I enjoyed the movie personally and I'm really excited for Batman v Superman, but it definitely had a pacing problem, in my opinion. Confusing him with the Joker in any sense was a serious misstep in Nolan's Superman. Making him suicidal is fucking terrible writing.
He wants to rule the world specifically transform the world into Krypton as much as possible.
#Man of steel reviews code
That's why he loves Chaos for its own sake and why to he wants Batman to violate his code and become a killer, even if the person he kills is the Joker. His goal is to prove that everyone else is faking social mores and that deep down they are as broken as he is. In the Joker's mind, if he makes Batman kill him then he wins. Sure, killing Zod was necessary in the moment but what the fuck was Zod doing? Why should Zod care to make Superman violate his code? Zod isn't the Joker.Įdit: I feel like elaborating. It's not that Superman made entirely terrible choices given his options, but it was the lazy writing that put him in those ridiculous positions. let Ben call the shots on everything else.
#Man of steel reviews how to
Affleck understands how to tell stories in film. Maybe Snyder is more like a modern Michael Bay, but without a sense of humor? As strange as it might sound, I think one key element to be optimistic about "Batman V Superman" is the involvement of Ben Affleck. I've heard Snyder called "style over substance" and "the modern Tim Burton", but I think Burton had a far better grasp of story/character than Snyder does.
He would have been incredible as a director of video game cut scenes or music videos. They asked him what it was like to work with Snyder (he was in the awful "sucker punch" movie) and he said: "Zack was very cool and incredibly down to earth and a great visual artist." I'm sure it wasn't intended as a slight on Zack, but it summed it up well. I thought Oscar Isaac summed it up great in his Reddit AMA. If "Batman V Superman" scores over 60 on metacritic, I'll be shocked. Fact is, every film he's made has received mediocre to poor reviews. What works great as a graphic novel doesn't necessarily lend itself to film. In "300" for instance, I'm pretty sure the stunted dumbed down dialogue was word-for-word from the graphic novel. Part of it might not be entirely his fault. He has real problems with character development, dialogue, story, etc. His overall instincts as a filmmaker are kind of suspect, though. He understands how to capture the aesthetic of the comics. "Man of Steel" had awesome action scenes lifted straight from the comics. His films aren't great, but they always look awesome. I'm in the camp that appreciates what Snyder does. It could have been better, but it's not the abomination so many make it out to be. There's also a lot of traditionalists who think the Christopher Reeve version of Superman is the only valid interpretation to put on film. Many seem to think he's a symbol of everything they think is wrong with modern blockbuster filmmaking, and they pretty much bash everything he's associated with. They don't like that he kills Zod, which is his only option to protect innocent people, even though he killed Zod in "Superman II" (when he was depowered and no longer a threat).Ī lot of the hate comes from a dislike of Zack Snyder's work in general. They claim he doesn't save enough people which is something he does throughout the film, even as a teenager. Many have argued that Superman is morally responsible for the destruction the Kryptonians cause which ignores his inexperience and how outmatched he is most of the time. There are some fair criticisms to make and genuine flaws to point out, but Man of Steel gets some ridiculous charges thrown at it.
0 kommentar(er)
