It primarily filtered cynical, nihilistic, psychopathic “NPCs” that can’t stand anything actually meaningful or interesting in film or stories, particularly and/or especially superhero and/or science fiction.
There are at least two or three meanings that are present/can be derived from BvS — all meaningful.
It’s these same people that keep making the same baseless points in their attempts to disparage MoS and BvS: >Clark destroyed so much of Metropolis and is not heroic
He’s on the other side of the world destroying the other part of the world engine — 98% of the destruction is caused by Zod and fellow genetically-engineered kryptonians (Clark is only responsible for maybe 2% of the destruction Metropolis endures in the film) >Superman is depressed and uncertain and not heroic is BvS
He has much of humanity, the media and even entire governments hating him, unable to see he’s just doing the right thing, and he’s not “non-heroic” because he’s adamant about pursuing the Batman case and even still continues following it after Perry White tells him not to. He even says (paraphrasing): “when you write a story you’re deciding who and what matters”
Someone yesterday made a thread on Cinemaphile using a MoS image and asked “why didn’t anyone recognize Clark when he was older in Smallville?”
It is never shown that Clark was around Smallville that much when older, except fighting Faora-Ul in iHOP, and the only one to recognize him there was his old bully-turned-friend.
Do these people even watch the films?
They’re too myopic or conditioned to see the beauty of the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good Kal-El, overcome the conformity of, and the thematic embodiments of predeterminism and inherent evil, the surviving genetically-engineered kryptonians, abominations like and lead by Zod.
Stop being sophistic or blinded for once and try to watch something in a more abstract way.
You will forever harp on about Jonathan’s death and “Martha” but you’ll never care about Kal-El being the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good and Zod being the thematic embodiment of predeterminism and inherent evil. Or how BvS has two or three meanings to it simultaneously.
These are films. They are different versions of the characters. Why can’t they do some different things? You have had the chance to see what these films are actually about for years now, and still after probably engaging in various debates and being told what they’re actually about, you still just go >Jonathan dies >Martha
Jonathan doesn’t think Clark is ready for the world yet and/or doesn’t know if Clark is ready yet. And there really isn’t a way Clark can save him without being found out.
Batman sees the life in Superman, the similarities between god and human, when Kal-El mentions Martha.
How many times do these things need to be told to you?
Imagine if Superman let his mom die for no reason in Man of Steel, instead of his dad. Then BvS happens >save… Johnathan… >I only care about Thomas >*stabs Superman to death*
Stop being sophistic or blinded for once and try to watch something in a more abstract way.
You will forever harp on about Jonathan’s death and “Martha” but you’ll never care about Kal-El being the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good and Zod being the thematic embodiment of predeterminism and inherent evil. Or how BvS has two or three meanings to it simultaneously.
These are films. They are different versions of the characters. Why can’t they do some different things? You have had the chance to see what these films are actually about for years now, and still after probably engaging in various debates and being told what they’re actually about, you still just go >Jonathan dies >Martha
Jonathan doesn’t think Clark is ready for the world yet and/or doesn’t know if Clark is ready yet. And there really isn’t a way Clark can save him without being found out.
Batman sees the life in Superman, the similarities between god and human, when Kal-El mentions Martha.
How many times do these things need to be told to you?
>You have had the chance to see what these films are actually about for years now, and still after probably engaging in various debates and being told what they’re actually about
Old expression: in music there are only three things that matter: 1) the song, 2) the song, and 3) the song. Apply that to film. Movies aren’t contained in online debates about what they mean, that’s not what draws me to a film. What matters is what happens on the screen.
It primarily filtered cynical, nihilistic, psychopathic “NPCs” that can’t stand anything actually meaningful or interesting in film or stories, particularly and/or especially superhero and/or science fiction.
There are at least two or three meanings that are present/can be derived from BvS — all meaningful.
It’s these same people that keep making the same baseless points in their attempts to disparage MoS and BvS: >Clark destroyed so much of Metropolis and is not heroic
He’s on the other side of the world destroying the other part of the world engine — 98% of the destruction is caused by Zod and fellow genetically-engineered kryptonians (Clark is only responsible for maybe 2% of the destruction Metropolis endures in the film) >Superman is depressed and uncertain and not heroic is BvS
He has much of humanity, the media and even entire governments hating him, unable to see he’s just doing the right thing, and he’s not “non-heroic” because he’s adamant about pursuing the Batman case and even still continues following it after Perry White tells him not to. He even says (paraphrasing): “when you write a story you’re deciding who and what matters”
Someone yesterday made a thread on Cinemaphile using a MoS image and asked “why didn’t anyone recognize Clark when he was older in Smallville?”
It is never shown that Clark was around Smallville that much when older, except fighting Faora-Ul in iHOP, and the only one to recognize him there was his old bully-turned-friend.
Do these people even watch the films?
They’re too myopic or conditioned to see the beauty of the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good Kal-El, overcome the conformity of, and the thematic embodiments of predeterminism and inherent evil, the surviving genetically-engineered kryptonians, abominations like and lead by Zod.
>blah blah blah
That’s not a counter argument.
You can’t just say this shit without providing anything to support what you say.
You are all cowards.
You’ll talk a bunch of shit but when someone actually provides a merited response you resort to bullshit like >blah blah blah
Damn you
Because it was shit scene. It just felt like the writers backed themselves into a corner couldn't come up with anything else to continue with the story they had in mind.
The funny part is Snyder just revealed how the scene came about and it’s even dumber than that
>The "Martha" exchange has long been a point of contention among fans. But as Snyder explained to GQ, screenwriter Chris Terrio realized that Batman and Superman both have mothers named "Martha" — a jolt that would shock the vengeful vigilante out of his apathy and antagonism toward Superman.
>"[Terrio] goes, 'Imagine that Batman sees Superman as an alien, as a monster, but realizes that his dead mother has the same name as this thing that he considers nonhuman. Like, that's gonna get him.'" Snyder said. "And I'm like, 'That is gonna get him, that's amazing.'"
>”What else could he say to Batman, holding the Kryptonite spear about to plunge it into his heart — like, what is he gonna say to convince him that his love of humanity is as high as Batman's?" he continued. "I mean, really, Superman could kill him in a second, like literally in a second, so that was why I was like, 'Okay, well, he's gotta play every possible trick.'"
>Snyder has previously defended the now-infamous scene as the turning point in Batman v Superman.
>”Clearly I am a fan of, and am very interested in how 'Martha,' that concept is central to the film. I mean, it's 100% the lynchpin that holds the entire movie together," Snyder said in 2021. "I think it's indicative of the way that Batman v Superman was received that its central tenant was sort of belittled and made fun of. I personally think it is like this beautiful and incredibly symmetrical idea that it completely finishes it as a concept. It all is 100% with intent and intention to be all the images that you see, as far as their inspiration and stuff like that."
Snyder is great at coming up with individual cinematography moments, but absolutely hot shitass garbage at linking them together with a coherent narrative and effective writing. You can write a doctoral thesis about the allegories and symbolism in BvS, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a shit movie to actually watch.
I don't care about their mother's names being the impetus for them finding common ground. Decent idea in my opinion. I just hate how it felt like they ran out of time so this literally flips a switch in Batman's brain, to go from antagonistic butthole with a victim complex, to suddenly taking time to consider what the frick is actually going on.
He was literally getting played by Lex until this snapped him out of it. Batman shouldn't be that easy to manipulate.
The line itself is fine but the context surrounding it is moronic. If they were fighting and Martha got caught in the crossfire, causing SM to drop the fight and go save her giving Bats the realization that this guy is not an butthole with a god complex or whatever, it would be fine.
The problem is that the Martha name comes out of fricking nowhere and superman literally crying his mother's name sounds pathetic at best and moronic at worst.
It primarily filtered cynical, nihilistic, psychopathic “NPCs” that can’t stand anything actually meaningful or interesting in film or stories, particularly and/or especially superhero and/or science fiction.
There are at least two or three meanings that are present/can be derived from BvS — all meaningful.
It’s these same people that keep making the same baseless points in their attempts to disparage MoS and BvS:
>Clark destroyed so much of Metropolis and is not heroic
He’s on the other side of the world destroying the other part of the world engine — 98% of the destruction is caused by Zod and fellow genetically-engineered kryptonians (Clark is only responsible for maybe 2% of the destruction Metropolis endures in the film)
>Superman is depressed and uncertain and not heroic is BvS
He has much of humanity, the media and even entire governments hating him, unable to see he’s just doing the right thing, and he’s not “non-heroic” because he’s adamant about pursuing the Batman case and even still continues following it after Perry White tells him not to. He even says (paraphrasing): “when you write a story you’re deciding who and what matters”
Someone yesterday made a thread on Cinemaphile using a MoS image and asked “why didn’t anyone recognize Clark when he was older in Smallville?”
It is never shown that Clark was around Smallville that much when older, except fighting Faora-Ul in iHOP, and the only one to recognize him there was his old bully-turned-friend.
Do these people even watch the films?
They’re too myopic or conditioned to see the beauty of the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good Kal-El, overcome the conformity of, and the thematic embodiments of predeterminism and inherent evil, the surviving genetically-engineered kryptonians, abominations like and lead by Zod.
There is no sincerity in these words.
>all these 2010s buzzwords
The world has moved on and left you and your grifter papi behind, gramps.
Imagine if Superman let his mom die for no reason in Man of Steel, instead of his dad. Then BvS happens
>save… Johnathan…
>I only care about Thomas
>*stabs Superman to death*
Stop being sophistic or blinded for once and try to watch something in a more abstract way.
You will forever harp on about Jonathan’s death and “Martha” but you’ll never care about Kal-El being the thematic embodiment of freewill and inherent good and Zod being the thematic embodiment of predeterminism and inherent evil. Or how BvS has two or three meanings to it simultaneously.
These are films. They are different versions of the characters. Why can’t they do some different things? You have had the chance to see what these films are actually about for years now, and still after probably engaging in various debates and being told what they’re actually about, you still just go
>Jonathan dies
>Martha
Jonathan doesn’t think Clark is ready for the world yet and/or doesn’t know if Clark is ready yet. And there really isn’t a way Clark can save him without being found out.
Batman sees the life in Superman, the similarities between god and human, when Kal-El mentions Martha.
How many times do these things need to be told to you?
>You have had the chance to see what these films are actually about for years now, and still after probably engaging in various debates and being told what they’re actually about
Old expression: in music there are only three things that matter: 1) the song, 2) the song, and 3) the song. Apply that to film. Movies aren’t contained in online debates about what they mean, that’s not what draws me to a film. What matters is what happens on the screen.
Blah blah blah.
>blah blah blah
That’s not a counter argument.
You can’t just say this shit without providing anything to support what you say.
You are all cowards.
You’ll talk a bunch of shit but when someone actually provides a merited response you resort to bullshit like
>blah blah blah
Damn you
>That’s not a counter argument.
nah it is actually
Snyderbot thread
Because it was shit scene. It just felt like the writers backed themselves into a corner couldn't come up with anything else to continue with the story they had in mind.
The funny part is Snyder just revealed how the scene came about and it’s even dumber than that
>The "Martha" exchange has long been a point of contention among fans. But as Snyder explained to GQ, screenwriter Chris Terrio realized that Batman and Superman both have mothers named "Martha" — a jolt that would shock the vengeful vigilante out of his apathy and antagonism toward Superman.
>"[Terrio] goes, 'Imagine that Batman sees Superman as an alien, as a monster, but realizes that his dead mother has the same name as this thing that he considers nonhuman. Like, that's gonna get him.'" Snyder said. "And I'm like, 'That is gonna get him, that's amazing.'"
>”What else could he say to Batman, holding the Kryptonite spear about to plunge it into his heart — like, what is he gonna say to convince him that his love of humanity is as high as Batman's?" he continued. "I mean, really, Superman could kill him in a second, like literally in a second, so that was why I was like, 'Okay, well, he's gotta play every possible trick.'"
>Snyder has previously defended the now-infamous scene as the turning point in Batman v Superman.
>”Clearly I am a fan of, and am very interested in how 'Martha,' that concept is central to the film. I mean, it's 100% the lynchpin that holds the entire movie together," Snyder said in 2021. "I think it's indicative of the way that Batman v Superman was received that its central tenant was sort of belittled and made fun of. I personally think it is like this beautiful and incredibly symmetrical idea that it completely finishes it as a concept. It all is 100% with intent and intention to be all the images that you see, as far as their inspiration and stuff like that."
Snyder is great at coming up with individual cinematography moments, but absolutely hot shitass garbage at linking them together with a coherent narrative and effective writing. You can write a doctoral thesis about the allegories and symbolism in BvS, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a shit movie to actually watch.
It is like a phrase made of random cool words.
I don't care about their mother's names being the impetus for them finding common ground. Decent idea in my opinion. I just hate how it felt like they ran out of time so this literally flips a switch in Batman's brain, to go from antagonistic butthole with a victim complex, to suddenly taking time to consider what the frick is actually going on.
He was literally getting played by Lex until this snapped him out of it. Batman shouldn't be that easy to manipulate.
It’s loved by dimwits like you.
>filter
Jesus I fricking hate snydergays
Its a dumb line in a dumb film that's trying to be deep while being nonsensical.
The line itself is fine but the context surrounding it is moronic. If they were fighting and Martha got caught in the crossfire, causing SM to drop the fight and go save her giving Bats the realization that this guy is not an butthole with a god complex or whatever, it would be fine.
The problem is that the Martha name comes out of fricking nowhere and superman literally crying his mother's name sounds pathetic at best and moronic at worst.
As a rando at the time who hated this hunk of shit and Affleck as an actor, I thought the Justice League was 10x better because atleast it was fun.
This movie was fricking moronic and a complete waste of money.
I did not and do not like Man of Steel.
I did not watch a DC film after that until The Joker.
Which part of the DCEU is your screenshot from?