Justice League 4K UHD (2017)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

So if it's finished in 1.33 (actually 1.316, but whatever), does that mean the 15/70 and 4K IMAX versions will be in 1.43?

It's not exactly a smoking gun, movies aren't always finished in the exact same ratio as their final exhibition. Jurassic World was finished 2398x1556, which is roughly 1.54, for the final 2.00 ratio.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Quick search says Watchmen cost 120 million and 300 cost 65 million. Clearly he can successfully make comic book movies at lower budgets.

You're employing what's called confirmation bias where any fact you come across is used as a basis to justify what you already think about Zack Snyder and validate your taste.

Note that I've not actually brought in my personal opinions on Snyder (I think he's an excellent technical director but he struggles with story and character). Trying to make out I'm some Snyder hater who twists things to make him look bad won't work because I actually like some of Snyder's movies; I love Watchmen and I really like Dawn of the Dead, 300, Man of Steel and Legend of the Guardians. Batman v Superman and Sucker Punch are the only movies of his I have problems with.

The budgets for Watchmen, 300 and Sucker Punch only prove that Snyder is capable of making these big movies on a decent budget, but something about his DCEU movies inflates costs which just raises more problems down the line such as the expectations for the movies at the box office increasing. Batman v Superman made nearly $900 million at the box office yet Warner Bros considers that a disappointment because of how much the movie cost. What if Justice League doesn't cross $1 billion? I want the DCEU to succeed, but the rushing of it and spending a fortune on each movie isn't the way to do it.

If the DCEU continues to have massive budgets, it places too much pressure on each movie. Any other studio would be overjoyed with the box office of Batman v Superman. Instead WB started scrambling to make changes to the DCEU because the movie fell short of what they needed it to make due to how much money they and Snyder had spent on it.

[LoSouL]

Yet, your rebut to imsounoriginal was pointed directly at trying to make the case that Zack Snyder can't manage money and was dropped instead of "invited back" -

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Please direct me to the part where I called Snyder a “hack”, a term I’ve never used.

Your entire argument falls apart anyway when you consider Fantastic Beasts, a movie from the same studio, with similar hopes placed on it, with a heavier reliance on VFX (and IMO better VFX than Batman v Superman) and an Oscar winning actor as it’s star only cost $180 million to make compared to Batman v Superman and Justice League costing $300 million each. And it’s really only Ben Affleck and Jeremy Irons who could negotiate a massive salary out of the cast (maybe JK Simmons) so I doubt salaries are a reason. And Suicide Squad had very extensive reshoots but still only cost $175 million.

I think the simple answer here is that Snyder (and by extension Whedon) just can’t keep a handle on budgets (probably spending/shooting more than they need to, inflating the budget) while other directors for WB like David Yates and David Ayer can (making Suicide Squad relatively cheaply despite its production issues is probably the reason Ayer was invited back for Gotham City Sirens).

Justice League cost more than Star Wars: The Force Awakens and is the third most expansive movie of all time (with Pirates of the Caribbean 4 and 3 in front of it). That’s... troubling.

...while you're now pivoting your argument to be that WB is making him scale up production too much in order to be the biggest and bestest with their movie universe, then getting all SquareEnix about the box office. Same playbook, different play.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Yet, your rebut to imsounoriginal was pointed directly at trying to make the case that Zack Snyder can't manage money and was dropped instead of "invited back" -



...while you're now pivoting your argument to be that WB is making him scale up production too much in order to be the biggest and bestest with their movie universe, then getting all SquareEnix about the box office. Same playbook, different play.

Maybe Snyder can control budgets on his non-DCEU movies, but it doesn’t prove he’s keeping budgets under control on his DCEU movies. Like I’ve said, there’s no valid reason for Batman v Superman and Justice League to have cost $300 million. It’s probably a mixture of both Snyder and WB.

I’ve not pivoted. In fact I stand by that Snyder can’t keep budgets on his DCEU movies under control. The fact Batman v Superman has a gross budget of $300 million indicates that.

In fact, it’s probably a mixture between a director who can’t keep the budget under control and studio executives who think the only way to fix a problem is to throw more money at it.

I don’t know why I’m debating this with you anyway. You always read your own meaning into anything I say and always try to make out I’m a biased DC/Snyder hater.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

It’s probably a mixture of both Snyder and WB.

So if you add Zack's 65 million capability to WB, then it becomes 300 million.

This would mean that anybody who's spent 65 million or more on a movie will spend 300 million or more working for WB on a DCEU movie.

But wait, that can't make sense, because Fury cost 80 million and Suicide Squad only cost 175 million.

Or is there some reason this X = Y logic only applies to Zack Snyder and the movies you don't like?

[film11]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

So if you add Zack's 65 million capability to WB, then it becomes 300 million.

This would mean that anybody who's spent 65 million or more on a movie will spend 300 million or more working for WB on a DCEU movie.

But wait, that can't make sense, because Fury cost 80 million and Suicide Squad only cost 175 million.
?

Probably cost less under Ayers. The crap that Trailer Park added (including the additional music rights expenses) is what inflated the budget. That's all Warners, not the director. Kevin Tsujihara is the worst thing to happen to Warner Bros since Batman & Robin.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's not exactly a smoking gun, movies aren't always finished in the exact same ratio as their final exhibition. Jurassic World was finished 2398x1556, which is roughly 1.54, for the final 2.00 ratio.

Yeah, I know, but it would be nice to have confirmation.

At any rate, we know some visual effects shots were finished at a taller aspect ratio (the Twitter versions of the trailers are cropped to 1:1 and have additional height), and it wouldn't make any sense to render additional information that would never be seen. So I expect that we might get a 1.43 IMAX version. What might cause issues is the reshot footage, which may or may not have been shot on 35mm and may or may not be able to be opened up to 1.43.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

So if you add Zack's 65 million capability to WB, then it becomes 300 million.

This would mean that anybody who's spent 65 million or more on a movie will spend 300 million or more working for WB on a DCEU movie.

But wait, that can't make sense, because Fury cost 80 million and Suicide Squad only cost 175 million.

Or is there some reason this X = Y logic only applies to Zack Snyder and the movies you don't like?

Dude way to misunderstand my point.
Just because a director spends well on some movies doesn’t mean they’ll spend well on every movie.

By saying what you said you just proved you’re just reading your own meaning into what I say and not actually reading. Where on earth did you get that I was saying adding Zack’s 65 million to WB equals 300 million?

Sometimes directors have a moment when they’re allowed a ton of creative freedom. And sometimes this leads to them and the studio spending lots of money. More than they should. Or sometimes they spend more than they should for other reasons.

Just because Zack kept his budget under control on his non-DCEU movies doesn’t mean he kept them under control on his DCEU movies. To my eyes it looks like Zack is going through a period of inflating budgets.

I’m not saying this because I don’t like the movies (or did you miss the part where I said I liked Man of Steel but still thought it’s bidget was too large?).

I’m saying this because as a DC fan I want these movies to do well but that’s never going to happen as long as the movies keep getting $250 million plus budgets. Because that means the movies have to make more at the box office for WB to consider them a success. We’re living in a time where studios like WB only judge movies by their box office worth. A time where a Transformers movie is considered a flop by grossing “only” $604 million mostly due to its massive budget.

My point is that Zack, as director, and his producers should be trying to keep these movies costing less. If Snyder wanted to do more of his controversial interpretations of Batman and Superman, he shouldn’t make the movies cost $300 million. If Batman v Superman has only cost $180-200 million, the DCEU would be in an entirely different position.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by film11

Probably cost less under Ayers. The crap that Trailer Park added (including the additional music rights expenses) is what inflated the budget. That's all Warners, not the director. Kevin Tsujihara is the worst thing to happen to Warner Bros since Batman & Robin.

WB's box office and critical reception of 2017 movies "might" disagree with you a bit there.

Not saying the stuff about him is not true but you have to give him credit for this year. WB killed it this year, from a monetary and artistic perspective. And just imagine if JUSTICE LEAGUE is well received and opens well? JUSTICE LEAGUE became less important for the studio after the hits of KONG, WONDER WOMAN, IT, ANNABELLE CREATION, and DUNKIRK. Critically, you're looking at DUNKIRK, WONDER WOMAN, and 2049 as serious Oscar threats.

Kevin had a great 2017. The cherry on top is if he delivers on JUSTICE LEAGUE.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Dude way to misunderstand my point.
Just because a director spends well on some movies doesn’t mean they’ll spend well on every movie.

By saying what you said you just proved you’re just reading your own meaning into what I say and not actually reading. Where on earth did you get that I was saying adding Zack’s 65 million to WB equals 300 million?

Sometimes directors have a moment when they’re allowed a ton of creative freedom. And sometimes this leads to them and the studio spending lots of money. More than they should. Or sometimes they spend more than they should for other reasons.

Just because Zack kept his budget under control on his non-DCEU movies doesn’t mean he kept them under control on his DCEU movies. To my eyes it looks like Zack is going through a period of inflating budgets.

I’m not saying this because I don’t like the movies (or did you miss the part where I said I liked Man of Steel but still thought it’s bidget was too large?).

I’m saying this because as a DC fan I want these movies to do well but that’s never going to happen as long as the movies keep getting $250 million plus budgets. Because that means the movies have to make more at the box office for WB to consider them a success. We’re living in a time where studios like WB only judge movies by their box office worth. A time where a Transformers movie is considered a flop by grossing “only” $604 million mostly due to its massive budget.

My point is that Zack, as director, and his producers should be trying to keep these movies costing less. If Snyder wanted to do more of his controversial interpretations of Batman and Superman, he shouldn’t make the movies cost $300 million. If Batman v Superman has only cost $180-200 million, the DCEU would be in an entirely different position.

Not saying you're not wrong about budget but Zack Snyder did not green light that BATMAN v SUPERMAN script. WB knew what he was making from the get go.

[Resettito]

Ultimately, potty is just basically saying "too expensive for my taste", and doesn't really have anything to back that up.

The DCEU is in fine fine shape, they're only 5 films in (counting JL): MOS did 668 million (when Returns didn't even crack 400), BvS did 873 million, SS did 745 million & WW 821 million. Compared to Marvel, they're making more money on their early films. It's only going to keep growing.

Plus, we don't even know the real budgets, it's reported numbers. From the first reactions, JL is the crowdpleaser WB needed, it might open lower than BvS (150-170 million seems to be the range right now) but will blow past it with strong audience reception.

Those reactions also indicate that, as expected, The Flash is a standout, so is Aquaman, and those will get people very excited for Flashpoint & Aquaman. Anyway, the budget is not necessarily the responsibility of the director. I can tell because, on a much smaller scale for now, I know, the producers determine the budget, the line producer makes sure everything stays on budget, as far as I know, Zack never went over. Obviously, the director will make certain choices depending on the budget he has, but it's not his responsibility to track it.

Potty seems to fundamentally misunderstand how much films cost by comparing "hey this film cost that much, why is this one costing more?", it's not like the money isn't on the screen for you to see, it quickly adds up, films are ****ing expensive, that's just a fact, I know people from the outside who don't know about that stuff are puzzled as to what costs so much, but there's always a reason. The number floated around for reshoots alone for Justice League is 25 million.

It's also flawed to not take into account that certain blockbusters may have benefited from tax incentives by shooting in certain states. The DCEU is a train that's not stopping now, and this impressive early success bodes very well for the future. Watch JL either flirt with one billion or reach it, and then Flashpoint, Aquaman, The Batman blow past that.

[Pieter V]

Justice League (2017) Digibook

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

Yeah, I know, but it would be nice to have confirmation.

At any rate, we know some visual effects shots were finished at a taller aspect ratio (the Twitter versions of the trailers are cropped to 1:1 and have additional height), and it wouldn't make any sense to render additional information that would never be seen. So I expect that we might get a 1.43 IMAX version. What might cause issues is the reshot footage, which may or may not have been shot on 35mm and may or may not be able to be opened up to 1.43.

Folks be saying that the reshoots were done on Alexa 65, shot open gate you end up with 6.5K @ roughly 2.11 so they'd have extracted the 1.85/1.90 from that.

[BluRayHiDef]

I fear that Justice League won't be as good as it should be due to WB's post-production mandates and the potentially subsequent tacky composition of the film (e.g. jarring transitions between obviously reshot portions of the movie and those that were shot during principle photography, poor animation of Steppenwolf due to a lack of full-body motion capture, Steppenwolf's weakness as a villain according to Twitter reactions, the Uncanny Valley Effect of Supes' face, etc). I hope that I'm wrong and love this film as much as I love MoS and BvS (UE).

[BluRayHiDef]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Justice League (2017) Digibook

This will be added to the OP. Thanks, mate.

[film11]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

WB's box office and critical reception of 2017 movies "might" disagree with you a bit there.

Not saying the stuff about him is not true but you have to give him credit for this year. WB killed it this year, from a monetary and artistic perspective. And just imagine if JUSTICE LEAGUE is well received and opens well? JUSTICE LEAGUE became less important for the studio after the hits of KONG, WONDER WOMAN, IT, ANNABELLE CREATION, and DUNKIRK. Critically, you're looking at DUNKIRK, WONDER WOMAN, and 2049 as serious Oscar threats.

Kevin had a great 2017. The cherry on top is if he delivers on JUSTICE LEAGUE.

Those movies would have done just as well without his interference. In fact, they might even have made more money since they would have been better reviewed by critics. BvS Ultimate Cut is pretty much accepted as a major improvement. And some scuttlebutt has indicated that Ayers SS was a better, more mature film (and got high marks at test screenings) than the Trailer Park version. (Although that tested well also).

As for box office, movies like KING ARTHUR and BLADE RUNNER might disagree. (Both good films, although ARTHUR needs to be seen in 3D to be best appreciated.) And IT was thru New Line so one might thank Emmerich over K.T. for that one. And I doubt Kevin would override Nolan on DUNKIRK.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by film11

As for box office, movies like KING ARTHUR and BLADE RUNNER might disagree. (Both good films, although ARTHUR needs to be seen in 3D to be best appreciated.)

Meh, saw it in 2D and I liked it just fine. The UHD is also nice.

[BluRayHiDef]

[Show spoiler]

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by BluRayHiDef

[Show spoiler]

I think I just got cancer from reading that.

[film11]

Tsujihara strikes again. I can only hope the original cut was saved.