[Movie] Snyder Cut: Justice League

[ohiostate124]

Does anyone care in 2020? let alone 2021?

Based on the fact that it is happening, I’d say that the answer is a resounding yes.

[Orby]

Not like it matters. You can't polish a turd. All other Zack Snyder DC movies were a dumpster fire. The "uncut" Justice League won't make a difference. It will still be another shitty Snyder movie.

Yea but now we get extra added shit on top of it :P

[Cosmic Janitor]

While it would be interesting to see how a different vision plays out, at the end of the day the idea of having another grim-dark verse version of snyder does absolutely nothing for me. I'm not sure why people think he would produce something better, maybe he will use less red filter, but that will come at the cost of 100 times more jesus comparisons.

[Egomaniac]

Yea but now we get extra added shit on top of it :P

yeah...like an extra hour and a half worth.

Say what you want about the "Whedon Cut"...at least it was only 2 hours long.

[Eapoe]

Why was everyone so eager for this? Do they think it’s going to turn a trash movie into an award winning masterpiece?
Personal opinion obviously, but the only DC movie recently made that was good was the first Wonder Woman (havent seen Joker yet). Everything else has been junk.

[Ausr]

Why was everyone so eager for this? Do they think it’s going to turn a trash movie into an award winning masterpiece?
Personal opinion obviously, but the only DC movie recently made was the first Wonder Woman (hasn’t seen Joker yet). Everything else has been junk.

I don't get the praise Aquaman gets either. The god awful CGI threw me right out of any enjoyment of the movie.

[Eapoe]

I don't get the praise Aquaman gets either. The god awful CGI threw me right out of any enjoyment of the movie.

I agree that I don’t understand it. I think the trend lately, after watching some YouTube critics, is that people are wanting fun, light hearted comic book movies more recently. I’m only stating that for the high praise of Thor: Ragnarok (which I thought was awful), Aquaman with its emphasis on comedy portions, and Gaurdians of the Galaxy.
I loved GotG, but they were set up to be that comical dynamic. The story was made that way. Aquaman, afaik, has always been more of a serious character. Same with Thor, who already has cinematic universe setup as the serious, stoic, yet awkward comic relief from a one liner here and there (while being awkwardly serious (“he’s adopted” line for instance)); but then suddenly in Ragnarok he’s a wise cracking, 4th wall breaking character. I wasn’t a huge fan.
I’m not saying I don’t like comedy super hero style setups. As stated, GotG is phenomenal, and I love Deadpool, but it makes sense in those scenarios.
Anyways, I’m getting off point. TLDR: I agree with you on Aquaman.
I’m not sure why the Snyder cut is so wanted. Are people wanting more upskirt shots of Wonder Woman, or more awkward and unfunny Flash dialogue (the startled look with Superman watching him was admittedly funny), or the now infamous Superman cgi? Some parts with Aquaman were okay, but pretty underutilized as a character.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Joker was also good, but calling it a DC movie is highly misleading. It's a bona fide drama with a very, very thin coat of DC paint. It was essentially bleeding heart film makers smuggling an original movie by the studio execs by hiding it behind the thin veil of a comic book movie.

[Eapoe]

Joker was also good, but calling it a DC movie is highly misleading. It's a bona fide drama with a very, very thin coat of DC paint. It was essentially bleeding heart film makers smuggling an original movie by the studio execs by hiding it behind the thin veil of a comic book movie.

That’s kind of how I felt it was watching previews. Always looked like it was just a really amazingly written drama made about mental health and mental break down, but they couldn’t get it accepted to be made a movie until they turned it into Joker. Still intend to watch it at some point.

[Gallahadd]

Joker was also good, but calling it a DC movie is highly misleading. It's a bona fide drama with a very, very thin coat of DC paint. It was essentially bleeding heart film makers smuggling an original movie by the studio execs by hiding it behind the thin veil of a comic book movie.

Indeed. You could change a handful of names and it would be totally unrelated. Nothing in the actual story has any ties to DC.

Joker owes far more to movies like Taxi Driver, or King of Comedy, than it does to any DC movie.

[Ivanstone]

I agree that I don’t understand it. I think the trend lately, after watching some YouTube critics, is that people are wanting fun, light hearted comic book movies more recently. I’m only stating that for the high praise of Thor: Ragnarok (which I thought was awful), Aquaman with its emphasis on comedy portions, and Gaurdians of the Galaxy.
I loved GotG, but they were set up to be that comical dynamic. The story was made that way. The story was made that way. Aquaman, afaik, has always been more of a serious character. Same with Thor, who already has cinematic universe setup as the serious, stoic, yet awkward comic relief from a one liner here and there (while being awkwardly serious (“he’s adopted” line for instance)); but then suddenly in Ragnarok he’s a wise cracking, 4th wall breaking character. I wasn’t a huge fan.

There's nothing inherently comedic about the Guardians. Its only a superhero comedy because James Gunn wanted to make a superhero comedy. Transplanting the idea to Thor is a little out of place but its easily the best of the 3 Thor movies and properly makes use of Hemsworth's comedic talents.

Aquaman's been the butt of everyone's jokes for decades. They really only have been seriously building up the character properly in recent years. I thought the Aquaman movie was solid. Its a straight ahead superhero flick. It doesn't try to be great but avoids being stupid.

[Beefhammer]

Yay, we get to see how crappy this would have been.

The only thing that could save this abortion of a movie is to go back in time and stop it from being made.

[Gelannerai]

The only thing that could save this abortion of a movie is to go back in time and stop it from being made.

Yep. One hallmark of a good story is respect for the characters in it. In the first Game of Thrones book, Martin legitimately tried to figure out a way for Ned Stark to make it out alive, but every option would’ve degraded the character’s values of honesty and reliability. Ned didn’t make it. Snyder doesn’t respect his characters. Every movie he makes is essentially just a montage of Snyder cosplaying as different characters. He replaces the characters’ values with his own, and then belittles anyone that points this out.

[Mirishka]

Sorry,No. Can not stand his version of Supes.

Agreed, he was just too... sad/pouty, and I say that as a huge fan of Henry Cavill. MoS was a decent enough film but they went into it wanting a gritty/dark take on Superman (because of the huge success of Nolan's DK trilogy) and he isn't a dark/gritty character.

If anything I'm curious to see just how different Snyder's version is, but its more like... the kind of morbid curiosity like when you drive past a car wreck.

[Skulltaker]

Why do movies have award shows then

So that a bunch of inconsequential people can make themselves feel good about what they do and how inconsequential it is.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Agreed, he was just too... sad/pouty, and I say that as a huge fan of Henry Cavill. MoS was a decent enough film but they went into it wanting a gritty/dark take on Superman (because of the huge success of Nolan's DK trilogy) and he isn't a dark/gritty character.

I legitimately don't get this. Why did they think that was a good idea? It would have made sense if they had some grandiose plans for a bunch of superman movies, but the second already was practically an early justice league movie. Why not use the contrast between the gritty and dark character of batman vs the hopefull and inspiring character of superman to utilise the diffence between the characters and build a legitimate conflict that is believable? Or if you want an elseworld dark superman, why not contrast it with a different incarnation of batman? In the end it just felt like they tried to out-edge one another.

Not to mention other questionable choices like Jessy Eisenberg's Lex Luthor. He should have been the Riddler or Joker.
And again, thinking about Bats vs Subs makes me once again wonder why people are so desperate for that snyder cut?

[Mirishka]

I think they getting the cast back and also doing some reshoots, but might be wrong.

Nope, HBO shot that down.

https://www.ign.com/articles/zack-sn...atman-superman

[Egomaniac]

I think they getting the cast back and also doing some reshoots, but might be wrong.

It wouldn't really be "the Snyder Cut" if they did more reshoots.

[ohiostate124]

They are not doing reshoots. Unless something changes, they are just recording some new dialogue.

[Ielenia]

While Snyder has done a lot of questionable of things in his projects I think most people can agree that BvS was a superior product to JL.

But "Justice League" is not a very high bar to beat, is it? That's like saying a punch to the face is better than a punch to the balls. Both are bad, but one hurts less than the other.

So I am quite interested in seeing what he has to offer here. It's also important for DC to have a GOOD Justice League movie if they are ever going match Marvel.

And that is highly unlikely to happen unless DC introduces the JL heroes properly, with their own movies or TV series, before doing a JL movie. Otherwise a good portion of the film would be wasted making quick, super abbreviated introductions for all the heroes.