If Malick made a Superman film

The film is stunning.

Thousands of posts later, you're still begging for people to agree with you. The cinematography in that scene is shit. The color temperature is desaturated and completely wrong for the scene, the lens flares mitigate whatever they're trying to say visually, the lens looks fucking dirty. It's like a tutorial on what not to do with after effects.

It's stunning in the sense that it rattles your head with loud noises and buildings falling down for what feels like 3 hours.

>completely wrong
more like
>I don't like it
>not muh Donner

More like
>reductio ad absurdum
Why are Snyder fans so hopelessly retard... oh, right.

Mate, you're not saying anything of substance. You're saying the filmmaker's choice is wrong because you don't like it.

Please go and stay go.

>inb4 muh shakey cam

The shot is is filtered through Jonathan looking at Clark.

I love this scene.

why would he wear a cape
who is he wearing a cape and thinking he is? we wear capes as kids because we want to be superman

what is this scene trying to say, that the cape was genetically enhanced into his mind to know he wanted to wear a cape

>what are knights
>what are wizards
>not reading Narnia as a child

You guys are getting as bad as Plinkett drones.

...

So he's wearing a cape behind his back because hes trying to immitate a knight in full armor.

or a wizard because of the full robe

or someone from narnia by being naked.

>what are knights
Guys who wear suits of armor.

>what are wizards
Guys who wear robes and pointy hats.

none of the things you stated are iconic enough for a child to say to wear a cape and pretend to be it

it's a stupid scene, like the entire film

Are you guys this stupid
1. capes from fantasy, kids love fantasy
2. Superman pose because guess what? He is Superman. We don't know when he coined his trademark pose.

think
use brain

What you're doing is constructing headcanon to fill in the gaps of the narrative. You are not interpreting the movie. You're just creating nonsense to explain the nonsensical.

>1. capes from fantasy, kids love fantasy

You're delusional if you think even two out of ten kids associate capes with fantasy more than superheroes.

Actually capes are a common symbol of superheroes.

Claiming that it's not is actually appealing to headcanon and "in-universe" explanations.

>none of the things you stated are iconic enough for a child to say to wear a cape and pretend to be it
nigger all i and my friends did as children was pretend to be knights and we used our coats for our capes

No.
Think.

Superman popularized that pose.
Young Clark is (obviously) going to grow up to be Superman.
Therefore, that pose is something he does. Why would he only pose like that later in life? He had to start doing this sometime.

This is called basic logic.

see
I did this as well. I wanted to be King Peter in Narnia.

...

...

...

Is this a yuropoor thing? I've literally never seen any kids do this and I grew up going to the Renaissance Faire every summer.

I grew up in the woods of Virginia and we all had toy swords and capes and helmets and stuff.

That scene doesn't make any fucking sense. When it was in the trailer, I assumed it was the last shot of the movie, a kid inspired by Superman (who I never dreamed would have murdered someone and be a needlessly controversial figure). It doesn't make any fucking sense that it's Clark. It's so emblematic of everything that's wrong with Snyder - pretty pictures with absolutely no narrative talent. Slo-mo, montage, that's where he's at home. A music video director through and through.

>didn't read the thread before shitposting

I want reddit to leave.
But before you leave, try and fail to refute this-

Absolute bullshit. At a stretch you could say he's playing as a king, but there's absolutely zero context or reason to believe this would be the case.

>who I never dreamed would have murdered someone
You've never seen Superman 2?
youtube.com/watch?v=IxA5ECu2u3A

T H I S

The whole movie relies on pre-existing knowledge of Superman.

>but there's absolutely zero context or reason to believe this would be the case.
>kid playing outside
>zero context or reason

retard alert

i am British, what do american kids play as? other than cowboys and indians?

I read it you idiot fuck, it's bullshit.

nah
get out pls

>dropping someone down a bottomless pit like in a cartoon is the same as snapping someone's neck

Sure thing buddy, that old chestnut. Should we talk about the arrest in the original scene too?

These days?
Nothing.
Kids just play video games.
In Clark's day?
Anything goes.

it shows he has always had chivalric values even as a child. if you can't see superman as a modern embodiment of ye olde knight then you're blind or american

You could have had the same effect if there was a paper crown that flew off of his head while he was playing with his dog. This scene is dumb and that's all there is to it. The movie is a fucking garbage fire. I'll readily admit when it does good things. Lois saying "Welcome to the Planet" is one of the best things in any version of Superman, but it doesn't make the movie not a giant fucking turd.

u first

Mos was a perfect Cape film, why does it garner so much negativity?

The aesthetics, the music, the villains...

I'm not being hyperbolic you dense motherfucker.

>wearing a cape for no reason
>it shows he has always had chivalric values

No, it doesn't.

>muh hyperbole
fuck off kid

There's not a lot hyperbolic about that post, son.

The script is pretty worthless and snyder is worthless as a director.

Because it's a terribly made film with no real narrative that shits all over a beloved character.

Confirmed for blind or American. Thanks for playing.

>The script is pretty worthless and snyder is worthless as a director.

>more hyperbole
No one takes these kinds of posts seriously, you know.
Are you in it solely for the (You)'s?

I'm British actually and I'm can't be "blind" to something that simply isn't there.

Hey, I'm game for that.

Source?

If you're still trying to get to grips with the definition of hyperbole I'd refrain from using the word.

I've been feeling generous, but this is your last one bud.

>no real narrative

>No, it doesn't.
knights wear capes, superman is a modernday romanticized knight, he's Arthur without a kingdom

snyder is all about symbolism, how can you not see this

>i-it's my version of reality
Everything works against what the scene is trying to convey. It's wrong because it evokes exactly the wrong feeling it's trying to evoke.
I wonder what it is that possesses retards to defend Snyder's crap.

>You could have had the same effect if there was a paper crown
he's not playing as a king. superman never even tries to rule mankind only serve. again Chivalry

>The shot is is filtered through Jonathan looking at Clark.
Is he 5 inches tall? These threads are great because snyderlards try to show off the "beautiful" shots and they just evidence what an incompetent idiot he is.

No, you idiot. The preceding shot is Jonathan staring at Clark.

It wasn't a literal statement you literal autist.

Then why even bring it up in the first place? There's no relevance to Jonathan being in the previous shot and there being shaky cam at all.
And it's not even shaky cam, they used a handy cam shot for apparently no reason whatsoever.
Every time you try to praise this movie's cinematography you're going to shoot yourself in the foot.

Hey man, what is wearing a cape is just something that Clark always thought was cool? What if it all started with him that's why he wears a cape as an adult?

It is entirely possible to think of him as being the originator of capes on superheros. The trend setter. The meme maker. He came up the idea all on his own.

wut

I was merely trying to anticipate and deflect a few shitposts.
Looks like I failed.

How did you intend to do that, by posting a non-sequitur?

Well, one problem people might have with seeing that is none of that is true at all, in any way, shape, or form.

Exactly. The majority of shitposts are non sequiturs, after all.

Source?

Non whats?

sequiturs

>muh bit perfect grammar

>It is entirely possible to think of him as being the originator of capes on superheros. The trend setter. The meme maker.
yep

>He came up the idea all on his own.
no. human history exists in superman's world. he's a modern day equivalent of a knight

none of what is true? yes real knights didn't wear capes but the imagery of a knight in a cape exists in the human zeitgeist

I like how you're reaching so hard, but that's all you could grab.

not an argument

then explain how superman doesn't exemplify chivalry. superman is a modern day knight

>knights wear capes

no

>snyder is all about symbolism

give me a fucking break

u wot

capes signify superheroes or monarchs

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape#In_fiction

not "chivalry"

No. You don't ever listen.

not in reality no but then vikings didn't have horns on their helmets either.

>Malick superman film

>long hover shot as superman flies away, but you can hear Superman's thoughts.

>He is thinking about entry level existential philosophy and how it relates to his powers.

>Decides to pull a doc Manhattan and just leave this earth.

Jokes aside Richard Donner is closer to Malick in a cinematography sense.

>wikipedia
don't shoot yourself in the foot

he is a very visual director. doesn't mean he's good or that they hit the mark but you can't deny he puts a lot of effort into how his shots look

>Jokes aside Richard Donner is closer to Malick in a cinematography sense.

Maybe colorwise, but Donner's shot choices are incredibly bland.
Malick's are almost all inspired.

>"Capes were common in medieval Europe, especially when combined with a hood in the chaperon, and have had periodic returns to
fashion, for example, in nineteenth-century Europe. Roman Catholic clergy wear a type of cape known as a ferraiolo, which is worn for formal events outside of a liturgical context. The cope is a liturgical vestment in the form of a cape. Capes are often highly decorated with elaborate embroidery. Capes remain in regular use as rain wear in various military units and police forces, for example in France. A gas cape was a voluminous military garment designed to give rain protection to someone wearing the bulky gas masks used in twentieth century wars."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape#History

so clark is a history nut now, like a normal child his age

>i'm out of arguments
Thanks for playing!

or just like many children he heard stories about knights slaying dragons and saving princesses and wanted to be a knight

>"an ideal to strive toward"
>literally strides into the fucking sun
this is so sophomoric it's insane

My post was an argument, your post is a feeble attempt at having the last word and acting as though your original """point""" is valid. It's amazing how badly you're tying yourself in knots trying to defend this utter crap. Why can't you stan like this for the Nolan Batman movies, at least you wouldn't have to work so hard.

Nothing about that scene makes you think he's playing as a knight. No cardboard sword, no helmet, no shield, nothing. He's not fighting, he's not doing ANYTHING that would evoke the straws you're clutching at.

>an ideal
>murderous malcontent who views serving mankind as an insufferable burden

Hack Syder to the max

>he never wrapped a towel around his neck as a kid
did your uncle diddle you?

I think he is in a camera work sense as well, Donner is more likely to do a large pan out shot and show superman small and medium shots that show all the social interactions like Malick in Days of Heaven and Bad Lands. Even in his new films there is something very 70's about Malick's shot composition he just also added a lot of insect like hoover shots all over the place.

Most Snyder movies are about odd angles from high/low and side views. It's like he is always trying to film horror even though his ass only made one horror film and he didn't do many of those shots in that. Bizarre camera choices stick out a lot in Watchmen and BVS. I think all the praise of 300 having a unique visual style went to his head so he tries to ham fist any kind of style he can into movies even if it sets the tone way off in a film.

to be a superhero you fuckwit

when i played as a knight it was at school, therefore no sword.

>No cardboard sword, no helmet, no shield, nothing.
imagination, kids have that

>He's not fighting
he's superman, do you really think superman is going to gravitate towards whacking people with stick swords rather than towards the Chivalric ideals of a knight

>imagination, kids have that

HE'S NOT EVEN MAKING ANY ACTIONS AS THOUGH HE'S PLAYING WITH THAT STUFF INVISIBLY

THIS IS THE MOST BONKERS, SPURIOUS CLAIM OF ALL TIME

>Do you really think superman is going to gravitate towards whacking people with stick swords rather than towards the Chivalric ideals of a knight

KNIGHTS FIGHT AND THIS SUPERMAN KILLS

>KNIGHTS FIGHT AND THIS SUPERMAN KILLS
Chivalric ideals of a knight
he doesn't take pleasure from killing Zod he feels shame and pain because he was forced into doing it

>HE'S NOT EVEN MAKING ANY ACTIONS AS THOUGH HE'S PLAYING WITH THAT STUFF INVISIBLY
because the shot is only 3 seconds and again
he's superman, do you really think superman is going to gravitate towards whacking people with stick swords rather than towards the Chivalric ideals of a knight

>if Nicolas Winding Refn made a Superman film

>because the shot is only 3 seconds

You're useless. You don't care what the problem is, so long as the solution is the same: claiming Snyder is some kind of cinematic genius. Pathetic.

>if Tarantino made a Superman film

>claiming Snyder is some kind of cinematic genius.
he's not but you have such a hateboner for him that you cannot allow yourself to see the imagery he is trying to provoke

That sentence doesn't even make sense you retard.

>see the imagery he is trying to provoke

wut

You're trying to impose meaning on something that is not meaningful because Snyder has superficially constructed something that appears to have meaning.

This was such stupid shit.
>Hey, let's have Superman fight some CGI machine tentacles while Metropolis is fucked up!

>i'm too dumb for capeshit
yikes

>appears to have meaning.
>not the same as having meaning

idiot

Can you explainerr it do me boss? Herkaderp!

>muh Marvel
>muh Marvel
>muh Marvel
>muh Marvel

I wonder when DCucks will come up with a second argument

Marvel is the only thing that matters so that's all they can talk about. These people don't read DC or care about DC, they're just latching on to the DCEU so they can belong into their own group and hate on popular things.

They make sure to explain the hell out of it in the movie.
Probably Nolan's contribution, all that exposition.

So no, I won't spoonfeed you.

>These people don't read DC or care about DC
What compels you to make these incorrect assumptions?
I've loved DC comics for all my life, starting with PAD's Young Justice comic from the 90's.

Zack's DCEU films are amazing.

>pretentious
>self-serious
>pretends to be art and 2deep4you when it really isn't
>editing all over the place
>fans think they are superior to everybody because "they figured it out"

Sounds about right

They explain in the movie why the creators thought it was a good idea to have a boring action scene like that in there?

compelled*
my bad

>That sentence doesn't even make sense you retard.
how so?

>You're trying to impose meaning on something that is not meaningful because Snyder has superficially constructed something that appears to have meaning.
of course it has meaning, all of these shot have meaning otherwise they would have been included in the movie, the movie would just be superman interacting with other characters instead of flashbacks. these shots of superman paint his character his personality and philosophy. whether they hit the mark or not is a different discussion

The fact that you don't even think that's possibly only goes to show that you're the idiot here.

Why must you turn this thread into a house of lies?

>boring
Bordering on objectively wrong there, pal.

Fuck you.
I love DC comics and their films.
Not even just the DCEU.
I really like Superman Returns as well.

If this is indeed true, then you are an odd person.

say what you want but the soundtrack is glorious youtube.com/watch?v=DDSDloAcxAM