PDA

View Full Version : Zack Snyder on Superman?



cworkman
10-04-2010, 11:49 PM
Multiple outlets are now reporting that Zack Snyder will indeed be directing the new Superman film. I'm personally a fan of Snyder's; I liked DAWN OF THE DEAD and loved both 300 and WATCHMAN. I doubt I'll be seeing LEGEND OF THE GUARDIANS though; I'm just not that into digital kidz flicks. (When it comes out on DVD and I see it sitting on the shelf at the library, I might pick it up and give it a shot.)

Ehren H.
10-05-2010, 12:58 PM
One of the few times I disagree with ya, Chris. I think Snyder is Brett Ratner with delusions of grandeur. Dawn was alright, I hated 300, and I refuse to see Watchmen (Alan Moore's anger at it being made, along with all my friends who were diehard fans of the graphic novel that told me to stay away made an impression, plus I've not really liked anything else the man has done).

So count me out for Superman. Then again, I wasn't a fan of Singer's Superman flick either, though.

Terry Carpenter
10-05-2010, 01:41 PM
Will this be a reboot? Or a continuation of the first two?

MatthewA
10-05-2010, 02:12 PM
RE:"Snyder is Brett Ratner with delusions of grandeur."

Couldn't agree more.

Troy Howarth
10-05-2010, 02:16 PM
The only Snyder film I've seen is Dawn... it was OK, but didn't impress me that much.

Daniel M
10-05-2010, 03:24 PM
A Zach Snyder-directed Superman will have enough CGI to make TRANSFORMERS look like it was made by the Shaw Bros. in 1975.

Count me out, completely out, for this one.

cworkman
10-05-2010, 03:55 PM
Unlike Ratner, Snyder's films tend to have a story, and that's important. So I can't agree with that particular comparison. I can understand why the CGI is a turnoff, and I only hope that Snyder doesn't insist on making Superman all digital when flying like Singer did.

I loved WATCHMEN, both the DC maxi-series as well as the movie adaptation. They're very close; one thing Snyder does, almost to a fault, is stay true to his source material.

This will be neither a reboot nor a continuation. According to Nolan and Goyer (producer and screenwriter), they aren't interested in retelling Superman's origin, but neither are they interested in making sequels to the original two Superman movies (Singer did that and it bombed). They're just interested in telling a standalone Superman story with lots of action, romance, and fighting, like the comic book. So they've told us to definitely expect Superman to throw punches this time around, unlike in that piece of shit that is SUPERMAN RETURNS.

Daniel M
10-05-2010, 03:58 PM
I guess you haven't heard of "hyperbole."

The only thing worse than learning Zach Snyder is directing a Superman movie is learning Zach Snyder is directing a Superman movie from a David S. Goyer script.

This recipe for disinterest could only get better if Michael Bay were exec. producing or Platinum Dunes were kicking in some financing.

RichardDoyle
10-05-2010, 05:11 PM
Unlike Ratner, Snyder's films tend to have a story, and that's important.

"Red Dragon" didn't have a story?

"300" had a story?

Seriously though, although I detest "300" with a red-hot burning passion, I liked "Dawn of the Dead" and most of "Watchman", so this isn't terrible news.

I don't like Superman though, so probably don't care much in the first place.

Daniel M
10-05-2010, 05:14 PM
I liked RED DRAGON.

I also love MANHUNTER, but it was nice to see Harris' ending properly brought to the screen.

Scott MacDonald
10-05-2010, 05:19 PM
I actually really like Snyder, I haven't seen Dawn..., but 300 was a great theatrical movie (haven't felt the need to revisit on home video). I am a fan of the Watchmen graphic novel, and felt the movie was not only a great adaptation, but also managed to capture the essence of what Watchmen was. The only major change was the ending, and the way they did that worked really well. I don't understand all the hate for the film, I think it's one of the best comic films EVER made.

Also, Alan Moore disowns every film that's based on his work so his opinion on a film he refuses to see really doesn't affect me watching it. V was actually pretty good, and so was From Hell.

Alex K.
10-05-2010, 05:20 PM
Hey, how about Superman fights someone other than Lex Luthor? That whole angle is tired out. I'm not a fan of Superman at all, but I did like the animated Superman Doomsday which was really graphic and superior to all of the Live Action films.

Steven Millan
10-05-2010, 06:34 PM
I actually really like Snyder, I haven't seen Dawn..., but 300 was a great theatrical movie (haven't felt the need to revisit on home video). I am a fan of the Watchmen graphic novel, and felt the movie was not only a great adaptation, but also managed to capture the essence of what Watchmen was. The only major change was the ending, and the way they did that worked really well. I don't understand all the hate for the film, I think it's one of the best comic films EVER made.

Also, Alan Moore disowns every film that's based on his work so his opinion on a film he refuses to see really doesn't affect me watching it. V was actually pretty good, and so was From Hell.


The hate for this film comes from being that the film is too long(at three hours)and the ending absolutely stinks,otherwise Jackie Earle Haley was surprisingly the best thing about the film(and I really wanted to like that film),for they should have made a solo film about Haley's character instead.

cworkman
10-05-2010, 06:35 PM
"Red Dragon" didn't have a story?

"300" had a story?

Seriously though, although I detest "300" with a red-hot burning passion, I liked "Dawn of the Dead" and most of "Watchman", so this isn't terrible news.

I don't like Superman though, so probably don't care much in the first place.

Wow, you're smart enough that you can make a comparison between two individual films but can't seem to compare filmmakers entire bodies of work. Why am I not surprised?

Steven Millan
10-05-2010, 06:37 PM
I guess you haven't heard of "hyperbole."

The only thing worse than learning Zach Snyder is directing a Superman movie is learning Zach Snyder is directing a Superman movie from a David S. Goyer script.

This recipe for disinterest could only get better if Michael Bay were exec. producing or Platinum Dunes were kicking in some financing.


Since Zach Snyder's films are becoming more heavily reliant on CGI,it doesn't surprise me to hear this news,for he can't do no worse than Bryan Singer did with his extremely terrible SUPERMAN film,and I'm also interested on whether Snyder will continue Singer's storyline or go for a completely different direction(such as a gratuitious reboot,ala SPIDERMAN).

cworkman
10-05-2010, 06:37 PM
Hey, how about Superman fights someone other than Lex Luthor? That whole angle is tired out. I'm not a fan of Superman at all, but I did like the animated Superman Doomsday which was really graphic and superior to all of the Live Action films.

In the new film, the villain is apparently going to be General Zod rather than Lex Luthor. I'm with you on this, though; I don't mind Lex having a minor part in a Superman film (as long as it isn't anything like the interpretation we see in SUPERMAN THE MOVIE and SUPERMAN II). But I do not want Lex to be the main villain in any Superman movie for a long time to come.

Scott MacDonald
10-05-2010, 06:38 PM
I actually disagree, I feel the ending fits the story as it were told. And three hours is not a dealbreaker for me, I have been meaning to pick up the Blu for some time, and I've been contemplating the ultimate cut.

Also, can't wait for Sucker Punch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSIetIg7O3M

Oh yeah, and alledgedly the villain will be General Zod.

cworkman
10-05-2010, 06:40 PM
Since Zach Snyder's films are becoming more heavily reliant on CGI,it doesn't surprise me to hear this news,for he can't do no worse than Bryan Singer did with his extremely terrible SUPERMAN film,and I'm also interested on whether Snyder will continue Singer's storyline or go for a completely different direction(such as a gratuitious reboot,ala SPIDERMAN).

Warner wants an entirely new film that has nothing to do with Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS, which they see as an economic failure (though it still made quite a bit of money).

About the earlier point concerning Goyer, I agree that, when he isn't edited by someone better, his scripts stink. But when he is edited, they aren't too bad. In this case, he's working very closely with Christopher Nolan, so I expect the script to be pretty good.

cworkman
10-05-2010, 08:15 PM
I wish they'd gone with Brainiac rather than General Zod. I'm a bit 'zodded' out right now, what with him being the primary villain last season on SMALLVILLE. Doomsday or Darkseid would have been cool too, but at least it ain't Lex.

John G.
10-05-2010, 09:49 PM
Haven't liked any of Snyder's films... 300 was fun on the big screen but when I revisited it on DVD I was astounded at how utterly annoying, stupid and shrill I found it, perhaps the most dramatic 180 I've ever had from a first-to-second viewing. Snyder is all flash and no substance (as WATCHMEN ultimately proved).

cworkman
10-05-2010, 10:30 PM
Proved to you; I felt it very true to the comic series (except for a few minor points here and there), and therefore had about as much substance as Alan Moore's original story.

Alex K.
10-05-2010, 10:34 PM
I thought Watchmen was all right. I disliked the changes in the 3rd act compared to the book (where's the Squid?). And I really hated some of the slow-mo shots he did, because they didn't add anything to the story. However, they guy has a great eye for visuals, and is responsible for excellent montages.

John G.
10-05-2010, 11:36 PM
I disliked the changes in the 3rd act compared to the book (where's the Squid?).
This was the biggest fuck-up, IMO. I left the theater really annoyed with the film.

John G.
10-05-2010, 11:39 PM
therefore had about as much substance as Alan Moore's original story.
I disagree completely... I can't remember who said it here (Wostry maybe) but Alan Moore's work is a deconstruction and Snyder's film is not. I thought that this said it perfectly... many have argued that Moore's book is unfilmable, and I think the movie proves this.

Ehren H.
10-06-2010, 11:33 AM
Gilliam licensed Watchmen back in the day, and couldn't find a way to effectively bring it to the screen, apparently he was friends with Moore and contacted him for advice on how to adapt it. Moore said, "Don't." and heeded it. Personally, I put more far more stock in Gilliam than Snyder.

Also, the dude has directed what, two movies? And he had the nerve to actually bill himself as the "visionary" on the ads for Watchmen? I'm for showmanship but thats BALLS right there.

And I'm going 100% on hearsay here, because I never bothered to watch Watchmen (Who watches the Watchmen?...pun so intended), but with the fact Gilliam walked yeeeaaaars ago, combined with the fact that Snyder's track record has not impressed me at all, and that all the diehard fans of the comic who I knew that saw it said that somehow Snyder captured the visual element perfectly but somehow missed all of Moore's anarchistic subtext, which is a HUGE part of Watchmen (and V, they nailed it well onscreen in my opinion), so, in conclusion...I will probably never see the flick.

Can't they just rerelease Quest for Peace to theatres? *ducks incoming projectiles from Superman fans*

Troy Howarth
10-06-2010, 11:44 AM
Well, in fairness, would he have had anything to do with the way they billed him on the poster?

Ehren H.
10-06-2010, 11:54 AM
Well, in fairness, would he have had anything to do with the way they billed him on the poster?

After the money 300 made, probably. Him and Ratner are Bay 2.0. They're Hollywood's darlings. They make loud, bombastic, ridiculously expensive movies that unfathomably (to me) rake in hundreds of millions of bucks. I can absolutely see him pushing for that. And I can easily see them agreeing. I mean, 300 made a KILLING.

I remember distinctly seeing the Watchmen trailer for the first time and it opened with, "From the visionary director of 300", I couldn't believe it. Whether it was him, the studio, or whoever...that's just tacky. If he's a modern day visionary, the state of cinema is fucked.

Troy Howarth
10-06-2010, 12:05 PM
You may well be right. Like I said, I only have Dawn to go by - and I wasn't much taken with that film. Some of the acting was good, but it was all bombast and little else.

Ehren H.
10-06-2010, 12:09 PM
You may well be right. Like I said, I only have Dawn to go by - and I wasn't much taken with that film. Some of the acting was good, but it was all bombast and little else.

I thought it had some interesting ideas, I like what Gunn did with the script (sans a few lame characters, but I haven't read Gunn's original script so I can't blame him for it...yet haha) Also, Sarah Polley is an amazing actress. It just seemed to have none of the grit, and subtext a film like that should have. Just seemed hollow. That said, I own the flick and like it drastically more than I did 300.

cworkman
10-06-2010, 05:42 PM
Snyder had nothing to do with that ad, and he's directed more than just two movies, three of which I like a lot, one of which I haven't seen.

I didn't like the removal of the octopedal creature, I admit, but outside of that (and a reference in the comic to "a Monogram villain" changed to "a comic book villain"), there really aren't any major changes; if anything, the film proves that the book is filmable.

By the way, I can't imagine Terry Gilliam directing a version of this story. He's very unique and very visionary, but visually speaking, it would have been his story and would have looked nothing like Moore's/Gibbons' series. Then it really wouldn't have been faithful, unlike the 99% faithful version we got.

Daniel M
10-06-2010, 08:58 PM
Zach Snyder is a polarizing figure; in that sense a Michael Bay comparison is apt.

I will give Snyder credit for one thing - To my knowledge, he does not maintain a forum where his fans can stroke his ego 24/7.

cworkman
10-06-2010, 09:03 PM
Snyder is polarizing, which I'd expect given his penchant for using CGI, something I normally detest but find refreshing when Snyder does it. I simply cannot stand in any way, shape, or form Michael Bay...

John G.
10-06-2010, 10:05 PM
Michael Bay sucks but Snyder hasn't done anything as entertaining as THE ROCK, IMO.

cworkman
10-06-2010, 10:28 PM
No, because everything he's done is both more entertaining and better than THE ROCK!

cworkman
10-06-2010, 10:58 PM
Now, if only Warner would cast Tom Welling as Clark Kent/Superman and Erica Durance as Lois Lane, this movie would be perfect...

Daniel M
10-07-2010, 01:54 PM
John Gargo - I concur completely regarding THE ROCK. That is a film I can like without reservation.

The closest Snyder has come to that would be DAWN OF THE DEAD, but that was a remake with Romero's brilliant original used as a template.

RichardDoyle
10-07-2010, 04:52 PM
Wow, you're smart enough that you can make a comparison between two individual films but can't seem to compare filmmakers entire bodies of work. Why am I not surprised?

When you make a general claim, you are making it about everything that falls under the scope of the claim. So if I say:

"Zak Snyder's films have stories."

I am saying that about all of his films. That's why a counter example is a valid response.

Since you seem to speak English competently, I assume you know all this, so I'm not sure what the your point was.

RichardDoyle
10-07-2010, 04:59 PM
Snyder had nothing to do with that ad, and he's directed more than just two movies, three of which I like a lot, one of which I haven't seen.

The point was that he had only directed two films when the Watchmen poster came out.

cworkman
10-07-2010, 08:19 PM
When you make a general claim, you are making it about everything that falls under the scope of the claim. So if I say:

"Zak Snyder's films have stories."

I am saying that about all of his films. That's why a counter example is a valid response.

Since you seem to speak English competently, I assume you know all this, so I'm not sure what the your point was.

Actually, I was just being snyde when I wrote that.

WATCHMEN, DAWN OF THE DEAD, and 300 all have stories (maybe 300 a little... okay, a lot... less so). I haven't seen LEGEND OF THE GUARDIANS, so I can't comment on that one.

cworkman
10-07-2010, 08:20 PM
The point was that he had only directed two films when the Watchmen poster came out.

The underlying point is that he had somehow demanded that Warner place that statement on the ad, which in fact he didn't demand. Warner simply thought they could sell him that way because of 300.

Alex K.
10-07-2010, 08:49 PM
I'm not a big fan as stated, but I did like the Bruce Timm Superman cartoons. I was just thinking of what other villains they could use, and I think Parasite would be a great choice. Especially the re-imagined Parasite in the modern comics.

Christoffer S
10-08-2010, 07:55 AM
Am I the only one who feels that Superman: Balls of Steel would be a much better title then Superman: Man of Steel (which sounds really lame) ?

Troy Howarth
10-08-2010, 11:25 AM
I'm with you on that one!

John G.
10-08-2010, 12:17 PM
Haha. :)

Ehren H.
10-08-2010, 12:19 PM
The Rock is a highly entertaining action movie. 99.99% of it's fun is the casting, but there area also some great setpieces and Connery's character is just such a cool one. With that budget, that cast, and that script, it would have been hard to fuck it up.

Chris, how do you know he didn't want that on the ad? I'm not doubting you, I'm wondering if there was an article on it.

And I stepped around it a bit, but my main beef with Watchmen is that it is a fantastic comic with strong anarchist underpinnings, written by an outspoken anarchist, and it was made into a huge studio feature by a studio-whore director (he is, just like Ratner and Bay). That's wrong in my opinion. The same way the faithful would have felt if a sane person had directed Passion of the Christ.

Daniel M
10-08-2010, 03:16 PM
WATCHMEN would have killed with someone even just a little left of center in the director's chair.

Years ago, I remember Danny Boyle's name was attached to it for a hot minute; now THAT is the movie I wish had happened...

Ehren H.
10-11-2010, 12:20 PM
WATCHMEN would have killed with someone even just a little left of center in the director's chair.

Years ago, I remember Danny Boyle's name was attached to it for a hot minute; now THAT is the movie I wish had happened...

Boyle? That would have been interesting.

Personally, I just think it should have stayed a graphic novel, though.

Bryan Brassfield
10-11-2010, 01:52 PM
I think comparing Zack Snyder and Michael Bay is like comparing ice cream to horse manure.

I felt the Dawn of the Dead remake wasn't that bad. I was going in wanting to hate it, but didn't

300 is entertaining for what it is. I enjoyed watching it.

I loved Watchmen and agree with Chris that it's 99% accurate to the graphic novel. You could tell, in my opinion that Snyder seemed to be a fan and loved the source material.

I would take watching any of these three films in a 24/7 marathon then having to sit through Bay's Transformers 2.