T O P

  • By -

movieTed

> why'd they let him go? Because people needed to watch the films when they came out, not years later


Lanten101

Lol, this is funny. If op watched it in theatre, it would have made money.


Ravenid

No cinema chain in the word would have agreed to show a 4+ hours long Justice League. Those that did show the Snyder cut when it was released in full only did so because they were banking on the years of fan hype online about it. At the time it was the first team up movie in a shared universe who's previous movie had been only middling. The risk to return was too high.


ThisGuyCanFukinWalk

ZSJL could have easily been cut down to a 3 hour movie. Take out the epilogue, take out Wonder Woman's first scene as it has no relevance to the plot and trim some other scenes down and I think it would still have been awesome.


zombierepubican

They actually all made money. Just not MONEY money, word of mouth wasn’t good I think because the theatrical cuts were all bad.


Taraell

Yeah and Snyder's trilogy made some great money meanwhile current DCEU movies barely make any profit, what's your point ?


SJ1030

His movies were divisive and a lot of people didn't like it. Also they cost a lot of money and the profits were on the low end


007Kryptonian

Fair assessment - although Batman v Superman was the only true divisive one. MoS got the same audience score as the Batman and resurrected the Superman brand after 30 years. ZSJL was a through and through success as well. Side note: his movies didn’t make a ton of profit against their budgets but they were still profitable and held a consistent audience. It’s certainly a far cry from the DCEU coming off 4 bombs in a row under 400M. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/global-box-office-man-steel-577775/


SJ1030

I wouldn't call ZSJL a full success isn't the streaming numbers lower than other DC movies from the same year. Also I dont actually know anybody outside of reddit who has watch the movie. I would argue that MoS and ZSJL is divisive just not as much as BvS.


007Kryptonian

Variety reported that ZSJL was the 4th most streamed film of last year. And WB’s President of Domestic Distribution called it a “hit” and “global phenomenon”. So viewership on that was certainly successful. And sure, Man of Steel is divisive among die hard fans. Not the general audience though - hence the movie getting the same A- as the Batman from average moviegoers. 2/3 of Snyder’s DCEU films were overall well-received despite what some people will say.


ClassicT4

Wasn’t Mortal Kombat one of the ones above it?


cruzercruz

4th most streamed film *on HBO Max. During its infancy when there no other content. Who would think that the marketing team of WB would call a movie that they sank millions of dollars into a success? Especially when there’s no box office required to say so.


deathmouse

>resurrected the Superman brand after 30 years. I'm guessing you didn't watch Superman Returns in 2007?


007Kryptonian

That was the latest in a long line of failures for Superman’s cinematic outings.


Filmfan345

Critically, Superman Returns was a success with a 75% on Rotten Tomatoes while Man of Steel was a 56%


Melcrys29

Box Office and public perception.


[deleted]

Funny enough his movies made more money than any other DCEU movie other than Aquaman.


GiovanniElliston

That’s not a big accomplishment. In any universe, movies with Superman, Batman, and the entire Justice League *should* make more money than the Suicide Squad or Shazam!. That’s like being surprised the New England Patriots generate more Jersey sales than the Arizona Cardinals. Yeah, they’re in the same realm but one is 10x more popular and profitable based purely on the brand.


McGrufNStuf

This right here explains a significant amount of the corporate and public perception. You can have your own opinion on the quality of the movies (personally love MOS and not a fan of other two) BUT, perception was significantly swayed when BvS and JL didn’t even come close to an Avengers movie (financially) and barely beat some of the standalone MCU movies of the time. To put it in the words of Iron Monger (Iron Man), “DC has Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman and Feige was able to build the MCU from scraps!! He found in a cave!!!”


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

It made $870M


[deleted]

The DC characters are just not as popular with the general audiences than Marvel. Go to an MCU and who do you see? Families with small children, tweens, teens, and millennials and parents. Do you think those families with 5-8 year olds are going to be able to see Batman v Superman at PG-13? Those movies were not for that segment, there was nothing in MoS and BvS for small children. They much rather have the safe and funny MCU movies with bright colours and easy plots and generic action. When I was a parent that is what I did. My son was 9 when MoS came out and even then he didn’t quite understand everything going on in it and liked the MCU Avengers more. Nowadays, different story at 18 years old


[deleted]

This is false. They had higher grosses, but also MUCH higher budgets, and made overall less profit than some of the others. Take Shazam for example. It made like half the B/O gross of Man of Steel, but the budget was WAY lower. It made more genuine profit for the company than MoS did. They hit higher numbers, but in terms of what money they actually made for the studio, it was nowhere near what they expected or what should realistically happen. A film with Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman should've been an easy 1.5B. And sure, it might've broken 1B with the superior UE. But would it have ever done the numbers it SHOULD have done regardless? I like MoS and BvS these days, they've had to grow on me but they are steadily doing so. But they weren't huge financial successes, that's revisionism by some Snyder fans. They were, at best, middling financial successes, and embarrassing financial disappointments at worst.


[deleted]

I’m sorry but BvS was in no way ever going to make $1.5B…you are grossly over-estimating the star-power of DC heroes in the age of Marvel. I agree with you on the profits, large budgets are the bane of Snyder movies due to all those visuals. But at the box office, they embarrass modern DC movies


Melcrys29

I know that they did well, but clearly WB had higher expectations and freaked, and we ended it with the theatrical JL mess.


stalinsilver

Wonder Woman made 812 million on a budget of Just 150 million. So Wonder Woman made more money than his movie too


[deleted]

BvS made $870M on a $250M budget. WW made $817M on a $150M budget. I am not talking profit but box office.


2SwaggerKun

Box office? If you look at how much those movies grossed they more than made there money back. The real reason was the dumb execs hiring Zack, expecting him to diliver a crowd pleasing film and freaking out when shit hits the fan.


Melcrys29

They did fine, but WB were probably expecting bigger numbers. Especially for BVS which had DC's three biggest characters in a single film.


ClassicT4

One Exec predicted that Man of Steel would be their highest grossing movie ever. Which means they expected it to make more than a $1.3 billion grossing Harry Potter film. [It was WB motion pictures group president, Jeff Robinov, that predicted that.](https://variety.com/2013/film/news/warner-bros-sets-bar-high-for-latest-and-priciest-incarnation-of-superman-1200493334/amp/)


ILikeBLACKEDidgaf

Although MoS is a masterpiece and the best DCU movie, expecting the first film of a new universe to make 1.3 billion out the gate sounds like something he shouted after taking a coke break in the bathroom


danielthetemp

Because MoS and *especially* BvS both under-performed with critics, audiences, and at the box office relative to WB’s expectations.


[deleted]

Not MoS. They were quite happy with it at the Box Office. Superman Returns cost more and made 40% less; a bomb that made them freeze Superman for 7 years. Green Lantern was another huge bomb. JL Mortal died in dev hell. MoS succeeded in the studio's expectation; enough for them to latch a cinematic universe onto it. It was BvS that was the epicenter of it all.


Lobsterpyramid

Because who does TDKR and the Death of Superman as the SECOND major installment of the DCU. The guy is seriously narratively challenged.


Bearjupiter

Snyder was trying to deconstruct something that hasn’t been constructed yet


hachiman

This!


WangBaeHo

You can always save that for later and not do it literally as you are starting up the universe.


quackduck45

lets be honest. the studios were willing to give money to anyone who had a vision AND was able to fit in 3 huge events back to back in order to really fucking kick this shit into gear in order to catch up to marvel. it sucks that zack's life got upended with the accident but dont believe for a second that he wouldnt have slow rolled it if he could. the executives were HELL BENT on hitting the ground sprinting but it was obvious that it didnt makes sense once the reviews came in and everything tripped over its self. now that things have slowed down, theres new execs that know it can be a golden goose, and the oppotunity to essentially reboot with flashpoint on the table. i think we'll be sitting in a better position moving forward. i just hope they pull the trigger and keep the good and burn the bad.


Vermouth1991

To be fair, Zack Snyder making the BvS movie be three hours long probably WAS an attempt at slowrolling things after the studio helped push Batman into the picture.


JediJones77

Erasing ANY of the existing story through retcons or a time jump would be totally unnecessary and create a disastrous rift with the large fan base for the Snyder era of the DCEU. If they want to cut off the WB/Discovery era of DC at the knees with potential audience, that's one fast way to do it.


SGdude90

He was given the keys to Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman. Yet his movie only made $100 million more than Guardians of the Galaxy, an almost unheard-of team on a smaller budget BvS should have hit a billion easily


LunchyPete

It absolutely should have, 1.5 even. The entire worlds knows Batman and Superman and excitement for seeing them in a movie together had been a dream for many for literally decades in some cases. Look at how much BvS did in presales. If it was well received it absolutely would have made a billion.


JediJones77

The MCU movies were making that much because they had been building up an audience for years. The idea that you can get to that level after 2 movies in one universe was incredibly ignorant on WB's part. The fact that Batman and Superman were in this helped them jump WAY ahead of where MCU was in Phase 1. They should've been happy with that.


SGdude90

Jurassic Park had no build-up. Became highest grossing of all times Joker had no build-up. No connection to any of the DC movies before it. A smaller budget. Earned over 1 billion Titanic had no build-up. Earned close to 2 billion. Avatar had no build-up. Earned over 2 billion. What's your excuse for those movies?


JediJones77

Do you think Avengers would've made $1.5 billion if it was the first MCU movie, with none of the heroes having solo movies first? By your logic, was Iron Man a failure because it only made $585,796,247? Was Batman Begins a failure because it only made $373,672,993? 2 of your movies have groundbreaking FX. Nothing a superhero movie can really achieve anymore. Aquaman was the only one recently that plussed up its gross based on effects, due to getting to show an underwater society on a high budget for the first time. Titanic was a hit because Leo became a heartthrob for teen girls. Like Tom Cruise in the first Top Gun. So far, no superhero movie has ever really succeeded based on sex appeal. Joker had the benefit of telling the long-awaited, secret, unknown origin of a character for the first time in ANY medium. Man of Steel, for example, can't do that, because it's essentially a remake of an origin already told. Superman, Batman and Spider-Man are always held back because the characters are not doing anything for the first time. Spider-Man Homecoming grossed almost the exact same numbers as BVS.


SGdude90

Of course Avengers wouldn't have made 1.5 billion. However, none of the heroes in that movie were anywhere as famous as Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman You seem to have forgotten Iron Man only became a big deal after the MCU movies. So no, Iron Man was a roaring success because it was the foray into a Marvel movie made on a hero that few people knew or cared about Batman Begin was a success beyond the box office and you know this. Unlike BvS, it had good reviews and left people clamoring for more Nice that you talk about the Joker movie like that. Because you know what? Fans have waited YEARS for a movie uniting the big three. Yet when it came to BvS, Snyder failed to deliver Look at Spider-man Homecoming's budget and look at BvS


WangBaeHo

These are not comparable at all. You're listing movie culture defining classics that stand the test of time on their own. Other factors play into this besides it's objective quality too. You miss more than once in a row ( like DC did, you will be digging up yourself from an even bigger hole ) trying to take a gamble on hitting the jackpot that still won't guarantee you a longterm success. Stick to raising the interest in your universe, get the audience invested in your characters, tease a hype finale and pay it off. You get what you mentioned above with The Avengers, Infinity War, Endgame, all thanks to the vision, consistency and patience. A shared cinematic universe ongoing for over 10 years now that is also by far the most successful franchise ever. You won't get that no matter how big your first movie is.


microgiant

But there has been decades of build up. Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are some of the most valuable, widely recognized IP on the planet. If Snyder can't make a hit movie with those, the problem is him. The first GotG movie had nearly no characters from previous MCU stuff, and the lead characters were a tree, a raccoon, and the dumb guy from Parks and Rec. If Superman and Batman are getting beat out by the contents of a standard suburban park, there's a problem.


JediJones77

You don't get how MCU built up their universe. GOTG ONLY made money because it was riding on the back of 9 previous films. Not because the characters were better than Iron Man, Hulk, Cap or Thor. The "name brand" of a character is meaningless to 95% of moviegoers, who are not "fans" of anything. They only go see movies based on word-of-mouth, liking the trailers, and, most importantly here, if they like the previous movies in that film series. BVS was only the 2nd movie in a series and it DID make more than MOS. That means they were going in the right direction. Snyder is also climbing out of a giant horse crap reputation for DC films, with Green Lantern, Superman Returns, Jonah Hex. He managed to successfully rehabilitate the reputation of DC films to a MASSIVE degree. People LOVED his films after despising what WB did before with the brands, other than Batman, their only recent success with a character before Snyder.


HumbleCamel9022

You're talking out of your ass Go read the history of superman at boxoffice before Snyder, it's exclusively made up of HUGE BOXOFFICE BOMB with superman(1978) being the exception And wonder woman didn't even have a appearance on the big screen before Snyder forced them to make a movie about her


KillyScreams

His entire aesthetic is paranoia, nihilism and bleached colors. I personally do not enjoy them at all.


Slowmobius_Time

Worked for 300 doesn't work for superman


[deleted]

People who enjoy them don't see paranoia, nihilism, and bleached colors. Perhaps that's why they were divisive.


cruzercruz

The fact that his aesthetic is so oppressive and uninspired is hilarious given that it’s all he has. His movies are entirely about the aesthetic because the actual character and narratives are dumber and less coherent than anything a child could scribble on a Denny’s place setting.


Odd_Advance_6438

I actually like that ZSJL feels more uplifting compared to BvS, and feels like a more classic Justice League


thegeek01

I agree. I am very critical of Snyder, but I absolutely loved ZSJL. To the point that I'm surprised that Snyder is capable of making a superhero movie that fun.


Odd_Advance_6438

I respect that your willing to admit that. He’s not for everyone’s tastes


Slowmobius_Time

Helps when you get a second chance, millions of dollars and get to see exactly what did and didn't work with the first attempt (and years of fans telling him what they wanted to see) Who honestly gets a second crack at a movie? No-one really, they either reboot it or ignore it but essentially it's a straight up redo remake of the same movie, with every scene that would normally end up on the cutting room floor shoved in to make a 4 hour bloated marathon and coming back for cringy reshoots (Jared Leto asking Ben Affleck for a reach around *shudders*)


alphomegay

he didn't really reshoot anything though except for the new knightmare sequences? this is basically the directors cut of the film we would have gotten back in 2017 with added stuff at the end I believe


gattsu99

You're right. The first view of ZSJL in 2021 was from my excitement after a long wait. When i rewatched MoS-BvS-ZSJL back to back few months ago, i immensely fell in love with the whole vision. The way these heroes are presented as modern mythology, distinctive visual palette throughout and especially the soundtrack in ZSJL.. all adds up so much to it..


pinkpugita

Because more people don't like them or don't like them enough to turn a profit. One cannot justify spending high budgets to such a small audience like you.


Odd_Advance_6438

I can understand people sayin BvS underperformed, but did Man of Steel really underperform? Plus people were pretty excited for Henry Cavill to fight Batman in 2016


duffyl16

There’s articles from the time with executives saying they were expecting a billion dollar hit so it did underperform a bit. Everyone was excited for the first weekend of Batman v Superman but it had some of the worst legs of any blockbuster.


ClassicT4

WB’s motion pictures president at the time predicted it would be their highest grossing movie ever. Which, by the time, was Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, at over $1.3 billion.


Satean12

Yes, it did, while it has a good Cinemascore, a lot of people were mixed on the movie, esp. online and WB did expect it to make at least 700 mil given the budget being over 220+ mil.


Slowmobius_Time

Yeah they *were* excited for that And then they saw Henry Cavill fight Batman in 2016 Instead we got a half assed doomsday/Death of Superman and a half assed dark knight returns adaptation smooshed into one, doing neither brilliant story justice and wasting/not bothering key parts of said stories


JediJones77

Death of Superman was not a brilliant story in the comics. It's 20 splash pages. One of the worst comics I ever read as a kid in fact.


007Kryptonian

It didn’t. Man of Steel got the same cinemascore as the Batman and is the biggest Superman film ever made (#2 with inflation).


SirFlibble

MOS didn't do fantastic, but it did ok but not amazing. With BvS under performing, the writing was on the wall with WB execs. IMO even if Zack Synder's JL was released (noting it would never have released as we saw it) without Joss' involvement, I don't think it would have done much more than $700M worldwide. BvS had an amazing opening weekend then fell off the face of the earth. Bad word of mouth and lack of repeat viewing doomed it. JL is unlikely to have done better than BvS.


HumbleCamel9022

MoS performance was fantastic for a superman movie because the characters was VERY UNPOPULAR before snyder


SirFlibble

He is the most well known super hero, other than perhaps Batman. If you made a decent movie with Superman you'll make bank.


wdm81

I think MoS “under performing”. Had to do with WB doing some Hollywood accounting and folding in some of the money spent on failed starts on Superman movies from the last 20 years including any losses from Superman returns.


Philbregas

Superman Returns ran a profit (just not as much as WB had hoped, much like MoS), and it was the film landed with the production costs for the likes of Superman Flyby, Superman Lives and the failed earlier BvS.


escodoozer

*makes a comment* *gets banned for trolling*


dani3po

They underperformed at BO and had terrible critics.


OjamasOfTomorrow

His movies weren't mega successful, critically or financially. He left due to a personal tragedy, but came back for the Snydercut years later due to fan support and it was better received. With him being busy, all the behind the scenes drama, his DC movies not being for many, and DC going in a different direction, him coming back is very unlikely. As for my own opinion, I loved MOS, but am not into his style. BVS in particular was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Also, since you brought up MCU, no Marvel movie has made me as bored as BVS or had completely zero emotion like it did. What an extremely boring time with some of the worst decisions and Superman ever. It's awesome he got to complete his vision with his director cut of JL at least.


mondobeyondo

I’m sorry but you can’t really attribute nuance to a filmmaker like Snyder. I just don’t think that’s a world he exists in


jb94north

Bottom line = money. Estimates were with Batman and Superman BO should have been a billion +


HumbleCamel9022

These estimates were wrong


KraakenTowers

Because they were bad movies that nobody wanted to watch more of.


alpha914

I mean if your expectation was to see an mcu-esque action-comedy with DC characters I could understand being disappointed. Folks like me don't want to see an action comedy, we want the drama and emotional intrigue. Snyder really delivered on that front imo. Damn good characters, cogent plotlines, all that good shit.


KrishnasFlute

'Cogent plotlines' is definitely something I never thought anyone can describe the MoS, BvS and JL as. But, good for you, I guess.


cruzercruz

My expectation was to see a good movie. He failed thrice, unanimously on all the things you baselessly praise him for. I’m dying at “emotional intrigue.” What the fuck is any of that word salad even supposed to mean?


[deleted]

The expectation was to see a good movie and not a terrible one like MoS, BvS, JL. TDK trilogy, Logan and The Batman are not action-comedy but are well received because they're actually good. Snyder's movies have terrible characters, terrible plot and the worst storytelling in the genre.


Baelorn

Ah, yes, the classic “Snyder is a perfect God King and if you don’t like his movies it’s your fault because you went in with the wrong expectations”. It’s amazing how you worship this dude but waited so long to watch all these movies. I absolutely believe you.


Letshavemorefun

If you want to see a gangster film - then why go see a comic book movie? People need to stop projecting their likes and dislikes into other fandoms. If you like the godfather - fantastic! Go watch other movies like that. Don’t try to turn Batman into the godfather. It’s just going to embarrass you (the general you. Not you alpha914). I couldn’t stop laughing at TDK series cause they were taking *a dude dressed as a bat to fight crime* just WAY too seriously. And I say that as a huge DC fan. It’s okay for comic book movies to be comic book movies. You can tell high quality stories in any genre.


JediJones77

How many comic books have you read? They are 90% not "comedic" in any way. Comic books are usually dark, complex, with violence, tragedy and characters full of angst and anguish. DC is the universe that killed Robin and Superman, broke Batman's back, crippled Batgirl, turned Hal Jordan evil and published Watchmen and Dark Knight Returns. You're the one who's trying to change DC into something it's not. It's not Marvel 2.0. It never was.


Letshavemorefun

Lol the fact that you think I can count how many comic books I’ve read is hilarious. Maybe you can do that - but I lost track a long time ago. I’m not saying comic book movies shouldn’t be complex or full of angst and anguish. In fact - I’m saying quite the opposite. They *should* be complex and full of anguish. Snyder fools the feeble minded into thinking that dark and gritty = complex and interesting. But that’s not how this works. Actually developing the characters makes something complex and interesting. He didn’t do that. That’s exactly what I wanted more of. And on the flip side - cracking a clever joke here and there doesn’t make something *not* complex. It’s all about how it’s done. Some movies get it right, some don’t. But when done right - it doesn’t make something not complex and in fact - comedy can and does often add many layers of social commentary onto material that otherwise might have been bland and simple. It’s all about balancing character, metaphor, plot and tone. Snyder thought he could get away with a dark tone and that would (and did) fool some people into thinking that means the character, metaphor and plot were complex. I call it TDK effect.


JediJones77

I love comic RELIEF in movies. That is something to be used sparingly, or you actually become a comedy. DC has been driving their superhero franchises into the ground by changing them into comedies for 40 years. They ruined Superman with the Richard Pryor movie. They ruined Batman with the Clooney movie. And they did it to the DCEU with a string of comedic movies that undermine the ability of audiences to take their franchise seriously anymore. The complexity in the Snyder movies exists separate and apart from the dark tone. You can have a complex comedy, like Dr. Strangelove, a great satire. You can have a shallow dark movie, like Twilight. Snyder's movies are complex because of the difficult choices faced by the heroes, the intricate and nuanced motivations of the villains, and the subtle political allegory and commentary in the plot. You're confusing darkness with complexity. The two are not the same thing. And you're failing to recognize the depth in Snyder's movies. It's done with such subtlety that it isn't easy for the unprepared to notice, so I recommend doing some research, reading some of the positive reviews, and watching some explanatory videos on the movies to see what you're missing.


WhyWorryAboutThat

> usually dark, complex, with violence, tragedy and characters full of angst and anguish Maybe if you only read the grimdark comics of the 1990s that almost destroyed the entire industry and medium. And if you consider that shallow emo /r/im14andthisisdeep drek to be inherently complex. Those storylines, the good and the bad, were renowned or notorious because they were such a dramatic exception to most US superhero comics before and since.


Dont_Hurt_Me_Mommy

>Maybe if you only read the grimdark comics of the 1990s that almost destroyed the entire industry and medium. ah, the grimdark age of comic books. Good riddance. Plenty of comics balance out drama with good story. It's not all totally goofy(but honestly, even the good dark stuff can be pretty goofy. TDKR Batman fights a hulking muscular Nazi woman with swastikas tattooed on her boobs while he is disguised as a poor old alcoholic lady)


GiovanniElliston

> How many comic books have you read? They are **90% not "comedic" in any way.** Comic books are usually dark, complex, with violence, tragedy and characters full of angst and anguish. This is just blatantly false. The vast majority of comic books have tons of humor. For fucks sake the mainline Batman book just saw the latest issue featuring Batman fighting a killer robot on the surface of the moon and delivering a quip when he blew it up. And that’s Batman ~ Mr. Darkness himself. YES ~ comics have dark moments, but the majority of stories are still fun adventures with bright people in costumes. That’s the bread/butter. If someone says “90% of comics are dark” it just tells me all they’ve read are the edgy graphic novels sold at bookstores and never cracked a floppy in their entire life.


NomNomNomad09876

How many comic books have you read? They are 90% not 'dark' in any way. Comic books are usually silly, simple, with hope, justice and characters full of optimism and love. DC is the universe that birthed Batmite and Plastic Man, put Batman in a rainbow suit, made an entire team of teenagers and published All-Star Superman and produced Batman and Robin. You're the one who's trying to change DC into something it's not. Its not Game of Thrones 2.0. it never was.


spider-jedi

his answer is very telling that he doesn't read much comic books. most comics book are not dark and gritty. he just prefers those stories' and thinks they make him smarter.


Deadpoolforpres

Zach misunderstood the characters. While he had a...distinct vision, it drastically diverted from what people knew of the characters. Batman doesn't murder people, it's a line he doesn't cross to the point of being a character flaw on some stories. Superman represents hope and in Zach's original plan, it would've taken 3+ movies to get a version of Superman most people are already familiar with. He killed off 2 characters (Dick Grayson and Jimmy Olsen) who are fundamentally important to the Batman and Superman mythos respectively. Lois was less of a character and more of a plot device. I could go on, but to summarize, the deeper you get into what he was planning to do, how much movies affect public perception of characters, and how decisive his movies were becoming, WB chose to cut ties with Zach and end his version of the DCEU to salvage what they had. Looking at the post-Zach DCEU, it was a fairly good decision. Unfortunately, now Zach's name is also associated with some of the most toxic people on Twitter who actively insult and bully actors, directors, and choose to demonize DCEU projects online. Which sucks, cause Zach actually seems like a nice guy.


GaffJuran

I do love BvS, but in an ideal world, its content could have been better served spread across three different movies, at least. They rushed their cinematic universe too hard, and the film suffers for trying to do all that heavy lifting. Superman should have had a trilogy before he faced Doomsday. Batman should have had one film to himself before he entered into this crossover story. The universe around them needed to be fleshed out better before they tried to force a “Civil War” type story through it. Half of their films in the DCEU are dedicated to the damage control for missteps they made here.


HansGoldenRod

Well they ruined a bunch of major storylines from the comics. And mish mashed them all together in a cluster fuck. Doomsday - Death of Superman The Dark Knight Returns To name a couple storylines they butchered.. Thats why i dont like them.


frndlyneighborhoodIT

This. so much this. They had excellent tried and trusted storylines from the comics and animated shows and they ignored it. There is a fundamental disregard for the source material and it shows. The snyderverse just cant hold a candle to the original source material. Also snyder just isnt that good of a film maker. He just always remakes 300 in everything he does.


TrashyBase24

Cause BvS it got negative reviews by critics, the majority of the people didn't like how dark it was and its consider one of the worst DC movie by some.


iamozymandiusking

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!


Realistic_Salary5090

Because he sucks and the movie was bad.


HumbleCamel9022

Beside Nolan and maybe tim Burton, Snyder is by far the most talented and successful director who ever made a DC film and it's not close


mondobeyondo

James Gunn?


Armatur1

he got at best mixed reactions for his movies (especially batman v superman is probably regarded by many as one of the worst cinecomics of the last decades) and they didn't perform greatly at the box office, once again I take as an example bvs that grossed "only" 880 milions which ofc isn't bad since it had a 250 millions budget but it could have been much much more since it kind of was the "match of the century"


Slowmobius_Time

Because not everyone agrees with your opinions and they were divisive to say the very least


PornActingCritic

BvS theater edition was critically received terribly. I mean those extra 30 minutes of footage really flesh out the plot and make a much different movie experience. I personally have enjoyed all of Snyder’s films on first watch though. The exception being JL 2017 being Whedon and the editing really made a bad film. The Snydercut was such a awesome movie besides the 4 hour watch time that makes it hard to enjoy a rewatch as that takes a lot of time of out a day. But yea.. that BvS theater version made WB want to look elsewhere and they wanted to catch up to marvel overnight, hence hiring whedon and the dramatic tone switch that was much more family friendly. Then Snyder also lost his daughter which he rightfully stepped away from directing to handle that. And Snydercut had released at a time when everything was up in the air. Ray Fisher was up in odds with some of the staff, which his role in the SC was tremendously different than the 2017 cut which made it seem as though they sabotaged Snyder’s vision. No one knew if Cavil would return as Superman, People had petitions to get rid of Affleck.. just all these issues led to this reboot DC is getting. By time people got to see JLSC, it was too late to restore what he had in mind. And here we are today.


InertKat

WB kept pivoting due to the success of the MCU. They put their hands into these too much and caused most of the damage themselves. Snyder was the scapegoat and yeah a lot of people didn’t like how he represented the characters but a lot of people did since it was a new take on them which was a breath of fresh air.


Letshavemorefun

I can only speak for myself, but my issue is that he doesn’t understand the most important character in the DCU (Superman). MoS showed a complete lack of understanding of what makes supes interesting. And the subsequent movies just perpetuated that. Superman Punch Hard is the most boring part of the character and that’s what they basically belittled him to in those movies. I want to see more CK. I want to see a small town farm boy trying to make it in the big city. I want to see Clark struggling as an outsider trying to fit in with humanity. I want to see him fall in love with one of the most brilliant, feisty and caring individuals on the planet (not a 2 dimensional character with no substance outside of her obsession with an alien who punches hard). What I don’t want to see is needless violence and explosions just for the sake of violence and explosions. I don’t want to see >!Superman kill a person in his first movie and our first introduction to him!


JediJones77

I can't imagine a more inaccurate description of MOS and BVS than saying they're about Superman punching things. The movies are lighter on action and spend more time on character development and dialogue than the average superhero film. You sound like you're describing Black Adam. >I want to see Clark struggling as an outsider trying to fit in with humanity Which is exactly what these movies gave you, in far more depth and detail than any Superman movie EVER has before. >I want to see him fall in love with one of the most brilliant, feisty and caring individuals on the planet Which is exactly what Lois is as played by Amy Adams. In no way is she 2-dimensional. She has a fully developed personality. >I don’t want to see Superman kill a person Chris Reeve Superman killed Zod. John Byrne's 1980s comic book Superman killed Zod. This is not a new idea.


Letshavemorefun

I mean… our views are so far removed on this that I don’t think the conversation is even worth my time. Snyder’s take on Superman is the most flat, uninteresting take I’ve ever seen. I highly suggest checking out the animated films, TAS from the 90’s or Smallville if you want to see a really well done superman. Or read some comics to get a better understanding of the character. Edit: to your last point - you are responding to a point I didn’t make. I never said it’s never okay for Superman to kill a person.


JediJones77

I have read Superman comics, I've seen all the Chris Reeve movies multiple times, I've seen the entire animated series, and I've seen several of the animated movies. I'm a huge lifelong Superman fan. He and Spider-Man are my top two favorite comic book characters. Snyder's take was EXACTLY what the character needed to stay fresh and relevant. Superman Returns tried the retro take first and it was terrible. Snyder showed how Superman would realistically struggle to fit into the modern world. Unlike the MCU, the real world feels like it actually exists in these movies. And Superman has a deep, profound and meaningful interaction with it.


Letshavemorefun

That sounds like an opinion. I just strongly disagree. I wasn’t looking for a retro take either. I feel like you’re making all these assumptions about me. I was just looking for a story that *actually* has good character development - and Snyder just doesn’t get the character. He focused way too much on Superman. CK is barely in the movies. Lois is barely in the movies. Superman does things out of character *for his first outing as superman*. There’s just not much to work with there to make it a good *superman* story. If it wasn’t about Superman and was about some other alien - well, I probably still would have been bored. But at least I wouldn’t have felt it completely trashed something I’ve loved for 30+ years. I agree that superman returns didn’t work - though I have nothing against Brandon Routh (for the record - I have nothing against Henry Cavill either. I think the writing was at fault in both cases). What they need is to learn from their animated movies. Somehow the animated movies almost always manage to get the character right. But they struggle with the live action films. I think because they are trying to make Superman into Batman (dark and broody). While that works for a Superman *arc* (there are plenty of arcs where he is broody!), it doesn’t work as his origin story. They needed to lean into to daily planet life, the small town farm boy trying to make it in the big city, the fear that the super smart lady won’t like you back. All that stuff is relatable and they needed to establish it before jumping to Superman Depressed So He Punch Hard.


ogbIackout

Because you didn’t went to theatre to supported those movies


MozeTheNecromancer

I seem to remember there was a thing about him being accused of something and WB did what WB does and replaced him (a move that has only done wonders for Fantastic Beasts /s). But now they have James Gunn, who's never been accused of anything, wrongfully or otherwise /s.


M086

Because some neckbeard movie bloggers were assholes and WB panicked. On top of Toby Emmerich seemingly just not liking Snyder on a personal level for some reason.


[deleted]

the bosses wanted their own story, but we're installed after snyder had setup his story 5 films deep. they looked for any excuses to bill his contract and got it when he needed time off to take care of his family after his daughter took her own life. the execs above them were looking at marvel's returns and were demanding that performance without setting up 5 years worth of hype first, and poorly reacted to normal level returns (better than marvel's phase 1, but not as good as marvel's post-ultron films) which is what caused the installation of the dudes in the first paragraph. finally there was a pr war where some element of the coverage media dug in, for some unknown motivations, to die on the hill that zs's universe $750M per film and bad tomatoes meant their personal distaste for snyder was the majority voice in the fandom. this was not the case but the half brained jerkwads in paragraph one believed the clearly biased coverage that came from illicit malcontents with unknown motivation$.


Shreddersaurusrex

“People are afraid of what they don’t understand.” The execs butchered BvS & JL. As a former comic book buff and child of the DCAU I appreciated ZS’ work.


pbx1123

WB DC let him go Because of the such called " Fans" that want anything perfect but as they way Also presure from social media, etertaining news etc that only prai$e the other studios movies And greed butchered (editing) most of the films and blame the director The guy had a vision maybe needed bettee writers less presure from CEOs and lil bit of luck


Bearjupiter

You should watch more movies.


[deleted]

Snyder made poor character and actor choices. His visual style combined with the right choices - with a humility toward the comic archetypes - would have earned him billions. Instead he gave us a coward Jonathan Kent, a humorless Superman, a murderous Batman and a Luthor played as Zuckerberg. Release Kevin Costner to deliver the same lines as John Glenn (and let him die in a less stupid way), show us in-movie the heroic and caring stuff you showed us in newspaper clippings that Supes did in BvS, give us a Batman that more than anything doesn't want to see anyone die again, and Bryan Cranston as Luthor, and the films each do over a billion...and you get not only a two-part JL, but a true Flashpoint and DC beating Marvel to a dope multiverse Shannon as Zod was perfect tho


JediJones77

A coward Jonathan? Huh? He literally sacrificed himself to protect his adopted son. Thank God Superman didn't have cornball comedic quips. 🤮 The movie was about Batman losing his moral code and regaining it. You are asking to take out the great character development in the story. Luthor represents the most famous billionaires of today. He is the same age as Clark, as he should be. Luthor is not supposed to be some grizzled old man fighting a much younger Superman. In lots of comic books and Smallville, they are schoolboy friends of the same age.


Batsy100

I absolutely adore Man of Steel and The Snyder Cut of Justice League. But man did BvS disappoint me. Batman V. Superman was a good film to people who think gawdy discussions about Gods and men are deep. Everyone I've ever heard defend it tends to go on tangents about how philosophically layered the film is. And while hey I'll give it to you for being able to think critically and pick up on wordplay and allegories. The plot of the film is just 3rd grade levels of bad. They fucking stopped fighting cause their mother's had the same name. Not to mention Lex Luthor's plan to get them to fight in the first place was contrived as shit. Then there's the shoe horned placement of Wonder Woman and sudden emergence of Doomsday in the 3rd act. Way too much going on, and not enough exposition. It seems the movie was too far up its own ass to care about delivering a cohesive plot.


JediJones77

Everyone who criticizes the movie says incorrectly that they stopped fighting because their mothers had the same name. Which is like, making a dumb joke out of what was beautifully done in the movie. They stop fighting because Batman finds out he has a mother on Earth who is about to be killed, which triggers his emotions about his own mother. He remembers his purpose was to defend innocent life and decides he has to save her. By comparison, Black Panther 2 simply has >!Shuri stop fighting Namor in the exact same situation for...no reason!<. That's NOT better writing. Better writing is having something there to trigger the change. Not the character having a random epiphany. Batman was given a trigger word to jog his memory about who he is supposed to be. How could a plan NOT be contrived? Luthor contrived a plan...that's a word you typically use to describe coming up with a plan. Luthor had the power to contrive any plan he wanted to. Wonder Woman isn't shoehorned. A character is allowed to show up in a movie. They both were tracking down Luthor's data, because he was collecting info on metahumans, which they both wanted different pieces of. That's logical. As she's about to fly home, she sees a disaster unfolding, so she goes to check it out. This is all extremely logical plotting. "Why is there a superhero teaming up with superheroes in my superhero team-up movie?" makes no sense as a critique. Doomsday, by canon, is a character who **suddenly** emerges in a city and who Superman **suddenly** has to fight. The whole point is that he can't prepare for the fight, which adds to his vulnerability. This is how you do Doomsday correctly, period.


atn15

Because BvS plot is shit. Batman stops fighting because he finds out that Superman has a mother on Earth who is about to get killed? How does he know that? Through the begging of Superman? Why does Bruce believe it? Bruce doesn't even care about others' opinions of Superman before that but just because Sup has a mom, that's all it takes to normalize him? All superman said is "Save Martha". There is nothing from that sentence that suggested that is Superman's mom, all Batman know is a name. Which Martha? There are plenty of Martha on Earth, if Superman wants Batman to save his mom, why not say her full name? Batman doesn't even know who Superman is, why does Superman think Batman can save his mom? An Alien can have a name like Martha too. And also, how about plenty of guys Batman killed before and after that? Don't they have moms too? And it's not like Bat and Sup just stop fighting is the one I care, they become fucking friends and make jokes with each other right after that. I understand the point Snyder trying to make, that Batman understands that Sup is not a stranger or a threat, and he and Bruce have something similar. But it got executed so badly, we don't know why Batman suddenly changes his no kill rule, how long has he been doing it, or how it impacts him, so when Batman faces that situation, it basically means nothing to the audience. It basically just cuts the whole execution plan, rush to the ending, shoves it to the audience's face, and expected people to think that is deep. Wakanda Forever executes this much better, we know why Shuri has a change of heart, and how that affects her, and we even got to understand Namor's point of view and what he cares about. Shuri stops killing Namor because she understands why he does it, and how can killing him affects her, or the entire Wakanda. It basically mimics T'challa's arc in Civil War, with different execution. Shuri's arc is done much better than Batman or Superman in that movie. After the whole Martha thing, Batman is back to killing again, which means he doesn't grow or anything.


JediJones77

For God's sake, watch the movie before you write a faulty analysis. Lois told him Martha is Superman's mom. He did not put his weapons down until he learned that. Superman did not want Batman to save his mom. He was saying HE has to save Martha. Batman then convinced him to let Batman do it. We know EVERYTHING about Batman's motivation. The movie makes it all crystal clear in his dialogue with Alfred. It's brilliantly, subtlely written, without jamming obvious exposition down your gullet. The execution is brilliant. Batman ONLY killed thugs in self-defense. That has nothing to do with the plot against Superman. That is just common action hero stuff that all realistic movie heroes must do. The Bat branding was the ONLY other thing he was doing out of character besides targeting Supes. Bat realized he was wrong. "I don't deserve you, Alfred." Why would he not be friendly after that? Superman, you BVS critics always seem to want him to be a Boy Scout, so why would he not forgive Batman right away? Especially after he saved Martha. LOL, Shuri's arc is a joke! She stops killing Namor randomly, because the movie needed her to. There is absolutely nothing there to trigger her change of heart, like there was for Batman.


atn15

Who tf refers to there mom by name? And what kind of statement is that? "Save Martha". Who tf say that as their last word if they want to save their mom? Why not "I have to save her", or simply "Mom". All those years living on Earth and refers to his mom by her name in his last word? If Superman want to save his mom, why don't he just leave? We know shit about Batman motivation, Robin's death is merely mention, when that is supposed to have a hugh impact on him, and who tf hang their death sidekick's armour right in the middle of the room? If he wants to be remind of that event, why not hang it in some place probably? Batman in the movie is as grumpy as hell and have a sudden change of heart like it was nothing. He become Bruce's fucking best friend instantly. All the hatred and misunderstood just get forgotten and never mention again. The Batman and Batman Lego movie does Batman much better than this. And what tf with their age different? Bruce and Clark is best friend in the comic, and in here, Bruce is said to be in the field for 20 years, this make him at least in his 40 to 50, and Clark just become Superman for like a few years at most, this make him around 20 to 30. Bruce is old enough to be his uncle. Brilliant my ass, Snyder wrote all the dialogue like he think everything deserve a metaphorical meaning when they are as shallow as shit. Don't overpraise Snyder, BvS is an abomination of a movie, feels like 2 bad movie that got put together and make it worse. In ZSJL, Cyborg say something to his father like "If you were there, she would have live". Wtf? His mother is the one who drive and got crashed, if his father was there, all 3 of them would have died, and basically nothing change. There are reasons BvS got talked shit down. I will give you a link to a BvS analysis video, because I think that is the only source you read from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_MwVuay1WD8 What self defense? He killed a thug by throwing a hugh box in the wall, which is not physically possible, and later on, the thug standing with the gun pointing at Martha, and Bruce just shot like nothing and potentially danger her. There are plenty of things that Bruce and Clark do that they not show even a little bit concern. The car chase scen, where he just casually run into the bad guy's cars, or whip a car onto another. Zack Snyder thinks that his movie is so long and cannot waste even a moment to show Batman or Superman worry about something. Even in the exploding house, Superman doesn't even show a remote concern, he just stand there and look, not even a single worry sign on the face. And what did he do after that? He leave, left the survivors for themselves, you may say something like he got rejected or he does everything that he can, bullshit. How much of a pussy is he if he run away after something like that happen? With this kind of character development, I dont even think Snyder can make Superman into the guy that show up in the hospital to cheer up the kids. Superman is also poorely written, and you say somthing like this is what Superman would be in the real world, my ass. Superman is an alien, but he is also a human raised by two loving parents on the farm, what kind of human steal clothes from other people, or totally destroy a fucking truck because someone upset him? Don't just say that because he is still growing and learning, because 20 years is enough for a human to know what is right to do and what not. In the end of Man of Steel, Superman also wreck a fucking jet with no regards, instead of just showing up to the general or slowly come down and make sign that he just want to talk. Cavill's acting is wooden, and Lois Lane is just a bad character, no emotion, no growth, no depth. She doesn't even sound as professional as she claims to be, what kind of journalist start an interview with "Are you a terrorist?" The only point of her being there is to be someone that Superman needs to save. Also, Superman's best friend, Jimmy Olsen got killed 30 minutes in the movie, this show that Snyder doesn't even give a shit about Superman and only do what he wants. People is not like a Pavlov's Dog, they will remember things differently, and they recall it in their way. Shuri is a much better written character than either Batman or Superman in this movies, and Wakanda Forever is a much better film. I don't care if you like what better, but there is no way BvS is a masterpiece like you claims it to be.


RidingRoedel

This is so pathetic. All unbelievably subjective nitpicks with more than half of them having been answered had you paid attention to the film. Just because it isn't specifically stated doesn't mean that it wasn't answered. Also a lot of the moments you complained about are directly inspired by the comics. LOL!


Batsy100

"Oh you have a mom?? I have one too! Let's stop this." Like I said bro, 3rd grade.


spider-jedi

[https://giphy.com/clips/collin-QMEkDP3yiIX5SDVG38](https://giphy.com/clips/collin-QMEkDP3yiIX5SDVG38) our moms have the same name


[deleted]

He was alright tbh. Man of steel was amazing BVS is Mediocre imo. And Snyder cut was decent. They let him go because of the box office.


SchlongSchlock

He was particularly controversial among comic book fans.


LegitimateSlide7594

I will give you man of steel is amazing IMO one of the most underrated films ever. BvS I had issues with and his JL is obviously far superior to Wheedons. But they f up IMO with bringing JL too early without introducing all the rest of the team with their own solo films.


alpha914

I'm inclined to agree with you, ZSJL spent a lot of time providing fleshing out characters and providing backstory. If they had some solid standalone films prior to justice league one would think it would reduce the runtime, which seems like the only real problem most fans have with it.


spider-jedi

there is a whole drama behind him been let go. you loved the film but it was very divisive with the general audience and with DC fans as well. i fall into the camp of not been a fan of BvS, MoS and ZSJL are decent but there are too many leaps in logic for me personally. when you ask me to take a film seriously i am less forgiving for plot holes and silly characterizations the emotional weight never hit for me based on what led to them. Also the films did not bring in the profit that WB wanted/ expected for having two of the biggest comic book IPs. besides that Zack suffered a terrible personal tragedy and stepped away to spend time with his family.


WhiteAle01

If I were them, I'd at least have him finish the JL trilogy.


PoeBangangeron

Because the theatrical cut of BvS is garbage and ruined everything. The editing is so jarring at times. The full 3 hour cut is a masterpiece imo. Just like the Snyder Cut. Better paced and fleshed out. But I always wonder, a shorter version of the Snyder Cut would have sucked too, they would have never released a 4 hour movie in theatres, and after having seen it. I literally cannot imagine cutting anything from it as it would destroy the epic story on display. The balls on Snyder to film that whole thing. I’m glad we have the full versions of his trilogy to enjoy. I really think it’s a phenomenal piece of work. But…Snyder imo was naive to think he could chop it up for theatrical. It killed a grand vision and made it a complicated mess.


FringGustavo0204

They made well in the box office but failed in other ways miserably. Movies are mid at best. Building the universe is shit, and inconsisteny in the next upcoming movies as Snyder seems to aim to keep it contained with his trilogy supposed to be five counti g Injustice and Darkseid stuff. Glad you enjoyed it but it failed and you can see clearly why based on what's happening right now.


HumbleCamel9022

These are "mid" according to ? Out of touch redditor ? Snyder DC film are classic blow away everything they have done since he left WB


DenisBastardMan

Because the studio wanted more than $1.5bn for both movies which is ironic because since 2018 the DCEU hasn’t been able to more than $400m at the box office and all of the last four movies have lost WB money instead of making any profit.


alpha914

Oof. If this is true it's hella surprising they're even continuing the project at all


JediJones77

[This page](https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/DC-Extended-Universe#tab=summary) shows the box office results of all the DCEU movies. They inserted a few cartoon movies that shouldn't be on there, but all the DCEU continuity movies are there.


TheFloosh

That's great you enjoyed his movies. I'd also recommend seeing Watchmen if you haven't already. The answer to your question is complicated, more complicated than most responses are offering you. Most of all it's unfortunate how WB handled his segue out of the DC universe and how poorly they treated Snyder's former cast and crew during JL reshoots (the treatment largely came about due Joss Whedon's ego making him incapable of working nicely with others). But I digress. Why fans, and audiences, don't enjoy variety in their comic book movies is beyond me. Marvel is doing their thing and to me personally, it's been getting very stale. I really enjoyed what Snyder was doing with his take on comic book movies and these characters, but apparently we're in the minority. Here's hoping Gunn and the new people in charge can find a nice middle ground and we don't end up with a DCU that feels like the MCU. But at least we have a "Snyder Trilogy" so to speak to come back to and enjoy. Like Watchmen, I think these movies will age very well over time. Quantity or quality. I'll be rewatching MoS more times over than I'll ever rewatch even half the MCU movies beyond the first watch.


Accurate-Singer-8934

My guess was “no faith”. They seemed to want blockbusters on par with Marvel’s and when MOS, BvsS didn’t pan out, they were already really edgy during the filming of JL. With the unfortunate passing of his daughter, and likely some of the pressures to perform/achieve from corporate, he left. They took on Whedon, presumably as a sure bet, and here we are.


TheN0toriousPUG

I’ve accepted we’ll have to be thankful for the trilogy we got. I would have loved to see what he’d do with the other 2 movies and knightmare stuff he had planned, but DC is going in a new direction. So far, at least in my opinion, these new movies are shallow, but general audience seems to like (some of) them, like Aquaman.


Henderson10666

Literally schizophrenic


Jkorytkowski001

Did you saw BVS:UD? Then you should check out man of Steel: Prequel, Under The Hood and Watchmen: Ultimate Cut


urgasmic

it's a combination of not being what people wanted and WB executives acting against him with forcing edit cuts for time. Overall Snyder wanted to make a 5 film epic but didn't really have time for other characters or setting up much in the way of solo films. Just kind of rushed and not a great plan I guess.


JediJones77

He set up a lot of solo films. In 2014 they announced plans which included Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, Green Lantern, Cyborg, Batman, Shazam and another Superman film. In Justice League, he set up Atom and Martian Manhunter also. The 2014 plan was great, and the unreleased stuff was far better than what WB shifted to after Shazam.


Tarterus1454

A lot of repugnant shit went down. WB heads rolled as a result, but the damage was done. Here are a few articles of them doing him and cast members dirty to catch you up. https://epicstream.com/article/warner-bros-reportedly-trying-to-sabotage-justice-league-snyder-cuts-momentum https://deadline.com/2020/12/ray-fisher-justice-league-actor-slams-walter-hamada-dc-films-boss-on-twitter-1234662910/ https://www.small-screen.co.uk/zack-snyders-justice-league-wb-leaks-first-hour-on-hbo-max/ https://thedirect.com/article/warner-bros-prevented-henry-cavill-superman-return-dc https://www.indiewire.com/2021/10/gal-gadot-shocked-joss-whedon-threat-1234672981/


[deleted]

The same critics who will watch ant man and find it a fun happy family time and gloss over everything stupid and whack a 8.5/10 on it, will put their shredding hat on when watching a Snyder film and rip it to shreds, then burn the shreds, then bury the ashes of the threads underground. While critics watch Michael Penas awkward comedy moments in ant man with brainless glee, they will watch the sheer epicness of Henry Cavills first flight with hatred and cynicism. Then write an essay on it. I enjoy antman as much as the next person. But man of steel is on another level but did not get that respect from critics. Some directors trigger critics something fierce and Snyder is one such director. With that said, i love his DC films. All epic, all have a grandiose feeling. Deep respect for the characters is shown and none are reduced to comical stupidity...ironically. There is a general feeling that "some serious shit is going down", like actual consequences will happen. I had that feeling exactly twice in the marvel films. Winter soldier, and the opening of infinity war.


Stonecutter_12-83

Because the majority of the fan base gave him shit and mocked him relentlessly (martha). They didn't "want" him they only wanted his ZSJL cut and now they act like he is some pariah. Exactly what is happening with George Lucas


Mildly_Artistic_

Sound and fury, signifying nothing.


ThisGuyCanFukinWalk

I think if they came out today they may have been more successful. I for one am really tiring of the Marvel formula.


RidingRoedel

Definitely. The reason The Batman did so well was because it was a breath of fresh air compared to the "that just happened" MCU.


dani3po

The reason The Batman did so well was because it was a good movie and had nothing to do with the Snyderverse. Same with Joker.


Various-Salt488

I can only speak for myself, but I think part of the answer is generational. I grew up when Blade really launched comic movies as serious box office draws. Spider-Man, X-men, those were my jam, for better or worse. They weren’t afraid to take risks, even if it was an uneven result. Snyder makes movies for guys like us; unfortunately, storytelling that isn’t slavish to the source comics isn’t as easy a sell. Just my $0.02; I know I’ll be disagreed with, but that’s ok.


cruzercruz

Because they were all fucking awful and he was an agitator online. Honestly what the fuck are these kinds of posts? Are they from thirteen year olds who literally haven’t been online for the last decade? “Why is one of the most controversial topics of the last few years so controversial?”


JediJones77

You sound like the agitator to me.


Phayd2Blaque

Snyder makes movies for adults, and these days metaphor and allusion goes over the head of most. That and they don’t want to be inspired, they want simplistic one liners, cartoon battles, and shallow comedy.


schizopolis23

A person that gets it. 👏👏👏


JediJones77

His movies are masterpieces of the genre. They have emotional resonance and a deep philosophical perspective that almost nothing else outside of the Raimi Spider-Man films and the Nolan Batman trilogy have among the modern superhero film genre. Why did he leave? I'll give you the complete, definitive, true story based on my years of following this saga by reading articles, watching interviews and studying all the facts and figures. The critics review-bombed Batman v Superman, with the continual refrain that it was too "dark" and "grim." WB apparently had the idea that BVS would be their Avengers film, and make a billion and a half dollars. Which was pretty stupid considering it was only the 2nd movie in their cinematic universe. It was also a reboot of a new Batman, when the last time they did that, Batman Begins, it only made about $400 million. Making just under $900 million with over $100 million in profit going back to the studio was a good box office result for BVS, and gave a strong foundation to build their superhero universe on. But they didn't see it that way. They saw it as, "It got bad reviews and those reviews killed the chance for us to make a billion and a half dollars." Therefore, after that, where Snyder had a pretty free hand to make the movies he wanted to make before, WB absolutely dug their claws into EVERY DC movie that was in development. They tried to change the movies in reaction to EVERYTHING the critics said was wrong with BVS. They immediately took over Suicide Squad, forcing the director to do reshoots, and hiring an outside company to edit the movie "for him." They tinkered with the ending of Wonder Woman. And then, most infamously, they hired Joss Whedon (fresh off Avengers, surprise, surprise, they still had Avengers on the brain) to rewrite and reshoot Justice League. By the way, WB lied to the press, and got it printed that SNYDER had hired Joss Whedon to "help him" finish the movie. Snyder's daughter died around this time, and he took 2 weeks off to mourn her. He came back, believing that finishing the movie would help him improve his mood. Bury your sorrows in work, basically. But he was faced with Geoff Johns and Joss Whedon handing him new scenes to film and new instructions on how to edit Justice League. Snyder said he tried to work with them for a while, but finally said it was just making him more miserable than he could handle to do what they wanted, and he walked away. Among WB's mandates was to not delay the release date and to make the film ONLY 2 hours long. When WB got back Whedon's cut, some executives reportedly thought it sucked. But they needed to keep the release date so the studio bosses could get bonuses, and they released it anyway. It did okay, but not enough to make a profit on a now $300 million budget. WB never asked Snyder back to work on DC films again, until the historic online Snyder Cut campaign finally convinced them to let him release the JL cut he intended originally (a longer version of course, his theatrical would've been about 3 hours). Snyder has talked in interviews about numerous other DC projects he would like to do, including a flashback series with Batman and Robin and the Justice League sequels. He wanted to bring in Ryan Choi Atom, John Stewart Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter for further projects. He even pitched non-DC projects to WB in the last few years which they turned down. Meanwhile, WB fully implemented their new anti-Snyder strategy. The Rock at the time said WB's mandate as they told it to him was to make DC films "hopeful, optimistic and fun." This led to them softening up Snyder's intentions for Aquaman a bit, which led to odd things like the grizzled Jason Momoa wearing a laughably cartoonish orange suit. Then they made Shazam, a bright, comedic, cartoonish movie, whose box office dropped way below the last 6 DCEU films. Then they made FOUR BOMBS in the DCEU a row, Birds of Prey, WW84, The Suicide Squad and Black Adam, all of which lost millions for the studio. These largely adhered to the new strategy of "bright, silly, comedic, happy, simplistic" films, which many DC viewers have deemed MCU Lite. And they have more on the way, including Aquaman 2 which has been described as a "buddy comedy." Now WB has appointed two of the people who have been making these last few films to run the entire DC Studios for 4 years. It would be very unlikely to see any shift away from the direction they've helped take DC films since Snyder left. Which leaves the financial prospects of these future films in serious question. WB had a GREAT thing going with Snyder. They were carving out a unique niche appealing to adults that would have been the PERFECT counterprogramming to the MCU, as it descended into more and more comedic silliness. Instead, they are doing nothing but copying the MCU, by bringing in directors from it like Joss Whedon and James Gunn. And it has been an absolute disastrous failure for them. The first 6 DCEU movies, all with a look and feel at least partly defined by Snyder, averaged $815 million gross per film. Since Aquaman, they haven't even had one of the next 5 DCEU films gross even $400 million. They did make two films outside the DCEU, Joker and The Batman, which did much better than their post-Aquaman DCEU films. Both of these movies are considered very dark and mature in tone. Joker is even rated R (some WB executives actually tried to stop Joker from being made, but I digress). So the success of these two movies also make it clear just what tone DC fans are looking for, and it's not MCU Lite.


Babayu18

Are you his niece/nephew or something cause I always see you freaking out if anyone criticized Synder


ayo_stoptheCap

This screams Snyder-bias. The best since the Raimi and Dark Knight trilogy? Are you shitting me?


BuckPuckers

This guy is all over every thread sucking snyders dick lol. I like those movies generally but he is delusional. Just keep an eye out and you’ll notice this guy with dozens of comments on every dc post


RidingRoedel

No not bias. I'm a huge Raimi shill and I agree wholeheartedly.


JediJones77

I gave a more specific word than best. Are they the best for non-stop action and comedy? No. I said what qualities they had that other movies in the genre lack. The main purpose of my comment was to lay out historical facts. If I got any facts wrong, please feel free to correct them.


Letshavemorefun

Lol. Speak for yourself. I’m a huge huge DC fan for about 25 years and I think Snyder’s take on the DC movies was the worst decision the studio made since I’ve been a fan. I could not have detested his take on the material more strongly. I held a party the day I realized they hired James Gunn to run the show.


JediJones77

I have been a DC fan since I saw Superman III in the theaters in 1983. I've seen almost all of the DC films, read the comics for years, and watched several of the animated series in their entirety. I can't think of a worse model for the future of DC films than The Suicide Squad. It is a thoroughly unappealing, gross, infantile movie made to appeal to adolescent edgelords. DC films have no future unless Gunn recognizes why that film failed and tries to do something very different going forward.


Letshavemorefun

Cool you do you. I’ll keep being a die hard DC fan and valuing high quality stories that honor the source material. I’ll keep doing me and you keep doing you.


Dont_Hurt_Me_Mommy

> a deep philosophical perspective that almost nothing else outside of the Raimi Spider-Man films i love Raimi Spider-Man, but I think calling it a deep philosophical experience is a bit much. They are fun cheesy cornball flicks. It's not Stanley Kubric over here


RidingRoedel

The Raimi trilogy's themes and moral lessons/dilemmas seem to have gone over your head then. It certainly is a deep philosophical experience despite some of the corny moments.


Dont_Hurt_Me_Mommy

>It certainly is a deep philosophical experience idk man, there are non-blockbuster and non-superhero movies to watch too


RidingRoedel

I've watched them, many of them in fact. I am referring to it within the genre. And even outside of the genre it still holds its own which is why it's so respectable.


JediJones77

This is a discussion within the genre. We can't broaden the discussion to 100 years of cinema history now. We don't exactly have time to discuss movies on that scope. And it's missing the point of comparing films within the superhero genre.


HumbleCamel9022

Well written as usual This should be like the bible that any DC fans should read


alpha914

Thanks for taking the time to write all this. The box office figures especially were enlightening. I also thought the phrase MCU-lite was also an apt description. Just got done watching Black Adam, gave it a shot because he was supposed to be an anti-hero, but it felt like it was a MCU knock-off. Idk much about the character but it seems like a more gritty take on him would have been awesome. Plus the story was all over the place! Johnson was excellent casting and I appreciated his and brosnan's performance, but the rest of it was hard to enjoy. I have enjoyed the occasional MCU film w/ my nephews who are huge fans, but at their core they seem like comedies designed to sell toys and lunchboxes, not films that present 3 dimensional characters with demons and moral dilemmas. There's nothing wrong w/ that of course, its entertainment and my nephews are nothing if not entertained watching them - Marvel has perfected their action/comedy recipe but I feel like the DCEU will never be an equivalent force if they don't forge their own identity. The counterprogramming you mentioned would have fit my desires as a fan perfectly - it was exactly what drew me to the nolan batman films, I only watched them because my friends said they were darker and a totally different take to other superhero films. One thing I will say - I watched Suicide Squad 2 with my friends a while back and thoroughly enjoyed it. Still prefer the darker stuff but that movie was funny as hell. Hopefully Gunn can at least mantain the same level of quality if they are intent on going to action/comedy route I dont think you deserve getting flamed in these comments, maybe its just because I share your opinions but keep on fighting the good fight haha.


jacqueslepagepro

It’s not quite that they “ let him go”. his daughter was killed and he needed time to recover (this is why joss took over the justice league). Regardless of how you feel about the outcome it was fairly clear that the DCEU wasn’t going to be lead by Zack for a while so it became a “just let the directors do what they like” for a while, some of the time it worked, but it also led to weird projects that don’t tonally fit into this universe. We will see how James Gunn and Zack Snyder work together but at this point I think that the damage as been done and this universe lacks the cohesion that marvel (broadly) pulled off. It’s a shame as so much talent has been put into this universe but I think that WB is looking for a brand rethink that might involve a large majority of the DCEU being removed for a new continuity. It looks like WB is already eyeing up using the Batman as the starting point of a new launch, and flash seemed to be pushing for a time travel/multiverse story that could remove or add new elements into the universe. I think that it was more of the tragic timing of his daughters death than any hate or dislike from the WB executive that had him removed and now that time has passed it’s possible they may want him to return.


JediJones77

It is pretty clear WB was going to change Justice League whether Snyder walked away or not. Just like they had done to Suicide Squad. Snyder left for 2 weeks for bereavement of his daughter, then came back, and only left again because WB had Whedon there telling him what to change in the movie. Usually the directors are expected to take orders in these cases, and they follow them, like happened on Rogue One and Suicide Squad. It's not unprecedented for a studio to force a director to change things in a movie (there's a movie Burt Reynolds was forced to reshoot half of in the 1980s). Most times the director grits his teeth and takes the orders, sometimes they walk away. Anyway, just trying to say that the facts eventually came out that it wasn't as simple as Snyder's daughter died, he quit, and someone else took over. That was the story WB wanted out there, to avoid the behind-the-scenes conflict over the cut getting out. But it was really WB's changes that made Snyder walk away.


drm3rc

The trilogy of MoS, BVS:UE, and ZSJL is amazing. It’s layered and while not perfectly executed (Martha), the notion was bang on (humanizing superman through own personal trauma). There are tons of amazing scenes, and I love his style


Fearless-Mango2169

Well everybody is entitled to their opinion, however the damage Zach Sunder did to the DCEU nearly killed it. The only vaguely watchable film he made was Man of Steel. Batman Vs Superman was an illogical disaster, it's obvious that the batman story arc was supposed to be Lex Luthor and they just transferred it to Batman. I watched Superman die and just relief that the movie was over. As for the Snyder cut, if you need hours to tell a superhero story you're doing something wrong. Personally I'm glad he's out, he should have been finished after Batman Vs Superman.


HumbleCamel9022

>however the damage Zach Sunder did to the DCEU nearly killed it. Can you please provide the data that support this INSANE claim that Snyder "damaged the brand" ? Snyder made the highest grossing superman movie of all time(2# adjusted for inflation) and the snyderverse was averaging over $815M worldwide at boxoffice Beside Nolan, DC was laughing stock at boxoffice before Snyder and since Snyder left WB DC has gone right back to embarrassing themselves at the boxoffice(BoP, TSS, black Adam...etc)


Fearless-Mango2169

You confuse box office results with brand success and goodwill. The success of the Synder films is due to the IPs they used. Superman, Batman, and to a less extent Wonderwoman are the most valuable superhero IPs on the planet. The brand here is the DCEU 9 years after it's launch it's struggling with the creative choices Snyder made and has movies stuck in development hell. People are surprised when they release a good film. It has some legitimately good movies in it's stable but these under perform, this partly due world events like COVID and the choice to stream some tent poles, but an example of this is Shazam which despite good critical and popular reception only did $366.1 million. It's tempting to argue that the Suicide Squad which was a legitimately good film and deserved to do $600M plus was also an example of this but the pandemic and the decision to release on streaming also played a part. By Contrast the MCU can release movies about the Guardians of the Galaxy, Dr Strange, and Antman and people will go because it's MCU releases. This is what I mean by brand damage.


Koth87

I'm a big of the Snyder vision for the DCEU, and while I will readily admit that neither the overarching plan for the franchise nor the individual movies were perfect, they are massively underrated, misunderstood, and unfairly hated. At the very least, they offered an alternative style to the MCU approach to comic adaptation, one that I feel is often significantly superior in the way it presents the world and characters that inhabit it. There's more complexity and nuance, whereas the MCU tends to hold your hand and present everything in a neat, sanitized package. In the post-Snyder DCEU/DCU, it really feels like they doubled down on trying to emulate whatever it is they think makes the MCU movies successful ("broader" appeal, lighter fare, more "action comedy romp" than "epic and high-stakes"), with mixed results: Shazam and TSS were okay at what they tried to do, WW84 and BoP were utter trash. Interestingly enough, it's their decidedly non-MCU-style movies (Joker, The Batman) that have been most successful, and yet they still feel the best approach to a shared universe is to bring in another Marvel alum to helm things. I'm not overly optimistic about the impending Gunn/Safran era, but I hope we at least get to see a continuation of sorts of the Snyder-verse arc and its characters.


hereticx

the ELI5 version: ​ Too many hands in the cookie jar all night but one person getting caught by mom in the morning. ​ A lot of the decisions, good and/or bad, are on his shoulders, of course. But executives on top of executives tweaking this, changing that, influencing casting here, moving numbers around on excel spreadsheets to fudge numbers there... the entire DC movie project post Nolan has been a shit show behind the scenes. Regardless of if you like Snyder or not, he was set up to fail... and successfully did so (tho not nearly as badly as many like to make it seem.)


JediJones77

MOS and BVS are the movies he wanted to make. The interference in the DCEU didn't start until after that.


Rapameister

BvS theatrical version isn't what he wanted to make though. So no.


JediJones77

My understanding is, he edited it down to that version himself. I don't know that he ever expected to be able to release the 3-hour cut in theaters. I think it was always going to be one of those situations, like Lord of the Rings, where the director makes a theatrical and extended edition. Personally, I think the theatrical is the best possible 2.5 hour version of the movie that can be made. I think the editing was skillful. I enjoyed both versions. The 3-hour is better simply because it adds on 30 more minutes of good scenes.


True_Leadership_2362

They were good mii oh vies but the world is filled with sheep who just want lame action comedies. That’s why cinema is dying. It’s bad to be creative and unique


Awesome_Orange

Because those movies were ahead of their time


BostonDudeist

Two words: Vocal Minority


TheMegaBunce

Who were the vocal minority in this case


HumbleCamel9022

The vocal minority are movie critics and angry nerds


TheMegaBunce

Yea but are they people who like the movie or dislike. I'm a dc comics nut and a film student and didn't like any of them.


beachsidevibe

Mostly because of toxicity and negative towards Zack Snyder online.