Justice League 4K UHD (2017)

[pottyaboutpotter1]

When it comes to these big blockbusters, there can’t be too much studio control. Likewise, the Director can’t be allowed free reign to do whatever they please with beloved characters. There has to be a balance. A balance where the studio knows when to step back and when to step in, where the director knows when to go wild and when to realise their vision might not work. These types of movies are a collaborative process. Some directors like Edgar Wright and Josh Trank are unable to operate like this. Some great decisions in films have come from studio notes; the prologue sequence for Fellowship of the Ring was requested by the studio.

And likewise, quite a few Director artistic decisions are completely wrong for a project. Look at James Cameron’s unproduced Spider-Man script or John Boorman’s unproduced Lord of the Rings. Argue about it’s thematic or artistic quality, but there’s no denying looking at it from a wider viewpoint that starting a Justice League film with Wonder Woman being unable to stop a bomb and a bunch of innocent people (including children) dying was probably not the best decision. Especially for a film that needed to bring people back on board after Batman v Superman was criticised for being needlessly oppressive in its tone.

[GC Riot]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

When it comes to these big blockbusters, there can’t be too much studio control. Likewise, the Director can’t be allowed free reign to do whatever they please with beloved characters. There has to be a balance. A balance where the studio knows when to step back and when to step in, where the director knows when to go wild and when to realise their vision might not work. These types of movies are a collaborative process. Some directors like Edgar Wright and Josh Trank are unable to operate like this. Some great decisions in films have come from studio notes; the prologue sequence for Fellowship of the Ring was requested by the studio.

And likewise, quite a few Director artistic decisions are completely wrong for a project. Look at James Cameron’s unproduced Spider-Man script or John Boorman’s unproduced Lord of the Rings. Argue about it’s thematic or artistic quality, but there’s no denying looking at it from a wider viewpoint that starting a Justice League film with Wonder Woman being unable to stop a bomb and a bunch of innocent people (including children) dying was probably not the best decision. Especially for a film that needed to bring people back on board after Batman v Superman was criticised for being needlessly oppressive in its tone.

I still think it's wrong in principle and just goes to show that films are a "business" more than anything else. I don't want a "product", I want an idea, a vision, something that actually challenges me. When you say that the film "needed to bring people back on board after Batman v Superman was criticised for being needlessly oppressive in its tone.", you're only talking about economics, not the actual film. In a perfect world, a director would get to tell the story he or she wants to, in the manner he or she deems the most fitting. But hey, it's a business...

[legends of beyond]

I mean, after Wonder Woman was praised for Diana bringing a sense of... ahem... Wonder to the big screen, having her be moody and depressing would be a hell of a tonal shift.

[SwaGGInTheShadows]

Originally Posted by legends of beyond

I mean, after Wonder Woman was praised for Diana bringing a sense of... ahem... Wonder to the big screen, having her be moody and depressing would be a hell of a tonal shift.

They were decades apart. Or did you think she smiled and spun until she met Bruce at Lex' party? Lol

[legends of beyond]

Originally Posted by SwaGGInTheShadows

They were decades apart. Or did you think she smiled and spun until she met Bruce at Lex' party? Lol

True, but more people saw WW than BvS (no, I'm not in that camp. Yes, I watched the UE. No, I still didn't like it). Seeing as how Wonder Woman's Wonder Woman was much more popular than BvS's Wondy, it made sense, especially since Wonder Woman had regained her faith in humanity by the end of BvS and the modern-day segments of WW.

[Merkur]

But since WB green lit JL's production, didn't they approve the script? If they didn't like what they read why didn't they mandate something at that stage instead of going forward with a script and shooting it then butchering it and putting more money into it by re-shooting sections of it? WB certainly is the one who screwed up. We got something that's not satisfying to MoS & BvS fans nor to Marvel fans.

I don't know if there'll ever be a Snyder's cut made or released and it makes me sad because this movie had so much potential and there are few great sequences in it already but was butchered by senseless re-shoots and some wacky decisions by WB and Joss Whedon.

[henry00x]

not sure if this story has made its way here already but news has come to light that Snyder was fired from JL and that his rough cut was "unwatchable", so we can pretty much forget about ever seeing a "director/snyder cut"

https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/13/17...e-league-fired

[Vangeli]

Great, we can finally let it die.

Hyped for Aquaman and Wonder Woman 2! Ahh, feels so much better to be hopeful for the future rather than constantly condemning the past. Some of you should try this on.

[GC Riot]

Originally Posted by henry00x

not sure if this story has made its way here already but news has come to light that Snyder was fired from JL and that his rough cut was "unwatchable", so we can pretty much forget about ever seeing a "director/snyder cut"

https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/13/17...e-league-fired

If true, then Warner can truly go eff themselves.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by GC Riot

I still think it's wrong in principle and just goes to show that films are a "business" more than anything else. I don't want a "product", I want an idea, a vision, something that actually challenges me. When you say that the film "needed to bring people back on board after Batman v Superman was criticised for being needlessly oppressive in its tone.", you're only talking about economics, not the actual film. In a perfect world, a director would get to tell the story he or she wants to, in the manner he or she deems the most fitting. But hey, it's a business...

It’s not about economics. It’s about the film. Batman v Superman did not turn out well. So Justice League needed to bring people back on board, not just to help the franchise financially but to help repair the damage to the brand.

The important thing is, that sometimes directors are wrong. Filmmaking is a collaborative process. Or at least it should be. John Boorman’s Lord of the Rings has a scene where Gandalf throws Gimli in a hole and beats him until he remembers the Moria password. The way Boorman intended to tell the story? Aye. The right decision for the story? No.

To put it in more direct terms, Justice League would have started with a scene where a group of school children are blown up. The fact no one saw a problem with that until the reactions to the first test screenings and the fact no one saw a problem with BVS until audiences rejected it says more of the huge bubble Snyder and his team were operating in than anything else.

[SwaGGInTheShadows]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

It’s not about economics. It’s about the film. Batman v Superman did not turn out well. So Justice League needed to bring people back on board, not just to help the franchise financially but to help repair the damage to the brand.

The important thing is, that sometimes directors are wrong. Filmmaking is a collaborative process. Or at least it should be. John Boorman’s Lord of the Rings has a scene where Gandalf throws Gimli in a hole and beats him until he remembers the Moria password. The way Boorman intended to tell the story? Aye. The right decision for the story? No.

To put it in more direct terms, Justice League would have started with a scene where a group of school children are blown up. The fact no one saw a problem with that until the reactions to the first test screenings and the fact no one saw a problem with BVS until audiences rejected it says more of the huge bubble Snyder and his team were operating in than anything else.

Scarlet Witch says Hi...Charlie too
Lol

[EbonDragon]

If it truly was unwatchable, they made the right choice. Even if they still ended up with a Frankenstein film. Better than a shit film.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Justice League would have started with a scene where a group of school children are blown up.

We were robbed.

[Merkur]

I honestly think it's a ridiculous claim. How could it possibly be unwatchable? All assembly cuts are unwatchable - unless there was a "director's cut" which a lot of people say and believe it doesn't exist. So does it exist or not?

And then a question rises, did the cheesy one-liners make the movie easier to watch? Or the bland score, or the Russian family storyline, or the terrible editing (Aquaman and Bruce talking for the first time) or the horrendous CGI for Superman or the ugly red color grading for the third act. Goodness there's so much to list...

I believe that the bulk of the movie that Snyder made is obviously there but a lot has been taking out and some terrible stuff added (excluding the the Batman rooftop scene - that was decent).

I won't like, I found it entertaining anyway, even though I hated the forced humor. It's a shame it could've been great instead of average. The themyscira/Steppenwolf and the history lesson are two of my favorite DCEU sequences.

[GC Riot]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

It’s not about economics. It’s about the film. Batman v Superman did not turn out well. So Justice League needed to bring people back on board, not just to help the franchise financially but to help repair the damage to the brand.

How is that NOT economics? You're only thinking about what the general audience wants from a film, but that's not what I'm arguing for at all. It's the creator's intent and vision. So what if YOU think it's "wrong"? It's not your film. You may not like it but that's not the point.

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

The important thing is, that sometimes directors are wrong. Filmmaking is a collaborative process. Or at least it should be. John Boorman’s Lord of the Rings has a scene where Gandalf throws Gimli in a hole and beats him until he remembers the Moria password. The way Boorman intended to tell the story? Aye. The right decision for the story? No.

A director can never be "wrong" is what I'm saying. If he makes a historical drama based on real events and claims that World War 2 ended in 1960, then yes, he's wrong and should be told so, but when dealing with fiction, there is no such thing as "wrong". There may be things that can be made to make for a film that more people are likely to enjoy, but if that is forced upon a director then it's all for nothing as the original vision then goes to waste.

If I made something that I was proud of, only for it to be forced away from me and changed until barely recognizable any longer, I for one would be pissed.

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

To put it in more direct terms, Justice League would have started with a scene where a group of school children are blown up. The fact no one saw a problem with that until the reactions to the first test screenings and the fact no one saw a problem with BVS until audiences rejected it says more of the huge bubble Snyder and his team were operating in than anything else.

No, it just speaks to the money-counting suits who don't just want some money but want ALL THE MONEY, and will go out of their way to focus test and alter until they have a finished "product" with as much mass-market appeal as possible, and that kind of sickens me.
MoS and BvS, regardless of what you thought of them, dealt with heavy issues, and that scene you speak of would have been par for the course. Instead we get a hamfisted, forced rescue scene with an incredibly poorly delivered zinger in "I'm a believer!". Considering what had come before in the DCEU, that felt like such a weird tonal shift, and was clearly just put in there to make audiences happy more than anything.
Snyder had a vision, and he got effed over, because money.

[supersix4]

Originally Posted by GC Riot

I still think it's wrong in principle and just goes to show that films are a "business" more than anything else. I don't want a "product", I want an idea, a vision, something that actually challenges me. When you say that the film "needed to bring people back on board after Batman v Superman was criticised for being needlessly oppressive in its tone.", you're only talking about economics, not the actual film. In a perfect world, a director would get to tell the story he or she wants to, in the manner he or she deems the most fitting. But hey, it's a business...

Well WB/DC clearly haven't figured business out as they still continue to fumble away opportunity after opportunity and that's with some great casting that should have catapulted them to contenders with Marvel. Instead they're flopping around trying to find their place thinking they can duct tape movies together and compete with Marvel who set a pace and established a brand/ vision over 10+ years.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by henry00x

not sure if this story has made its way here already but news has come to light that Snyder was fired from JL and that his rough cut was "unwatchable", so we can pretty much forget about ever seeing a "director/snyder cut"

https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/13/17...e-league-fired

Heck of it is though that this doesn't sound 'new' new to me, I seem to recall hearing a while back that Warners considered his cut to be "unwatchable" which is why Whedon was brought in as a ringer in the first place.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by henry00x

not sure if this story has made its way here already but news has come to light that Snyder was fired from JL and that his rough cut was "unwatchable", so we can pretty much forget about ever seeing a "director/snyder cut"

https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/13/17...e-league-fired

The rumors about the rough cut being unwatchable I heard a long time ago, before it was announced that Snyder was leaving the movie, so that's no surprise.

I was gonna say the rumor he was fired from JL was untrue due to DGA rules, but the tweet actually says he was fired from the Cinematic Universe, and that I can see. WB would have been forced to let him direct the reshoots and be involved in JL post production, but limit his creative control where ever they could, as well as make sure he had no real creative involvement in any DC movies after JL (perhaps just getting an in name only executive producer credit like Nolan has on JL).

And with all these limitations, Snyder just didn't have it in him to continue after his family loss, and WB was more than willing to be able to officially replace him then.

[supersix4]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

The rumors about the rough cut being unwatchable I heard a long time ago, before it was announced that Snyder was leaving the movie, so that's no surprise.

I was gonna say the rumor he was fired from JL was untrue due to DGA rules, but the tweet actually says he was fired from the Cinematic Universe, and that I can see. WB would have been forced to let him direct the reshoots and be involved in JL post production, but limit his creative control where ever they could, as well as make sure he had no real creative involvement in any DC movies after JL (perhaps just getting an in name only executive producer credit like Nolan has on JL).

And with all these limitations, Snyder just didn't have it in him to continue after his family loss, and WB was more than willing to be able to officially replace him then.

None of that would have been an issue if WB/DC had committed to the long term rather than trying to duct tape catch up

Man of steel was a fresh good start
Wonder women was awesome

if they'd follow that with a Batman solo film affleck was good, followed by a flash movie maybe, then a better scripted batman vs. supreman and intro to the team and maybe another two solo films from aquaman and someone else

THEN a justice league movie they'd probably have a much better product.


Also with the iconic marvel characters all set to exit this was DCs time to take the reigns with great casting, name brand characters locked up. But nope. fumbled every chance they got.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by SwaGGInTheShadows

Scarlet Witch says Hi...Charlie too
Lol

But that Scarlet Witch scene was dealt with incredibly well and had long lasting repercussions. It's her mistake that kicks off the plot and her guilt is a major part of her character after this. Likewise, the scene in Revenge of the Sith where Anakin butchers a group of defenceless children was dealt with incredibly well and had long lasting repercussions (it's this act that makes Obi-Wan realise Anakin is too far gone and needs to be put down). The Justice League scene, if I know Snyder, would have had one or two shots of Wonder Woman looking sad then the film would have carried on as usual with not a single mention of it again. Just like how the courtroom exploding in Batman v Superman is never mentioned again significantly after a shot of Superman looking sad.