This week, Zack Snyder unleashes his version of "Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice," and it’s certainly a brawnier, louder, and well, more Snyder-esque take on the titular superheroes than we’ve seen before. However, the director wants you to know that underneath the hood of his blockbuster, there’s a lot more going on than just explosions, one liners, and the superficial workings of a major franchise. And in a new chat with The Wall Street Journal, Snyder draws a line between ‘Dawn Of Justice’ and his faithful, panel-by-panel adaptation of Alan Moore‘s "Watchmen."
“It’s all about the ‘why’ of superheroes: the political why, the religious why, the philosophical why,” he said about ‘Dawn Of Justice,’ which he says is "a little bit" of the continuation of the ideas in "Watchmen."
“Once you’ve absorbed that material, there’s no way it doesn’t resonate with you, especially when you’re dealing with characters like Batman and Superman and Wonder Woman, who are basically the trinity,” he added. “In some ways, this will be, I hope at its really best, the impossible version of ‘Watchmen.’”
That’s certainly a provocative notion worth thinking about, but one hopes Snyder can truly grasp the ideas that are on the table, because he seems to miss the point when he’s left to defend the collateral damage in "Man Of Steel."
"….well, what about [‘Star Wars: The Force Awakens‘]?” he said. “In ‘Star Wars’ they destroy five planets with billions of people on them. That’s gotta be one of the highest death toll movies in history, the new ‘Star Wars’ movie, if you just do the math.”
Perhaps, but those were largely deaths caused by The First Order, not Rey fighting Kylo Ren in a crowded metropolis.
"Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice" opens on Friday. Watch a new TV spot below.
He misses the point, because the point is so excruciatingly dumb that someone who understands the movie wouldn\’t think of it. The world engine does most of the destruction and then Superman fights Zod who he can barely outmatch, let alone control. It is collateral damage caused by villains, same as Avengers, same as Star Wars, same as James Bond, same as most blockbusters. The character is seen saving lives throughout the whole movie. Do we really need as forced exposition as the IM versus Hulk fight in age of ultron, where iron man is constantly saying \’oh gotta mind the people\’, to realize that the hero\’s intention IS to save people where and when they can manage it!?
The only reason some people complain is because they aren\’t used to a Superman who\’s not perfect. There is continuous cry-out for blockbusters that serve up the plot less cookie cutter, less spoon fed, lees annoying over-exposition, and yet when people get it, they don\’t actually \’get it\’. Man of Steel is a day 1 story that depicts what would happen if a boy who grew up here needed to suddenly tap into his extreme and (to him up to that point) unique powers, to a measure far beyond anything he\’s done before, against military fighters with the same super powers. His opponents wield a weapon of mass destruction. If there is ANYTHING one could critique, it\’s that Superman manages to win AT ALL. He flies to India to destroy the WMD, he flies back when most damage has been done to metropolis by said WMD\’s connection to Zod\’s ship and he fights a complete lunatic who literally says his goal is to kill as many (if not all) humans he can manage. \’Either you die, or I do\’. There\’s no level of reason to Zod at that point. "Hey zod, could we step away for a moment, lotta innocent lives here." "No Kal, I just said my goal is literally to kill every single human on this planet, does it surprise you Im gonna start right here?" "Gosh darnit." Really people? Do we need that? Pretty hypocritical for the constant lamenting of exposition and spoon fed plots in blockbusters. Superman isn\’t ABLE to get Zod out of metropolis. In fact, he DOES try, he gets him into space, but Zod overtakes him again. Superman does what he can, because it\’s his first god damn day against a military lunatic with the same powers. That is intentional, new, and interesting. Why? Because it\’s relatable in a way Superman hasn\’t been made before: he\’s humanised in being flawed, in having to overcome things he nearly or only partially can, just like many humans in real life. It\’s DAY ONE of his journey in becoming Superman, a hero who famously faces the biggest threats out there in his future \’career\’.
Zack misses the point because the point is invalid and a smart man isn\’t the one who\’s to blame for not realizing some people actually, clearly, do not use their brains when viewing a film, or even seem to pay attention. Hell, even refuse to look at the movie the way the movie is meant.
After three years I really do not understand how people not get this, and I am sure neither does Snyder. It\’s utterly ridiculous. Don\’t like Man of Steel, everyone\’s own taste, but the film does what it means to do very well (not perfectly, but very well and quite unprecedentedly so). If you don\’t like that, the movie simply isn\’t for you. Just like plenty of movies simply aren\’t for me.
I like your point, though.
I sadly see this comment section negated all the paragraphs and structure I gave my former post, didn\’t know it\’d do that.
He misses the point, because the point is so excruciatingly dumb that someone who understands the movie wouldn\’t think of it. The world engine does most of the destruction and then Superman fights Zod who he can barely outmatch, let alone control. It is collateral damage caused by villains, same as Avengers, same as Star Wars, same as James Bond, same as most blockbusters. The character is seen saving lives throughout the whole movie. Do we really need as forced exposition as the IM versus Hulk fight in age of ultron, where iron man is constantly saying \’oh gotta mind the people\’, to realize that the hero\’s intention IS to save people where and when they can manage it!?
The only reason some people complain is because they aren\’t used to a Superman who\’s not perfect. There is continuous cry-out for blockbusters that serve up the plot less cookie cutter, less spoon fed, lees annoying over-exposition, and yet when people get it, they don\’t actually \’get it\’. Man of Steel is a day 1 story that depicts what would happen if a boy who grew up here needed to suddenly tap into his extreme and (to him up to that point) unique powers, to a measure far beyond anything he\’s done before, against military fighters with the same super powers. His opponents wield a weapon of mass destruction. If there is ANYTHING one could critique, it\’s that Superman manages to win AT ALL. He flies to India to destroy the WMD, he flies back when most damage has been done to metropolis by said WMD\’s connection to Zod\’s ship and he fights a complete lunatic who literally says his goal is to kill as many (if not all) humans he can manage. \’Either you die, or I do\’. There\’s no level of reason to Zod at that point. "Hey zod, could we step away for a moment, lotta innocent lives here." "No Kal, I just said my goal is literally to kill every single human on this planet, does it surprise you Im gonna start right here?" "Gosh darnit." Really people? Do we need that? Pretty hypocritical for the constant lamenting of exposition and spoon fed plots in blockbusters. Superman isn\’t ABLE to get Zod out of metropolis. In fact, he DOES try, he gets him into space, but Zod overtakes him again. Superman does what he can, because it\’s his first god damn day against a military lunatic with the same powers. That is intentional, new, and interesting. Why? Because it\’s relatable in a way Superman hasn\’t been made before: he\’s humanised in being flawed, in having to overcome things he nearly or only partially can, just like many humans in real life. It\’s DAY ONE of his journey in becoming Superman, a hero who famously faces the biggest threats out there in his future \’career\’.
Zack misses the point because the point is invalid and a smart man isn\’t the one who\’s to blame for not realizing some people actually, clearly, do not use their brains when viewing a film, or even seem to pay attention. Hell, even refuse to look at the movie the way the movie is meant.
After three years I really do not understand how people not get this, and I am sure neither does Snyder. It\’s utterly ridiculous. Don\’t like Man of Steel, everyone\’s own taste, but the film does what it means to do very well (not perfectly, but very well and quite unprecedentedly so). If you don\’t like that, the movie simply isn\’t for you. Just like plenty of movies simply aren\’t for me.