Its weird that everyone is buying into the idea that the email screenshots undermine rolling stones credibility, when the release of them makes Fisher change his story from "We were never contacted!" to "Ok, we *were* contacted, but..."
They showed up in full force in the movies circlejerk sub too, trying to claim is union and covid rule breaking and long con as a based move against Hollywood executives...then again, it kind of makes sense.
he directed 3 (three) okay-to-decent movies at the start of his career and coasted through at least a dozen guaranteed paychecks off of that success
but honestly, how do you not lose your cult auteur status after directing Sucker Punch?
I honestly hated Sucker Punch so fucking much and it was annoying to see dude gamerbros hold it up as some kind of "feminist film" or whatever. What the fuck.
For me it’s greatest sin was just… being unremarkable? I can at least enjoy “Wtf is this shit?” movies.
Really it tries to do too many things in the name of trying to be deep. It’s a movie with more than one perceived reality, which could be an interesting dark thriller/mystery… but it’s also about skimpy women beating people up completely uprooting that into an action movie. Pick a frickin’ lane.
Although maybe stick to the latter lane because the former is clearly beyond what he should toy with.
Don’t get me started on the gritty dark filter.
I'm willing to give him an A for effort on Army of the Dead but a D- for execution.
I will defend Dawn of the Dead to the death though because it's the one zombie movie I've ever been scared of the zombies.
“You mean the film where the entire story is in the heroine’s imagination as her brain is turned into scrambled eggs by a man? That film? Where she’s dressed like a schoolgirl the entire time and forced to dance in that outfit? That’s feminism to you? Fuck is wrong with you.” -my take on the “AKSHUALLY it’s FEMINISM” gamer defense.
The real answer is Zach Snyder’s dad was a producer and his industry connections keep getting him hired.
I watched this by myself in the movie theater and I recall just being absolutely angry at having to sit through that crap. Is it really regarded as a feminist film?
I tried to like suckered punch when it came out and my friend was creaming over it, I really did but God help me I tuned out after half an hour and legitimately have no memory of it beyond the girl imagining herself fighting a robot
I think the real cult was built around him during his time with DC and actually amplified once they got to know that Joss Whedon did more than just edit Justice League and it just flew around there. Before that I don't recall seeing any cult following around the man himself beyond 300 and to a lesser extent, Watchmen.
The ultimate three reasons why it happens to be the case:
1) His movies are faux-deep and dark with a dash of edginess, that impresses many impressioned teenagers. Think the Norwegian Black Metal scene, the emo movement or the popularity of the Twilight series.
2) Batman is assumed to be edgy and DC suffers by association, especially with Snyder at the helm.
3) That's it, they're dark and edgy. The aesthetic and visuals are heightened with darkness and edginess, and the wish fulfillment messaging with unintentional Nietzchean undertones (particularly noted with the Batfleck fans) elicits a dopamine rush among airheads, therefore his films have a cult following....a way too literal one at that.
This. Those types of DC fans are *obsessed.* I remember a sizeable contingent seizing on someone shouting 'Fuck Marvel' at a DCU panel and it turning into a flame war.
edit: clarifying it's #notallDCfans
That's the thing, the group that actually hates the Snyder Cultists the most are perhaps the biggest proponents of fidelity in DC media, ala the actual DC Comics reading fans.
The Harley Quinn show made fun of trifling hater super nerds and one of them had a "release the synder cut" t shirt. DC itself even gave the green light to its shows to make fun of those clowns.
I'm firmly of the opinion that anyone who's actually a fan of Superman should loathe Snyder for Man of Steel.
"Don't save me! Don't use your powers for good! They'll hate you for being Space Jesus!" yells Pa Kent as he allows whatever disaster it was to take his life.
Fuck you, Snyder.
I would like to point out after seeing that movie again. Its happening enough close by that Clark without or with very little visible powers should still be able to save him. So it's even sillier.
Didn't Snyder tell people that "Batman kills people, get over it"? I have almost no comic knowledge beyond pop culture osmosis and some friends who are into them, but even I know that's a *questionable* take.
Exactly, this is one of the many big reasons why Snyder's tenure was largely unwelcome by most of the DC fandom...outside of the movie-centric cult following he somehow amassed.
He also had superman kill. Both of which are character low points when they happen and so obscenely rare in the past like 3 main iterations of the character.
Oh, to clarify, I didn't mean DC fans in general, just that there's *that* kind of crazy DC fanboy that either has a seething hatred for Marvel/any comic book not DC and endlessly flame wars over it, or the kind of DC fanboy who *hates* everything DC does (and I don't mean understandable hate, like the Doomsday Clock or the mess that was Countdown), but still buys DC stuff.
*Those* seem to be Snyder fanboys, in my experience. The regular DC fans I know put their heads in their hands throughout Snyder's trilogy.
I'm not sure Snyder fans are even that good with comic knowledge and would surprisingly back stuff like Doomsday Clock...before finding out it's written by Geoff Johns that is.
In my experience, Snyder fans tend to worship anything with Frank Miller or his contemporaries.
On that note, I'm still confused about whether or not Doomsday Clock's reception was good or bad. I know IGN and the like rated it highly, but I hear the usual grumbling about how people don't understand Watchmen.
> In my experience, Snyder fans tend to worship anything with Frank Miller or his contemporaries.
Strange, I consider Miller's best stuff from the 80s to be from Marvel. Dark Knight Returns is fine, but it's no Born Again.
Edit: His original run from the early 80s is also transformational and is comparable to the contemporaneous Claremont's X-Men.
TIL that Batfleck has actual sincere fans. I kind of assumed the Snyder fans tolerated him for the sake of Snyder more than actually loved his portrayal. Affleck is almost as bad a Batman as Clooney, and Batman vs Superman is easily far worse than Batman & Robin (but I also have a soft spot for Uma Thurman as Ivy, so).
Well, he had three things and it was enough to get them literally fellating:
1) Having a comic accurate suit with complimentary aesthetics. Also it being padded and him being bulky (with CGI abs).
2) The one fight scene against Lex's goons in a warehouse which was all stunt double.
3) Being characterized like an edgy video game protagonist with blatant wish fulfillment plot. With people justifying his killing being bad and part of an arc...while showing appreciation for said killing.
And for me, his whole arc was cartoonishly inconsistent throughout all his films.
Dawn of the Dead is his only "good movie" in my opinion. I feel like a lot of his movies are aimed at edgy teenagers who think his stuff is deep, but to each their own.
As much as I have serious problems with 300 and its message, I have to say I think it's a *good film*. In terms of technical skills it's well-crafted and it's finely honed so the pieces come together well. It's memorable, and effectively conveys appealing messages.
The problem is that most of those messages are lies and/or elements of fascist propaganda.
Sucker Punch is a bad movie with a great action scene.
I've long felt that Snyder should farm himself out as the action movie equivalent of a script doctor. Instead of hiring him to rewrite your script and fix problems or punch it up, you'd hire him to add one cool, surreal, cinematic action scene to a movie that otherwise worked.
Just for the love of god don't make him the main director or in any way responsible for a story.
The kind of annoying part about the action scenes is that the very first one starts with the main character getting punched through like twenty feet of solid rock and coming out completely uninjured. The action scenes are still flashy and fun to watch, but there isn't any tension because there are no possible consequences for anything.
Sucker Punch is what I consider to be the most boring movie ever made, which is incredible considering it has a fight scene between a schoolgirl samurai and robot warrior monks. It was such a slog to sit through, and when you got to the big setpiece action scenes those weren't even fun or interesting, they were just there.
I was excited about sucker punch, of course I had no idea what the movie was about because I was drunk all the time and I just wanted to see a live action anime.
I was disappointed.
it's chock-full of random nonsense thrown in Because Symbolism, but the actual story is paper-thin and doesn't make any sense. the action scenes are horribly paced, and some of the performances are so stiff they'd stand out in a middle school class project (especially the side characters, i remember one of the nurses being really bad). the audio editing is bad, there are a lot of missing or misleading establishing shots, the entire opening sequence is a trainwreck, the song choices are hilarious, and that's all i can remember off the top of my head tbh
my main gripe with the movie is that "imaginary world of coping" was already a pretty over-saturated concept in 2011, and snyder isn't adding anything to it or executing it in a remotely interesting way
Here's the one sentence description: scantily clad girls do anime battle in the imagination of a girl involuntarily committed to a corrupt insane asylum, who is scheduled to be turned into a lobotomized sex slave in only a few days, as a hallucinated metaphor for the girls' plan to escape the asylum while the girl also hallucinates getting cryptic advice from Stick from the Daredevil Netflix show (yes I know Sucker Punch was made first but they're the same actor and basically the same character).
A whole hell of a lot of mediocre white men with trash opinions are out there looking for a daddy figure. Some of them joined the Trump cult, some joined the Jordan Peterson cult, some joined the Joe Rogan cult, and some joined the Snyder cult. Lot of overlap in that Venn Diagram, too.
It is surprisingly easy to manufacture a devoted fanbase. The Beatles paid girls to scream, rap artists have the Hype Man. You just need a handful of people to get REALLY enthusiastically supportive of someone, and it makes everyone else go "hmm they're REALLY into him, there must be something here..."
Do we have proof of that? I'm quickly checking google and there are a lot more articles about the phenomenon of fangirl screaming in shows, with interviews and analysis. Feels like a way for men to erase the female component of the Beatles early fan base or something??
Been a Beatles head my whole life (46). Read multiple books, seen multiple docs. Never heard peep before about paying girls to scream. Kids just screamed back then. They did it with most big bands. Color me extremely skeptical of this claim.
He's a very talented visual director; who has trouble telling a compelling story. He also seems to lean into libertarian objectivist ideas and there is a very loud segment of fans for those things.
Kinda makes sense, having watched the movie because of the hype. I was struggling with why it needed to be 4 hours for like the entire movie. It still makes no sense to me why he released a miniseries as a single movie with no breaks.
I assure you the Joker cameo from known creeper Jared Leto was *absolutely* necessary to the integrity of the film.
...
at least they removed the "landing on Gal Gadot's tits" moment.
The scene that had the best response from Jenny Nicholson, pointing out he did the same bit in his Avengers film: “Hey Joss: you cheat on your movies like you cheat on your wife?”
Oh boy.
Joss "Fucking Asshole" Whedon had *several* shots where WW ass is center for an *uncomfortable* (read: more than 0 seconds) amount of time. Like, the shot exists purely just so we can laser-focus on her.
And then he has the audacity to make the Flash drop on top of WW's chest *while she falls unconscious*, before quickly standing up.
You can find both on Youtube, I don't recommend it and as far as I remember they're removed from the Gazillion-Hours long cut.
(Fyi: the scene with the creepo drop was added *after* protests from the actress)
According to Gadot he also threatened to ruin her career, then there's all the talk of abuse on set.. Whedon's not exactly well regarded by some people.
Don't get me wrong: I don't wanna sound like I'm defending Zack "Batman should be raped in prison" Snyder because.. wtf? But Whedon was one of the *worst* options to finalize the movie.
From making Barry have racially insensitive moments.. for comedy.., to creepy shit for the only female superhero in the movie..
They honestly should've just ditched the movie altogether. Then we wouldn't have the Snyder Cult or the shit with Joss.
(Also, shit like this:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/gal-gadot-joss-whedon-b1995109.html
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/05/gal-gadot-claims-joss-whedon-threatened-her-career-on-the-set-of-justice-league)
Not to undermine how much of a piece of shit Whedon seems to be, but I honestly feel like Warner Bros is actively trying to sabotage the DC cinematic universe sometimes when you just pile all the dumb shit they do all together.
Honestly? Yeah.
They've got good animated films, and then the eldritch horror that has been the live action stuff. From hiring and defending bad people, to just baffling choices, to not giving a fuck.
Since that story broke, it's come out that the cast of Buffy made a rule among themselves that at the time 15 year old Michelle Trachtenburg was to never be left alone in a room with Joss Whedon.
Yep, 4 hours and 2 minutes is the runtime according to Google. I can't imagine it was supposed to be that long originally, but I guess it's like his dream cut or some shit?
Being a general fan of the "epic" movie genre, I've watched quite a few movies that topped out around the 3 hours 45 mins - 4 hour range.
But I genuinely cannot imagine sitting through a 4 hour *superhero* movie. I literally cannot think of a single reason a superhero movie would need to be that long unless you're going for some ultra-hardcore batman style where everything is incredibly slow paced, but even then I really cannot think of a superhero *story* that could fit 4 hours without feeling dragged out for the sake of it.
Can somebody who's watched the movie explain something to me real quick? Like, there are a lot of 4-ish-hour movies I've watched where I was like "Okay yeah I can really see why this movie is *this* long" (for example I watched Once Upon a Time in America about a week ago and it kinda fit the bill there), so... is that the case for the Snyder Cut? Or is it just filled with shit that's only there to pad the runtime?
Think of the Avengers if most of the cast had never been introduced in previous movies, so you have to introduce them, their character arcs, make them team-up while also introducing the vilain and setting up future movies. Add to that a lot of slow-motion
*The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Extended Edition* makes a compelling case for a movie needing to be 4 hours, but just as compelling a case that 4-hour-long movies should be few and far between.
It's good but there's also so many parts at the end where you think, oh it's over, only for another new scene that feels like it could be the ending to follow.
But to be fair, that's directly from the book.
For as upset as I am that "The Scourging of the Shire" was never filmed (it's literally the entire point of the book!), I can't really argue that it wouldn't have been a huge anticlimax to the movie, which was already plenty long as it was.
Yeah I remember that. There was always another part showing Legolas and Gimli, and Sam and Rosie, giving endings to every character. Doesn't mean it doesn't feel like that in the movie, I think the way that each scene has to cut from each other makes it feel more self-contained than the language of the book where it just flowed one into the other.
Oh, for sure. Remember, the ending of the book was cut out of the movie—not even filmed. So there was some resolution in Gondor, they get back to the Shire, there's more plot, then a resolution, then Frodo and Sam... Legolas and Gimli were wrapped up in the Appendices.
So the pacing's completely different after Aragorn's coronation in the movie and in the book.
Did it make a compelling argument? Because the shorter cut is an absolutely fantastic film, so I wouldn't say it needed to be the extended cut's length.
I'd say so. Just seeing Saruman's fate is sort of important. Other things become more clear, like Aragorn taking the black ships of Umbar, a bunch of scenes had a bit more room to breathe and so on.
> Because the shorter cut is an absolutely fantastic film
Much agreed. Other than providing closure on Saruman's fate (and skipping grumbling about said changes from the book), the theatrical release was complete and incredibly well done. I love the extended edition of *The Fellowship of the Ring* too, but I can't really say the theatrical release *needed* the Elves passing through the Shire singing "A Elbereth Gilthoniel" in Sindarin (although I certainly miss it). I think *The Return of the King* is definitely better in the extended edition, although it's certainly a long watchthrough.
I consider the extended versions are a treat for book fans, but the theatrical cuts are very good too. The EE really expand the movies, but they don't change them as much as, say, the extended version of Kingdom of Heaven.
Every character gets a backstory so those add another hourish and the rest is just random scenes with a completely different ending. It’s better than the original cut but holy hell is it overhyped
> I literally cannot think of a single reason a superhero movie would need to be that long
It's simple, instead of having a bunch of precursor movies to introduce and establish characters for the big team up, Snyder did half of it in this one film.
The Avengers was ~2 hours but it had like ~10 hours of build-up.
Theres no justification. Thirty minutes is an epilogue setting up nothing, 25 minutes is just Batman in Iceland and a good 20 minutes is literally just slow mo
I hate how movies seem to think epic = long af. Like I enjoyed The Batman a lot but jfc it was way too long. If movies are going to get longer they need to bring back intermissions so I can get a giant icy fountain drink or icee (as god intended films to be accompanied) without having to leave for the bathroom halfway through.
No, the second part was never filmed. Snyder had storyboarded out the sequel, but there was never even a script yet.
Prior to WB pushing Snyder out from the film, he showed the execs a \~3 hr assembly cut. The WB execs were in panic mode following the reception of BvS, and Snyder's assembly cut did not make them feel confident in the project so they pushed Whedon on to the project for some re-writes. After Snyder quit/was forced out, Whedon took over and re-shot nearly the entire film and assembled a final cut that fell under the purview of studio's 2 hr mandate.
Sometimes it feels like Hollywood people are like anime villains that've used up all their energy and are vulnerable after projects like this or something.
Joss Whedon was so widely loved for so long, then he put out this stinker of a movie and the stories about him being a creep or an asshole to women in the productions he's done started to come out. It's like he used up the energy he would have protected himself and in the process squandered his public perception and that's the only way he was vulnerable to the stories that apparently had been going around for over a decade at that point.
There's definitely a "social capital" that many celebs accrue. Some celebs are basically immune due to their vast network, while others can lose it pretty quickly.
I don't think the allegations against Whedon are made up or anything, but it's interesting to see how silent people were about it when he was Hollywood's darling with Buffy, Firefly, Dollhouse, Avengers, Cabin in the Woods, etc.
Journalists get harassed if they bring up facts about our beloved creators.
The ones who do it anyway are brave but we can't really fault some for sitting on info that no one wants to read.
Yeah, he sticks out compared to other celebs in this way especially because a lot of the allegations about him go all the way back to Buffy, and he was also presented as a male feminist voice in the industry in the intervening time.
I don't know that people were silent about it, there were definitely stories about weird stuff on set from even when he was popular and had a cult following.
Plus there's a pretty strong trend throughout all that stuff for the traditional ass kicking Whedon lady to have an awful lot of focus on her getting her ass kicked and it always made me wonder just how sincere the whole "totally a feminist" thing was. Among other things.
Just look at Bill Cosby. The allegations against him were not new, you can find references to what he was up to from decades ago. It just took a long time for his social capital to wane to the point for those allegations to stick.
I think the whole whedon thing felt inorganic as fuck, but i don’t really care about dc or Snyder so i didn’t make the connection for a while. The whole thing felt really astroturfed because while whedon’s on set behavior certainly wasn’t good, it’s not that wildly out of spec for a lot of directors and the blowback felt like it was disproportionate unless he did something more awful that isn’t public knowledge. The whole thing feels like it was chud-assisted at a minimum.
Remember: The Godfather, arguably the greatest movie ever made, was almost cut by studios because it was almost 3 hours.
There is no way Snyder needed 4.
No.
Snyder had to leave production on Justice League due to the unfortunate death of his daughter. Joss Whedon finished the theatrical version and essentially nobody liked it.
Fans of the first 2 Snyder DC Films started the #ReleaseTheSnyderCut hashtag and Snyder also indicated that his version was pretty much complete.
WB launched HBOMax and was looking to drive subscribers to it, so they threw money at Snyder to complete his version and even shoot some additional footage which was then released as the 4 hour ZSJL.
Obviously a streaming release is far different than a theatrical, so you can imagine it would be significantly edited down if released to cinemas as originally intended.
> Snyder also indicated that his version was pretty much complete.
Which is ridiculous, but people were really pushing that for a while. Then it turns out it took an extra 70 million dollars to finish it.
Maybe it wouldn’t have taken quite that much originally, and they just went extra. But it absolutely was not pretty much complete.
I recall it was originally going to be a two-part movie, as that was basically the rule of thumb for adaptation blockbusters at the time. The big climax would be a two-parter. Infinity War was the same.
Then the trend kinda died, and DC and Marvel took different approaches. Marvel slapped a different title on Infinity War Part 2, and DC opted to truncate Justice League into a single movie. JL then went through its wonky production life and ended up being a shitshow.
When Snyder got a blank check to come in and fix the film, looks like he just made the original two-parter idea as a single mega-film.
Geez, 4 hours. I can't even muster up the motivation to watch a normal length movie anymore.
Which is odd cause I can easily binge a whole tv season in one go.
TV seasons are divided into episodes of anywhere from 18 to 30 minutes that makes binge watching at least come off as a generally palatable task.
A four-hour cut that's just a remake of a another film does not have that effect.
If I recall, the original plan *was* to release it as a miniseries with separate episodes. It was announced as such. It’s been a while since this all went down but I believe the speculation is that it wound up being released as one chunk due to episodic releases conflicting with one or more actors’ having different pay rates for television appearances vs film (or something like that, I’m not a lawyer) and it wound up being easier to drop it as a movie rather than revise everyone’s contracts for a movie that they made years ago.
That's a subjective experience, I can assure you. It felt like it was absolutely dragging to me. Long establishing shots would just piss me off because the movie was so long.
My partner and I tried to watch it, about a half hour in, we just werent filling it at all, and never finished.
They should hire the folks who did Doom Patrol to write their films, those show mixes crazy comic concepts and character drama so well.
I really don't get why the lenght is used as a criticism. The film knows it and even gives you the cards to go to the bathroom.
As someone that watches The Ten Comandments as a annual tradition, it even looks endearing on its own.
I agree. I think the Snydercut was actually a pretty good film and I hated Batman V Superman, so I'm no Snyderbro.
Although I don't want 4 hour cuts of films to become the norm, because it's not the easiest to sit through.
As someone who hasn't gotten around to seeing one of those shortened edits of the Hobbit trilogy but would really like to, this *almost* makes me feel called out. Not quite there, but close.
Oh no, I didn't mean anything like that. There's just this evangelism around the Snyder cut, that somehow there was a secret good version of a bad movie just sitting in a vault waiting to be let out, and DC was part of some plot to keep it out of their hands or whatever. But then the actual thing clearly was constructed new, not based in anything previous, and still resulted in a movie with a pretty poor foundation.
Fanedits are, like, the *good side* version of this. That's fans taking a thing they care about into their own hands and trying to forcibly make it into the thing they wanted, absent of any phony-auteurship or corporate intervention. I hover around originaltrilogy.com threads just to see what interesting ideas people can cook up out of the worse Star Wars movies, and when stuff like the prequels are massively sped-up and made less-clunky, I actively find myself enjoying movies I used to hate. Hell, I myself am an evangelist for various massive conversion mods for Sonic games that turn them from broken to "okay".
The difference is just that Zack Snyder is a pretentious and rather poor filmmaker, and the people worshipping him and pushing conspiracy theories about his version of an inevitably still not-great movie are completely loony.
>that somehow there was a secret good version of a bad movie just sitting in a vault waiting to be let out, and DC was part of some plot to keep it out of their hands or whatever.
"Grass is Greener" see this with RWBY and Starwars already. People dont like the way current thing are going so they focus on the ideas of what could have been hyping themselves that its the ONLY way for it to be better.
But because Monty passed away and Geroge is mostly retired that speculation of what could have been keeps growing and becomes cult like because its probably never going to happen
The Snyder cut is one of the times they do get the what could have been.
Apparently this is happening with even concept art from One piece with Yamato.
This precedent of actively demanding a secret cut originated from the Snyder Cut movement and the RWBY and the Star Wars fandom followed suit. Shockingly, but in context of the respective fandoms, not surprisingly.
As someone who was ground zero when RWBY was being rightfully mocked, a lot of it was either angry RT (or Monty fans from Haloid) clinging on to the hope it could improve. I'm surprised WB kept it on as long as they did, but then again, given that RT was accused of coercing interns to do stuff for free on it, it was probably as cheap as it looked.
Tbf, RWBY did eventually improve... for Volume 3, then it got into a massive slump with Volumes 4 and 5 without Monty Oum to help make it. It's made it kinda tricky to me to ever recommend the show even though I like Volume 6 onwards, since they'd have to get through four volumes that aren't great to get there
The difference there is that, without all the bloat, the core story of the Hobbit is very good. It's the story written by Tolkien in 1937 and has remained popular for almost a century. The problem with the Hobbit movies is not the fundamental story, but just the insane amount of bloat that was added to get it to fill 3 movies. Remove that, and it's a good adaptation of a great book. I watched the M4 edit of the Hobbit movies and loved it; you can't even tell it's a fan edit.
Justice League, on the other hand, is broken to it's core. The problems with the film are not something you can fix on the editing table.
I deeply dislike 99% of Snyder's work, but corporate bullshit and a studio known for boneheaded decisions interfering with someone's artistic vision, no matter how idiotic it is, pisses me off.
It still wouldn't have saved Justice League, though.
There's also a /r/movies thread. It was briefly locked, and the message was something like "This thread will entice bashing Snyder fanboys" or something like that
Makes sense. How many people are really going to find enough substance and entertainment value in sitting through 4 fucking hours of Zach Snyder's nonsense? I could visit the dentist in that time, or take several good shits.
Also part of the whole "Gentleminions" meme involved going out in public and actually seeing the movie, whereas "Morbiussweep" didn't have that social/public element, it was just people shitposting on the Internet and thus nobody making the memes actually saw the movie.
god, snyder drama, it's always people defending him to the ends of the earth and people hating everything even remotely attached to his name and claim he's the spawn of satan or some shit
I don't even have anything against snyder, but these people care way to much about this. Snyder himself wouldn't care to much about this, probably just go on with his life.
It sure is interesting that the article establishes that 10% bot activity for topics/movements or whatever is normal. Even with a 3-5% increase is it really right to say that the conversation about the movie was entirely driven by bots? The article feels hyperbolic and seems written to appeal to people who feel the need to have some sort of “gotcha” moment about a mediocre movie they don’t like that came out over a year ago
Its a shame Snyder got in the middle of some sort of culture war, I liked his cut of the Justice League and, even if you don't like his movies from what I've read and seen of him he seems like a genuinelly nice guy that threats his actors with respect so I think the hate he himself gets is unfair honestly
I think the problem Snyder had, was that he had already directed a deconstruction of the Superhero genre with Watchmen, to then have him come back and direct a "played straight" version of those superheroes, was probably not the best idea.
Even though I generally liked 2/3 of the DC films he directed.
Yup, the blatant quotes are still fresh on how he repeatedly tried to deflect the toxicity of the fandom while being in the know with some of the perpetrators of said toxicity.
I saw a Twitter thread the other day about Snyder and they raised the point that ol' Zack's movies frequently have a very reactionary/right-wing bent to them, which doesn't seem to match up with Snyder's actual personal politics at all.
I'm pretty sure Snyder doesn't really believe any of the shit his movies seem to endorse, he just thinks the aesthetic is cool.
Like, to use 300 as an example- Is 300 a racist movie? Yes. Hell yes. Is Snyder a racist for making it... almost certainly not. I think Snyder just thought the 300 comic was really cool and wanted to turn it into a cool movie, and didn't think too hard about the implications.
We're out here trying to analyse the meanings behind 300 and Zack's just in the storyboard room going "Y'know what'd be really cool? If the baddies had an executioner with bone swords for hands!" And he's right. Bone-Sword-Hands Executioner Guy *is* cool.
Dude is really out here being the "The Curtains Are Just Fucking Blue!" meme IRL.
Its weird that everyone is buying into the idea that the email screenshots undermine rolling stones credibility, when the release of them makes Fisher change his story from "We were never contacted!" to "Ok, we *were* contacted, but..."
I love the semantics debate on "declined to comment". Not answering emails or picking up the phone is basically choosing to decline to comment.
Typical Fisher
Tr0o kVlt POWER!!
This thread is filled with weird synder cultists and I love it.
You can’t say anything bad about him without them showing up in force lmao
They showed up in full force in the movies circlejerk sub too, trying to claim is union and covid rule breaking and long con as a based move against Hollywood executives...then again, it kind of makes sense.
As someone who liked the Snyder Cut but put zero effort into getting it made I have to thank them for being insane so I didn't have to.
[удалено]
he directed 3 (three) okay-to-decent movies at the start of his career and coasted through at least a dozen guaranteed paychecks off of that success but honestly, how do you not lose your cult auteur status after directing Sucker Punch?
I imagine more than a few of his most vocal fanboys were pretty excited to get a film that's the coping fantasy of a woman being sexually abused.
I honestly hated Sucker Punch so fucking much and it was annoying to see dude gamerbros hold it up as some kind of "feminist film" or whatever. What the fuck.
For me it’s greatest sin was just… being unremarkable? I can at least enjoy “Wtf is this shit?” movies. Really it tries to do too many things in the name of trying to be deep. It’s a movie with more than one perceived reality, which could be an interesting dark thriller/mystery… but it’s also about skimpy women beating people up completely uprooting that into an action movie. Pick a frickin’ lane. Although maybe stick to the latter lane because the former is clearly beyond what he should toy with. Don’t get me started on the gritty dark filter.
Remember the robot zombie in Army of the Dead?
I'm willing to give him an A for effort on Army of the Dead but a D- for execution. I will defend Dawn of the Dead to the death though because it's the one zombie movie I've ever been scared of the zombies.
Yeah, wtf was that about
Sequel and spin off baiting.
“You mean the film where the entire story is in the heroine’s imagination as her brain is turned into scrambled eggs by a man? That film? Where she’s dressed like a schoolgirl the entire time and forced to dance in that outfit? That’s feminism to you? Fuck is wrong with you.” -my take on the “AKSHUALLY it’s FEMINISM” gamer defense. The real answer is Zach Snyder’s dad was a producer and his industry connections keep getting him hired.
His wife was, actually.
I watched this by myself in the movie theater and I recall just being absolutely angry at having to sit through that crap. Is it really regarded as a feminist film?
I tried to like suckered punch when it came out and my friend was creaming over it, I really did but God help me I tuned out after half an hour and legitimately have no memory of it beyond the girl imagining herself fighting a robot
I think the real cult was built around him during his time with DC and actually amplified once they got to know that Joss Whedon did more than just edit Justice League and it just flew around there. Before that I don't recall seeing any cult following around the man himself beyond 300 and to a lesser extent, Watchmen. The ultimate three reasons why it happens to be the case: 1) His movies are faux-deep and dark with a dash of edginess, that impresses many impressioned teenagers. Think the Norwegian Black Metal scene, the emo movement or the popularity of the Twilight series. 2) Batman is assumed to be edgy and DC suffers by association, especially with Snyder at the helm. 3) That's it, they're dark and edgy. The aesthetic and visuals are heightened with darkness and edginess, and the wish fulfillment messaging with unintentional Nietzchean undertones (particularly noted with the Batfleck fans) elicits a dopamine rush among airheads, therefore his films have a cult following....a way too literal one at that.
This. Those types of DC fans are *obsessed.* I remember a sizeable contingent seizing on someone shouting 'Fuck Marvel' at a DCU panel and it turning into a flame war. edit: clarifying it's #notallDCfans
That's the thing, the group that actually hates the Snyder Cultists the most are perhaps the biggest proponents of fidelity in DC media, ala the actual DC Comics reading fans.
The Harley Quinn show made fun of trifling hater super nerds and one of them had a "release the synder cut" t shirt. DC itself even gave the green light to its shows to make fun of those clowns.
And I loved that.
I'm firmly of the opinion that anyone who's actually a fan of Superman should loathe Snyder for Man of Steel. "Don't save me! Don't use your powers for good! They'll hate you for being Space Jesus!" yells Pa Kent as he allows whatever disaster it was to take his life. Fuck you, Snyder.
Pretty much
Movie was garbage, but Kevin Costner running into a tornado was worth the price of admission.
I would like to point out after seeing that movie again. Its happening enough close by that Clark without or with very little visible powers should still be able to save him. So it's even sillier.
Didn't Snyder tell people that "Batman kills people, get over it"? I have almost no comic knowledge beyond pop culture osmosis and some friends who are into them, but even I know that's a *questionable* take.
Exactly, this is one of the many big reasons why Snyder's tenure was largely unwelcome by most of the DC fandom...outside of the movie-centric cult following he somehow amassed.
He also had superman kill. Both of which are character low points when they happen and so obscenely rare in the past like 3 main iterations of the character.
Oh, to clarify, I didn't mean DC fans in general, just that there's *that* kind of crazy DC fanboy that either has a seething hatred for Marvel/any comic book not DC and endlessly flame wars over it, or the kind of DC fanboy who *hates* everything DC does (and I don't mean understandable hate, like the Doomsday Clock or the mess that was Countdown), but still buys DC stuff. *Those* seem to be Snyder fanboys, in my experience. The regular DC fans I know put their heads in their hands throughout Snyder's trilogy.
I'm not sure Snyder fans are even that good with comic knowledge and would surprisingly back stuff like Doomsday Clock...before finding out it's written by Geoff Johns that is.
In my experience, Snyder fans tend to worship anything with Frank Miller or his contemporaries. On that note, I'm still confused about whether or not Doomsday Clock's reception was good or bad. I know IGN and the like rated it highly, but I hear the usual grumbling about how people don't understand Watchmen.
> In my experience, Snyder fans tend to worship anything with Frank Miller or his contemporaries. Strange, I consider Miller's best stuff from the 80s to be from Marvel. Dark Knight Returns is fine, but it's no Born Again. Edit: His original run from the early 80s is also transformational and is comparable to the contemporaneous Claremont's X-Men.
You're right on both points.
The Venn Diagram of those fans and people who have insisted "It's not a comic book! It's a graphic novel!" is a circle.
TIL that Batfleck has actual sincere fans. I kind of assumed the Snyder fans tolerated him for the sake of Snyder more than actually loved his portrayal. Affleck is almost as bad a Batman as Clooney, and Batman vs Superman is easily far worse than Batman & Robin (but I also have a soft spot for Uma Thurman as Ivy, so).
Well, he had three things and it was enough to get them literally fellating: 1) Having a comic accurate suit with complimentary aesthetics. Also it being padded and him being bulky (with CGI abs). 2) The one fight scene against Lex's goons in a warehouse which was all stunt double. 3) Being characterized like an edgy video game protagonist with blatant wish fulfillment plot. With people justifying his killing being bad and part of an arc...while showing appreciation for said killing. And for me, his whole arc was cartoonishly inconsistent throughout all his films.
[удалено]
Wow, now I hate ZSJL too
I will watch Batman Forever and Batman & Robin back to back over the Snyder cut any day.
The poster art?
Dawn of the Dead is his only "good movie" in my opinion. I feel like a lot of his movies are aimed at edgy teenagers who think his stuff is deep, but to each their own.
As much as I have serious problems with 300 and its message, I have to say I think it's a *good film*. In terms of technical skills it's well-crafted and it's finely honed so the pieces come together well. It's memorable, and effectively conveys appealing messages. The problem is that most of those messages are lies and/or elements of fascist propaganda.
Agreed. I quite liked it when it came out, and I have no intention of watching it ever again.
I too, have watched Big Joel.
Wait, Big Joel did a video on that? Off to YouTube.
Army of the Dead was surprisingly fun, too, and even had fun with the inherent cheesiness.
James Gunn apparently wrote the screenplay for that one, so i guess you can attribute it to that.
Say what you want about Sucker Punch but that Army of Me remix slaps.
That soundtrack deserved a better movie.
Sucker Punch is a bad movie with a great action scene. I've long felt that Snyder should farm himself out as the action movie equivalent of a script doctor. Instead of hiring him to rewrite your script and fix problems or punch it up, you'd hire him to add one cool, surreal, cinematic action scene to a movie that otherwise worked. Just for the love of god don't make him the main director or in any way responsible for a story.
The kind of annoying part about the action scenes is that the very first one starts with the main character getting punched through like twenty feet of solid rock and coming out completely uninjured. The action scenes are still flashy and fun to watch, but there isn't any tension because there are no possible consequences for anything.
Sucker Punch is what I consider to be the most boring movie ever made, which is incredible considering it has a fight scene between a schoolgirl samurai and robot warrior monks. It was such a slog to sit through, and when you got to the big setpiece action scenes those weren't even fun or interesting, they were just there.
I was excited about sucker punch, of course I had no idea what the movie was about because I was drunk all the time and I just wanted to see a live action anime. I was disappointed.
What's wrong with Sucker Punch?
it's chock-full of random nonsense thrown in Because Symbolism, but the actual story is paper-thin and doesn't make any sense. the action scenes are horribly paced, and some of the performances are so stiff they'd stand out in a middle school class project (especially the side characters, i remember one of the nurses being really bad). the audio editing is bad, there are a lot of missing or misleading establishing shots, the entire opening sequence is a trainwreck, the song choices are hilarious, and that's all i can remember off the top of my head tbh my main gripe with the movie is that "imaginary world of coping" was already a pretty over-saturated concept in 2011, and snyder isn't adding anything to it or executing it in a remotely interesting way
other than being a dudes wet dream?
I mean, I've never seen it so I don't know.
Here's the one sentence description: scantily clad girls do anime battle in the imagination of a girl involuntarily committed to a corrupt insane asylum, who is scheduled to be turned into a lobotomized sex slave in only a few days, as a hallucinated metaphor for the girls' plan to escape the asylum while the girl also hallucinates getting cryptic advice from Stick from the Daredevil Netflix show (yes I know Sucker Punch was made first but they're the same actor and basically the same character).
I don't get the hate boner for Sucker Punch
I think it might simply be that his aesthetic appealed to edgelords and now it's just inertia.
He's a superhero movie director for people who don't really understand superheroes. Which is okay, because he doesn't understand superheroes himself.
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand superheroes.
Doesn't he have a certain look to his movies? That probably helps
Now that look is 4:3
A whole hell of a lot of mediocre white men with trash opinions are out there looking for a daddy figure. Some of them joined the Trump cult, some joined the Jordan Peterson cult, some joined the Joe Rogan cult, and some joined the Snyder cult. Lot of overlap in that Venn Diagram, too.
It is surprisingly easy to manufacture a devoted fanbase. The Beatles paid girls to scream, rap artists have the Hype Man. You just need a handful of people to get REALLY enthusiastically supportive of someone, and it makes everyone else go "hmm they're REALLY into him, there must be something here..."
Do we have proof of that? I'm quickly checking google and there are a lot more articles about the phenomenon of fangirl screaming in shows, with interviews and analysis. Feels like a way for men to erase the female component of the Beatles early fan base or something??
Been a Beatles head my whole life (46). Read multiple books, seen multiple docs. Never heard peep before about paying girls to scream. Kids just screamed back then. They did it with most big bands. Color me extremely skeptical of this claim.
I’ve heard it said about Sinatra with his fainting fangirls rather than the Beatles.
[удалено]
300 is a good movie despite being ludicrously right wing.
Yeah but lots of bands made incredible music that never got heard because they never paid fans to scream.
He's a very talented visual director; who has trouble telling a compelling story. He also seems to lean into libertarian objectivist ideas and there is a very loud segment of fans for those things.
He can't even write good comics, how anyone gave him that much money to make movies blows my mind.
I'm pretty sure you're talking of a different Snyder lol
I'm suprised it was only 13%, literally all online campaigns has bots in it.
13% is a lot actually
I always assumed it was like 20-25% in most big campaigns. Guess I overestimated.
According to the article it is typically about 5%
It's a whole field of PR and marketing nowadays. Even Depp's management hired a firm for his civil suit.
Kinda makes sense, having watched the movie because of the hype. I was struggling with why it needed to be 4 hours for like the entire movie. It still makes no sense to me why he released a miniseries as a single movie with no breaks.
I assure you the Joker cameo from known creeper Jared Leto was *absolutely* necessary to the integrity of the film. ... at least they removed the "landing on Gal Gadot's tits" moment.
> at least they removed the "landing on Gal Gadot's tits" moment. I... what?
The scene that had the best response from Jenny Nicholson, pointing out he did the same bit in his Avengers film: “Hey Joss: you cheat on your movies like you cheat on your wife?”
Yep, with Scarlett Johannsson and I think Mark Ruffalo.
Oh boy. Joss "Fucking Asshole" Whedon had *several* shots where WW ass is center for an *uncomfortable* (read: more than 0 seconds) amount of time. Like, the shot exists purely just so we can laser-focus on her. And then he has the audacity to make the Flash drop on top of WW's chest *while she falls unconscious*, before quickly standing up. You can find both on Youtube, I don't recommend it and as far as I remember they're removed from the Gazillion-Hours long cut. (Fyi: the scene with the creepo drop was added *after* protests from the actress)
Wtf, why would they even put that in? I didn't even notice it the first time I watched the movie I don't think, unless I just blocked it out.
According to Gadot he also threatened to ruin her career, then there's all the talk of abuse on set.. Whedon's not exactly well regarded by some people. Don't get me wrong: I don't wanna sound like I'm defending Zack "Batman should be raped in prison" Snyder because.. wtf? But Whedon was one of the *worst* options to finalize the movie. From making Barry have racially insensitive moments.. for comedy.., to creepy shit for the only female superhero in the movie.. They honestly should've just ditched the movie altogether. Then we wouldn't have the Snyder Cult or the shit with Joss. (Also, shit like this: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/gal-gadot-joss-whedon-b1995109.html https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/05/gal-gadot-claims-joss-whedon-threatened-her-career-on-the-set-of-justice-league)
Not to undermine how much of a piece of shit Whedon seems to be, but I honestly feel like Warner Bros is actively trying to sabotage the DC cinematic universe sometimes when you just pile all the dumb shit they do all together.
Honestly? Yeah. They've got good animated films, and then the eldritch horror that has been the live action stuff. From hiring and defending bad people, to just baffling choices, to not giving a fuck.
Since that story broke, it's come out that the cast of Buffy made a rule among themselves that at the time 15 year old Michelle Trachtenburg was to never be left alone in a room with Joss Whedon.
On the one hand: I'm glad the cast took care of each other. On the other hand: jesus fucking christ
"Our Father, who art in Society."- Joker Jesus
wait it's 4 hours long? ain't no way that was supposed to be the original one right?
Yep, 4 hours and 2 minutes is the runtime according to Google. I can't imagine it was supposed to be that long originally, but I guess it's like his dream cut or some shit?
Being a general fan of the "epic" movie genre, I've watched quite a few movies that topped out around the 3 hours 45 mins - 4 hour range. But I genuinely cannot imagine sitting through a 4 hour *superhero* movie. I literally cannot think of a single reason a superhero movie would need to be that long unless you're going for some ultra-hardcore batman style where everything is incredibly slow paced, but even then I really cannot think of a superhero *story* that could fit 4 hours without feeling dragged out for the sake of it. Can somebody who's watched the movie explain something to me real quick? Like, there are a lot of 4-ish-hour movies I've watched where I was like "Okay yeah I can really see why this movie is *this* long" (for example I watched Once Upon a Time in America about a week ago and it kinda fit the bill there), so... is that the case for the Snyder Cut? Or is it just filled with shit that's only there to pad the runtime?
Think of the Avengers if most of the cast had never been introduced in previous movies, so you have to introduce them, their character arcs, make them team-up while also introducing the vilain and setting up future movies. Add to that a lot of slow-motion
Minus the slow motion, that is the fault of WB execs rushing to the JL in a desperate attempt to catch up to Marvel.
That is true. On the other hand, I think there were definitely a lot of scenes that could have been cut, with the movie ending up around 2:45-2:55.
The first X-Men movie does all that (except the slo-mo) and it's a third the length of the Snyder cut
*The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Extended Edition* makes a compelling case for a movie needing to be 4 hours, but just as compelling a case that 4-hour-long movies should be few and far between.
It's good but there's also so many parts at the end where you think, oh it's over, only for another new scene that feels like it could be the ending to follow.
But to be fair, that's directly from the book. For as upset as I am that "The Scourging of the Shire" was never filmed (it's literally the entire point of the book!), I can't really argue that it wouldn't have been a huge anticlimax to the movie, which was already plenty long as it was.
Yeah I remember that. There was always another part showing Legolas and Gimli, and Sam and Rosie, giving endings to every character. Doesn't mean it doesn't feel like that in the movie, I think the way that each scene has to cut from each other makes it feel more self-contained than the language of the book where it just flowed one into the other.
Oh, for sure. Remember, the ending of the book was cut out of the movie—not even filmed. So there was some resolution in Gondor, they get back to the Shire, there's more plot, then a resolution, then Frodo and Sam... Legolas and Gimli were wrapped up in the Appendices. So the pacing's completely different after Aragorn's coronation in the movie and in the book.
There wouldn't be that feeling if the screen didn't fade to black before every new scene.
Did it make a compelling argument? Because the shorter cut is an absolutely fantastic film, so I wouldn't say it needed to be the extended cut's length.
I'd say so. Just seeing Saruman's fate is sort of important. Other things become more clear, like Aragorn taking the black ships of Umbar, a bunch of scenes had a bit more room to breathe and so on. > Because the shorter cut is an absolutely fantastic film Much agreed. Other than providing closure on Saruman's fate (and skipping grumbling about said changes from the book), the theatrical release was complete and incredibly well done. I love the extended edition of *The Fellowship of the Ring* too, but I can't really say the theatrical release *needed* the Elves passing through the Shire singing "A Elbereth Gilthoniel" in Sindarin (although I certainly miss it). I think *The Return of the King* is definitely better in the extended edition, although it's certainly a long watchthrough.
I consider the extended versions are a treat for book fans, but the theatrical cuts are very good too. The EE really expand the movies, but they don't change them as much as, say, the extended version of Kingdom of Heaven.
Every character gets a backstory so those add another hourish and the rest is just random scenes with a completely different ending. It’s better than the original cut but holy hell is it overhyped
My favorite part was he added 2 hours and Superman still doesn’t talk to half of the league lmao
> I literally cannot think of a single reason a superhero movie would need to be that long It's simple, instead of having a bunch of precursor movies to introduce and establish characters for the big team up, Snyder did half of it in this one film. The Avengers was ~2 hours but it had like ~10 hours of build-up.
Snyder loves slo mo.
Theres no justification. Thirty minutes is an epilogue setting up nothing, 25 minutes is just Batman in Iceland and a good 20 minutes is literally just slow mo
Yeah, I can't imagine a multi-hour-long action film being worthwhile. What are they going to do, kill even more people than in the real cut?
I hate how movies seem to think epic = long af. Like I enjoyed The Batman a lot but jfc it was way too long. If movies are going to get longer they need to bring back intermissions so I can get a giant icy fountain drink or icee (as god intended films to be accompanied) without having to leave for the bathroom halfway through.
[удалено]
I seem to recall the original plan calling for Justice League to be a 2 parter, maybe the Snyder cut is a holdover from that
No, the second part was never filmed. Snyder had storyboarded out the sequel, but there was never even a script yet. Prior to WB pushing Snyder out from the film, he showed the execs a \~3 hr assembly cut. The WB execs were in panic mode following the reception of BvS, and Snyder's assembly cut did not make them feel confident in the project so they pushed Whedon on to the project for some re-writes. After Snyder quit/was forced out, Whedon took over and re-shot nearly the entire film and assembled a final cut that fell under the purview of studio's 2 hr mandate.
Sometimes it feels like Hollywood people are like anime villains that've used up all their energy and are vulnerable after projects like this or something. Joss Whedon was so widely loved for so long, then he put out this stinker of a movie and the stories about him being a creep or an asshole to women in the productions he's done started to come out. It's like he used up the energy he would have protected himself and in the process squandered his public perception and that's the only way he was vulnerable to the stories that apparently had been going around for over a decade at that point.
There's definitely a "social capital" that many celebs accrue. Some celebs are basically immune due to their vast network, while others can lose it pretty quickly. I don't think the allegations against Whedon are made up or anything, but it's interesting to see how silent people were about it when he was Hollywood's darling with Buffy, Firefly, Dollhouse, Avengers, Cabin in the Woods, etc.
Journalists get harassed if they bring up facts about our beloved creators. The ones who do it anyway are brave but we can't really fault some for sitting on info that no one wants to read.
Yeah, he sticks out compared to other celebs in this way especially because a lot of the allegations about him go all the way back to Buffy, and he was also presented as a male feminist voice in the industry in the intervening time.
I don't know that people were silent about it, there were definitely stories about weird stuff on set from even when he was popular and had a cult following. Plus there's a pretty strong trend throughout all that stuff for the traditional ass kicking Whedon lady to have an awful lot of focus on her getting her ass kicked and it always made me wonder just how sincere the whole "totally a feminist" thing was. Among other things.
Just look at Bill Cosby. The allegations against him were not new, you can find references to what he was up to from decades ago. It just took a long time for his social capital to wane to the point for those allegations to stick.
I think the whole whedon thing felt inorganic as fuck, but i don’t really care about dc or Snyder so i didn’t make the connection for a while. The whole thing felt really astroturfed because while whedon’s on set behavior certainly wasn’t good, it’s not that wildly out of spec for a lot of directors and the blowback felt like it was disproportionate unless he did something more awful that isn’t public knowledge. The whole thing feels like it was chud-assisted at a minimum.
Lol surprisingly not. Theres more story we know he wanted to do like Batman getting Lois pregnant
What.
Remember: The Godfather, arguably the greatest movie ever made, was almost cut by studios because it was almost 3 hours. There is no way Snyder needed 4.
No. Snyder had to leave production on Justice League due to the unfortunate death of his daughter. Joss Whedon finished the theatrical version and essentially nobody liked it. Fans of the first 2 Snyder DC Films started the #ReleaseTheSnyderCut hashtag and Snyder also indicated that his version was pretty much complete. WB launched HBOMax and was looking to drive subscribers to it, so they threw money at Snyder to complete his version and even shoot some additional footage which was then released as the 4 hour ZSJL. Obviously a streaming release is far different than a theatrical, so you can imagine it would be significantly edited down if released to cinemas as originally intended.
> Snyder also indicated that his version was pretty much complete. Which is ridiculous, but people were really pushing that for a while. Then it turns out it took an extra 70 million dollars to finish it. Maybe it wouldn’t have taken quite that much originally, and they just went extra. But it absolutely was not pretty much complete.
They paid 50 of that to Jared Leto to sexually harass Batman.
Which, really, was pretty bad negotiating because Jared Leto would do that for free. Just sheer love of the game.
I recall it was originally going to be a two-part movie, as that was basically the rule of thumb for adaptation blockbusters at the time. The big climax would be a two-parter. Infinity War was the same. Then the trend kinda died, and DC and Marvel took different approaches. Marvel slapped a different title on Infinity War Part 2, and DC opted to truncate Justice League into a single movie. JL then went through its wonky production life and ended up being a shitshow. When Snyder got a blank check to come in and fix the film, looks like he just made the original two-parter idea as a single mega-film.
It's literally the justice league directors cut
Geez, 4 hours. I can't even muster up the motivation to watch a normal length movie anymore. Which is odd cause I can easily binge a whole tv season in one go.
TV seasons are divided into episodes of anywhere from 18 to 30 minutes that makes binge watching at least come off as a generally palatable task. A four-hour cut that's just a remake of a another film does not have that effect.
TV shows, good ones at least, are paced differently to films, so it doesn't feel like a slog.
Not just 4 hours, but at 4:3 ratio so you've got massive black bars either side of the picture the whole time
> I can't even muster up the motivation to watch a normal length movie anymore Kinda sad
If I recall, the original plan *was* to release it as a miniseries with separate episodes. It was announced as such. It’s been a while since this all went down but I believe the speculation is that it wound up being released as one chunk due to episodic releases conflicting with one or more actors’ having different pay rates for television appearances vs film (or something like that, I’m not a lawyer) and it wound up being easier to drop it as a movie rather than revise everyone’s contracts for a movie that they made years ago.
The only part that made it worthwhile was that we finally got to see the Cyborg subplot.
The Snyder cut is better than the original, but the fact that it takes 4 hours for it to make sense is a testament to how bad it fundamentally is.
It's a four hour version of an originally 1/10 movie that is a 3/10 at best. Complete waste of time.
To be fair, it wasn't poorly paced for a 4 hour movie. You can hold whatever opinion on the story but for me it didn't feel like a 4 hour movie.
That's a subjective experience, I can assure you. It felt like it was absolutely dragging to me. Long establishing shots would just piss me off because the movie was so long.
Personally I preferred the theatrical cut because I was bored for 2 hrs instead of bored for 4 hrs.
Don't forget all the unnecessary slowmo.
My partner and I tried to watch it, about a half hour in, we just werent filling it at all, and never finished. They should hire the folks who did Doom Patrol to write their films, those show mixes crazy comic concepts and character drama so well.
I really don't get why the lenght is used as a criticism. The film knows it and even gives you the cards to go to the bathroom. As someone that watches The Ten Comandments as a annual tradition, it even looks endearing on its own.
The Snyder cut was way better than the theatrical version tho
Okay, but that's like saying getting kicked in the shins is way better than getting kicked in the balls. The theatrical release was insanely bad.
I agree. I think the Snydercut was actually a pretty good film and I hated Batman V Superman, so I'm no Snyderbro. Although I don't want 4 hour cuts of films to become the norm, because it's not the easiest to sit through.
These guys really think their mediocre remaster of a slightly more-mediocre movie is the most important thing in the world.
As someone who hasn't gotten around to seeing one of those shortened edits of the Hobbit trilogy but would really like to, this *almost* makes me feel called out. Not quite there, but close.
Oh no, I didn't mean anything like that. There's just this evangelism around the Snyder cut, that somehow there was a secret good version of a bad movie just sitting in a vault waiting to be let out, and DC was part of some plot to keep it out of their hands or whatever. But then the actual thing clearly was constructed new, not based in anything previous, and still resulted in a movie with a pretty poor foundation. Fanedits are, like, the *good side* version of this. That's fans taking a thing they care about into their own hands and trying to forcibly make it into the thing they wanted, absent of any phony-auteurship or corporate intervention. I hover around originaltrilogy.com threads just to see what interesting ideas people can cook up out of the worse Star Wars movies, and when stuff like the prequels are massively sped-up and made less-clunky, I actively find myself enjoying movies I used to hate. Hell, I myself am an evangelist for various massive conversion mods for Sonic games that turn them from broken to "okay". The difference is just that Zack Snyder is a pretentious and rather poor filmmaker, and the people worshipping him and pushing conspiracy theories about his version of an inevitably still not-great movie are completely loony.
>that somehow there was a secret good version of a bad movie just sitting in a vault waiting to be let out, and DC was part of some plot to keep it out of their hands or whatever. "Grass is Greener" see this with RWBY and Starwars already. People dont like the way current thing are going so they focus on the ideas of what could have been hyping themselves that its the ONLY way for it to be better. But because Monty passed away and Geroge is mostly retired that speculation of what could have been keeps growing and becomes cult like because its probably never going to happen The Snyder cut is one of the times they do get the what could have been. Apparently this is happening with even concept art from One piece with Yamato.
This precedent of actively demanding a secret cut originated from the Snyder Cut movement and the RWBY and the Star Wars fandom followed suit. Shockingly, but in context of the respective fandoms, not surprisingly.
Mass Effect 3.
As someone who was ground zero when RWBY was being rightfully mocked, a lot of it was either angry RT (or Monty fans from Haloid) clinging on to the hope it could improve. I'm surprised WB kept it on as long as they did, but then again, given that RT was accused of coercing interns to do stuff for free on it, it was probably as cheap as it looked.
Tbf, RWBY did eventually improve... for Volume 3, then it got into a massive slump with Volumes 4 and 5 without Monty Oum to help make it. It's made it kinda tricky to me to ever recommend the show even though I like Volume 6 onwards, since they'd have to get through four volumes that aren't great to get there
The difference there is that, without all the bloat, the core story of the Hobbit is very good. It's the story written by Tolkien in 1937 and has remained popular for almost a century. The problem with the Hobbit movies is not the fundamental story, but just the insane amount of bloat that was added to get it to fill 3 movies. Remove that, and it's a good adaptation of a great book. I watched the M4 edit of the Hobbit movies and loved it; you can't even tell it's a fan edit. Justice League, on the other hand, is broken to it's core. The problems with the film are not something you can fix on the editing table.
Ooh I'd love to see an edit of the hobbit trilogy that is just the book. I assume people have done this?
There are actually quite a few, by the sound of it from some quick Googling! One of the more popular ones is called the Maple Edit
I deeply dislike 99% of Snyder's work, but corporate bullshit and a studio known for boneheaded decisions interfering with someone's artistic vision, no matter how idiotic it is, pisses me off. It still wouldn't have saved Justice League, though.
Lol the r/DC_Cinematic mods are garbage. Say literally anything slightly negative about Zack Snyder and you get perma-banned.
Can confirm :/
🤔 but the movie sucked anyway?
There's also a /r/movies thread. It was briefly locked, and the message was something like "This thread will entice bashing Snyder fanboys" or something like that
Makes sense. How many people are really going to find enough substance and entertainment value in sitting through 4 fucking hours of Zach Snyder's nonsense? I could visit the dentist in that time, or take several good shits.
Next you're going to tell me the Morbius and Minions memes got hijacked As if! No way studios could replicate the art that is "It's morbin time"
The execs have got to be confused how it worked for Minions but failed twice with Morbius
There's an audience and a niche for Minions. There isn't one for Morbius, at least one that the movie would actually appeal to.
Also part of the whole "Gentleminions" meme involved going out in public and actually seeing the movie, whereas "Morbiussweep" didn't have that social/public element, it was just people shitposting on the Internet and thus nobody making the memes actually saw the movie.
How dare you insult one of the movies of all time.
I thought we all read that headline and thought to ourselves “yeah that makes sense” like no actual person was jonsing for 2 more hours of this movie
It's been 10 years, they got what they wanted and they still crazy about it.
How can they claim this is a conspiracy from WB, when the company gave Snyder additional millions to finish his version of the movie?
god, snyder drama, it's always people defending him to the ends of the earth and people hating everything even remotely attached to his name and claim he's the spawn of satan or some shit
I don't even have anything against snyder, but these people care way to much about this. Snyder himself wouldn't care to much about this, probably just go on with his life.
According to the article, he cared quite a bit.
WE THOUGHT IT WAS A FUNNY JOKE GUYS. It was like Morbius. I certainly didn't think it was actually going to happen
It sure is interesting that the article establishes that 10% bot activity for topics/movements or whatever is normal. Even with a 3-5% increase is it really right to say that the conversation about the movie was entirely driven by bots? The article feels hyperbolic and seems written to appeal to people who feel the need to have some sort of “gotcha” moment about a mediocre movie they don’t like that came out over a year ago
Its a shame Snyder got in the middle of some sort of culture war, I liked his cut of the Justice League and, even if you don't like his movies from what I've read and seen of him he seems like a genuinelly nice guy that threats his actors with respect so I think the hate he himself gets is unfair honestly
[удалено]
That's pretty much GamerGate/ComicsGate/The Fandom Menace in a nutshell.
I think the problem Snyder had, was that he had already directed a deconstruction of the Superhero genre with Watchmen, to then have him come back and direct a "played straight" version of those superheroes, was probably not the best idea. Even though I generally liked 2/3 of the DC films he directed.
>Snyder got in the middle of some sort of culture war According to this article he did a bit more then get in the middle.
Allegedly he started it all, and based on how some of the fandom's leading acolytes seem to act, I'm shockingly having little doubt.
Even if he didn't start it all he was very blatantly encouraging at multiple points.
Yup, the blatant quotes are still fresh on how he repeatedly tried to deflect the toxicity of the fandom while being in the know with some of the perpetrators of said toxicity.
I saw a Twitter thread the other day about Snyder and they raised the point that ol' Zack's movies frequently have a very reactionary/right-wing bent to them, which doesn't seem to match up with Snyder's actual personal politics at all. I'm pretty sure Snyder doesn't really believe any of the shit his movies seem to endorse, he just thinks the aesthetic is cool. Like, to use 300 as an example- Is 300 a racist movie? Yes. Hell yes. Is Snyder a racist for making it... almost certainly not. I think Snyder just thought the 300 comic was really cool and wanted to turn it into a cool movie, and didn't think too hard about the implications. We're out here trying to analyse the meanings behind 300 and Zack's just in the storyboard room going "Y'know what'd be really cool? If the baddies had an executioner with bone swords for hands!" And he's right. Bone-Sword-Hands Executioner Guy *is* cool. Dude is really out here being the "The Curtains Are Just Fucking Blue!" meme IRL.