Explain why it’s bad

Only valid criticism was that he didn’t try to protect the city from being annihilated. But it was great on most other things to me. Hated all the Snyder shit that came after though.

Stop, my invincible son.

I kind of liked it but the color grading was always weird, I don't think we see enough of Clark being "normal"

>Desaturation
>Pa Kent essentially telling Clark to let people die so they don't know his secret powers, as opposed to saying "just don't get caught again."
>No invincible son, don't save me even though the tornado obscures everyone vision, so you totally can save me and make it look like a miracle.
>No Clark, don't do anything to this drunk trucker because you are actually Superman and will kill him otherwise, according to the movies logic even though you could put him in a hold and throw him in a snow pile or something relatively nonviolent. No hidden strength gags allowed.
>We were at my remote farm house, but now I am forcing you into a trainyard and blowing it up, by the way I'm Superman and ended up endangering more people than previous because of this.
>Also I did it because we needed an Army advert and an iHop advert.
>overt Jesus imagery
>Killed off bad guy right from the get-go, instead of doing it maybe third movie or so for a better impact.

>Shitty sequel, which also has a Batman who kills, even though it'd be cooler to just have him beat up goons real good.
>also if Batman kills, why is Joker even alive.

Better than Superman Returns though.

Attached: s9RXtni.jpg (684x960, 73.56K)

Not Marvel

The main reason is because it's one big giant contradiction. Snyder wants to create this brooding, gritty, uncompromising "deconstruction" of the character that barely resembles Superman and yet he still wants to have these classic comic book moments of spectacle and heroism even though they are totally incongruous.

He further contradicts himself by creating a world that is grounded in as much reality as possible, going for something weighty, uncompromisingly bleak and totally absent of whimsy, camp, pastel colored spandex or charm, and yet he also has wacky alien planets with giant dragonflies, goofy overacting, phantom zones and phantom drives colliding to create black holes and other nonsense which is more reminiscent of 1950's sci-fi B movie shlock than anything else.

The entire movie is just an exercise in tonedeafness and tonal whiplash, too ponderous and self-serious to be fun yet too goofy and stupid to be taken seriously. It tries to Nolan-ize Superman while still wanting to take advantage of all the marketability, tradition and mass-appeal of the character, and it completely fails.

While it's fair to say plenty of Superman fanboys didn't accept the film because it was too far removed from the way the character is traditionally portrayed, I'm not one of those people as I'm open to weird and radical re-interpretations of characters. The problem for me is you have to pick a lane. the movie presents two very distinct/different directions to go that do NOT fit together and they end up DOA somewhere in the middle, possibly by virtue of indecision (like what happened with Prometheus).

Also the action sequence at the end was way too long and it gave me a headache.

All they would need to do is execute it in a way that wasn't so laughably stupid. The family has plenty of room to run away, but even if they're petrified with terror, Superman could just as easily have physically moved Zod's head to avert the beam hitting them with the same or less amount of effort required to kill him. I know they were going for the idea that Zod won't ever stop and has dedicated himself to punishing Superman via every human being he sees, but then there's no need to act like this one moment with this handful of people is suddenly so important when Zod has already murdered countless people either directly or indirectly and has already promised to make them suffer. Besides, throughout the film Superman is portrayed such a careless, callous, objectivist sociopath that it makes no sense that it would be such a challenge for him ethically to snap someone's neck. A few minutes earlier he murdered an entire species with his heat vision after thinking about it for all of five seconds, and this was after his dad told him he was meant to be a "bridge between two worlds". The script is just all over the place, it decides to do these things in the moment but doesn't bother to build to them, like it's changing its mind about what it wants to be about every few pages. It wants to be this sprawling epic that tackles all these different ideas and themes but the person writing it just doesn't have the talent or the intelligence to pull it off.

Because comic book are for faggots and coloreds

...

...

It’s a goddam masterpiece.

Thanks for stopping by Zack

Yes. Because when s gun is pointed at you your first instinct is to run.

But it is good. Not a masterpiece because it was kinda boring. But it was better than muh reeves!

Zack, downgraiding your claim from "masterpiece" to "not masterpiece but good" doesn't make it any more believable.