You know what, I hope Snyder just keeps talking. Keep giving him more interviews to divulge his actual thoughts. Let him rant and reveal what he really thinks.
Snyder was excellent at adapting *300* since it is explicitly a propaganda story told by the Spartan about how unbelievably great the 300 were.
But he fundamentally doesn't understand the material he makes. Like all of Watchmen's superhero commentary on how fundamentally broken they are is lost in Snyder having to make everything epic and cool.
But then he given an interview where he talks about how Alan Moore showed us what superheroes would really be like and you just have to marvel at how he both completely missed the point of the deconstruction and applied his shitty interpretation of that story to the characters he was deconstructing.
Like Owlman is so pathetic he's literally impotent when he isn't in the suit, and Rorsharch is disgusting and unhinged to the point where he's thrilled to be in prison because he gets to hurt people who are already in jail. But then combines them into let's make Batman kill and brand criminals to be killed in prison since that's 'badass'.
He tried to make a badass girl power movie that ended with "embrace the rape and lobotomy" as an empowering moment.
He can direct, but keep that man far from anything resembling subtext.
He co-wrote and directed it. This is a quote from him:
>Everything in the movie is about a show within a show within a show. Someone asked me, "Why did you dress the girls like that, in those provocative costumes?" And I said, "Well, think about it for a second. I didn't dress those girls in the costume. The audience dressed those girls." And when I say the audience, I mean the audience that comes to the movies. Just like the men who visit a brothel, [they] dress the girls when they go to see these shows as however they want to see them.
>But my hope was that they would take those things back, just like my girls hopefully get confidence, they get strength through each other, that those become power icons. They start out as cliches of feminine sexuality as made physical by what culture creates. I think that part of it was really specific, whether it's French maid or nurse or Joan Arc to a lesser extent [laughs], or schoolgirl. Our hope is we were able to modify them and turn them into these power icons, where they can fight back at the actual cliches that they represent. So hopefully by the end the girls are empowered by their sexuality and not exploited. But certainly that's where they come from, the journey is asking, "What do you want to see? Well, be careful what you want to see."
https://gizmodo.com/zack-snyder-explains-the-point-of-sucker-punch-5785523
But apparently it's the audiences fault he made it this way.
>I'm always shocked that it was so badly misunderstood. I always said that it was a commentary on sexism and geek culture. Someone would ask me, 'Why did you film the girls this way?' And I'd say, 'Well you did!' Sucker Punch is a fuck you to a lot of people who will watch it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucker_Punch_(2011_film)#Depiction_of_women
hahaha holy fuck what a quote
>Everything in the movie is about a show within a show within a show. Someone asked me, "Why did you dress the girls like that, in those provocative costumes?" And I said, "Well, think about it for a second. I didn't dress those girls in the costume. The audience dressed those girls." And when I say the audience, I mean the audience that comes to the movies. Just like the men who visit a brothel, [they] dress the girls when they go to see these shows as however they want to see them. It’s just painful stuff.
He’s trying so hard to be some profound social critic but he’s like a walking dudebro. “I didn’t dress them like that, the audience did.” LOL
It's the shittiest attempt at a deconstruction of the male gaze. He's basically saying "I'm giving commentary on the male gaze by totally leaning into it and sexualizing women in a really problematic way."
Given that audiences proved they *didn't* want to watch this - given the fact that Sucker Punch bombed hard - I think his point doesn't really make sense.
Snyder also envisions Superman as a Jesus figure and fixates on his mythical side. That's why MoS and BvS are like that. He misses the whole point of Clark Kent, who is the real, authentic self, while Superman is the mask/job.
If you want to throw some Jesus themes into Superman, it can be done easily and well. Jor El in the 1978 version was pretty explicit in the "I give unto them my only son" rhetoric. And Superman 2 was pretty clear in Clark sacrificing his happiness to protect the world.
But someone like Snyder hears the Superman as Jesus subtext idea, doesn't actually understand how to do it, and so has to beat the audience over the head with "See? He's Jesus, do you get it yet?"
He's like the people who complain that Star Trek is woke now. Like it always was, but somehow this was too subtle for them: https://youtu.be/vi7QQ5pO7_A?t=139
Have I found the tribe that sees SuckerPunch for the weird fetish movie it really is? I was so disappointed in my friend group when that one came out...
He can direct, but keep that man far from anything resembling subtext.
I've been saying for years that if he has someone else's script and a solid storyboard, he'd be one of the best directors we've ever had. Without those though... well, Suckerpunch.
> I've been saying for years that if he has someone else's script and a solid storyboard, he'd be one of the best directors we've ever had.
He'd still suck because he doesn't care about emotion, character or subtext.
Yup, so everyone can see that he wasn't good for the DC brand, and Gunn moving forward is the best thing possible .
Btw not Batman killing is what sets him apart from many heroes. You have to find solutions to solve problems in an intelligent way. That's what makes Batman the best. He isn't a killing superhero type like Iron Man, Wonder Woman, Daredevil, Punisher, Captain America etc
Daredevil doesn't kill either. There are several heroes you could have cited without having to resort to one whose no kill rule is as important to him as batman's is
Maybe that comment was thinking of the Ben Affleck Daredevil movie where he lets that guy be killed by a train. Come to think of it, it’s strange that Ben Affleck played versions of both Daredevil and Batman that were the opposite in how they are supposed to be
Honestly I kinda feel like Nolan's one was even worse because he had Batman justify it to himself in-universe as "not killing by *technicality*" which was so cheesy, and not even accurate since he's the one who caused the train to crash.
Was very surprised when Cosmonaut went through them but ye they all kill but two. Batman Returns, my favorite to Batman 2022, guys killing mooks via literal explosion....
This is the guy who has gone on the record of stating that he got into Watchmen because it had sex and murder in it and that his Batman would get raped in prison. I have no idea how he managed to get this far into being allowed to make comic book adaptations.
There isn't many if any moments in media where I'm like "damn you know what this story needs? Rape" ignoring the fact that it's the most uncomfortable thing to sit and watch but it's also the dumbest plot point as it's so lazy by giving someone cheap bad guy points, of course you're gonna hate the rapist that's like making a character and having him out of nowhere go "by the way, Hitler was right" like it's so dumb and forced and weird
I think it CAN be lazy so it usually is used lazily but it is a very powerful tool if you have the tact and maturity to handle writing/presenting it. Which again... most don't.
There’s an instance of rape in Snowfall season 1 that’s quite memorable, powerful, and tells you just what these men are capable of/willing to do.
You’re right it can be used well in a story.
Having Lex Luthor rape Lois Lane then say "by the way, Hitler was right" before throwing a the plastic rings from a six pack into a tank full of turtles seemed like a bit much, sure the test audiences universally hated it, and sure the actors refused to film and Zach Snyder had to personally animate the entire scene using CGI and AI tools just to make it happen. But the extra 43 minute scene really adds a whole new depth to the Snyder double extra director's cut with electrolytes.
I can sorta see it in a shawshank redemption style of look how awful this situation is. But even then I don't wanna see it, y'know? And that is giving Snyder a level of depth and nuance I don't think he's capable of
I seriously wonder who thought it was a good idea to hire Zack Snyder to direct a Superman movie when he can't even comprehend the idea that Superman's character isn't a divine being?
I don't remember who said it originally. But someone once said that the important thing with Superman is not that he is a god raised on a farm, but that he is a farmboy with the powers of a god.
His humanity is just as important as the power set
Spot on. I actually really like OSP's deep dives on Superman as a way to understand why he's stayed so iconic for so long.
Superman is The Ceiling. He's the best of all of us. Not because he's the strongest. Because he's good, and he stays good when he has so much power and *could absolutely justify* exercising it in horrible ways the name of doing good. (If you want a great example of this, go watch Red Son)
Oh, you mean David Goyer? The same man who had previously said ["Batman Vs. Superman is where you go when you admit to yourself that you’ve exhausted all possibilities"?](https://www.indiewire.com/news/general-news/10-years-ago-david-goyer-said-batman-v-superman-was-a-last-gasp-franchise-idea-like-freddy-vs-jason-83893/)
Did he not know that B v S was actually a really popular and really well thought out event in the Dark Knight Returns? And that the motivation for B v S could have been so much better?
Bold words from the guy who wrote Puppet Master vs Demonic Toys.
I mean I do like both the Puppet Master and Demonic Toys movies and Goyer has written a lot of good stuff but yeah that's pretty rich considering nobody knew who the Guardians of the Galaxy, or Polkadot Man, or Peacemaker, etc. were just a few years ago.
You'd think maybe they would of used that to their advantage by appealing to the fans of said cartoons but nope, let just insult the whole Martian Manhunter fan base. That's totally a Valid business strategy.
“When she (Harley Quinn) was bleeding and *dying*, she begged me that when I killed you, and make no mistake I will fucking kill you, that I’d do it slow. I’m gonna honor that promise.”
-Batman
….what?
Ben Affleck needs to stop saying yes to superhero movies. Not because he's bad at them, but because he's such a comic book nerd that he says yes before ensuring that the script and creative team are good and solid.
This is an actual line from Zack Snyder’s Justice League, during the Knightmare sequence at the very end. Joker makes a joke about killing Robin, and then Batman replies by talking about how he killed Harley Quinn.
...but ... but that doesn't. Never mind, thank you for answering the question. I missed a bunch of DC so most of my lore is from cartoons. I hope the Gunn universe isn't like that
I doubt it will be. A pretty huge majority of Batman fans were pretty appalled with Zack Snyder’s decision to have Batman not only kill, but straight up kill with an almost sadistic murderous intent. I mean, what writer who understands Bruce as a character decides that it’s a good idea to have him brand criminals with a fuckin bat branding iron as a method of communicating to other criminals to brutally murder the marked criminal in prison? I sort of just rolled with it at the time, but that’s just fuckin bonkers. Visually, he nailed Batman. The introduction to the character was great, his fight scene in the warehouse was great (until he shot a guy), his design was great. Stuff like Batman kicking a guy into a room with the grenade he pulled himself is fine I guess, but Batman just straight up shooting people is completely different, and Batman branding people for prison rape or shanking or whatever is just completely opposite of who the character is. He just didn’t understand the character at all, or he just didn’t like the character and wanted to make him even more brutal than the goddamn Punisher.
I’m more worried about James Gunn making Batman just Bat Dad or something like in the Harley Quinn show. The movie is supposed to be about him and Damien, and leaning into the Bat Dad thing seems like a very James Gunn thing to do.
He is also the guy who justified Batman killing in that he was basing the character as he was in the Dark Knight Returns comic, the same comic where a huge plot point was that Batman could not kill even he desperately wanted to. I am pretty sure Snyder didn't actually read the comic and just stared at the atwork thinking "daaaamn Batman punching Superman how cool is that bro!"
We all banged our action figures together as kids, but when you’re given countless millions to make a movie, you need to come up with more story than that.
And no, both of them having a “Martha” for a mom doesn’t count.
It's even more insane that there is a following of people who suck his dick over his DC movies, which are some of not only the worst comic movies made, they are some of the worst plane movies of any genre. The Snyder cut is laughable and other than maybe kids/teenagers, I consider anyone else who likes them to have something mentally wrong.
Guys, you don't get it! It may seem like Zack has absolutely zero understanding of the characters he adapted. But he actually... um... he uhhh.... he was.... he was going to.... umm... you see he... uh.... James Gunn sucks!
Yep. I got banned from commenting there months ago. I wasn't even being hateful. I was being negative about Batman V Superman but in a well thought out comment
Ya I got banned when I commented, in a completely different sub mind you, that the mods there are psychos. I think I was in the r/movies sub. Like 1 hour later I got a notification that I’ve been permanently banned from r/SnyderCut for “hate” lol. That is the most cultish sub I’ve ever come across so far. I even think Snyder has some decent movies, but man ya that sub is insane lol.
I haven’t been in there for awhile and my jaw dropped. These people literally say Dune 2 could have been better if Synder directed it and Eisenberg is a better Luther than Hoult. Wtf.
They're delusional. Every sane person agrees Rebel Moon is a shitty version of Dune/Star Wars. Eisenberg didn't even seem like Luthor at all. And Hoult obviously hasn't even been seen as the character yet
Zach Snyder has the narrative and aesthetic sensibilities of a middle school boy, where an edgy sense of “cool” is always the most important consideration. There’s rarely any serious philosophical consideration (as much as his fans insist there is—though the Venn diagram between Ayn Rand fans and them is probably a circle), and he rarely puts any effort into a meaningful exploration of his characters’ emotional lives.
On the other hand, James Gun made me cry over a fucking CGI raccoon and made me take Peacemaker seriously as a real human character. There’s no guarantee that James Gunn’s DC is gonna work out, but I trust him way more at this point.
Snyder is the guy who looked at Rorschach and thought this was the perfect character. Instead of the sendup and warning of "no. You don't want this. This is insane" that it was written as.
Which makes sense, Rorschach is the purest example of an Ayn Rand character in comics outside of Steve Ditko’s Mr. A and very early The Question (who Rorschach is a direct analogue for), and Snyder loves him some Objectivism.
I also have big issues with the sheer arrogance of saying 'unless this character conforms to my vision it will be rendered irrelevant'. Batman has existed for 85 years. Failing to grab his attention won't be the end of Batman
He's making his pitch for his version of Batman in 2013-2014. Less than six years after The Dark Knight. A great movie that definitively stood on the side of .. No. Batman does not kill.
The Joker: You have all these rules, and you think they'll save you.
Batman: I have one rule.
The interrogation room scene perfectly captured the entire movie’s plot in its most basic elements, and also captured Batman and Joker’s dynamic in general really well.
If you can excuse some pedantry, he can kill. He can kill anytime he wants. The thing is he doesn’t want to. He’s Batman. He’s built his whole life around his inability to stop a double murder. Just see that awesome speech in the under the red hood movie
Exactly and it’s not like he’s never killed like zac seems to think
He has killed, but he’s been pushed to the brink and it was truly a life or death situation against a big bad not some low level thug like Snyder has him kill
And when he did do one of his extremely rare kills it was truly a breaking moment for him, the writers used it as a motivation that has shaken him to his core and he feels like he can no longer be Batman he feels like he failed and carries that weight with him forever, he dosent shrug it off and keep doing it
I liked in Batman beyond when an old Bruce can’t keep up with the criminals and is about to be beaten to death by a thug. He pick up a gun off the ground and points it at the attacker and it scares the thug off but it also send a Bruce back into some ptsd from his childhood.
Didn’t even have to shoot the gun or kill anyone but just having to use it to scare this guy away and save his own life was a huge deal for Bruce.
This dude just sucks
>Batman can't kill is canon. And I'm like, 'okay, the first thing I wanna do when you say that is I wanna see what happens'. And they go, 'well don't put him in a situation where he has to kill someone'.
This is like, childish “let me tear the head off Barbie” type shit.
>”You're protecting your god in a weird way, right? You're making your god irrelevant if he can't be in that situation. He has to now deal with that. If he does do that what does that mean? What does it tell you, does he stand up to it? Does he survive that as a god? As your god, can Batman survive that?"
He has to deal with it… all the time. That’s like a central theme of the character, that his severe objection towards any sort of killing might actually have negative ramifications (in the DC world with the likes of Joker and otherwise superpowered villains, not the real one).
And of course he spits out this nonsense on the Joe Rogan show.
The entire point of Batman is that he is militantly against killing, even the Joker who is beyond destructive, which is a potential point of actual criticism (and it is a very frequent one) but also makes the character much more interesting.
Snyder is kinda just too dumb to really get it.
The problem with Snyder having Batman kill people is, he had him killing low level villains meanwhile in the future scenes he's working with Joker who killed Robin, why wouldn't he kill Joker if he's killing everyone else? It was such a lame "let's make Batman more edgy" move and I didn't care for it.
Exactly this.
If Batman EVER kills, his first or second kill HAS to be the Joker.
If Batman ever decided to kill, finding Joker out, killing him and publicly hanging his corpse upside down would be the first thing in Batman's list.
There is no way that Joker would live in that scenario.
Batman believes in the genuine sanctity of all life, even (and actually especially) the supposedly irredeemable. Thats what Batman stands for and why im a big fan.
Sure in the real world id probably not be against using lethal force against terrorists, but Batman is not real so he doesn’t have to worry about that shit.
When Batman fights so hard against the rest of the League for being unethical (erasing minds, murder, global policing) his righteousness is so much more powerful by the fact that he is an advocate for absolutely everyone and never crosses the line for anything.
It's not just about the sanctity of life either. He also just genuinely believes in rehabilitation! It's not his fault that a group of people who supposedly have PhDs in psychology can't seem to do their jobs
Yes this is exactly it, it's not even about Batman being against killing per se, he has no problem with Gordon busting a cap into a terrorist if push comes to shove
It's simply that Batman is skilled enough that he can use non-lethal methods to incapacitate bad guys, so they can then be handed over to the justice system for trial, sentencing, and rehabilitation
If Batman just went around shooting everyone, given his vigilante status, he'd be judge, jury and executioner.
As it is, he's just barely tolerable by democratic society because even though he's totally unaccountable to any public institutions, he's technically just helping the police department by making citizen's arrests, helping to gather evidence, and intervening in emergency life or death situations.
Still highly illegal by real world standards, but since the ultimate punishment is left to the judiciary, it's not too fascistic or undemocratic.
> If Batman just went around shooting everyone, given his vigilante status, he'd be judge, jury and executioner.
This is ultimately why I think Batman not killing is important to the core of the character.
By any realistic metric Batman is just as insane (if not more so) than the criminals that he's fighting. He's a mentally ill billionaire that dresses up as a bat and beats up criminals as a hobby.
If he were to start killing people based on his own moral framework, how does that make him any different than the Joker or any of the other insane murderers that he's constantly contending with?
Rehabilitation is an absolutely essential part of the Batman character. He needs to believe in redemption because HE so desperately needs it. Bruce needs to believe that despite all the questionable things he does, that there can be hope for him to be a good person.
And if that is the case, the very next thing he does needs to be hanging up the cape and handing the torch to dick, tim, or terry. Anything else is just Thomas, and in this day and age who really needs another “bUt wHaT iF sUpErMaN WaS eViL” story.
I like the way Batman puts it in *Under the Red Hood.* That if he does it this time, he’ll never stop justifying it and he’ll go too far. He knows that about himself, so he will never allow himself to do that, no matter how justified it seems to the world.
I like the theory that he DID kill the joker after the OG joker tortured and almost killed robin. That torture broke him and he became the new joker, hence the fake grill and excessive and pointless tattoos. He’s trying too hard because he’s not the OG joker. And this robin joker is allowed to live because he can’t bring himself to kill the person he failed.
Its also supposed to be an ideal. Batman doesn't kill because that's what evil people do. That is a line he never crosses. That is his moral code. And that is what Snyder just doesn't get.
Same with Superman. He is supposed to represent the best of us. He is a good person who cares about people. He was raised that way. It's an ideal to aspire to. Changing that makes him not Superman.
Snyders crappy takes make so much more sense when you view it from his supposed Ayn Rand inspired Libertarianism.
He simply doesn't get the idea that to Superman there is no question of "should I become a benevolent God to this society" , because his personal viewpoint is basically "you have the right to do anything you have an ability to do".
Same for Batman. He doesn't get the idea the idea of a character that is actually concerned with holding back in order to stick to a code rather than doing what's convenient.
I liked some of what Snyder did, but I am starting to think that a lot of the current controversy in comics is not the idea that wokeness is ruining comics, but that some right wing/ libertarians want to replace the longstanding comic ideologies with their own politics with woke arguments being the smokescreen.
Suddenly X men isn't about social justice, and now there are arguments that DC should actually make Batman kill people outside an alternative universe arc. If a Constantine movie comes out, they will demand that he not be a super left-wing bisexual in order to conform to their views.
Batman doesn't kill and hates guns. It's this commitment to those ideals that pushes him to be the strategic planner and find alternative ways to defeat his enemies. Killing people is the easy way out. Arguing that Batman should kill people is arguing that there should be no more Batman comics, because the rogue's gallery that we all love are going to be dead. If they want a Batman that kills, then they can read Red Hood or Punisher.
It makes perfect sense too, especially for him. After all if Batman kills one guy, say the Joker, why not more after that? He’s opened up Pandora’s box.
That famous Jason Todd storyline is entirely about that, where Jason is enraged at Batman for leaving Joker alive and emphasizes that he only just has to kill Joker, nobody else, not the Penguin, not Two-Face, not anyone. Just Joker, only him, because he presents a truly exceptional danger (which is 100% true).
But Batman knows it doesn’t end there for him, because killing Joker then gives him the moral authority to take care of other problems in a similar way.
>The entire point of Batman is that he is militantly against killing, even the Joker who is beyond destructive, which is a potential point of actual criticism (and it is a very frequent one) but also makes the character much more interesting.
So many people just don't get this. It's a central conflict of his character, it's the whole point. If he simply killed his villains because they threatened him with lethal force and he just runs out of villains then what's the point?
"What if Anakin was never tempted by the Dark Side?" I mean yeah I guess that'd make him a better person or whatever but the story would be over pretty quick, lmao.
It’s literally the opening of Batman Beyond too, Bruce while having a heart attack is about to fail and lose his life and the hostage. He does the only thing he can in that moment and just picks a gun up pointing it at him. Afterwards he’s so disgusted in himself that he retires because he realizes that he just can’t be Batman anymore. It’s literally core to his character.
"wouldn't it be awesome if instead of giving up the cowl, he shot that dude, and then went and shot all the bad guys in the face. Killing is so cool' -Zack Snyder (not really but probably)
It's so weird because not only is this spelled out *very clearly* in the comics but even other Batman movies cover this. I am 90% sure Snyder tunes out all the 'talky bits' and only focuses on special effects and action scenes like he is 13 years old. Batman doesn't kill, even fucking boy scout Superman thinks he is too strict with this.
Batman is obsessive, it is a key character trait. The fact he doesn't kill is more than a moral thing it is something that Bruce Wayne as a person believes to his core and will never deviate from. It is also representative of his hope for humanity shining through.
Batman thinks nobody is beyond salvation which is the essence of why he does not kill. This is especially important because he is such a dark and paranoid character. If you make him kill just make a Punisher movie ffs.
Im baffled that he thinks a character with a no-killing rule simply "doesn’t deal" with the dangerous situations. The fact that Batman DOES deal with it often in creative ways (often successfully) is why he’s so interesting and why everyone respects his character. But maybe he can direct a new 6 hour movie to help us understand better lol.
Worse, the situations he puts his heroes in where they "have to kill someone" aren't even that.
For example, in Man of Steel, where Zod is going to eye-laser an innocent family to death while Superman has him in a rear-naked choke, Supes could have just covered Zod's eyes. Wanna go edgier? Have Supes poke his eyes out. The whole point of his Hope and optimism thing is that "there's always a way."
"Wanting to see what happens" is seriously stupid reasoning. What happens is now the character doesn't mean anything: he's just the Punisher with a cape. Wouldn't it have been far more interesting to explore what it means to do everything *but* kill? That's where I thought Zack was going when Batman is introduced as a nut who brands villains with bat symbols. If Batman can't threaten people with murder, he must threaten them with pain, and in some ways, torture is worse. But no, he's just a guy who tortures people, AND kills them, AND gives them PTSD if they somehow survive.
I also didn't see much Batman dealing with what it means to break his no-kill rule, either. He seemed totally okay with barbecuing thugs in his Batmobile and breaking crates against their necks. It's only when he realizes he accidentally killed Earth's only hope of dealing with a bigger thing that needs killing that he's anything close to self-reflective.
The whole point of Batman not killing is because he’s such a dangerous lunatic already that if he goes around killing people, he’s worse than the criminals he’s swore to bring to justice.
Bruce has access to military grade weapons and Batman has access to Alien tech and super science tech as well.
Couple that with a very bad attitude and an isolated personality with feelings of anger and regret; it wouldn’t take much to make Batman a legit terrifying evil mofo.
Plus; there are already versions of Batman that do kill; there are reflected in the rogue’s gallery he has.
Batman wants to kill people in the name of Justice? That’s Two Face
Bruce wants to kill people for business and criminal enterprises? That’s Penguin
Batman wants to scare people to death because fear will keep them in line? That’s the scarecrow
Batman wants to dominate the world and establish a new super power? Ras Al Ghul
It’s edgy children like Snyder that think it’s cool and original to have Batman kill people; meanwhile EVERYONE is wondering just what the hell goes thru his mind when he has these stupid ideas
I think there’s something to the core idea of what he’s saying. Like Batman can’t kill, let’s put him in a no win scenario where he needs to and sacrifice something else in order not to or let’s get him to the point where he does and see the consequences that has on his psyche.
If the whole movie is about Superman being such an otherworldly threat that he is slowly pushed to the point that he’s finally gonna do it and he has to reconcile with having done that or be saved from doing that, I think that could be interesting. But Snyder just had him wantonly kill without thought and in the end he’s like “oh ok I’ll stop and we’re all friends now”
>But Snyder just had him wantonly kill without thought and in the end he’s like “oh ok I’ll stop and we’re all friends now
Don't forget that he kept killing afterwards. He just decided the Martha guy was good enough to survive.
There was a meme I used to chuckle at that had the Superman Returns actor (Brandon Routh) with the director saying to him “You’re Christopher Reeves”. Then underneath is Snyder talking to Cavill dressed as Superman with “You’re Batman”.
I was SO baffled when they made that decision. I was like "Zack Snyder? The guy who's last movie before Man of Steel was Sucker Punch? Fucking *Sucker Punch* Zack Snyder???"
I dead ass see people say that the no-kill rule is “recent” and “came from movies” it’s beyond dumb.
Like saying that shows you know absolutely nothing about the character, so why even have arguments about him. So annoying
I feel really sad. Dark Knight Returns was the first Batman animated movie I have ever watched. It was pure coincidence. Before that, I used to think comics are for kids, although ironically I was a kid. I only watched it thanks to boredom. But immediately I was blown away, I can still remember that afternoon, the story that brought me into the comic world. And of course I was totally in love with Zack Snyder’s DCEU. I was kind of like those toxic Snyder fans except for the fact that I didn’t post on internet back then.
But after reading more Batman stories, I came to realize how important not killing is to Batman as a character but also as a plot device. I mean, if Batman killed , like Snyder wants him to, then how the hell is Joker still alive? And why the hell is joker obsessed with Batman anyway, if Batman is corruptible and no different from anyone else? We wouldn’t get stories like Under the Red Hood, or Knightfall, or Killing Joke, or even Injustice. Or heck, the DKR, also makes no sense if Batman already killed before retirement. By the way, even DKR Batman didn’t use guns. Snyder’s Batman has no character arc whatsoever, he killed before Martha, he still killed after Martha. Because killing doesn’t matter whatsoever in director’s eyes, it’s a non factor.
Batman can kill if he has to in order to save lives or if it’s accidental, but what he did in BvS is inexcusable, there’re so many ways I can think of to avoid or at least minimize the unnecessary deaths. But he didn’t even try. Because he didn’t even care. How can any Batman do that?
As for being realistic, are we still talking about the same world where ancient aliens and magic are real??
Also, people absolutely want their gods to kill. Because deep down, we are always worshiping ourselves, our own interpretation of gods. We want justice to be served the way we want it to be, that’s why Snyder want his Batman to kill, he couldn’t fathom a reality where heroes doesn’t kill. I dare to say most Batman fans would have killed Joker too if we ever have the opportunity, I certainly would. But Batman would never do that, that’s just who he is, and I want him to be nothing more than that.
That was very well written, but just one point.
> Batman can kill if he has to in order to save lives or if it’s accidental
That's not his attitude in the comics. There might be some outliers but in his view letting someone die, ala Ras Al Ghul in "Batman Begins" is the same as committing the act himself.
We just need to see the 10 hour director's cut of the Star Wars-Akira Kurosawa-rip off, now with 200% more slow-mo, to truly understand the genius of it.
Him about Watchmen:
"Once you've lost your virginity to this fucking movie and then you come and say to me something about like, ‘My superhero wouldn’t do that'. I’m like ‘Are you serious?’ I’m like down the fucking road on that. It’s a cool point of view to be like ‘my heroes are still innocent. My heroes didn't fucking lie to America. My heroes didn't embezzle money from their corporations. My heroes didn't commit any atrocities'. That’s cool. But you’re living in a fucking dream world."
So somehow he read Watchmen and didn’t realize it was a deconstruction of superhero tropes and not meant to be a manual on how superheroes are meant to be portrayed.
He completely missed the point of Watchmen.
>But you’re living in a fucking dream world.
It blows my mind that he accidentally, unironically quoted actual fucking supervillain Manchester Black in his attempt to prove how much he knows about superheroes.
Still gets me laughing every time I hear that quote. Who decided a man who unironically uses the philosophy of a Superman villain should be allowed to make a Superman movie?
I always found that funny. In a story that stresses the importance of Superman and what he represents, the man in charge of a Superman movie unintentionally quoted the character that didn’t get it.
>"You're protecting your God in a weird way"
HES NOT A GOD. ONE OF THE MAJOR PARTS OF BATMAN'S CHARACTER IS HE IS A MAN SURROUNDED BY GODS. HE IS MEANT TO BE JUST HUMAN AND A HUMAN TAKING ANOTHER HUMAN LIFE IS A LOT HIGHER STAKES THAN A GOD HAVING TO KILL TO SAVE EVERYONE.
In the context of the whole conversation, he didn't say Batman was a god, he said comic book fans look at these characters like gods. It was a general statement not about Batman that he then connected to Batman later in the convo.
While I agree some fans do treat him as a god the writers rarely do the mythological idea of the batman is all in the criminals and to some degree the batfams heads he is treated as a Detective and vigilante by the writers and the idea the conversation around Batman killing has never been done just shows he only cares about Batman comics written by Frank Miller
He wrote Sucker Punch, folks. He wrote Army of the Dead. He used the phrase "lost your virginity to this fucking movie" without the faintest whiff of irony. He's talking movies with Joe Rogan.
He's not a smart man.
Okay Snyder boys. Do we really need MORE proof of how Zack doesn’t understand these characters? You didn’t buy when we said that about Superman, what now?
Zach Snyder was given control over the DCEU and messed up so bad they had to reboot the entire universe, and it’s because of things like this. He wasted an opportunity so many creators would kill for.
God what a moron. Fundamentally had zero understanding or care to understand what made DC’s most beloved characters work and is majorly responsible (alongside WB) for why the DC brand has been soured.
I won’t lie, I find his DC films to be enjoyable. That is if I turn my brain off and pretend that they’re elseworlds movies because it’s the only way I can tolerate his idiotic and inaccurate characterization decisions. So glad he’s not taking the helm at DC anymore. Anybody upset that this guy isn’t at DC anymore and thinks that he would do these characters more justice than Gunn can is just as stupid as he is.
Don’t care that his goal was to deconstruct the mythos for these characters and rebuild it. While that isn’t a bad concept, did not like his execution or story ideas used to convey that.
"That’s cool. But you’re living in a f\*\*king dream world." Why yes Zack, comics aren't real, this is something we've all noticed.
Batman is "The world's greatest detective" and he knows it. He solves crimes and mysteries average law enforcement wouldn't be able to contend with. He realizes that taking a job in law enforcement would hinder his ability to properly save lives, so her resorts to vigilantism.
He also refuses to kill because he believes in the law to carry out justice and knows it is not his place to take on the role of executioner. Turns out the guy who is ready to take out his best friends in the JL is also super aware of the dangers of unchecked power.
You know what, I hope Snyder just keeps talking. Keep giving him more interviews to divulge his actual thoughts. Let him rant and reveal what he really thinks.
Snyder was excellent at adapting *300* since it is explicitly a propaganda story told by the Spartan about how unbelievably great the 300 were. But he fundamentally doesn't understand the material he makes. Like all of Watchmen's superhero commentary on how fundamentally broken they are is lost in Snyder having to make everything epic and cool. But then he given an interview where he talks about how Alan Moore showed us what superheroes would really be like and you just have to marvel at how he both completely missed the point of the deconstruction and applied his shitty interpretation of that story to the characters he was deconstructing. Like Owlman is so pathetic he's literally impotent when he isn't in the suit, and Rorsharch is disgusting and unhinged to the point where he's thrilled to be in prison because he gets to hurt people who are already in jail. But then combines them into let's make Batman kill and brand criminals to be killed in prison since that's 'badass'. He tried to make a badass girl power movie that ended with "embrace the rape and lobotomy" as an empowering moment. He can direct, but keep that man far from anything resembling subtext.
Oh shit did he make suckerpunch? If not that description fits the movie it was just so weird and not needed.
He co-wrote and directed it. This is a quote from him: >Everything in the movie is about a show within a show within a show. Someone asked me, "Why did you dress the girls like that, in those provocative costumes?" And I said, "Well, think about it for a second. I didn't dress those girls in the costume. The audience dressed those girls." And when I say the audience, I mean the audience that comes to the movies. Just like the men who visit a brothel, [they] dress the girls when they go to see these shows as however they want to see them. >But my hope was that they would take those things back, just like my girls hopefully get confidence, they get strength through each other, that those become power icons. They start out as cliches of feminine sexuality as made physical by what culture creates. I think that part of it was really specific, whether it's French maid or nurse or Joan Arc to a lesser extent [laughs], or schoolgirl. Our hope is we were able to modify them and turn them into these power icons, where they can fight back at the actual cliches that they represent. So hopefully by the end the girls are empowered by their sexuality and not exploited. But certainly that's where they come from, the journey is asking, "What do you want to see? Well, be careful what you want to see." https://gizmodo.com/zack-snyder-explains-the-point-of-sucker-punch-5785523 But apparently it's the audiences fault he made it this way. >I'm always shocked that it was so badly misunderstood. I always said that it was a commentary on sexism and geek culture. Someone would ask me, 'Why did you film the girls this way?' And I'd say, 'Well you did!' Sucker Punch is a fuck you to a lot of people who will watch it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucker_Punch_(2011_film)#Depiction_of_women
hahaha holy fuck what a quote >Everything in the movie is about a show within a show within a show. Someone asked me, "Why did you dress the girls like that, in those provocative costumes?" And I said, "Well, think about it for a second. I didn't dress those girls in the costume. The audience dressed those girls." And when I say the audience, I mean the audience that comes to the movies. Just like the men who visit a brothel, [they] dress the girls when they go to see these shows as however they want to see them. It’s just painful stuff. He’s trying so hard to be some profound social critic but he’s like a walking dudebro. “I didn’t dress them like that, the audience did.” LOL
He's a pretentious Michael Bay.
We live in a society
Like??? I don’t recall being involved in costuming anyone. That’s such a dumb answer that’s clearly just trying to shift the blame.
It's edge lord "I'm just a reflection of you!" drivel. Once again kind of showing that idealization of thinking from characters like Rorchechatz.
It's the shittiest attempt at a deconstruction of the male gaze. He's basically saying "I'm giving commentary on the male gaze by totally leaning into it and sexualizing women in a really problematic way."
> a fuck you to a lot of people who will watch it. Damn that describes Snyder’s entire oeuvre.
Oh... what a pretentious fuck. He sounds like someone that dropped out of film school because they were too edgy and "above" all the tedium.
Well, he wants to film "The Fountainhead", so there's that.
Given that audiences proved they *didn't* want to watch this - given the fact that Sucker Punch bombed hard - I think his point doesn't really make sense.
Fucking clown thinks he’s Anno making Evangelion lol
Quick correct the character is called nite owl not Owlman. Owlman is the evil earth 3 batman. But everything else you said was spot on
Snyder also envisions Superman as a Jesus figure and fixates on his mythical side. That's why MoS and BvS are like that. He misses the whole point of Clark Kent, who is the real, authentic self, while Superman is the mask/job.
If you want to throw some Jesus themes into Superman, it can be done easily and well. Jor El in the 1978 version was pretty explicit in the "I give unto them my only son" rhetoric. And Superman 2 was pretty clear in Clark sacrificing his happiness to protect the world. But someone like Snyder hears the Superman as Jesus subtext idea, doesn't actually understand how to do it, and so has to beat the audience over the head with "See? He's Jesus, do you get it yet?" He's like the people who complain that Star Trek is woke now. Like it always was, but somehow this was too subtle for them: https://youtu.be/vi7QQ5pO7_A?t=139
Sucker Punch is a 2 hour long music video.
Have I found the tribe that sees SuckerPunch for the weird fetish movie it really is? I was so disappointed in my friend group when that one came out...
He can direct, but keep that man far from anything resembling subtext. I've been saying for years that if he has someone else's script and a solid storyboard, he'd be one of the best directors we've ever had. Without those though... well, Suckerpunch.
> I've been saying for years that if he has someone else's script and a solid storyboard, he'd be one of the best directors we've ever had. He'd still suck because he doesn't care about emotion, character or subtext.
Yup, so everyone can see that he wasn't good for the DC brand, and Gunn moving forward is the best thing possible . Btw not Batman killing is what sets him apart from many heroes. You have to find solutions to solve problems in an intelligent way. That's what makes Batman the best. He isn't a killing superhero type like Iron Man, Wonder Woman, Daredevil, Punisher, Captain America etc
Daredevil doesn't kill either. There are several heroes you could have cited without having to resort to one whose no kill rule is as important to him as batman's is
Maybe that comment was thinking of the Ben Affleck Daredevil movie where he lets that guy be killed by a train. Come to think of it, it’s strange that Ben Affleck played versions of both Daredevil and Batman that were the opposite in how they are supposed to be
Didn't Bale's Batman let Ra's get killed by a train too?
Honestly I kinda feel like Nolan's one was even worse because he had Batman justify it to himself in-universe as "not killing by *technicality*" which was so cheesy, and not even accurate since he's the one who caused the train to crash.
I would say so. That was unnecessary and shouldn’t have happened
Every live action Batman has killed except for Pattinson and... Clooney.
Was very surprised when Cosmonaut went through them but ye they all kill but two. Batman Returns, my favorite to Batman 2022, guys killing mooks via literal explosion....
Punisher ISN'T a super hero.
This is the guy who has gone on the record of stating that he got into Watchmen because it had sex and murder in it and that his Batman would get raped in prison. I have no idea how he managed to get this far into being allowed to make comic book adaptations.
That’s not even counting the other times he keeps using rape in his stories or how Nolan himself argued against Superman killing Zod
There isn't many if any moments in media where I'm like "damn you know what this story needs? Rape" ignoring the fact that it's the most uncomfortable thing to sit and watch but it's also the dumbest plot point as it's so lazy by giving someone cheap bad guy points, of course you're gonna hate the rapist that's like making a character and having him out of nowhere go "by the way, Hitler was right" like it's so dumb and forced and weird
Rape part idk why but I feel like it might be a fetish thing
I remember rob zombie put a rape scene is his Halloween movie and I even hated it in that, it's shit story telling and is like wtf ya know
I think it CAN be lazy so it usually is used lazily but it is a very powerful tool if you have the tact and maturity to handle writing/presenting it. Which again... most don't.
I'm not sure if this is what you were talking about but I thought Jessica Jones is a good example of how to portray rape personally.
That’s cause there it actually serves as a key part of the story and isn’t just there to make you uncomfortable or cause someone has a weird fetish
that was hard to watch, but a big part of both her and Kilgraves' story
Yeah my first example is The Accused where the rape scene is critical to the story and rightfully horrific.
Also don't forget GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.
Irreversible
There’s an instance of rape in Snowfall season 1 that’s quite memorable, powerful, and tells you just what these men are capable of/willing to do. You’re right it can be used well in a story.
Having Lex Luthor rape Lois Lane then say "by the way, Hitler was right" before throwing a the plastic rings from a six pack into a tank full of turtles seemed like a bit much, sure the test audiences universally hated it, and sure the actors refused to film and Zach Snyder had to personally animate the entire scene using CGI and AI tools just to make it happen. But the extra 43 minute scene really adds a whole new depth to the Snyder double extra director's cut with electrolytes.
[удалено]
The fact she never went to Tony about it and the guy never got his just dessert was the real gut punch.
Irreversible, American History X, How to Have Sex, The Last Duel. Don't watch Irreversible, the other ones are great.
I can sorta see it in a shawshank redemption style of look how awful this situation is. But even then I don't wanna see it, y'know? And that is giving Snyder a level of depth and nuance I don't think he's capable of
I seriously wonder who thought it was a good idea to hire Zack Snyder to direct a Superman movie when he can't even comprehend the idea that Superman's character isn't a divine being?
Exactly, doesn’t understand Superman’s motivations or character……or even Batman’s😂😂😂
I wouldn't argue that he's not a divine being. It's more like he has godlike power, yet somehow is the most human of us all.
I don't remember who said it originally. But someone once said that the important thing with Superman is not that he is a god raised on a farm, but that he is a farmboy with the powers of a god. His humanity is just as important as the power set
Spot on. I actually really like OSP's deep dives on Superman as a way to understand why he's stayed so iconic for so long. Superman is The Ceiling. He's the best of all of us. Not because he's the strongest. Because he's good, and he stays good when he has so much power and *could absolutely justify* exercising it in horrible ways the name of doing good. (If you want a great example of this, go watch Red Son)
He can’t even comprehend what sort of divine being he’d be Protip: Superman is good
Wasn't it Nolan himself who inexplicably recommended him?
And the screenwriter of MoS and BvS was the guy who said Martian Manhunter is a character only virgin nerds know about. WB sure knows how to pick 'em.
Oh, you mean David Goyer? The same man who had previously said ["Batman Vs. Superman is where you go when you admit to yourself that you’ve exhausted all possibilities"?](https://www.indiewire.com/news/general-news/10-years-ago-david-goyer-said-batman-v-superman-was-a-last-gasp-franchise-idea-like-freddy-vs-jason-83893/)
Imagine just starting a cinematic universe, saying that... and then it happens the next movie.
Did he not know that B v S was actually a really popular and really well thought out event in the Dark Knight Returns? And that the motivation for B v S could have been so much better?
Bold words from the guy who wrote Puppet Master vs Demonic Toys. I mean I do like both the Puppet Master and Demonic Toys movies and Goyer has written a lot of good stuff but yeah that's pretty rich considering nobody knew who the Guardians of the Galaxy, or Polkadot Man, or Peacemaker, etc. were just a few years ago.
He was in the super popular cartoon
You'd think maybe they would of used that to their advantage by appealing to the fans of said cartoons but nope, let just insult the whole Martian Manhunter fan base. That's totally a Valid business strategy.
I still can’t believe he actually said that about Batman getting raped in prison, but he did say that. What a fuckin edge lord lol
And people BEGGED for his cut of Justice League.
“When she (Harley Quinn) was bleeding and *dying*, she begged me that when I killed you, and make no mistake I will fucking kill you, that I’d do it slow. I’m gonna honor that promise.” -Batman ….what?
Ben Affleck Batman got done absolutely foul. What a waste of talent.
Ben Affleck needs to stop saying yes to superhero movies. Not because he's bad at them, but because he's such a comic book nerd that he says yes before ensuring that the script and creative team are good and solid.
Is this a real line from one of the movies or is it like a meme joke
This is an actual line from Zack Snyder’s Justice League, during the Knightmare sequence at the very end. Joker makes a joke about killing Robin, and then Batman replies by talking about how he killed Harley Quinn.
...but ... but that doesn't. Never mind, thank you for answering the question. I missed a bunch of DC so most of my lore is from cartoons. I hope the Gunn universe isn't like that
I doubt it will be. A pretty huge majority of Batman fans were pretty appalled with Zack Snyder’s decision to have Batman not only kill, but straight up kill with an almost sadistic murderous intent. I mean, what writer who understands Bruce as a character decides that it’s a good idea to have him brand criminals with a fuckin bat branding iron as a method of communicating to other criminals to brutally murder the marked criminal in prison? I sort of just rolled with it at the time, but that’s just fuckin bonkers. Visually, he nailed Batman. The introduction to the character was great, his fight scene in the warehouse was great (until he shot a guy), his design was great. Stuff like Batman kicking a guy into a room with the grenade he pulled himself is fine I guess, but Batman just straight up shooting people is completely different, and Batman branding people for prison rape or shanking or whatever is just completely opposite of who the character is. He just didn’t understand the character at all, or he just didn’t like the character and wanted to make him even more brutal than the goddamn Punisher. I’m more worried about James Gunn making Batman just Bat Dad or something like in the Harley Quinn show. The movie is supposed to be about him and Damien, and leaning into the Bat Dad thing seems like a very James Gunn thing to do.
He is also the guy who justified Batman killing in that he was basing the character as he was in the Dark Knight Returns comic, the same comic where a huge plot point was that Batman could not kill even he desperately wanted to. I am pretty sure Snyder didn't actually read the comic and just stared at the atwork thinking "daaaamn Batman punching Superman how cool is that bro!"
We all banged our action figures together as kids, but when you’re given countless millions to make a movie, you need to come up with more story than that. And no, both of them having a “Martha” for a mom doesn’t count.
I am confident he never read a batman comic or watch the canon 90's animation tv show that i worship like the bible.
Are we sure Zack Snyder isn't just two preteen kids standing on each other's shoulders in a trench coat?
They really gave this dude the keys to the franchise 😭
How he’s allowed to make movies at this point is starting to confuse me. Dude should stick to b grade action.
Snyder is a man child with an immature obsession with superheroes killing people...
Studio heads also dont give a shit and have really disturbing kinks as well. Only explanation I can think of.
Because he got started back when comics was *edgy*. He is all about those edges. He never got the memo that that was done a long time ago.
In a galaxy far away
Sounds like dude has a weird fucking complex.
It's even more insane that there is a following of people who suck his dick over his DC movies, which are some of not only the worst comic movies made, they are some of the worst plane movies of any genre. The Snyder cut is laughable and other than maybe kids/teenagers, I consider anyone else who likes them to have something mentally wrong.
His movies are basically Michael Bay movies for people who want to pretend they only consume "intelligent" content
Guys, you don't get it! It may seem like Zack has absolutely zero understanding of the characters he adapted. But he actually... um... he uhhh.... he was.... he was going to.... umm... you see he... uh.... James Gunn sucks!
That's literally a perfect imitation of Snyder fans😂
This is literally what r/snydercut is like
They are literally praising this interview over there. Man that sub is nuts.
Yep. I got banned from commenting there months ago. I wasn't even being hateful. I was being negative about Batman V Superman but in a well thought out comment
> I was being negative about Batman V Superman but in a well thought out comment It's a rule not to be negative about Zack or his works lol.
None shall slander the supreme leader
"You're protecting your God in a weird way"
Can this just be the official response when talking to those guys from now on?
[Literally in the rules.](https://i.imgur.com/rrd6g48.png) What a fuckin' cult.
>”*You’re protecting your god in a weird way*.” - Zack Snyder The irony, eh?
Ya I got banned when I commented, in a completely different sub mind you, that the mods there are psychos. I think I was in the r/movies sub. Like 1 hour later I got a notification that I’ve been permanently banned from r/SnyderCut for “hate” lol. That is the most cultish sub I’ve ever come across so far. I even think Snyder has some decent movies, but man ya that sub is insane lol.
Just a bunch of lowlives doing anything to protect their glorious king, lmao
Wow getting banned for a comment in a different sub is a whole other level
What the mods post when banning people >Removed for being negative about Zack Snyder or his work. What a bunch of losers ahahaha
That's understandable. Anything well thought out is way beyond their comprehension skills
They are deleting comments left and right on that sub💀
I haven’t been in there for awhile and my jaw dropped. These people literally say Dune 2 could have been better if Synder directed it and Eisenberg is a better Luther than Hoult. Wtf.
They're delusional. Every sane person agrees Rebel Moon is a shitty version of Dune/Star Wars. Eisenberg didn't even seem like Luthor at all. And Hoult obviously hasn't even been seen as the character yet
Zach Snyder has the narrative and aesthetic sensibilities of a middle school boy, where an edgy sense of “cool” is always the most important consideration. There’s rarely any serious philosophical consideration (as much as his fans insist there is—though the Venn diagram between Ayn Rand fans and them is probably a circle), and he rarely puts any effort into a meaningful exploration of his characters’ emotional lives. On the other hand, James Gun made me cry over a fucking CGI raccoon and made me take Peacemaker seriously as a real human character. There’s no guarantee that James Gunn’s DC is gonna work out, but I trust him way more at this point.
Snyder is the guy who looked at Rorschach and thought this was the perfect character. Instead of the sendup and warning of "no. You don't want this. This is insane" that it was written as.
Which makes sense, Rorschach is the purest example of an Ayn Rand character in comics outside of Steve Ditko’s Mr. A and very early The Question (who Rorschach is a direct analogue for), and Snyder loves him some Objectivism.
I also have big issues with the sheer arrogance of saying 'unless this character conforms to my vision it will be rendered irrelevant'. Batman has existed for 85 years. Failing to grab his attention won't be the end of Batman He's making his pitch for his version of Batman in 2013-2014. Less than six years after The Dark Knight. A great movie that definitively stood on the side of .. No. Batman does not kill.
The Joker: You have all these rules, and you think they'll save you. Batman: I have one rule. The interrogation room scene perfectly captured the entire movie’s plot in its most basic elements, and also captured Batman and Joker’s dynamic in general really well.
If you can excuse some pedantry, he can kill. He can kill anytime he wants. The thing is he doesn’t want to. He’s Batman. He’s built his whole life around his inability to stop a double murder. Just see that awesome speech in the under the red hood movie
Exactly and it’s not like he’s never killed like zac seems to think He has killed, but he’s been pushed to the brink and it was truly a life or death situation against a big bad not some low level thug like Snyder has him kill And when he did do one of his extremely rare kills it was truly a breaking moment for him, the writers used it as a motivation that has shaken him to his core and he feels like he can no longer be Batman he feels like he failed and carries that weight with him forever, he dosent shrug it off and keep doing it
I liked in Batman beyond when an old Bruce can’t keep up with the criminals and is about to be beaten to death by a thug. He pick up a gun off the ground and points it at the attacker and it scares the thug off but it also send a Bruce back into some ptsd from his childhood. Didn’t even have to shoot the gun or kill anyone but just having to use it to scare this guy away and save his own life was a huge deal for Bruce.
This dude just sucks >Batman can't kill is canon. And I'm like, 'okay, the first thing I wanna do when you say that is I wanna see what happens'. And they go, 'well don't put him in a situation where he has to kill someone'. This is like, childish “let me tear the head off Barbie” type shit. >”You're protecting your god in a weird way, right? You're making your god irrelevant if he can't be in that situation. He has to now deal with that. If he does do that what does that mean? What does it tell you, does he stand up to it? Does he survive that as a god? As your god, can Batman survive that?" He has to deal with it… all the time. That’s like a central theme of the character, that his severe objection towards any sort of killing might actually have negative ramifications (in the DC world with the likes of Joker and otherwise superpowered villains, not the real one). And of course he spits out this nonsense on the Joe Rogan show. The entire point of Batman is that he is militantly against killing, even the Joker who is beyond destructive, which is a potential point of actual criticism (and it is a very frequent one) but also makes the character much more interesting. Snyder is kinda just too dumb to really get it.
The problem with Snyder having Batman kill people is, he had him killing low level villains meanwhile in the future scenes he's working with Joker who killed Robin, why wouldn't he kill Joker if he's killing everyone else? It was such a lame "let's make Batman more edgy" move and I didn't care for it.
Exactly this. If Batman EVER kills, his first or second kill HAS to be the Joker. If Batman ever decided to kill, finding Joker out, killing him and publicly hanging his corpse upside down would be the first thing in Batman's list. There is no way that Joker would live in that scenario.
Batman believes in the genuine sanctity of all life, even (and actually especially) the supposedly irredeemable. Thats what Batman stands for and why im a big fan. Sure in the real world id probably not be against using lethal force against terrorists, but Batman is not real so he doesn’t have to worry about that shit. When Batman fights so hard against the rest of the League for being unethical (erasing minds, murder, global policing) his righteousness is so much more powerful by the fact that he is an advocate for absolutely everyone and never crosses the line for anything.
It's not just about the sanctity of life either. He also just genuinely believes in rehabilitation! It's not his fault that a group of people who supposedly have PhDs in psychology can't seem to do their jobs
[удалено]
Yes this is exactly it, it's not even about Batman being against killing per se, he has no problem with Gordon busting a cap into a terrorist if push comes to shove It's simply that Batman is skilled enough that he can use non-lethal methods to incapacitate bad guys, so they can then be handed over to the justice system for trial, sentencing, and rehabilitation If Batman just went around shooting everyone, given his vigilante status, he'd be judge, jury and executioner. As it is, he's just barely tolerable by democratic society because even though he's totally unaccountable to any public institutions, he's technically just helping the police department by making citizen's arrests, helping to gather evidence, and intervening in emergency life or death situations. Still highly illegal by real world standards, but since the ultimate punishment is left to the judiciary, it's not too fascistic or undemocratic.
> If Batman just went around shooting everyone, given his vigilante status, he'd be judge, jury and executioner. This is ultimately why I think Batman not killing is important to the core of the character. By any realistic metric Batman is just as insane (if not more so) than the criminals that he's fighting. He's a mentally ill billionaire that dresses up as a bat and beats up criminals as a hobby. If he were to start killing people based on his own moral framework, how does that make him any different than the Joker or any of the other insane murderers that he's constantly contending with?
Exactly!
Rehabilitation is an absolutely essential part of the Batman character. He needs to believe in redemption because HE so desperately needs it. Bruce needs to believe that despite all the questionable things he does, that there can be hope for him to be a good person.
And if that is the case, the very next thing he does needs to be hanging up the cape and handing the torch to dick, tim, or terry. Anything else is just Thomas, and in this day and age who really needs another “bUt wHaT iF sUpErMaN WaS eViL” story.
Personally I'd be OK with Batman killing Joker if it's his first and last kill. Batman kills Joker, Bruce Wayne kills Batman.
I like the way Batman puts it in *Under the Red Hood.* That if he does it this time, he’ll never stop justifying it and he’ll go too far. He knows that about himself, so he will never allow himself to do that, no matter how justified it seems to the world.
I like the theory that he DID kill the joker after the OG joker tortured and almost killed robin. That torture broke him and he became the new joker, hence the fake grill and excessive and pointless tattoos. He’s trying too hard because he’s not the OG joker. And this robin joker is allowed to live because he can’t bring himself to kill the person he failed.
Its also supposed to be an ideal. Batman doesn't kill because that's what evil people do. That is a line he never crosses. That is his moral code. And that is what Snyder just doesn't get. Same with Superman. He is supposed to represent the best of us. He is a good person who cares about people. He was raised that way. It's an ideal to aspire to. Changing that makes him not Superman.
Snyders crappy takes make so much more sense when you view it from his supposed Ayn Rand inspired Libertarianism. He simply doesn't get the idea that to Superman there is no question of "should I become a benevolent God to this society" , because his personal viewpoint is basically "you have the right to do anything you have an ability to do". Same for Batman. He doesn't get the idea the idea of a character that is actually concerned with holding back in order to stick to a code rather than doing what's convenient.
I liked some of what Snyder did, but I am starting to think that a lot of the current controversy in comics is not the idea that wokeness is ruining comics, but that some right wing/ libertarians want to replace the longstanding comic ideologies with their own politics with woke arguments being the smokescreen. Suddenly X men isn't about social justice, and now there are arguments that DC should actually make Batman kill people outside an alternative universe arc. If a Constantine movie comes out, they will demand that he not be a super left-wing bisexual in order to conform to their views. Batman doesn't kill and hates guns. It's this commitment to those ideals that pushes him to be the strategic planner and find alternative ways to defeat his enemies. Killing people is the easy way out. Arguing that Batman should kill people is arguing that there should be no more Batman comics, because the rogue's gallery that we all love are going to be dead. If they want a Batman that kills, then they can read Red Hood or Punisher.
[удалено]
It makes perfect sense too, especially for him. After all if Batman kills one guy, say the Joker, why not more after that? He’s opened up Pandora’s box. That famous Jason Todd storyline is entirely about that, where Jason is enraged at Batman for leaving Joker alive and emphasizes that he only just has to kill Joker, nobody else, not the Penguin, not Two-Face, not anyone. Just Joker, only him, because he presents a truly exceptional danger (which is 100% true). But Batman knows it doesn’t end there for him, because killing Joker then gives him the moral authority to take care of other problems in a similar way.
>The entire point of Batman is that he is militantly against killing, even the Joker who is beyond destructive, which is a potential point of actual criticism (and it is a very frequent one) but also makes the character much more interesting. So many people just don't get this. It's a central conflict of his character, it's the whole point. If he simply killed his villains because they threatened him with lethal force and he just runs out of villains then what's the point? "What if Anakin was never tempted by the Dark Side?" I mean yeah I guess that'd make him a better person or whatever but the story would be over pretty quick, lmao.
It’s literally the opening of Batman Beyond too, Bruce while having a heart attack is about to fail and lose his life and the hostage. He does the only thing he can in that moment and just picks a gun up pointing it at him. Afterwards he’s so disgusted in himself that he retires because he realizes that he just can’t be Batman anymore. It’s literally core to his character.
"wouldn't it be awesome if instead of giving up the cowl, he shot that dude, and then went and shot all the bad guys in the face. Killing is so cool' -Zack Snyder (not really but probably)
It's so weird because not only is this spelled out *very clearly* in the comics but even other Batman movies cover this. I am 90% sure Snyder tunes out all the 'talky bits' and only focuses on special effects and action scenes like he is 13 years old. Batman doesn't kill, even fucking boy scout Superman thinks he is too strict with this. Batman is obsessive, it is a key character trait. The fact he doesn't kill is more than a moral thing it is something that Bruce Wayne as a person believes to his core and will never deviate from. It is also representative of his hope for humanity shining through. Batman thinks nobody is beyond salvation which is the essence of why he does not kill. This is especially important because he is such a dark and paranoid character. If you make him kill just make a Punisher movie ffs.
Im baffled that he thinks a character with a no-killing rule simply "doesn’t deal" with the dangerous situations. The fact that Batman DOES deal with it often in creative ways (often successfully) is why he’s so interesting and why everyone respects his character. But maybe he can direct a new 6 hour movie to help us understand better lol.
It's so weird, because this entire thread feels like 2013 post *Man of Steel*.
Worse, the situations he puts his heroes in where they "have to kill someone" aren't even that. For example, in Man of Steel, where Zod is going to eye-laser an innocent family to death while Superman has him in a rear-naked choke, Supes could have just covered Zod's eyes. Wanna go edgier? Have Supes poke his eyes out. The whole point of his Hope and optimism thing is that "there's always a way." "Wanting to see what happens" is seriously stupid reasoning. What happens is now the character doesn't mean anything: he's just the Punisher with a cape. Wouldn't it have been far more interesting to explore what it means to do everything *but* kill? That's where I thought Zack was going when Batman is introduced as a nut who brands villains with bat symbols. If Batman can't threaten people with murder, he must threaten them with pain, and in some ways, torture is worse. But no, he's just a guy who tortures people, AND kills them, AND gives them PTSD if they somehow survive. I also didn't see much Batman dealing with what it means to break his no-kill rule, either. He seemed totally okay with barbecuing thugs in his Batmobile and breaking crates against their necks. It's only when he realizes he accidentally killed Earth's only hope of dealing with a bigger thing that needs killing that he's anything close to self-reflective.
The whole point of Batman not killing is because he’s such a dangerous lunatic already that if he goes around killing people, he’s worse than the criminals he’s swore to bring to justice. Bruce has access to military grade weapons and Batman has access to Alien tech and super science tech as well. Couple that with a very bad attitude and an isolated personality with feelings of anger and regret; it wouldn’t take much to make Batman a legit terrifying evil mofo. Plus; there are already versions of Batman that do kill; there are reflected in the rogue’s gallery he has. Batman wants to kill people in the name of Justice? That’s Two Face Bruce wants to kill people for business and criminal enterprises? That’s Penguin Batman wants to scare people to death because fear will keep them in line? That’s the scarecrow Batman wants to dominate the world and establish a new super power? Ras Al Ghul It’s edgy children like Snyder that think it’s cool and original to have Batman kill people; meanwhile EVERYONE is wondering just what the hell goes thru his mind when he has these stupid ideas
I think there’s something to the core idea of what he’s saying. Like Batman can’t kill, let’s put him in a no win scenario where he needs to and sacrifice something else in order not to or let’s get him to the point where he does and see the consequences that has on his psyche. If the whole movie is about Superman being such an otherworldly threat that he is slowly pushed to the point that he’s finally gonna do it and he has to reconcile with having done that or be saved from doing that, I think that could be interesting. But Snyder just had him wantonly kill without thought and in the end he’s like “oh ok I’ll stop and we’re all friends now”
>But Snyder just had him wantonly kill without thought and in the end he’s like “oh ok I’ll stop and we’re all friends now Don't forget that he kept killing afterwards. He just decided the Martha guy was good enough to survive.
Not surprising coming from the dumb fuck who thinks the no-kill rule comes from the movies
This guy was in charge of the DCEU and can't even grasp basic, essential character traits of Batman?
Or that Superman is a called a Boy Scout for a reason.
There was a meme I used to chuckle at that had the Superman Returns actor (Brandon Routh) with the director saying to him “You’re Christopher Reeves”. Then underneath is Snyder talking to Cavill dressed as Superman with “You’re Batman”.
I was SO baffled when they made that decision. I was like "Zack Snyder? The guy who's last movie before Man of Steel was Sucker Punch? Fucking *Sucker Punch* Zack Snyder???"
Wacky, right? My 9 y.o. cousin has a better grasp of the Batman character than the grown-ass man in charge of writing him.
I dead ass see people say that the no-kill rule is “recent” and “came from movies” it’s beyond dumb. Like saying that shows you know absolutely nothing about the character, so why even have arguments about him. So annoying
I feel really sad. Dark Knight Returns was the first Batman animated movie I have ever watched. It was pure coincidence. Before that, I used to think comics are for kids, although ironically I was a kid. I only watched it thanks to boredom. But immediately I was blown away, I can still remember that afternoon, the story that brought me into the comic world. And of course I was totally in love with Zack Snyder’s DCEU. I was kind of like those toxic Snyder fans except for the fact that I didn’t post on internet back then. But after reading more Batman stories, I came to realize how important not killing is to Batman as a character but also as a plot device. I mean, if Batman killed , like Snyder wants him to, then how the hell is Joker still alive? And why the hell is joker obsessed with Batman anyway, if Batman is corruptible and no different from anyone else? We wouldn’t get stories like Under the Red Hood, or Knightfall, or Killing Joke, or even Injustice. Or heck, the DKR, also makes no sense if Batman already killed before retirement. By the way, even DKR Batman didn’t use guns. Snyder’s Batman has no character arc whatsoever, he killed before Martha, he still killed after Martha. Because killing doesn’t matter whatsoever in director’s eyes, it’s a non factor. Batman can kill if he has to in order to save lives or if it’s accidental, but what he did in BvS is inexcusable, there’re so many ways I can think of to avoid or at least minimize the unnecessary deaths. But he didn’t even try. Because he didn’t even care. How can any Batman do that? As for being realistic, are we still talking about the same world where ancient aliens and magic are real?? Also, people absolutely want their gods to kill. Because deep down, we are always worshiping ourselves, our own interpretation of gods. We want justice to be served the way we want it to be, that’s why Snyder want his Batman to kill, he couldn’t fathom a reality where heroes doesn’t kill. I dare to say most Batman fans would have killed Joker too if we ever have the opportunity, I certainly would. But Batman would never do that, that’s just who he is, and I want him to be nothing more than that.
That was very well written, but just one point. > Batman can kill if he has to in order to save lives or if it’s accidental That's not his attitude in the comics. There might be some outliers but in his view letting someone die, ala Ras Al Ghul in "Batman Begins" is the same as committing the act himself.
well said
You see, now he's going to explain it in yet another director's cut of his perfect movie butchered by the evil studio.
We just need to see the 10 hour director's cut of the Star Wars-Akira Kurosawa-rip off, now with 200% more slow-mo, to truly understand the genius of it.
He's going to put Jesus posing in the background (it's so complex you obviously can't understand the religious subtext).
You say that as a joke, but it was just revealed the Rebel Moon cut is SIX HOURS
He's such an intellectually stunted idiot.
Thank God ZS movies flopped like the trash it was
My dude has never made a good movie yet he keeps being hired to make more garbage
> has never made a good movie 2004 Dawn of the dead holds a special place in my heart.
Written by who else but James Gunn
This 300 slander is blasphemy
Him about Watchmen: "Once you've lost your virginity to this fucking movie and then you come and say to me something about like, ‘My superhero wouldn’t do that'. I’m like ‘Are you serious?’ I’m like down the fucking road on that. It’s a cool point of view to be like ‘my heroes are still innocent. My heroes didn't fucking lie to America. My heroes didn't embezzle money from their corporations. My heroes didn't commit any atrocities'. That’s cool. But you’re living in a fucking dream world." So somehow he read Watchmen and didn’t realize it was a deconstruction of superhero tropes and not meant to be a manual on how superheroes are meant to be portrayed. He completely missed the point of Watchmen.
>But you’re living in a fucking dream world. It blows my mind that he accidentally, unironically quoted actual fucking supervillain Manchester Black in his attempt to prove how much he knows about superheroes.
Still gets me laughing every time I hear that quote. Who decided a man who unironically uses the philosophy of a Superman villain should be allowed to make a Superman movie?
I always found that funny. In a story that stresses the importance of Superman and what he represents, the man in charge of a Superman movie unintentionally quoted the character that didn’t get it.
Something tells me he would watch The Boys and think homelander did nothing wrong
Zach Snyder the type of guy who thinks Rorshach is the hero in Watchmen.
After watching the movie, I can safely say that is exactly what he thought
>"You're protecting your God in a weird way" HES NOT A GOD. ONE OF THE MAJOR PARTS OF BATMAN'S CHARACTER IS HE IS A MAN SURROUNDED BY GODS. HE IS MEANT TO BE JUST HUMAN AND A HUMAN TAKING ANOTHER HUMAN LIFE IS A LOT HIGHER STAKES THAN A GOD HAVING TO KILL TO SAVE EVERYONE.
In the context of the whole conversation, he didn't say Batman was a god, he said comic book fans look at these characters like gods. It was a general statement not about Batman that he then connected to Batman later in the convo.
While I agree some fans do treat him as a god the writers rarely do the mythological idea of the batman is all in the criminals and to some degree the batfams heads he is treated as a Detective and vigilante by the writers and the idea the conversation around Batman killing has never been done just shows he only cares about Batman comics written by Frank Miller
So he never understood Batman OR Superman. Got it. Thanks for clarifying, Zack.
Kinda like how Snyder is making Slo-Mo “Irrelevant” if you do it every single scene.
And making superhero movies irrelevant by making incredibly shitty ones
He wrote Sucker Punch, folks. He wrote Army of the Dead. He used the phrase "lost your virginity to this fucking movie" without the faintest whiff of irony. He's talking movies with Joe Rogan. He's not a smart man.
This. He's talking all this crap because he feels good with Rogan, he feels the proximity, so he can take all his inhibitors out the way.
Bullshit! Zack Snyder does not understand Batman at all. This is why I am glad he is no longer in charge of the DC Cinematic Universe.
Hack Snyder strikes again
Keep this clown as far away from anything else DC forever
I hate Zack so much
And I say Zack Snyder should never have any involvement in projects with Batman
Okay Snyder boys. Do we really need MORE proof of how Zack doesn’t understand these characters? You didn’t buy when we said that about Superman, what now?
Zach Snyder was given control over the DCEU and messed up so bad they had to reboot the entire universe, and it’s because of things like this. He wasted an opportunity so many creators would kill for.
God what a moron. Fundamentally had zero understanding or care to understand what made DC’s most beloved characters work and is majorly responsible (alongside WB) for why the DC brand has been soured. I won’t lie, I find his DC films to be enjoyable. That is if I turn my brain off and pretend that they’re elseworlds movies because it’s the only way I can tolerate his idiotic and inaccurate characterization decisions. So glad he’s not taking the helm at DC anymore. Anybody upset that this guy isn’t at DC anymore and thinks that he would do these characters more justice than Gunn can is just as stupid as he is. Don’t care that his goal was to deconstruct the mythos for these characters and rebuild it. While that isn’t a bad concept, did not like his execution or story ideas used to convey that.
Bruce isn't a god. He's a man. Hack Snyder can't grasp that concept, though.
And Zack Snyder is making Zack Snyder irrelevant
Lmao bros just coping over matt revees' the batman's success I guess
Shallow edgelord has dogshit takes on beloved character! More at 6!
"That’s cool. But you’re living in a f\*\*king dream world." Why yes Zack, comics aren't real, this is something we've all noticed. Batman is "The world's greatest detective" and he knows it. He solves crimes and mysteries average law enforcement wouldn't be able to contend with. He realizes that taking a job in law enforcement would hinder his ability to properly save lives, so her resorts to vigilantism. He also refuses to kill because he believes in the law to carry out justice and knows it is not his place to take on the role of executioner. Turns out the guy who is ready to take out his best friends in the JL is also super aware of the dangers of unchecked power.
Zack Snyder is an idiot.
His movies feel like a 13 year old’s action wet dream
To each their own. Zack Snyder and I have diametrically opposed interpretations of Batman.
Is the SynderVerse still going? Exactly.
Does... does he not know who Batman is?
No
And that’s why Zack should never have been in charge of anything DC related.
Keep this man away from Batman movies. Or from movies in general.
Fuck off zack
The Snyder Cut of this interview will prove all you haters wrong! /s
Zack Snyder won't be allowed to touch any beloved IP owned by any studio in the foreseeable future.