoP sucked ass at the box office, are you calling that good??
@@skullquarry Shazam! was released in the United States by Warner Bros. Pictures in RealD 3D, Dolby Cinema, IMAX 3D, 4DX and ScreenX on April 5, 2019. The film grossed over $366 million worldwide, making it a box office success.
Birds of Prey has grossed $84.2 million in the United States and Canada, and $117.7 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $201.9 million.[3][4] According to Variety, the film needed to gross $250-300 million worldwide in order to break even.[2]
You are kinda right? But certainly not as sucked ass as you think thou.
@@skullquarry they made that box office money thanks to the snyder movies tarnishing the brand. People associate DC movies with a bad time at the cinema thanks to snyder, so obviously (even if the movie is good) theyre not gonna show up
I still think DC is better when they're not trying to immitate the MCU.
I wouldn’t reply to Sachin Grey. They’ve posted on other comments berating anyone who doesn’t like Snyder’s movies, even if it’s only an opinion. They’re obviously the worst type of fan
On point, because Snyder didn't tap into any of the social-political elements that made Watchman and Dark Night Returns, genuinely subversive and insightful.
They probably wouldn't let him really put the actual politics of DKR in the movie, because that thing is one of the most divisive comics nowadays. He took the tone and lots of dialogue and some plot elements out of it, but I'm betting the studio was probably like, "Pump the brakes, Zacky! Going full Libertarian is a good way to alienate a large portion of our potential audience! Let's not put everything from the comic into the movie."
@@TH3F4LC0Nx That seems like fanfiction to me. Doesn't Zack deserve any blame for that film?
@@Cursed_Mark Oh, he totally does, but he also deserves at least a little praise for the good elements in that film too. Most of the problems in BvS started with the script, but the way Snyder had that movie unfold definitely deserved criticism. The only good fight scene Snyder has ever shot was the Batman fight scene in the warehouse. The fight scene in Batman's dream sequence/time travel vision thing was poorly choreographed and lame. Also the painfully obvious product placement in both Man of Steel and BvS is bad. (I'm convinced the entire budget of Man of Steel was contributed by Denny's and Sears! XD And of course Bruce Wayne doesn't drive a Lamborghini or a Mercedes; naw, he drives a Jeep! XD)
@@TH3F4LC0Nx Batman using a gun was soo stupid and lame.
Especially if Batfleck is based on The Dark Knight Return incarnation
@@wrestlinganime4life288 He is, and it might have worked if Superman was the naive company man that he was in DKR, to provide a contrast. Instead, it's just two dour brooding heroes having a punch-up in the rain.
I’ll be honest, I haven’t read any of the comics mention or otherwise. But I still love Man of Steel because it shows struggle. Clark spent his entire life in the closet, he’s never really used his powers which makes it believable to me that his first battle was messy and a failure. I’m a Power Ranger fan as well and one criticism I always hear from others is “how do they know how to do everything?” I.e. their weapons and zords. Why isn’t the same logics applied to superheroes, especially Superman? Diana spent her life fighting which is why she hit the ground running when she left the island. Her only flaws were not being versed in man’s world. Henry Cavill was a great actor to portray Superman as well.
ParadoxFreak Diana’s naivety is another flaw of her, but also the biggest strength because it is the main thing that makes her a hero.
I am glad someone said it. People in general just don't want to think beyond surface while watching a superhero film, that's a sad reality.
I get what you're saying, but I feel like even on your first day on the job you should know not to punch another Kryptonian THROUGH a skyscraper since it's probably going to collapse and crush a bunch of flimsy humans. Despite that I actually DO like a lot of Man of Steel - Henry Cavill is a fantastic Superman and Michael Shannon is absolutely riveting as Zod. But the one thing I HATED was Jonathan Kent's death. A heart attack (like in the comics) is such a perfect metaphor to show Clark that no matter how powerful he becomes, he will never be able to save EVERYBODY. Why would you change that to Jonathan CHOOSING to die just so Clark wouldn't reveal himself? It goes against everything Superman stands for, putting the wellbeing of others above his own. I find it impossible to believe that if there was even a chance that Clark could have saved his dad he would do it in a heartbeat, regardless of how much it might screw up his life. Not to mention, I feel like Clark could have run out there, grabbed his dad, flown him away once they were obscured by the tornado, and then just told everyone they got lucky and were thrown clear by the wind. Haha
@@LoganBluth clark was young,hadn't mastered his ability. IMO he *won't* be able to saved jonathan without getting exposed.
@@sipalingindonesia Yeah, but that's my point - If there was even a one in a million chance that Clark could save his dad he would absolutely go for it, even if it meant he was GUARANTEED to expose his powers to the entire world and lose any hope of a normal life forever.
As soon as he said two comics I immediately thought “Watchmen”
Duh. And TDKR, That’s literally the only comic they’ve ever made films from. It’s fucking annoying.
#Waltdisney, #Loki, #Prevengers
i didn't think watchmen but i immediately thought of TDKR
seriously these two comics destroyed the whole comic medium. after the debut of these two comics, literally everyone in the planet wanted to make a comic based in a dark gritty grime reality, where everyone is asshole and the protagonist is also a anti-hero.. who is apparently going from some psychological trauma and questioning his own morality.. this idea has been at least used trillion times now, sometimes they use this just as a excuse to make something dark.
I mean like seriously, I wonder how the comic industry would be today, if these two comics wouldn't be exist
I loved how he said, "People seemed to like Aquaman and Wonder Woman was great." That's my exact feeling.
Aquaman has the best third act in a SH movie ever.
@@MaxIronsThird has the what third act?
@@MaxIronsThird that's ur subjective opinion
Maxi Iroh i didnt even get that far without being bored out of my mind and stopping the movie
@@arobarbie Watch it then, all of the action scenes in the movie kick ass.
“You see where you’re going? Now let’s worry about how you get there.” -Hawkeye
They focused too much on their destination and didn’t care enough about the journey.
Lois, "you smell nice."
It felt like a comedy to me at this point lol
Dude I've said that to my Fiancee it's because he an Lois. Had had sex it what you say sometimes
@@jasonbarkley4586 I just thought it was a funny thing to say since he was dead for awhile in the ground. Though I don't remember if they had sex prior to that statement.
Probably written by the Joss Whedon
What went wrong? They gave the keys to the kingdom to Zack Snyder.
And now they’re distancing themselves from his vision. Batman’s getting rebooted, Man of Steel isn’t getting a sequel, and Justice League isn’t getting a Snyder Cut.
Vladimir Manosalvas IG: TheVladMan It’s necessary. His vision affects the image of Batman and Superman so bad. I think that’s why an animated Death of Superman was released 2 years after BvS
Lucian Umbra And they recently released Superman: Red Son, which was Batman v Superman-ish.
@@TheVladMan. Clown haha
@@redbleidd Ah, being a Asshole to someone that Knows DC Comics better than you. Quite shocking, I know.
I think if BVS was instead released as "Zac Snyder's The Dark Knight Returns" it would've done much better, but that's just my take.
Faxs
LOL No, that would have made it WORSE as he RUINED the take of TDK Returns by destroying what made those stories work.
WB : James Gunn made a hit movie with a talking racoon and a tree
Zack Snyder: well, I'm not James Gunn sir... Or the russos...Or Kevin feigie
TONY STARK MADE THIS IN A CAVE! WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!
@@troyk7100 That will never get old.
thank GOD he's not. I appreciate his vision but sadly normies want what normies want and thats where the money is.
its easy to make comedy!
@@TowDow3 ofcourse 300 is a masterpiece right😂
TLDR: DC tried to copy Marvel movies and forgot the formula they had with their tv shows. (Except Titans) OG Teen Titans and animated Batman anyone?
You're probably thinking of the DC Animated Universe
Live action and animated TV shows are different from movies.
WB/DC were jealous of the financial success enjoyed by the MCU, so they rushed to create their own, as evidenced by a premature team up (Justice League) made before all the heroes were properly introduced via their own individual films.
They also picked Snyder to oversee their DCCU, but he was the wrong person for the job and already had his hands full (some would say he was swamped) portraying Superman and Batman.
In that regard, WB thinks that audiences are stupid and wonder why there's two versions of characters around. That's why they killed off Deadshot in Arrow before the Suicide Squad movie came out, and why he came back as a hallucination after it bombed.
They didnt try to copy marvel, The first movies in the DCU series were dark themed from the beginning complete opposite of marvel. After the failure of the Snyder era they're now changing tone to copy marvel.
@@achronos178 they weren't talking about copying Marvel tonal wise in they mean the movies by me bvs was there Civil War suicide squad was obviously Guardians of the Galaxy even their humour (which made everthing so overdramatic tried lighting it up with a tasteless joke) was similar to Marvel and the way that we're building up there Universe to Justice League was exactly like Marvel. (it was just rushed)
I think of it like this: As an artist, if I make a portrait of someone, and there's an infinite amount of detail, colors, shapes that make it "pretty" but there's no soul or heart in the eyes, it just doesn't have the impact that it should when looking at the picture of a loved one through the eyes of an artist. An artist knows this and would rather give the portrait life than just simply eye candy. This is where Zach Snyder I feel dropped the ball. He went for the dark, grim and "pretty" but forgot to put soul and heart into a story that would resonate with both a casual movie-goer and a fan of the genre.
The soul was Martha
Nah there's a lot of soul in both movies
Simple Zach Snyder’s post apocalyptic, nightmarish world with a murdering batman was a route that didn’t appeal to the wider audience and then when WB tried to interfere with justice league to make it another avengers the whole thing ended up a tonal mess.
Except that's like a DC fans wet dream...
Salter I agree
@@DynestiGTI A Batman that use guns?? WTF the creator themselves established how Batman SHOULD NOT USE guns.
The Dark Knight Return prove it
@retsaM innavoiG I agree with the first part of your comment and some aspects of your second one where you said the murder side was not addressed very well I don't think it would have given it a pass I think they would have understood if they showed Robin being beaten up with a crowbar. Detective side is not the only thing missing he's also not intelligent.
@@wrestlinganime4life288 Leave him alone , he is a subscriber to Ping Pong Flix . They all circlejerk over Zack Snyder , they are delusional.
Love how you built the entire history of the titular DC characters to drive a point home. Remarkable oration and presentable skills!
They shouldn’t have tried building a universe on around Zack “All Surface, No Substance” Snyder. Visually, his movies are great but they’re about as deep as Barbie’s Dream House hot tub. The rush to catch up to Marvel was detrimental and I’m sick of Batman movies based off TDKR. There are so many other great stories to reference
@@night6724 Marvel's substance is repetitive to the point of being, sure, probably due to being hobbled by Disney. But Snyder's work lack substance in the sense that it has no internal logic, says nothing new or substantial about anything, and no plot that an audience can stay awake through.
@@catatoblob8598 to the MCU credit they at least know how to write characters.
I wanted the dceu Superman to saying inspiring speech like Captain America..
Guess I'm too naive and stupid
@@wrestlinganime4life288 I grew up reading DC comics, largely due to their amazing animated series. The DCU has a lot of critically acclaimed stories with deep messages. Snyder clearly enjoys these stories, but his failure to adapt them into watchable movies suggests that he can only see the surface of these stories without understanding what gives them substance. Snyder's superman can't make an inspiring speech like Captain America because Snyder doesn't understand or respect superman. His Superheroes are out of character and excessively villainous because he doesn't really understand superheroes. He has great visuals, but really not a great choice for writing a mainstream, or even a subversive film about superheroes, because he doesn't connect with the fundamental concept of the stories he's being tasked to tell.
@@catatoblob8598 He's obsession with Watchmen and The Dark Knight returns is quite boring.
Those comics do not represent the best of DC.. I'm not saying you can't try, but just because you can that does not you should.
The famous World cardboard of Superman highlights how frustrated Superman is. That's why I find hard to believe he would go mad because Lois is dead cough Injustice cough
Batman has a so fucking many great story to tell but they always chose tdkr 😂
I honestly will never get tired of people criticizing the DCEU.
Me neither. Given the directions and decisions, even with the recent solo movies that were decent, it'd be almost a decade before the DCEU can stand on its own feet.
But what if they manage to get their shit right and yet videos like that are still made?
Imagine if the MCU operated like the DCEU. They would’ve killed Captain America in his second movie, and revived him in The Avengers.
The DCEU didn’t have one consistent creative vision. The end
Edward Polenzani they did. Zack Snyder before he was fired
They did have a singular vision, he just couldn't see the spark that made DC IP so special.
@@DavidJohnson-bj2yt this.
@@emanuel6693 Snyder's vision doesn't count because it was TERRIBLE!!!
@@zechrojas2202 lmao injustice is bad?
The Superman story „What's So Funny About Truth, Justice & the American Way?“ is a great take on the differences between the moral driven Superman and the new, grim kind of superheroes of the dark age...
Zack Snyder: You're living in a f**king dream world.
Superman: I wouldn't have it any other way.
Que Zack Synder fans telling people that they just didn't "get" the perfect symbolism and themes of BvS
And misunderstood for now but will be hailed as great movies later.
Well those fan are as retarded as their idol. They were only able to see the surface level detail from scene to scene. However, they never realized that those “symbolism” are fragmented moment that does not help contribute to the whole storyline.
Avatar the last airbender is a perfect example on how to use symbolism.
The show is deep and philosophical
@@joevenespineli6389 hahahahahahahah no
@@luciusnguyen2449 thank you
08:55 Watchmen....and 300. Don't forget 300. SPARTA!!
300 was mediocre guilty pleasure movie..
@@mahanubhavs9980 On a broad enough spectrum, every movie falls into some category of mediocre. It is also a comic book based Zack Snyder directed movie that raked in cash, is the point....
Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice should’ve had the movie just focus on the two characters coming into conflict because of their different ideologies. Lex Luthor would still be the villain of the film pulling the strings behind the heroes conflict but no Doomsday, no Wonder Woman, and no Jesse Eisenberg. The real film should’ve starred Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Henry Cavill as Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman, Amy Adams as Lois Lane, James McAvoy as Lex Luthor, Diane Lane as Martha Kent, Laurence Fishburne as Perry White, Holly Hunter as Senator June Finch, Tao Okamoto as Mercy Graves, Callan Mulvey as KG Beast, and Jeremy Irons as Alfred Pennyworth.
So Snyder’s faithfulness to the source material was superficial, missing the deeper message.
If you want that then you should just read the book. The problem is that we have a lot lazy people who don't read books.
that is what they claim ... but he only keeps saying tha tSnyder's uses surface level material... they don't really tell us why. I get the themes just like in Watchmen. What made BvS confusing is the Luthor plans that distracts us from understanding Clark and Bruce's points of view.
Snyder doesn't miss the deeper message at all. He just spends a lot of time questioning it (perhaps too much time) before ultimately affirming it. He takes a dialectical approach to the underlying philosophy of the comics. He presents the source material's thesis, offers an antithesis based on real-world examples, and then modifies the original thesis into a synthesis: a version of the comic book viewpoint that better accounts for the problems posed by real life. In doing so, he inevitably makes the heroes look a little bad before reaffirming what makes them so good.
zack snyder is a hack. everything he's ever done is copy and paste. keep him the f away from story telling and let him go back to mtv music videos
@@beautifulfriend7143 can you prove it ?
WB: Guys...the MCU raked billions of dollars, let's do our own shared universe and do it QUICK!!!
This. People talk and analyse films and go too deep when the only reason is that the people at WB just wanted to cash money asap and didnt care for anything else.
@@tarnishedpose The reason we keep talking/analyzing though is that DC/Warner Bros was well-positioned to do just what their greedy overlords were asking for. We already know quite well who Batman, Superman, even to some degree the Flash and Wonder Woman are. You need some setup to kind of orient us (which time period, are there aliens, which Flash are we using LOL), but beyond that, you're free to skip over a lot of establishing stuff - no real need for origin movies. WB also has some of the best directors, writers, producers, actors, and crew, all of whom will put as much effort into Pluto Nash as they did Lord of the Rings. So the fact that they took literal box office gold and turned it into shite is worth examining.
Destroying the characters with it i think that is not something you should be happy with. Only the biggest fanboys somehow keep defending the movie. Because of the cool fightingscenes. 😔
If I want bright, colorful and fun I’d watch marvel. The directors cut of BvS was actually really good, and gave you more to think about then most other superhero movies.
Maverick ssb4 thank you! Idk why everyone, including wisecrack are obsessed with knocking DC for “being too dark” when the shit marvel puts out is EASILY mediocre excluding some movies....like if you’re a cornball that likes predictable films I guess marvel is your thing.
Hey, I haven't seen the director's cut of BvS, does it explain why Batman is casually murdering criminals or why he's got a weird Dick Cheney mentality about Superman (i.e. His line about "If there's even a 1% chance Superman could turn evil then I absolutely have to murder him right now!")? Also, does it address Superman's weird behaviour after the massacre in the opening scene? Like, he's accused of killing all those people, why doesn't he hold a press conference and say "Did you notice that all the bodies are riddled with bullets...? Does it seem like I would need a gun if I really wanted to kill all those guys.....?"
I'm not being facetious (well, not ENTIRELY), I'm seriously asking because if it makes all the insane Batman characterisation make sense then I'll definitely give it a watch! :D
@@LoganBluth to answer your question or part of it, with regard to batman killing and wanting superman dead, his motives/reasons are made clear from his interactions with alfred. You can see he views people as potential "bad guys" if you will. He has seen too many people go bad or change from being good to something else entirely and has seen what those type of people are capable of. Now someone who views the world like that for regular humans or even meta humans in the case of his rogues gallery, it would be easy to understand how much of a threat they see superman as considering his god-like abilities and how there is little to no chance anyone has to stop him as bruce/batman sees him as just another person waiting to go bad only that this time the person in question can wipe out every single person on the planet with relative ease.
If you didn't already know that this version of batman is a worn down world weary one, as that was like one of the biggest things they said about him as a character even before the movie came out, then it clearly shows that you like movies that will spoon feed you information in the form of unnecessary exposition like if alfred were to say "Master wayne, you need to stop killing and branding bad guys, robin's death was not your fault. not everyone is bad so you need to find hope in people and be better" all the time he was on screen. I'm not making fun of you or your taste in movies and if you didn't get that the movie addressed some of your questions even in the theatrical cut then you should watch the director's cut, if you are indeed a fan then I believe you will enjoy it as some development and plot points were removed but as for batman killing and wanting superman dead I believe it was on the table even though I haven't seen the theatrical version in ages. :)
Joel Mutshaeni Ah, okay. See I figured there would be some better explanation in the Director’s Cut for Batman becoming a guy who just casually murders pretty much every criminal he sees than simply “He’s worn down so much that he just kills people now.” So what you’re basically saying is he’s “Batman In Name Only”. I mean I could almost understand if Batman had been pushed so far that he IS willing to kill, but only in EXTREME cases (like Superman, who like you said is such a MASSIVE potential threat). But I just can’t enjoy a depiction of Batman who murders every random thug he comes across (unless of course it’s some sort Elseworlds story in which Batman has become utterly irredeemable). Never mind, I’ll give the directors cut a miss. I’m sure you’ll say I just can’t handle movies that don’t spoon feed everything to me (while also INSISTING that you don’t mean to insult me whatsoever, for which I must commend you for employing such a very mature and not at all obnoxious style of discourse). To this I say I’m happy for you to believe about me whatever pleases you. You’ve certainly told me everything I need to know about you. 😘
Go watch it and see, dude. You have quite an opinion for someone who didn’t watch the directors cut.
If it were up to me i'll just keep shazam, wonder woman and aquaman and trash everything else with reboot
Flashpoint will most likely retcon Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad and Justice League. There’s no plans for these movies to get a sequel, and there’s no plans to release the Snyder Cut.
Gunn has confirmed that The Suicide Squad will be a total reboot, not a direct sequel.
Just by Hell, I’d only keep Wonder Woman and trash everything else that’s apart of the DCEU. Just give me more movies like Joker and The Batman, and I’ll be happiest DC fan of all time!
@@TheVladMan. I'm not exactly up to date with all the news, is flashpoint a thing? i heard there was some drama with flash actor and how it could be cancelled but i'm not sure.
But those are certainly movies that i will not miss
Just by Yeah. It’s been confirmed that The Flash movie will be based on Flashpoint. Whether they keep Ezra “The Choker” Miller or not‘s up in the air.
@@thebatman8815 trash the entire DCEU and stick to independent movies(as in these are not connected at all, like Joker and the next The Batman). If anything works... a trilogy doesnt so bad. Ask Nolan...
Just in time for Henry Cavill's birthday on May 5
Former DCEU actor
@@Knightfall182 he never confirmed his resignation. Just playing around till its official or he's called back.
Cinco de Cavill
@@sharilshahed6106 He doesn't have to confirm it. The TRADES confirmed it, and they were right about Affleck, despite Ben's denials.
Knightfall182 Superman isn’t that great of a box office draw, so that might by why they’re distancing themselves from him. The last four major movies with him - Superman Returns, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Justice League - all underperformed financially.
While Returns and Batman Year one are great, Miller himself lost his way with The Dark Knight Strikes Again and more importantly All-Star Batman and Robin. Plus, Miller totally screwed over Dick Grayson and the less spoken about ASBAR, the better
So, when I saw Superman, man of steel, i really stopped thinking of anything but that great Henry Cavill body!!
I think we are in the "batman & Robin" phase again. After messing around with archetypes and after seing what birds of prey had to offer we'll have to wait a while before superhero movies get to be good again... Frankly even Marvel is going down in quality in my opinión and what l've seen from what will be the new batman film doesn't strike me as WB learning anything from past mistakes.
@retsaM innavoiG Honestly, my opinion. But if you want the long answer, I think Marvel is slowly falling into the money and political propaganda trap. Latetly their movies are about an agenda first and a story second, take what they do: usually all their character movies have the same plot, it's more obvious every time and is because they have to, HAVE TO hit those political agenda points, damned be the script with which they do it. They started with a great idea about characters that build a universe but now they focus on "well, this will be the first female lead movie or the first black lead movie or the first whatever", and act like those things have never happened before and get credit like crazy because that's how Hollywood works. They wanted to give black panther an oscar, and yeah is a good movie and all but come on, is not original at all and is not even comparable with the dark knight and that movie didn't even get nominated back then, I mean is another subject but it ilustrates the point. Then there is the thing they did to spider-man... they straight conned us. Dead is the base from which that character stud. They have the nerve to say this won't be an origin story yet they give us a three movie origin for the character and still is not even close to be spider-man proper. They replaced uncle ben with Tony, which no matter how many easter eggs they put in their movies it doesn't have the same value. Their visual effects are mediocre at best, compared to the artistic efforts put in by the team behind the raimi movies (which are not perfect, no I'm not a raimi fanboy). Over all, they are very few the times where a marvel movie has moved me and is sad bacause I'm a huge fan of their characters but if you ask me, their strategy has been basically to turn all of their very diverse and unique characters from the comics into a version of Spider-Man (they are all snapy and quick-witted) and then turn Spider-Man into Iron-man jr. I remember my heart beating at the ferris scnene in TDK, my eyes getting teary with aunt May's speech, my joy at the last swing in Spider-Man 2, my smile when Superman looked at the camera at the end and smiled back to me, and by far I remember when heroes inspired me and others instead of acting like completely incompetent people. Marvel has had those moments too. Avengers, winter soldier, iron-man, etc. But they end up being just that, moments. In the other examples those moments were part of a bigger idea behind the entire movie, is called theme. And you can't have the same theme in all your movies about different characters and expect me to believe that you (marvel) are dedicating the same amount of passion and care to these projects. Recently IN MY OPINION, they haven't. No wonder they are making movies about the vilains now (which is even worse from DC). All of these is excluding the Daredevil, Punisher and Jessica Jones series which I think have been Marvel at its best.
IMHO two things killed the DCEU, trying to build up their universe too soon and giving Zach Snyder absolute creative freedom.
Thank you!
Nobody seems willing to admit, how much of a bad decision the appointment of Zack snyder was.
He was the one that fucked it up, before WB made it even worse.
When I watched Justice League, all I was thinking was "poor Joss Wheden, desperately trying to add color into the inktank Zack Snyder has created"
Unfortunately its both true and not true. If he wasnt pushed to compete with the mcu we could of got perfection. Oh well
@@StevenZephyc He was also restricted by likely studio mandate to make a movie short - look at JL runtime. It's idiocy to make a group movie that has 120 minutes runtime, even solo character movies are usually longer, of course you produce a jumbled mess out of it.
sneakpeeker it was Warner Bro’s giving Geoff Johns the role of Kevin Feige for DC.
The fact they could’ve build up to Doomsday instead of rushing things and actually have a meaningful superman death then, it sucks, especially knowing the MCU has nailed it in making a cohesive cinematic universe. Iron Man’s death and Steve’s fulfillment of getting his dance made the whole world weep, meanwhile we have superman dying in one movie and coming back alive in the next
Yeah they should've have superman and batman killed after battling darkseid.
Also, Snyder is an objectivist, so he wrote Superman through that lens, so of course it’s terrible
Yeah but it was relatable lol since its the same lens humanity would have
B Black Only privileged rich idiots have that lens
"...ultimately hollow. Enter Zack Snyder..."
Snyder is a visionary filmmaker. The worst parts of BvS were evidently from studio meddling, and the ultimate edition is genuinely fantastic. Although Snyder evidently had too much fun with certain violent elements, the core ideas in the movie are profound and moving. The world deserves to see the snyder cut.
Please. BvS was bad and the ultimate edition was just longer and bad
I personally love the grit in Batman v Superman, but it’s kind of a dead end, you can’t separate a hero from his moral superiority, or at least his effort to strive towards it.
That movie was too dark to the point people couldn't have fun with it. you can have a dark movie but there was to be little bits of light-heartedness or small personal intimate moments.
0:43 *shows Thor: Dark World*
Me: *remembers the Incredible Hulk*
ant man and the wasp, iron man 3, age of ultron
Office Hulk was Universal Pictures though, not marvel studios/ Disney. It's like Venom, it's "MCU adjacent"
I actually enjoyed the incredible hulk. Mostly for the fight between him and abomination though.
@@EasyCure0 it is marvel studios. It had RDJ. I hope you aren't thinking about Ang Lee's Hulk movie which was Universal Studios
@@MrGregory777 You're technically both right. IH is 100% MCU, but it was released through Universal. The Hulk cannot have another stand alone film unless it's through Universal.
Thanks for continuing to produce videos during this time! Much appreciated, my dudes!
I have a love-hate relationship with DC. My 3 favorite superhero movies of all time in no particular order are Watchman, The Dark Knight and Joker... but my most hated superhero movies are Suicide Squad, Batman v Superman and Batman and Robin. It's not a very healthy relationship.
It's impressive how people dont get it. Super needs time to handle his abilities, on MOS, he had nothing time, every fight is grounded on the lack of ability of ground control end focus. And, in bvs, he was put on a place that is cleary references on our age. A hero can't be unanimous, if he is, the people in charge of power changes that. You all supposed to watch a dam funny superhero movie, but forgot to watch a movie that gone further.
You can have a strong concept with horrible execution you know
I have been studying BvS obsessively ever since it came out four years ago because, for me, it wasn’t enough that I didn’t like it, I had to understand why - why did most people hate it while a select few hailed it as a masterpiece? What was the X factor?
And after reading many, many articles and think-pieces from both sides of the argument, I believe I’ve finally figured it out.
I believe the answer is twofold: its attempt at realism, and Zack Snyder’s philosophies when it comes to storytelling.
It’s obvious that Mr. Snyder has a very unique taste when it comes to filmmaking and craft stories, and he’s very unapologetic about it despite how divisive it can be. The only film he’s ever directed that has garnered mainstream recognition for him was 300, and I’m willing to bet it was for reasons he didn’t intend. All other works he’s been involved in have seemingly been destined for cult followings - Watchmen, Sucker Punch, Dawn of the Dead, The Guardians of Ga’Hoole, Man of Steel, etc. - all of this is to illustrate he’s, at his heart, niche creator. He himself admitted more than once that the "mainstream has never interested" him. Despite that, he continues to try his hand in these ventures that more-or-less ‘’requires‘’ mainstream recognition in order to be successful. This is a bad equation. Mainly because he doesn’t make movies ... he makes poetry. He makes very complex visual fairytales where dialogue is either secondary or tertiary to the point of the story. You could watch his movies with the sound off and you’d probably get a ‘’better’’ understanding of what’s going than you would otherwise.
Taking that into consideration, it’s easier to see where BvS went wrong, especially in its regards to realism because that movie is NOT realistic. Not even close (see here for more information: tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/IdiotPlot/DCExtendedUniverse). However, it is metaphorically realistic. That’s an important distinction.
It has more in common with ancient hero-myths or epic poetry in its scale, in that things seemingly happen without warning or build-up and you’re not supposed to question it. It functions on right-brain thinking and you’re just supposed to suspend your left-brain logic in order to appreciate the larger meta-narrative, which some people are just prodigiously attuned to.
This is not how movies have evolved to work over the last decade or so because of the internet. Best exemplified by TH-cam series like Honest Trailer or CinemaSins, where they will point out any and all flaws when and where they can find them.
I once read you could never make “RAIDER OF THE LOST ARC” now because the day it would be released, thousands of articles would be written pointing out how the hero had no real effect on the plot; if Indiana Jones had done literally nothing, then the Nazis would have opened the Arc and all died. Of course the point of the movie isn’t if Indy can stop the Nazis, it’s about whether the cynical Dr. Jones can put his faith in the “magic hocus-pocus “ he scoffed at in the beginning, but that wouldn’t matter to audiences these days. Everyone would be criticizing it for having a story with no real consequences.
This is all to say that Zack Snyder’s tenure as the de-facto architect of the DC film franchise was destined to fail because his artistic philosophies just don’t work for tent pole blockbusters anymore. The mainstream demands tighter plotting and deeper characterization than what he wants to do, so maybe it’s for the best that he has moved back into his comfort-zone with his low-risk zombie-heist film (even though zombies have been done to death and undeath at this point).
Although, I hope he hasn’t completely given up on superheroes just yet, because I think he’s the perfect man to direct the rumored MCU adaptation of the SQUADRON SUPREME, which is shockingly identical to BvS.
Absolutely spot on. You can apply that same mentality Synder had with the dcau to Watchmen. A lot of people miss that he didn't understand the original text because he pretty much apes the plot of the book. But certain stylistic, design changes contradict what Watchmen was saying. He got the surface meaning but not the deeper meaning
It's possible that he actually does understand Watchmen, he just doesn't care. He was drawn to the material because he likes bad heroes, blood and guts, bombastic overkill. The rest doesn't matter to him.
what went wrong? They hired Snyder, they gave him power and Silverman did not check what he was doing.
Facts
Not facts! Snyder was a scapegoat. The truth was that the studio execs wanted to instantly have a marvel universe and pushed for it. (a cash grab.) Because of this it became too much too soon. Snyder had a long term plan and he was overridden by the studio micromanaging everything and the Superman vs Batman movie was a mess caused by the execs. When they finally released the ultimate edition which was closer to Zack Snyder's vision the fans who saw it said it was better than theatrical cut (not perfect but better). Then the Justice League movie came out and bombed. That movie was greatly changed from Snyder's vision (and was Josh Whedon's mess.) They also cut out all references to Darkseid and let that plot line fade into oblivion. Everyone said Zack Snyder's vision was too dark but they went too far the other way. What many of the younger fans don't understand is that for decades Marvel was the serious comic company read by older kids and college students. DC was for the kiddies. That's why they had the crisis reboot in1985 and why they hired John Byrne to reboot Superman. His book sales were so poor they felt that they needed to "Marvelize" Superman. Look at the horrendous JLA NBC specials, the ridiculous Cathy Lee Crosby Wonder Woman movie and the silly Superman musical. No one took DC seriously! Even Linda Carter's WW series and Christopher Reeve's Superman movies had their share of silly baggage. As of 1989 the best super hero franchise's in tv and movies were the second Superman movie,the first Tim Burton Batman movie and the Incredible Hulk tv series all of which had darker tone or more formidable villians . That's why Snyder felt he had to have a darker vision for our heroes. That's why he chose to pattern his Batman after the comic book Dark Knight Returns Batman. That's why so many fans want to see the Snyder cut of Justice League.(If it exists.). Snyder had a vision but never was allowed to carry it out. It was the movie studio execs (and tv network show runners) that were (and are) messing with our heroes as they always have done.
@@LSOK38 you definitely have some good points about Snyder he did have a vision for the dceu but WB screwed him over because they want to play catch-up marvel. although everybody knows he's not a good Storyteller he can't make it coherent and his character development is messy or underdeveloped. He's mostly good with visuals and action scenes and translating Page by Page other comic book that's it.
@@LSOK38 wow text but ok.
I disagree. Snyder was the problem from the beginning. MoS was 100% his own vision and this movie has so many problems in storytelling, character development missuse of allegories etc. The movie itself is already a dumpsterfire and I dont talk about the neck snap of Zod or the 9/11 depiction but the problem of thematical flip floping between nature vs nurture that even Jor-El symbolises both instead of free will vs Zod deterministic genetics, the problem of missunderstanding that Superman is not Jesus but Moses, that in the story it should be the struggle of Clark making his decision between his kryptonien father hand the promess to his earthly father is taken away by the arrivel of Zod which then in return makes the sacrifice of Kent meaningless in a way, the changing from a altruistic symbol of Superman to an cynic Ayn Rand objectivist even though his nature would be good (schoolbus) which again takes away the human connection of the core superman that normaly gets installed by his human connection of his parants which then violates again a compationat scene of Clark in the school by the speech of Clark about saving the children and these are not even all problems.
This movie shows already that Snyder is not capable of telling a story that is in character development, storystructure, thematic coherence etc. Which is exactly the problem Snyder is criticed for he goes for spectical over substance. He is like a bad student that uses scientific words cause they sound cool but is unable to grasp the correct meaning and uses them not in the right relation to each othere. Snyder was the biggest mistake they made and afterwards they tryied everything to correct it but without knowing what the really want which keeps being WB moto.
@@martinwinter615 Boy this text is pretentious as fuck. You pretty much copied and pasted these points from other WiseCrack's video.
As far as MoS, I hoped that the death of Zod at Kal's hands was going to be a lesson for him, if it had been thought of. A lesson for taking a massive threat away from populated areas to protect innocents. Something he probably wouldn't consider because he had never dealt with those with almost a zealot level of belief.
That’s what they get for making DC’s Avengers Endgame before making solo movies.
Slow and steady wins the race.
Wonder woman - Steve ,Sam ,Charlie chief, Etta candy
Aquaman- vulko ,mera ,attlana ,orm,tom
Shazam - Freddie ,Choi ,Darla ,Mary ,Pedro
These 3 movies are character diven bvs man of steel overely on spectacles and end up feeling like expensive cosplays than a cohesive movie
Both bvs and mos have way better supporting characters only Jeremy irons Alfred, Russel crowe jor El and fishburnes Perry are worth watching the rest wasted or no impact
Personally, I think it's a ridiculous notion that "all shared cinematic universes should have to first have a bunch of inter-connected solo films before bringing them all together for a team-up movie". Imagine applying that logic to some of our most cherished classics...I mean, should every Ghostbuster have had a solo movie first before "just throwing them all in there together"? Does that mean it was "rushed"? How about the Ninja Turtles? Or Ocean's 11? Or the Seven Samurai? Ad infinitum. It's downright preposterous to forcibly apply one specific structure to every single movie that has more than one or two main characters.
Also, the whole idea of DC "trying to catch up to Marvel" isn't close to being accurate either, especially considering that DC had major commercial success with their comic books, serials, tv shows, cartoons, and, yes, *movies* way before Marvel ever even found their footing. Keep in mind back in the 60's and 70's, Marvel was barely able to put out poorly animated (and voiced) cartoons in an attempt to match the success of DC's Superfriends. At that time, they were also barely able to fund their first few attempts at film with all their cheesy, made-for-tv movies like Captain America and the legendary Fantastic Four made-for-tv movie. While DC was churning out game changers like Donner's Superman and Burton's Batman, Marvel was putting out stuff like the notoriously corny and awkward Howard The Duck movie.
So while I am aware that Marvel is now wildly successful thanks to Disney's financial backing and insane promotion, let's not forget that DC was the first to do so and literally paved the way for this age of superhero movies we currently live in.
No, I completely agree that Snyder missed the point. From the Watchmen onwards I've felt that he was superficial in his research. I feel though, that he gets the brunt of the ire when David S Goyer deserves some too.
I don't actually dislike Thor: The Dark World, but it is my least favourite of the Thor trilogy.
But what you seem to be saying is:
1-Zack Synder is edgy/gritty just for the sake of it, which I agree with.
AND
2-Zack Synder forgot the essence of what made the original characters he "adapted" who they are, which I don't think I know quite enough about DC comics to agree or disagree with.
Well as an avid reader of superman, he absolutely lost the core of that character. I remember in the cinema when they began quoting all star superman, I was so pissed. It was like someone had killed your best friend, and was now puppetering there corpse around as it was the real deal. If you want a true superman origin, check out John Byrnes man of steel or Supeman for all seasons. Birthright too is a solid book. And the comic kingdom come is the anti dc cinematic universe book.
DC fan here:
1 - yes.
2 - yes x2
I don't think it's that he forgot but that he just didn't like it or cared.
One man and a studio is to blame for the mess of the DCEU. Zack Snyder directed The Dark Knight returns in the second film of the DCEU and The Death of Superman in his second movie. Batman vs Superman should’ve never happened.
I think it could have happened, but not as the 2nd movie of their Universe, if we look at the MCU movies like Civil War happened after 8 years of building their Universe, at first they did the Iron Man trilogy, then 2 movies on Captain America, Thor and The Avengers, that's why it works to see them on e against the other, while with BvS is the complete opposite, that movie did what it did with only one movie behind, that's why it felt so heavy, if they would have done more movies and then BvS it would've been much better.
@@EN_02 exactly it was stupid to do BVS and do a Justice League movie after that. How were they gonna do a Justice League movie without Superman? Superman was barely in the movie. He should’ve had a much bigger role.
2:23 Ah, yes. I always love cinematic equivalents of beating a dead horse.
Except this dead horse is the most famous superhero of all time.
What went wrong you say?
One word:
Martha.
Tbh, someone made a really good argument about how that scene would have worked. If in movie they showed that batman doesn't kill human then after knowing that superman has a mother and he is human just like him and others he would realise what he was going to do.
MARTHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But I like that scene
Jeet JoJo Moviebob?
@@Christ2010Grad moviebob? Is that a youtube channel
Probably the worst failing in my eyes is that Snyder wanted to deconstruct without the initial buildup. From the get-go he establishes that someone's success lead to another's defeat.
I honestly think Snyder is getting too much blame for the issues. You can clearly see Nolan's influence in Man of Steel and the studio forced Snyder to make BvS into an intro for the Justice League... now, I know what I'm saying isn't fact, but I feel that Man of Steel's Superman wasn't supposed to be Superman YET.. think about it... he had NO experience, never had a single fight in his life and all of the sudden has to fight for his life and protect his home planet...
There was way too much studio intervention and way too many things that the studio itself wanted... and Snyder would probably not blame the studios unless if he never wants another job again...
It's funny to take a shot at Thor: The Second Thor in a video that is about the failings of movies that are far, far worse. It puts things in perspective. Like sure, it's probably in just about everyone's bottom 3 Marvel films, but it's still way better than Batman v Superman or Justice League.
It's funny how everyone thinks Thor 2 is the worst MCU movie. When in reality, they pushed the acutal worst MCU movie, The Incredible Hulk, out of their memories.
Watched The Dark World for the first time last night and really enjoyed it. And it's still better than both Ant-Man movies.
@@justinfarischon7868 oh man, guilty. Like most people I generally think of Iron Man as the first MCU film.
*MAD* facts.
@@samtoshner8002 Iron Man is the first. The Incredible Hulk is the second
One of the great problems is that Superman, the shining beacon of hope, truth, justice, and the good in the world is reduced to a somewhat dark interpretation of himself. If I was a wealthy man who had the rights to these DC characters, I would hire a filmmaker to create a more optimistic and positive Superman movie rather than the failure Man of Steel was!
Man of steel ? failure?
ok you can say you didn't like the movie or hated the movie
It is not failure -coz most of the people dosnt share your opinion mr.
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! "Synder decided..." ??? How can you answer the question in the title without even MENTIONING all the corporate greed and executive interference and mandates??
Snyder is a Randian Objectivist so it’s impossible to be “too hard” on him lol
Which is also why he can't get past a surface level interpretation. He never understood the subject matter in the first place.
this so hard tho lol
Is he really a Randian Objectivist or am I not getting a joke?
@@escapefromtibet2530 Pretty sure Wisecrack went deeper into it in the What Went Wrong Batman v Superman video. Snyder really wants to make an Ayn Rand movie but no studio backed him as of yet .
@@escapefromtibet2530 He most likely is, otherwise his obsession with adapting The Fountainhead and the creeping of Randian ideology in his superhero movies would be...confusing