I also included the metacritic rating fyi…

I also included the good metacritic rating in my comment…

"Middling critical reception wasn’t enough to dissuade".

It sounds like she also hasn't seen any of the previous films so that's not really a valid example.

People who've read the books really aren't qualified to be making this assumption. Having not read the books myself, everything in these films made perfect sense. Not everything needs intricate backstories to make sense within the context of what's happening on screen.

People have very clearly explained to you the purpose of the showrunner. You not being able to comprehend their obvious role doesn't make their existence blameless

The comic did make it clear though

It actually is explained. I personally never understand why people think it is open ended considering Ampersand's existence.

Only one theory actually makes sense considering Ampersand's existence

well the VP that he chose is extremely anti LGBT so assuming he has some influence over what Trump will do means bad things for same-sex marriage.

he probably saw it as a kid so therefore it's one of the best movies ever made

If all of his films were bad then I could see the "entire career rests on nepotism" argument but Chronicle, his first film, was very good so that doesn't make sense. Tons of writers continue getting jobs because of the first film they had produced so it's not unreasonable to think Max Landis is getting jobs because…

I can understand not liking the show, but that kind of hyperbolic statement completely nullifies anything else you can try to say on the subject.

The Walking Dead is about character arcs, not story arcs.

I recall evacuations happening in Age of Ultron but not the first Avengers.

The beauty of continuity in films is that this very problem is addressed and fixed in Batman v Superman but people still do seem unable to get past it.

I suppose I can understand people not liking it because it's not the same character they loved before. That's not really a problem with the film itself, and more about expectation vs reality though. I personally greatly prefer his rendition of Superman as a flawed, more relateable character. It's also not as though…

I actually like everything he's done except for Sucker Punch. I actually don't even really understand why people hate on Man of Steel and Watchmen but can obviously see problems with Batman v Superman. I do think BvS is a very well made film in almost every aspect except for awful editing and lacking motivations,…

They all sort of have filters over them to create a sort of uniform color (blue in Watchmen, orangey in 300, Blackish in Batman v Superman, Greyish in Man of Steel, maybe reddish? in Sucker Punch. They also look kind of CGish (not in a bad way) if that makes sense, as if everything is shot on green screen.
I think…

All of his films very clearly look like a Snyder film so I don't understand how they can't be considered to have a specific aesthetic.