They trusted him to direct Man of Steel, Batman vs. Superman AND Justice League. And just now they're realizing this isn't the guy for the job. They should've known after Man of Steel. He just has an incredibly shallow style of film-making.
sharePeople love the look of Snyder's films. He rocked with 300, Watchmen had a great design, as did Sucker Punch. Then they slapped Christopher Nolan on as producer and I feel like they felt that Nolan would act as a rudder and basically magically turn Superman into a rebirthed phenomenon the way Nolan made Batman one of the hottest film franchises in the 2000s.
shareGreat summary; Snyder has a lot of talent for visual design and had a good amount of good graces and success going into Man of Steel. combine him with Nolan and you basically got a winning combination. But Snyder and his design was a bad fit for superman, who is more colorful, also combine that with a modern 'trend' of thinking that dark and brooding = good and you get the results that are in Man of Steel. Man of Steel wasn't terrible per-say but it did not feel at all like superman.
Then when you move on from there Warner Bros basically trying to rush and 'force' a DCEU to compete with Marvel (but without taking the time to build it through ground work) you get the results that we got.
I think Snyder might have been 'okay' if the studio didn't interfere so much and also there was more of a collaborative effort (have a Batman film with a different director before moving into Batman Vs Superman for example). Despite the criticisms of the Marvel films being 'simple' are true, the way they framed the "phases" and built the Avengers like a TV series with Finales was absolutely brilliant from a technical and financial side of it. They produce a 'safe' and comfortable 2 to 2.5 hours of entertainment every single film (just about). Snyder was never good at that sort of design.
Then they slapped Christopher Nolan on as producer and I feel like they felt that Nolan would act as a rudder and basically magically turn Superman into a rebirthed phenomenon the way Nolan made Batman one of the hottest film franchises in the 2000s
I think the problem was twofold:
1. As arflexit pointed out above, they were in a rush to compete with Marvel. Marvel had built a groundwork that they built on to develop their universe. DC just wanted to match it, but without the organic growth at the ground level, they keep fumbling and it always feels weird. It smacks of desperation. "We've got an extended universe, too! Guys? Guys...?"
2. Part of the reason Nolan was successful with Batman was because he kept the dark, gloomy, brooding atmosphere and world of the Dark Knight intact. As so many do, DC confused "gritty" with "good art". So they pushed this "edgy, brooding" Superman. Superman is a spit-curl and a smile. He's primary colours. He's Gleam incarnate. His pain comes from his loneliness and his inability to save everybody (actually masterfully done by Superman Returns, a mixed-bag film, but that scene where he's floating with Lois is POWERFUL). But he doesn't carry it around and dwell on it. He isn't about his pain.
If they'd set out to just tell a really great Superman story and worried about the franchise-ability later, they would have done better. If they hadn't pushed gloom onto the property, it could have been what it needed to be -artistically speaking - instead of feeling false and weird.
Yeah but that really didn't happen did it. A Superman movie were everyone would be better off and alive. Is not a good Superman movie. The last thing Superman needed was becoming a clone of Batman. Superman is about hope and optimism. Batman is about pain and justice.
shareThat's a pretty good summary of it, yeah. Superman doesn't need to be "edgy".
I'm not sure what you mean by, "A Superman movie were everyone would be better off and alive. Is not a good Superman movie."
[deleted]
Like Michael Bay "Those aren't ideas, those are special effects".
shareI wouldn't say his film-making is shallow at all. I think that he's just not the best writer. He would be so much better if he just left that for someone else. I'm a Snyder fan and I could defend many of his creative choices, but some are worth criticizing. I completely understand the criticism of Superman's depiction as a warrior, rather than a guardian. I loved the Snyder Cut, but the would-be love triangle between Clark, Lois, and Bruce that was set up is a bullet dodged.
I think he decides what his movies will look like before or as he writes them. Again, a I'm fan, but that's never good. If someone else was in charge of the writing and overall story of the DCEU and Snyder was tasked with bringing it to the screen he'd have been a great choice.
If someone else was in charge of the writing and overall story of the DCEU and Snyder was tasked with bringing it to the screen he'd have been a great choice.
>> They should've known after Man of Steel. He just has an incredibly shallow style of film-making. <<
No kidding! I'm tired of hearing the propaganda that WB was "listening to the fans" by releasing this jackass's 4-hour version of Justice League. IF WB had actually "listened to the fans", they would have FIRED this guy after Man of Steel under-performed and got WORSE reviews than the film it was made to "reboot" (Superman Returns).
Snyderites certainly don't represent "the fans" as a whole, they are a small but vocal MINORITY of fans on the internet.