ByRaza Shahid, writer at
here to ramble
Raza Shahid

Imagination and escapism; the value of which innocence near immediately associates with superheroes. Cherished memories of astonishment and a let go of reality all to wonder whether a man can fly. Decades later and children are supposed to find joy in hope-devoid stories with unnecessarily dark implications.

What is the point of far fetched mythology if it ultimately parallels real world weakness and consequence? Why tell a story of heroes children most look forward to if your intention isn't to stretch the moral strengths of fictional characters; to educate on hope and the importance of being good?


Unnecessary Themes and Self Righteous 'heroes'

With that said, what's with you, Zack Snyder? (or Warner Bros. I'm not entirely sure but given Sucker Punch, am inclined.) Dawn of Justice asks all the wrong questions. What defends Superman's presence on Earth if the Metropolis death toll is his fault to begin with (attracting the remnants of his superpowered species to Earth)? How is the collateral damage in Gotham (thanks to Doomsday and co.) justified any differently from the former destruction in Man of Steel? Why admire Batman if he's given up the importance for human life (and not, apparently, for necessity's sake because why is Joker alive)? What self righteous prophecy can these "Gods" convince themselves of that refutes the truth so far established in the DCynic's Universe that their very existence means massive loss of life?

Forget that Superman is miscasted and inaccurately characterised and that Lex Luthor is, for the most part of the film, having a stroke, but what is the moral of the story, exactly? "Nothing. It is what it is. You can't have a super powered alien without a few million folks dead. Also, no one stays good in this world. That's the film I set out to make. That's the message I thought was important to convey in a movie about a dude who wears his underwear over super-spandex." said Zack Snyder, insufferably unsubtle and rarely delicate with thematic exploration.


Inaccurate Characterisation and Sucker Punch

Regardless of whatever adjective applies to the DCEU thus far, 'realistic' or 'unnecessarily dark' which is subjective to viewers, these 'heroes' are painted in a despicable light. Batman beats on mere thugs with a disregard for finality (stabbed two of them, blew up some of them and straight up drove over and crushed some cars with his Bat-murder-mobile). The notion that this is the result of a dead Robin doesn't entirely justify so given a ten year gap since the Bat-tragedy (according to Snyder). 10 years is a long time, even The Punisher targets the least redeemable.

Moreover, the arguably unnecessary or wasted choice to infuse religious consciousness into stories about Superman is worst executed by someone who couldn't go a few minutes without reminding the audience of his narrative agenda.

Who disregarded narrative consequence (he himself set up an expectation for) by repeating the very destruction that drove the grudge match between the titular brooding pieces of shite (in this film, anyway. I'm sure no one was killed, Batman). To further illustrate my point, he made Sucker Punch (which you haven't seen because you have self respect), and intended its release for young audiences. Sucker Punch included themes of prostitution, rape, objectification of women by men (and the director, ironically) and was supposedly intended to empower women by having them fantasise about battles with otherworldly creatures dressed like this:

you tell em Snyder
you tell em Snyder

The response to BvS has been so divisive that a petition on was launched for Warner Bros to let go of Zack Snyder (hahah). Zack Snyder is a bad filmmaker. BvS is a dark, cynical film and 'joyless' is a reference to the hopeless world he's created, not a lack of humor.

Thanks for reading! What do you think of Zack Snyder and BvS? Leave your thoughts in the comment section. :)


Latest from our Creators