Batman v Superman Director Zack Snyder Defends Aquaman

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

chocolate pickles:

WhiteTigerShiro:

chocolate pickles:
"The cool thing with Aquaman is he has his trident."

Oh shit guys, watch out! A trident! Who can save us from this weapon from weapon of mass destruction? Apart from, you know, the guy who tanks actually tanks and shoots lasers from his eyes.

Congratulations on cherry-picking a single sentence that was clearly not rehearsed ahead of time (it was him just talking), and not only omitting the follow-up sentences that give support to the sentence, but apparently not even reading them based on your "Superman could kick his trident's ass" counter.

Gordon_4:

Aquaman can and does go toe to toe with the man of steel; he's also king of a nation who's naval power is to the world at large, comparable to the British Empire at the height of their capability. Their technology is also highly advanced and they still command sorcery, a well known weakness of Superman.

He's a badass, end story.

Gonna lay my cards on the table: That was less a jab at Aquaman (who i don't really have anything against btw), and more a jab at Snyder - If he's going to try and defend a character (hell, it could have been superman in this context), then he SHOULD at least rehearse it and not come at with daft lines like that. yes, i know there was followup explanation, but to be honest, this whole statement seems poorly planned and written in general, and honestly does not do a good job of trying to defend the character.

As for my supposed "Superman could kick his trident's ass" counter (never actually said that, but whatever) - I'm not a comics expert, and will never claim to be an expert on the subject. However, what knowledge i do have is of Superman's portrayal in the film, and how he clearly had some high level feats and powers. Until we actually see Aquaman in the movie (if he IS in the movie), then we will never be able to say who wins a fight between the two. Sure, you can theorize all you want from the info in the comics, but look at how badly Nolan batman ended up differentiating from his comic counterparts - Aquaman could be seriously de-powered or buffed in the movie. However, i do feel it is safe to speculate that considering Superman's portrayal, he will be able to give aquaman a worthy fight at the least.

Oh, well don't I just feel silly then :P

That's cool, Aquaman as a character got a bad rep thanks to the old Superfriends cartoon. Thankfully, recent portrayals in the DCAU, Batman the Brave and the Bold and Young Justice cartoons went a long way to improving his image to casual watchers. Comic fans have had several very excellent runs and takes on the character so he never quite suffered the same to that crowd.

chocolate pickles:

Gonna lay my cards on the table: That was less a jab at Aquaman (who i don't really have anything against btw), and more a jab at Snyder - If he's going to try and defend a character (hell, it could have been superman in this context), then he SHOULD at least rehearse it and not come at with daft lines like that. yes, i know there was followup explanation, but to be honest, this whole statement seems poorly planned and written in general, and honestly does not do a good job of trying to defend the character.

You're aware that this was a call-in to a radio show or something, right? By time he would have sat down and written down his thoughts and edited them to sound more concise, and suddenly the next show is on. Let's see your arguments be completely flawlessly-worded right on the spot.

WhiteTigerShiro:

chocolate pickles:

Gonna lay my cards on the table: That was less a jab at Aquaman (who i don't really have anything against btw), and more a jab at Snyder - If he's going to try and defend a character (hell, it could have been superman in this context), then he SHOULD at least rehearse it and not come at with daft lines like that. yes, i know there was followup explanation, but to be honest, this whole statement seems poorly planned and written in general, and honestly does not do a good job of trying to defend the character.

You're aware that this was a call-in to a radio show or something, right? By time he would have sat down and written down his thoughts and edited them to sound more concise, and suddenly the next show is on. Let's see your arguments be completely flawlessly-worded right on the spot.

The difference being, my statements are not going to be read by the thousands. Type in 'Zack Snyder' or 'Aquaman' into Google, and his statement is on the top of the first page. It will be read by a considerable amount of people before it becomes old news, and like me, many will consider the statement poorly written and no real aid to the characters image.

Yes, i know he was on the spot, but the fact is he put himself into that position. Nobody is to blame for the statement other than himself.

Firstly, I agree that Aquaman isn't the shittiest superhero ever. He may not be the most interesting, but he's certainly more capable than people give him credit for. Secondly, the reason this stereotype of "aquaman is shit" is because of that REALLY crappy old Superfriends cartoon, compounded with shows like Family Guy carrying the joke of that show and its iteration of characters even farther.

That being said, I think its funny he has to clarify "I'm not saying he's in the movie." If he's not in the movie, then don't even bother bringing up the subject.

What bugs me is we've heard talk about Wonder Woman being a descendant of Kryptons, and she'll be weaker than Superman. But now we're getting statements that AQUAMAN is capable of wounding Superman (meaning, on some level, he can be just as strong). Just pointing out something that seems fishy to me... no pun intended.

chocolate pickles:

The difference being, my statements are not going to be read by the thousands. Type in 'Zack Snyder' or 'Aquaman' into Google, and his statement is on the top of the first page. It will be read by a considerable amount of people before it becomes old news, and like me, many will consider the statement poorly written and no real aid to the characters image.

Yes, i know he was on the spot, but the fact is he put himself into that position. Nobody is to blame for the statement other than himself.

I just think you're a little too eager to have a reason to slam on Zack Snyder, is all. Heaven forbid that a celebrity of any sort should call into a radio show on a whim and not be 100% eloquent in their word choice. Clearly he's a bad man because he can't spit-out rehearsed-sounding gold that sounds like it was read from a script on the spot.

SilverUchiha:
Firstly, I agree that Aquaman isn't the shittiest superhero ever. He may not be the most interesting, but he's certainly more capable than people give him credit for. Secondly, the reason this stereotype of "aquaman is shit" is because of that REALLY crappy old Superfriends cartoon, compounded with shows like Family Guy carrying the joke of that show and its iteration of characters even farther.

That being said, I think its funny he has to clarify "I'm not saying he's in the movie." If he's not in the movie, then don't even bother bringing up the subject.

You know how fans are. Zack calls-in to a radio show to talk about [DC Hero] and suddenly the next day the headlines are reading "Confirmed: [DC Hero] to appear in Batman v. Superman movie," unless he specifically says otherwise ahead of time.

Imperioratorex Caprae:

image

Is that dude supposed to be Harry Knowles? If so, uncooooool.

WhiteTigerShiro:

chocolate pickles:

The difference being, my statements are not going to be read by the thousands. Type in 'Zack Snyder' or 'Aquaman' into Google, and his statement is on the top of the first page. It will be read by a considerable amount of people before it becomes old news, and like me, many will consider the statement poorly written and no real aid to the characters image.

Yes, i know he was on the spot, but the fact is he put himself into that position. Nobody is to blame for the statement other than himself.

I just think you're a little too eager to have a reason to slam on Zack Snyder, is all. Heaven forbid that a celebrity of any sort should call into a radio show on a whim and not be 100% eloquent in their word choice. Clearly he's a bad man because he can't spit-out rehearsed-sounding gold that sounds like it was read from a script on the spot.

I'm not interested in 'slamming' him. You wanna know why? Off the top of my head, i can't tell you another film he's done other than man of steel. And hell, i LIKED man of steel (Still kind of confused on the hate it got). I have no love/hate for the man, so no, there is no eagerness on my part to slam him. I took the piss because it was badly written. It could have been written by the pope for all care.

'Bad' man? I'm not great for checking over my posts, but i don't remember the part where i called him a shitty human being.

So what if he's "super strong"? That's true of just about every superhero. Aquaman's "thing" will always be fish.

chocolate pickles:
I took the piss because it was badly written.

And that's the problem. Once again you're assuming that this is some sentence he wrote-out and had time to edit and revise. Again, this is just him calling into a radio show. Live.

WhiteTigerShiro:

chocolate pickles:
I took the piss because it was badly written.

And that's the problem. Once again you're assuming that this is some sentence he wrote-out and had time to edit and revise. Again, this is just him calling into a radio show. Live.

Let's swap 'written' for the right verb then: I took the piss because it was badly... thought out? (My fault here: I knew this wasn't something he actually wrote, it's what he was saying

I'm not assuming this his something he pre-planned. I KNOW it wasn't pre-planned as you described. My point is that it SHOULD have been pre-planned, and that if he DIDNY have time to make a good reply (as i acknowledge, is the case here), he SHOULDN'T have made one at all: Maybe it would have been a better for Snyder to not call in at all, when he had such limited time to defend a quite ill thought of character. Perhaps it would have been better to voice his opinion on Aquaman on his own terms: he could have released an independent statement after he had time to plan out his argument probably.

Johnny Novgorod:
So what if he's "super strong"? That's true of just about every superhero. Aquaman's "thing" will always be fish.

Maybe so, but you don't see Batman singing a

, do you?

McMarbles:

Johnny Novgorod:
So what if he's "super strong"? That's true of just about every superhero. Aquaman's "thing" will always be fish.

Maybe so, but you don't see Batman singing a

, do you?

If they made a movie in that key then I would be the first in line to see it.

Didn't know much about the character until the Injustice game (I don't follow DC much :| ). However, the first time I saw him I thought he was Poseidon or Neptune cause his powers seemed kinda similar. They should just rename him to one of those two names to get rid of the stigma associated with the whole aquaman name :P

Pescetarian:

Imperioratorex Caprae:

Is that dude supposed to be Harry Knowles? If so, uncooooool.

Don't know, I don't write the comic nor illustrate it. However I think its more a dig at the know-it-all nerd stereotype. I mean look at the neckbeard...

People forget that Superman is vulnerable to Magic. I'm pretty sure Aquamans Trident is magic.

GamerKT:

aegix drakan:
...Still, gotta be said that the Flash is the only non-batman DC superhero I give a fraction of a damn about.

Is the New 52 Flash a good place to start with him?

I only have the first few issues of his new 52 comics (Xmas gift from my now-ex), and it was pretty good. So yeah, I'd say it's a good place to start.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here