QuoteBut for me, it definitely made him more relevant and closer to the comic book version (52 era).
Spot on. This guy isn't the Christopher Reeves guy. He's not the John Byrne guy. I think a lot of the criticism leveled at MoS (and DoJ) was from movie-core fans and casual readers of event comics. And there's nothing wrong with that, by the way - I don't read comics regularly, but I made a point of following the New 52 for about a year or so to see what all the kerfuffle was about.
Both MoS and DoJ are divisive movies. Some would say they're shit movies - especially DoJ. I can honestly see both sides of the argument - I loved both films and I've seen them multiple times, whereas (because the Marvel comparison is always made), I watch Avengers or Iron Man once and forget about them. They're good but they're not particularly thought provoking and don't invite debate - they are what they say on the tin - fun, entertaining movies.
Snyder and Co, I think, are guilty of too much fan service. People on this forum have - for years - picked over the bones of various aspects of A/P movies... its pretty clear to me that Snyder (whatever you think of his talents) knows his source material.
So for massive fans of the DCU, there's a tonne of stuff in these films to tweak your nerdy buttons. The motherbox, the Flashpoint references, the Omega... all these things have been mentioned here. Fans get it.
But that doesn't necessarily make for a good experience for everyone else who found it confusing and / or dull.
I read a lot that "Snyder doesn't understand the character of Superman." This is unfair - I think he totally understands the character of this generation's Superman. But its not the character that some people seem to want. Conversely, Bryan Singer served up the character that we all knew and loved, but he was labelled boring and a creepy stalker and that Singer payed too much reverence to Richard Donner's take.
What is very clear is that WB haven't been able to nail the universal success of Disney in bringing these characters to the big screen. But as I say, Disney movies very safe movies that follow the Blake Snyder formula to a T. And that formula works like a charm - every time.
It's interesting to me that in the fallout over BvS there were millions upon millions of words written about it. My Facebook feed was cracking under the weight of commentary - for and against. With Civil War - its come, its made loads of money, and it'll go. But no one's really talking about it. Cos there's nothing really to talk about. It delivered. End of story. Which is what Disney does - but I don't think the MCU films are particularly thought provoking or interesting.
The DC ones are - or at least seem to be, given the amount of column inches (or whatever the internet equivalent is) they've generated.
Warners gave Snyder the job of creating the strategy and the tactical delivery - its pretty clear given the appointment of Geoff Johns and the other chap who's name escapes me that they have baulked. Snyder has had two strikes and not really delivered fiscally even if he has served up two nerdily fancore pleasing movies.
But as I say, its not fair to level the not understanding the source material crime at his door - he evidently does.
I don't have a case to defend on DoJ - I loved it but I see why many didn't. But even for me, it could have been better... and that is a bit of a crime in a Superman vs Batman movie... and the Martha bit was bad. Really bad - even if it does show that Snyder knows his DC lore. Should have just said "his mother" - it would have had the same humanising effect.
Ultimately, though, I don't think Warners will quit on the DCEU. I think all these films will make money, which is the name of game.
