Justice League 4K UHD (2017)

[Geoff D]

It's not a myth, it's just not finished either.

[car2nst]

Originally Posted by zodwriter

The Snyder Cut is a different situation from any of the examples you mentioned above. It's almost a completely different film from the one released in theaters. I would compare The Snyder Cut of Justice League to Kingdom of Heaven. That movie had poor reviews and did terrible at the box office, and got it's superior almost completely different version released on video to the delight of a small percentage (likely much smaller than those of us clamoring for Zack Snyder's cut of Justice League) Your continued adamant claims that The Snyder cut is not complete enough to possibly get released get less and less convincing by the day, especially when more evidence continues to mount suggesting Snyder's cut was very close to completion. We now have several examples of Snyder himself supporting the campaign to get his director's cut released, as well as rumors that WB is in the process of mending fences with Snyder over the theatrical cut. So the logical conclusion would be that even if a Snyder cut is not ready for release tomorrow it could very well be in the process of being completed. If Zack Snyder knows he doesn't have a full cut of Justice League he wouldn't be misleading the fan-base. Support from Zack Snyder goes a long way to deflate the theories that a Snyder cut is non-existent! As far as the financial end of the argument goes, if there is enough footage of Snyder's in the can, it's not going to cost WB anymore than it would to release an extended Whedon cut. Not only that Zack Snyder did submit his request for his directors cut, so that means he and his editor would likely be brought back if they were needed to complete the cut for release. Directors Guild rules stipulate that WB would have to pay for that anyway, barring any re-shoots or heavy VFX work.

Lets say for the sake of argument they released a Zack Snyder cut as well (as you say may very well be a completely different movie/story) This would be a great marketing idea (putting the reasons of why aside for a moment) to have a Deluxe Edition with an "Earth 2" version as the Snyder cut. 2movies for the price of 1...it's marketing ingenious. (which The Flashpoint movie could also show multiple universes with multiple outcomes, So Affleck/Batman may not get replaced directly, either someone takes over his mantle of the batman or a different Universe version from now on....if Affleck does step down/get replaced)

I Don't Know I just think it would be pretty cool. (it would never happen of course)

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's not a myth, it's just not finished either.

Just to clarify, when I refer to the Snyder cut, I refer to the cut that is apparently a completely different film. I just doubt Snyder's cut was that different from what we got.

Tone wise probably, but not story. For these cinematic universes where multiple movies are in production at the same time, the story for each instalment is set in stone. While the details can change, the story won't alter all that much. If WB changed the story of Justice League late on, it would have impacted Aquaman and every other film in production.

While some plot details might have changed, I don't think Snyder's earlier cut was too significantly different. Especially since leakers can't seem to decide what actually happens in Snyder's earlier cut ranging from it being a completely different film to being incredibly similar bar some details.

[meatball_84]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

I thought Edward Norton put on a great performance like he usually does. It was a very serious Bruce Banner as opposed to Mark Ruffalo's Banner who is a little more laid back. The Hulk vs Abomination fight felt a little short but anytime we saw the Hulk it was a lot of fun. I really liked the idea of the whole movie being a man on the run and trying to right his wrongdoings and protecting people by trying to get rid of the gamma radiation instead of embracing his abilities.

Not sure what this has to do with Snyder.

Just remember that film is subjective. While you may have liked MoS and been lost during BvS, I absolutely loved both. I do not find BvS hard to follow. I will watch them over and over and not get tired of them. I love Snyders movies. He is one of my must see directors, but its fine if you don't care for him.

The biggest flaw that I will give Snyder is not that he cant tell a cohesive story, it is that he cannot properly do so in a truncated run time. Every one of his directors cuts are far better than what was released theatrically. The problem with movies is that if you didnt like it in theaters, then you probably wont watch it again at home. The theatrical cut of BvS really did not make sense. WB cut 30 minutes of important story material out. Some of my friends do not care to watch the ultimate cut because they didnt like the original enough.

There is another great director that even at 80 years old, has trouble securing a directors cut theatrically. That is Ridley Scott, and his directors cuts are always better. He just tells a better story when the run time is not a concern. Kingdom of Heaven's directors cut is an outstanding film, but the original was nowhere even close.

There is no reason to show in in a forum and tell people that they shouldn't like a specific director, or that his movies suck. You are entitled to your opinion. But there are plenty of threads dedicated to hating Zack Snyder. I dont feel the need to go there and plead my case for his respect.

Do you have a favorite director or movie that most people do not care for?

[meatball_84]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Just to clarify, when I refer to the Snyder cut, I refer to the cut that is apparently a completely different film. I just doubt Snyder's cut was that different from what we got.

Tone wise probably, but not story. For these cinematic universes where multiple movies are in production at the same time, the story for each instalment is set in stone. While the details can change, the story won't alter all that much. If WB changed the story of Justice League late on, it would have impacted Aquaman and every other film in production.

While some plot details might have changed, I don't think Snyder's earlier cut was too significantly different. Especially since leakers can't seem to decide what actually happens in Snyder's earlier cut ranging from it being a completely different film to being incredibly similar bar some details.

Lets say conservatively that 30% of the theatrical cut is not Snyder. That is 36 minutes of the 2hr run time. If we also conservatively pretend that the Snyder cut is 2hr and 35min. We are now looking at 1hr and 11min of new scenes. That is a massive impact. The basics of the story are the same, sure, but the character building of not only the heroes, but the villain would be very noticably different. Especially for Aquaman, Cyborg, and flash.

Also you can tell that many of the scenes in the move are out of order. Putting them in the right place can be huge to building a sense of danger, which the theatrical did not have. Add of top of that visual effects that dont completely remove you from the movie, and you have something that would seem like an entirely different movie.

So that 30% difference becomes a whole lot more. And I didnt even factor in the implications of adding Darkseid, or the emotional impact of restoring a score that fits the movie better and carries over previous themes.

[zodwriter]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Just to clarify, when I refer to the Snyder cut, I refer to the cut that is apparently a completely different film. I just doubt Snyder's cut was that different from what we got.

Tone wise probably, but not story. For these cinematic universes where multiple movies are in production at the same time, the story for each instalment is set in stone. While the details can change, the story won't alter all that much. If WB changed the story of Justice League late on, it would have impacted Aquaman and every other film in production.

While some plot details might have changed, I don't think Snyder's earlier cut was too significantly different. Especially since leakers can't seem to decide what actually happens in Snyder's earlier cut ranging from it being a completely different film to being incredibly similar bar some details.

Your uninformed. Watch this video. https://nerdist.com/every-way-zack-s...-nerdist-news/

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by meatball_84

Lets say conservatively that 30% of the theatrical cut is not Snyder. That is 36 minutes of the 2hr run time. If we also conservatively pretend that the Snyder cut is 2hr and 35min. We are now looking at 1hr and 11min of new scenes. That is a massive impact. The basics of the story are the same, sure, but the character building of not only the heroes, but the villain would be very noticably different. Especially for Aquaman, Cyborg, and flash.

Also you can tell that many of the scenes in the move are out of order. Putting them in the right place can be huge to building a sense of danger, which the theatrical did not have. Add of top of that visual effects that dont completely remove you from the movie, and you have something that would seem like an entirely different movie.

So that 30% difference becomes a whole lot more. And I didnt even factor in the implications of adding Darkseid, or the emotional impact of restoring a score that fits the movie better and carries over previous themes.

See, that’s reasonable. But that’s not what a lot of people have been saying. A lot of people have been pushing the narrative there’s a completely different film with a completely different story. See the people armament there’s an evil Superman plotline in the Snyder cut.

People also don’t factor in that Snyder was (at least in the press) trying to please the audience instead of his fans with this film. In every interview he was stressing that Justice League would be fun, have more jokes and be much more light hearted. This was coupled with reports that the script was being heavily rewritten during principal photography and screenings were not going over well at all. I think this film got Snyder to confront that no one (at least anyone who’s opinion mattered to the studio - so the general audience not Snyder’s fans) wanted the type of films he wanted to make with these characters. So he started trying to please his critics and win the audience back. How much of the films Frankenstein nature can be traced to the reshoots and how much to the heavy rewrites?

I think Justice League was always doomed to be a Frankenstein mess. And I feel some of that might be due to Snyder himself trying to retrofit the darker script into a light hearted blockbuster.

If a significant portion of the film wasn’t Snyder’s, the DGA would have stepped in. The official story is that Joss Whedon finished the film how Zack wanted it done. If anything had been done that contradicted that story and there was solid evidence to support it, the DGA would have launched an enquiry. Spielberg was fined by the DGA just for his comments about him taking charge on Poltergeist. If they fined Spielberg, you can bet they’d go after Joss Whedon and WB if they felt there was something solid to the idea the final film was not mostly Snyder’s and contradicted the official story of Whedon finishing the film how Zack wanted.

[Synchg]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

This will be an expensive undertaking and will likely be the most expensive "special edition" cut of a film for home video ever made.

couldn't they cut the budget of VFX in half, if they did it in house AND over a lengthy amount of time? ie: years. I dont want to wait 20 years to see snyders cut though. Isnt' the reason why special effects budgets are so expensive because they branch out the work to other effect studios AND expect it done in a short amount of time, hence the high cost

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

See, that’s reasonable. But that’s not what a lot of people have been saying. A lot of people have been pushing the narrative there’s a completely different film with a completely different story. See the people armament there’s an evil Superman plotline in the Snyder cut.

People also don’t factor in that Snyder was (at least in the press) trying to please the audience instead of his fans with this film. In every interview he was stressing that Justice League would be fun, have more jokes and be much more light hearted. This was coupled with reports that the script was being heavily rewritten during principal photography and screenings were not going over well at all. I think this film got Snyder to confront that no one (at least anyone who’s opinion mattered to the studio - so the general audience not Snyder’s fans) wanted the type of films he wanted to make with these characters. So he started trying to please his critics and win the audience back. How much of the films Frankenstein nature can be traced to the reshoots and how much to the heavy rewrites?

I think Justice League was always doomed to be a Frankenstein mess. And I feel some of that might be due to Snyder himself trying to retrofit the darker script into a light hearted blockbuster.

If a significant portion of the film wasn’t Snyder’s, the DGA would have stepped in. The official story is that Joss Whedon finished the film how Zack wanted it done. If anything had been done that contradicted that story and there was solid evidence to support it, the DGA would have launched an enquiry. Spielberg was fined by the DGA just for his comments about him taking charge on Poltergeist. If they fined Spielberg, you can bet they’d go after Joss Whedon and WB if they felt there was something solid to the idea the final film was not mostly Snyder’s and contradicted the official story of Whedon finishing the film how Zack wanted.

There’s not an evil Superman plotline in Snyder’s Cut, no. But, his ressurection and the reason for it is completely different in Snyder’s version and makes way more sense than the theatrical.

As for the theatrical cut, it’s way more Whedon than many think. There isn’t a scene in the film that Whedon DIDN’T touch.

[The Dark Shape]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

There’s not an evil Superman plotline in Snyder’s Cut, no. But, his ressurection and the reason for it is completely different in Snyder’s version and makes way more sense than the theatrical.

I don't know about the reason for it, but using the mother box to resurrect Superman in the ship's pool was absolutely shot by Snyder.

[zodwriter]

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape

I don't know about the reason for it, but using the mother box to resurrect Superman in the ship's pool was absolutely shot by Snyder.

In The Snyder Cut, Superman is not evil, but is possessed and controlled by Darkseid. His confrontation with the Justice League lasts a lot longer than it does in the theatrical cut. After kicking the snot out of the Justice League and flying off, the next time Superman is seen, he is wearing the black suit. At that point Superman is kind of a villain for the Justice League till he is eventually stopped. This is a payoff from Bruce Wayne's Knightmare dream from BvS Lois and Martha eventually snap him out of his mind controlled state, Superman's suit begins changing from black to normal.

That's just one example of the many major differences between what Whedon re-shot and put in theaters versus what Zack Snyder originally shot.

[Deric2014]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is probably the perfect example. That film was constantly changing. Characters were cut entirely, some had their screentime trimmed to the bare minimum, many pivotal story and character scenes were cut, Gwen Stacy's fate was constantly changing etc. Early test screenings reported a widely different film than what was released. These big superhero movies are in a constant state of flux. It's rare when one is released where it doesn't undergo massive changes.

I know this is off topic but I just want to know why didn't Amazing Spider-Man 2 get a Director's Cut after high demand by the fans and also did the film do as bad as Justice League in terms of box office and is that what made SONY scrap plans for sequels? Hopefully you can answer my question and you seem to know a lot.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Just to clarify, when I refer to the Snyder cut, I refer to the cut that is apparently a completely different film. I just doubt Snyder's cut was that different from what we got.

Tone wise probably, but not story. For these cinematic universes where multiple movies are in production at the same time, the story for each instalment is set in stone. While the details can change, the story won't alter all that much. If WB changed the story of Justice League late on, it would have impacted Aquaman and every other film in production.

While some plot details might have changed, I don't think Snyder's earlier cut was too significantly different. Especially since leakers can't seem to decide what actually happens in Snyder's earlier cut ranging from it being a completely different film to being incredibly similar bar some details.

Not at all. The DCEU isn't the MCU. They don't have to rely on previous films, thankfully, which hampers all the Marvel movies into feeling like the same film. There WERE major story changes in Whedon's version, resulting in nearly every Superman scene being re-shot, story beats changed or finessed, and Whedon removed a major villain. That's changing the story.

https://screenrant.com/justice-leagu...snyder-whedon/

[Sabre95]

Originally Posted by meatball_84

Not sure what this has to do with Snyder.

Do you have a favorite director or movie that most people do not care for?

It doesn’t have anything to do with Snyder, the other guy said he hadn’t seen The Incredible Hulk and asked what I liked about it. So I answered.

I do have a favorite director, Quentin Tarantino, but a good amount of people watch his movies. The movie I did say I liked but people don’t care for is The Incredible Hulk.

[meatball_84]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

The other guy said he hadn’t seen The Incredible Hulk and asked what I liked about it. So I answered.

Ah. My bad. I enjoyed it.

[meatball_84]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

It doesn’t have anything to do with Snyder, the other guy said he hadn’t seen The Incredible Hulk and asked what I liked about it. So I answered.

I do have a favorite director, Quentin Tarantino, but a good amount of people watch his movies. The movie I did say I liked but people don’t care for is The Incredible Hulk.

Tarantino isnt a guilty pleasure director though. Anyone who doesnt like his movies is pretty much shunned.

Michael Bay would be a guilty pleasure director though. Even though I enjoy his movies, I know they are not good from any standpoint except balls to the wall action. Although The Last Knight really tested me. I was blown away by how bad it was.

[Sabre95]

Originally Posted by meatball_84

Tarantino isnt a guilty pleasure director though. Anyone who doesnt like his movies is pretty much shunned.

Michael Bay would be a guilty pleasure director though. Even though I enjoy his movies, I know they are not good from any standpoint except balls to the wall action. Although The Last Knight really tested me. I was blown away by how bad it was.

I never said Tarantino was a guilty pleasure director, I knew the question that was asked but I didn’t have an answer that would fit so I said my favorite director and said “but a good amount of people watch his movies” since I understand that he’s popular.

[meatball_84]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

I never said Tarantino was a guilty pleasure director, I knew the question that was asked but I didn’t have an answer that would fit so I said my favorite director and said “but a good amount of people watch his movies” since I understand that he’s popular.

Whaaat?! You probably really like Uwe Boll

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

It doesn’t have anything to do with Snyder, the other guy said he hadn’t seen The Incredible Hulk and asked what I liked about it. So I answered.

I do have a favorite director, Quentin Tarantino, but a good amount of people watch his movies. The movie I did say I liked but people don’t care for is The Incredible Hulk.

TOTALLY misread your last reply lol I thought you were referring to the Ang Lee Hulk when you first responded. I LOVE Incredible Hulk! Norton gives good Hulk!

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by Deric2014

I know this is off topic but I just want to know why didn't Amazing Spider-Man 2 get a Director's Cut after high demand by the fans and also did the film do as bad as Justice League in terms of box office and is that what made SONY scrap plans for sequels? Hopefully you can answer my question and you seem to know a lot.

Amazing Spider-Man 2 performed well below Sony’s projections. It sent Sony into a panic about what to do. TASM2 was supposed to be the launching pad for a Spider-Man focused shared universe, but the films underperformance put the future of that in doubt. As for why there hasn’t been another cut of the film released, probably because Sony is trying to move on from it. We might get one down the line (I’d love to have Marc Webb’s original cuts of both TASM films released) but at this point Sony is more focused on launching their second attempt at a Spider-Man shared universe with Venom out this year and Silver and Black supposedly out next year.

Basiclaly TASM2 was a big financial disappointment for Sony because of how much money they sunk into it and this made them rethink what they wanted to do going forward. So they decided to reboot again which turned out well for them since Homecoming only fell $10 million behind Spider-Man 3 and outgrossed both TASM films.