[Movie] Snyder Cut: Justice League

[DingDongKing]

I’m factually correct in saying there wasn’t character development in this cut that wasn’t in the theatrical, which was that persons main point.

1. Cyborg’s arc was completely different given his mother wasn’t in the theatrical and his Dad lives in the theatrical cut. Difference. He’s coming to terms with the idea that his powers are a gift, not a curse and he isn’t alone in this world. He was basically just a robot dude in the theatrical film because Whedon/Johns/Berg didn’t want an ‘angry black man at the centre of a franchise film’.

2. Batman’s arc is completely different given he’s not trying to commit suicide or whatever was implied in the theatrical. He’s just trying to be the best leader he can for the team. He also isn’t moping over Superman as much as he is in the theatrical cut of the film.

3. Aquaman’s arc lined up with his solo movie versus whatever was in the theatrical cut, which was more to do with ‘this is a waste of time and I don’t want to die’. Here he’s understanding his place in the world.

4. Wonder Woman isn’t moping about Steve Trevor but instead has a yearning to return home and is co-leading the team with Batman.

5. Flash is probably the only one who is basically the same, but is less Shaggy from Scooby Doo and more just new to being a hero.

So yeah. Not the same. It’s okay if you didn’t enjoy the film. There’s no need to try and take away the enjoyment of others or try and ‘factually’ nail a film when it’s not valid. Peace.

[Bodakane]

1. Cyborg’s arc was completely different given his mother wasn’t in the theatrical and his Dad lives in the theatrical cut. Difference. He’s coming to terms with the idea that his powers are a gift, not a curse and he isn’t alone in this world. He was basically just a robot dude in the theatrical film because Whedon/Johns/Berg didn’t want an ‘angry black man at the centre of a franchise film’.

2. Batman’s arc is completely different given he’s not trying to commit suicide or whatever was implied in the theatrical. He’s just trying to be the best leader he can for the team. He also isn’t moping over Superman as much as he is in the theatrical cut of the film.

3. Aquaman’s arc lined up with his solo movie versus whatever was in the theatrical cut, which was more to do with ‘this is a waste of time and I don’t want to die’. Here he’s understanding his place in the world.

4. Wonder Woman isn’t moping about Steve Trevor but instead has a yearning to return home and is co-leading the team with Batman.

5. Flash is probably the only one who is basically the same, but is less Shaggy from Scooby Doo and more just new to being a hero.

So yeah. Not the same. It’s okay if you didn’t enjoy the film. There’s no need to try and take away the enjoyment of others or try and ‘factually’ nail a film when it’s not valid. Peace.

You're confusing different story arcs for character development.

The point made to me is that the theatrical cut didn't have character development and this one did. My point was that there was just as much character development in both.

I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone. I'm being told X happened, when X did not happen. Like it, love it, dislike it or hate it, I don't care. Just don't tell me this was better BECAUSE it had X when the other didn't, when neither had much of X at all.

[Aurrora]

so it WAS a scream after all. which is... a choice.

I don't see what you think you're getting at here, the Mother Boxes sensed Superman's death with that scream. They weren't awakening because they sensed a kryptonian, but rather that there was no longer a kryptonian on the planet; which is why they didn't awaken at the end of Man of Steel. It explicitly states this later in the film that the mother boxes were afraid of him.

It's basically Silas used the human's mother box to rebuild his son, it senses Superman and goes back to sleep after building Cyborg, Superman dies, the mother box senses this and awakens on Themyscira.

[DingDongKing]

You're confusing different story arcs for character development.

The point made to me is that the theatrical cut didn't have character development and this one did. My point was that there was just as much character development in both.

I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone. I'm being told X happened, when X did not happen. Like it, love it, dislike it or hate it, I don't care. Just don't tell me this was better BECAUSE it had X when the other didn't, when neither had much of X at all.

The story arcs are tied to the development of the characters. Each one of them found a place in this world. That’s the how arcs for characters in the film work. They are A type of person at the start of a story and with a combination of their own pro activity and circumstances around them, they become B type of person. Usually for the better. You’re wasting your time trying to convince people to see things your way, because what your saying isn’t valid. You’re just choosing to die on a particular bill because reasons. It’s not worth it. You don’t enjoy the film, that’s fine. Don’t go out of your way trying to tell other people they shouldn’t have enjoyed it. It’s childish. You’re better than that.

[VinceVega]

I was REALLY sceptical about that movie.

But it suprised me. Was it a masterpiece? No. But i watched the whole 4 hours and did skip nothing.
The slow scenes gave the characters what was missing,

MCU had most of their main characters in single movies before. DCEU had not so they needed this.
Superman was better with the small scene on the farm. Cyborg actually got a story this time. Flash seemed more human and less of just a comic relief. Even Steppenwolf had motivation and was not just a generic evil.

The only sad part is, that we probably will never get another JL film with these actors. Cavill got booted out by another superman film to complement marvels Black Panther (not that there would be any other black superhero in the DC Comics... sigh...), Affleck has no interes anymore in it i think, Momoa and Gadot will probably make one more movie and that is it... Miller will do his Flash movie and that will be it. You can't just restart a whole cinematic universe.
MCU does this over YEARS with tons of tv shows and over many movies. Old actors out new ones in. But not all at once.

I think the only way we will se more is if they give Cavill another movie. Scrab that other superman movie and make one with a more prominent black superhero to appease twitter, like Mister Terrific or a Green Lnatern Movie with john stewart. Damn i would LOVE to see those movies...

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see what you think you're getting at here, the Mother Boxes sensed Superman's death with that scream. They weren't awakening because they sensed a kryptonian, but rather that there was no longer a kryptonian on the planet; which is why they didn't awaken at the end of Man of Steel. It explicitly states this later in the film that the mother boxes were afraid of him.

It's basically Silas used the human's mother box to rebuild his son, it senses Superman and goes back to sleep after building Cyborg, Superman dies, the mother box senses this and awakens on Themyscira.

That part actually confused me. Why did the one on Themyscira awaken in the first place? Why did the one from silas go back to sleep so deep, that it cannot come back online wihtout an external source of power. Why did the other two not need it?

[Wangming]

Not surprised. The movie was shit... Snyder’s cut wasn’t going to change that.

THIS. I don't know what people expected. A few reshoots won't turn it into Shawshank redemption. It will just suck less.

[Bodakane]

The story arcs are tied to the development of the characters. Each one of them found a place in this world. That’s the how arcs for characters in the film work. They are A type of person at the start of a story and with a combination of their own pro activity and circumstances around them, they become B type of person. Usually for the better. You’re wasting your time trying to convince people to see things your way, because what your saying isn’t valid. You’re just choosing to die on a particular bill because reasons. It’s not worth it. You don’t enjoy the film, that’s fine. Don’t go out of your way trying to tell other people they shouldn’t have enjoyed it. It’s childish. You’re better than that.

Sigh. I'm giving this arbitrary numbers so you'll understand.

Someone Else: The theatrical version had 0 character development and that the Synder cut had +5 character development therefore it was better.

Me: Both versions had like +2 character development so neither was better.

You: The Synder cut had +5 in X type of character development.

Me: Synder cut had +2 in X type of character development and the theatrical cut had +2 in Y type of character development so neither was better.

Furthermore, the things you're calling character development were entirely unearned....despite the movie being so much longer.

[DingDongKing]

THIS. I don't know what people expected. A few reshoots won't turn it into Shawshank redemption. It will just suck less.

Again, it’s entirely your opinion. And secondly, no one said it’s Shawshank Redemption. The intensity with which people like dimming someone else’s enjoyment of things is 10/10. And highly lame.

Sigh. I'm giving this arbitrary numbers so you'll understand.

Someone Else: The theatrical version had 0 character development and that the Synder cut had +5 character development therefore it was better.

Me: Both versions had like +2 character development so neither was better.

You: The Synder cut had +5 in X type of character development.

Me: Synder cut had +2 in X type of character development and the theatrical cut had +2 in Y type of character development.

Here’s an arbitrary number for you.

Cyborg and Aquaman had 0 character development in the theatrical cut. They had +5 in this cut.

Flash, Wonder Woman and Batman had +2 character development in the theatrical cut. They had something like +3.5 character development in this cut.

That’s a net gain no matter how you want to do it. And again, why does it bother you so much if other people liked it and you didn’t?

[Bodakane]

Again, it’s entirely your opinion. And secondly, no one said it’s Shawshank Redemption. The intensity with which people like dimming someone else’s enjoyment of things is 10/10. And highly lame.



Here’s an arbitrary number for you.

Cyborg and Aquaman had 0 character development in the theatrical cut. They had +5 in this cut.

Flash, Wonder Woman and Batman had +2 character development in the theatrical cut. They had something like +3.5 character development in this cut.

That’s a net gain no matter how you want to do it. And again, why does it bother you so much if other people liked it and you didn’t?

The bold is why I know you're full of shit, cause I didn't say that, in fact said I don't care if people like it or not.

[Aurrora]

That part actually confused me. Why did the one on Themyscira awaken in the first place? Why did the one from silas go back to sleep so deep, that it cannot come back online wihtout an external source of power. Why did the other two not need it?

Maybe they were networked somehow and all got put into standby when Silas first used it? Maybe building Cyborg drained the human mother box enough that it couldn't awaken when Superman died? I think the Atlantean's one must have been in a similar state otherwise wouldn't it have called out to Steppenwolf so he could boom tube directly to it?

[DingDongKing]

The bold is why I know you're full of shit, cause I didn't say that, in fact said I don't care if people like it or not.

If you don’t care, why are you so aggressively fighting people about it? Surely you can just leave people to it?

[Bodakane]

If you don’t care, why are you so aggressively fighting people about it?

I'm not aggressively fighting them over them liking it or not. I'm arguing about a point someone made that I feel is wrong. I've said this more than once now.

You, on the other hand, seem to be the one with a real problem about what others feel about the movie, since you're so clearly upset, you're not reading what's being said.

[DingDongKing]

I'm not aggressively fighting them over them liking it or not. I'm arguing about a point someone made that I feel is wrong. I've said this more than once now.

You, on the other hand, seem to be the one with a real problem about what others feel about the movie, since you're so clearly upset, you're not reading what's being said.

1. You've called the movie shit and talked about some 'emo dial' being turned to 11.
2. You have been quite aggressive in your language as referred above about the movie being 'shit' and the 'emo dial' thing.
3. You've said there was no character development in this versus the theatrical cut, which clearly isn't true. You're welcome to watch the movie and make notes.
4. You've on one hand said there's no metrics to say there was more or less character development, yet you yourself tried to assign an arbitrary number to it.
5. My simple point is even IF you say there is no character development and someone else says there is, why does it bother you so much? Even if it is wrong, is anyone's enjoyment or declaration that they saw character development a massive deal to you? To the point that you're trying to convince anyone you can that they're wrong?

I'm not upset, I just find it odd that you'd dedicate so much time to trying to tell people they're wrong about a movie you don't have an interest in.

[Bodakane]

1. You've called the movie shit and talked about some 'emo dial' being turned to 11.
2. You have been quite aggressive in your language as referred above about the movie being 'shit' and the 'emo dial' thing.
3. You've said there was no character development in this versus the theatrical cut, which clearly isn't true. You're welcome to watch the movie and make notes.
4. You've on one hand said there's no metrics to say there was more or less character development, yet you yourself tried to assign an arbitrary number to it.
5. My simple point is even IF you say there is no character development and someone else says there is, why does it bother you so much? Even if it is wrong, is anyone's enjoyment or declaration that they saw character development a massive deal to you? To the point that you're trying to convince anyone you can that they're wrong?

I'm not upset, I just find it odd that you'd dedicate so much time to trying to tell people they're wrong about a movie you don't have an interest in.

Jesus fucking christ.

1. So? I don't like the movie, that doesn't mean the point I'm arguing is about liking the movie or not.
2. Again, so?
3. Its not clearly untrue. I've watched both.
4. There's so much wrong in what you just said here I'm not sure where to start. I guess we can try here.....I never said there's no metrics.
5. That's not been your point at all. Your point was that you think I'm goin after someone for liking something I didn't, when I'm not. I was having a conversation. I made statements. Someone disagreed with them and replied to me. I replied back, then you jumped the fuck in and made this an issue. You. So ask yourself #5.

[DingDongKing]

Jesus fucking christ.

1. So? I don't like the movie, that doesn't mean the point I'm arguing is about liking the movie or not.
2. Again, so?
3. Its not clearly untrue. I've watched both.
4. There's so much wrong in what you just said here I'm not sure where to start. I guess we can try here.....I never said there's no metrics.
5. That's not been your point at all. Your point was that you think I'm goin after someone for liking something I didn't, when I'm not. I was having a conversation. I made statements. Someone disagreed with them and replied to me. I replied back, then you jumped the fuck in and made this an issue. You. So ask yourself #5.

Its not. It's worse. There was no real character development at all and that was supposedly what the bloated run time was for. There's no metrics that say this was better.

Your words re: metrics, not mine as far as point 4 is concerned. As far as point 5 is concerned, you're getting wound up when I'm asking you why you're insisting on arguing this out so much when you don't even like the film.

And your only response so far is 'someone said something and I replied'. Once, cool. Twice, I suppose. You've been at it a while now. So yeah. Just odd. Again, this isn't personal. I'm just curious as to why it matters so much.

[owbu]

well, I guess it was less shit than the theatrical movie AND BvS. Not sure it was worth all this drama, but I guess it's good that it exists.

[Bodakane]

you can't rly say that, by all metrics the theatrical version was worse, just by having a better and more compelling character development and backstory for some of then already make this version better.

not saying one is shit and other is good, is a rabbit hole i don't want to enter, but this version is straight up better.

Your words re: metrics, not mine as far as point 4 is concerned.

As far as point 5 is concerned, you're getting wound up when I'm asking you why you're insisting on arguing this out so much when you don't even like the film.

And your only response so far is 'someone said something and I replied'. Once, cool. Twice, I suppose. You've been at it a while now. So yeah. Just odd.

Again, this isn't personal. I'm just curious as to why it matters so much.

Really?

First of all, it was not my word:

you can't rly say that, by all metrics the theatrical version was worse, just by having a better and more compelling character development and backstory for some of then already make this version better.

not saying one is shit and other is good, is a rabbit hole i don't want to enter, but this version is straight up better.

Its not. It's worse. There was no real character development at all and that was supposedly what the bloated run time was for. There's no metrics that say this was better.

You'll see I responded to someone else using the word.

Secondly, the word metrics wasn't;lt used by either fo us to define character development points.

Lastly, I've been arguing with YOU for awhile now. That means YOU have also been arguing as much as I have. So once again, ask that bullshit question of yourself.

[DingDongKing]

Really?

First of all, it was not my word:



You'll see I responded to someone else using the word.

Secondly, the word metrics wasn't;lt used by either fo us to define character development points.

Lastly, I've been arguing with YOU for awhile now. That means YOU have also been arguing as much as I have. So once again, ask that bullshit question of yourself.

As far as the poster is concerned, he's right. The theatrical version is undoubtedly worse. Your metrics are like you said, are arbitrary.

There IS character development that's better fleshed out than the theatrical cut, purely because there's more scenes to facilitate that.

I've been asking questions. Not arguing. You've been getting angry. I'm not angry. I'm okay for you to disagree on the quality of the film, it's okay.

[Bodakane]

As far as the poster is concerned, he's right. The theatrical version is undoubtedly worse. Your metrics are like you said, are arbitrary.

There IS character development that's better fleshed out than the theatrical cut, purely because there's more scenes to facilitate that.

I've been asking questions. Not arguing. You've been getting angry. I'm not angry. I'm okay for you to disagree on the quality of the film, it's okay.

You are a liar.

You lied about my argument. Lied about what I said. And you're now lying about things you've said.

And you're doing all of it without even a hint of self reflection.

And now we are far afield of the topic. So, get back on topic.

There was little to no character development in either.

[DingDongKing]

You are a liar.

You lied about my argument. Lied about what I said. And you're now lying about things you've said.

And you're doing all of it without even a hint of self reflection.

And now we are far afield of the topic. So, get back on topic.

There was little to no character development in either.

1. You've said there's no more character development in this cut than in the theatrical. This is not true.
2. You then tried to apply an arbitrary metric to the character development. This was not valid.
3. You've then tried to say that you're not angry and you're not arguing, but just telling people they're wrong.
4. Issue is they're not wrong and you're still at it.
5. You've then tried to call me a liar in a clearly angry tone, even though I'm simply showing you what you've said.

So...yeah. There was character development, you just didn't find it satisfactory. And that's okay. Just don't get so mad about it.