*** Justice League Thread ***

V_R

V_R

Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
9,721
Location
UK
That looks brilliant. If its half as good as the trailer makes it look it'll wipe the floor with the old film.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Mar 2010
Posts
11,070
Location
Bucks
Dc make some great trailers.

I'm hopeful though. We know the originally released version was never the real vision and we also know Synder has the benefit of reading reviews and criticisms and should be mindful enough to adapt the film to take all this into account whilst pushing his narrative. We also know that over 3 hours is footage we've never seen before so will be very interesting to compare the two.

In short if this is trash there is really no hope.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Nov 2007
Posts
7,938
Location
Deepest Darkest Essex!!
The new trailer -

Holy crap that looks good!

Agreed. Even though Snyder is a 'marmite' hollywood director, you love or hate his films. Me = Loved 300, Watchmen, DC films, Hated Sucker Punch.

This is the version of the film that WB should have released, they should have let Snyder get over the loss of his daughter instead of getting Joss Whedon to do the post production originally. It would have made the money that WB intended it to make.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Jul 2010
Posts
25,718
I missed most of the info about this. Did they get back all the actors (plus new ones) add new scenes, or is this content that was cut from the previous release tidied up and re-edited?
I believe they've recorded new scenes as well as using some existing ones. I'm not sure how much is new though.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Mar 2007
Posts
13,509
Location
South Yorkshire
I missed most of the info about this. Did they get back all the actors (plus new ones) add new scenes, or is this content that was cut from the previous release tidied up and re-edited?

See below, pretty much going to be a new movie if you've watched the original.

reddit user Dru_Zod47 said:
Some frequent questions I've seen coming up is what's different with this version to the 2017 version of Justice League.

Zack Snyder shot 5 hours of assembly footage during principle photography in 2016. From that, he edited it to 214 mins(3.5 hours) and was happy to call it his director's cut. From this, he was happy to edit it down to 3 hours for the theatrical cut, and release the 3.5 hour directors cut in Blu-ray.

But WB wanted Zack Snyder to cut it to 2 hours for the theatrical cut. Which is unbelievable, since cutting 1.5 hours from a 3.5 hour movie would make it extremely unwatchable and make absolutely no sense. Snyder tried his best to negotiate with WB to release a longer cut, even made a 2.5 hour cut, which was extremely compromised and makes no sense, but WB wasn't happy. This was when Snyder suffered a family tragedy and lost the will to fight with WB for the longer cut.

He stepped down and WB(Geoff Johns) used this opportunity to hire Joss Whedon, and use the 2 months of reshoots to reshoot almost the entire film. He wrote 88 pages of reshoots, which translates to almost 90 mins of the final movie.

The original cinematographer, Fabian Wagner, and later Snyder confirmed that only 30 mins of the theatrical cut of Justice League had shots by Zack Snyder, and even those were heavily edited. The rest were shot by Joss Whedon.

So Zack Snyder's Justice League releasing next month, which is 4 hours, will contain at minimum 3.5 hours of footage we never saw.

The only new idea is the 4 mins of new footage he shot recently with Jared Leto and Joe Mangeniello, which he added since he wanted this universe's Batman and Joker meet at least once. Other than that, it's all shot in 2016.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
8,845
It will be a bit unfair to compare this 4 or 3.5 hour mini series to a 2 hour film. There is a lot of after the fact criticism of Whedon but Snyder was as sure to fail as Whedon did given the constraints he would have had to meet. He also gets the hindsight benefit of knowing what did and didn't work before. I'm looking forward to the Snyder cut it could correct a deeply flawed movie but it won't be comparing apples with apples with regard to the original release.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,889
Yeah, 2 minutes of brief flashes from a 4hr movie tell you everything you need to know.
Your superior intellects can fill in the rest :p

Name one 4 hour movie that was actually really good. Even 'Return of the King: Directors Cut is flawed

If it takes 4 hours to tell your movie, and it wasn't adapted from a book, it should probably have been a TV show.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Jul 2012
Posts
15,885
Location
London
Name one 4 hour movie that was actually really good. Even 'Return of the King: Directors Cut is flawed

If it takes 4 hours to tell your movie, and it wasn't adapted from a book, it should probably have been a TV show.
Movies are subjective. I could name ones that I've liked and you could say whatever.
All movies are flawed in one way or another.

Your argument is poor.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,889
My argument was that TV series are better for long form entertainment and 4 hour movies are too long.

I don't think that's a poor point to make.

At the end of the day they could have had amazing success if they hadn't rushed to force all these characters together.

Batman vs Superman was too soon.

It would have worked much better after those two characters had already worked together on something in a previous movie. They should have built up some distrust conflict, where Bruce Wayne comes to realise Superman is too powerful and could be a real threat to the Earth...instead they ret-conned a Wayne Enterprises building getting destroyed when Superman fought General Zod.

The MCU in comparison built up conflict between Captain America and Iron Man from the outset, and it wasn't until the 13th movie in the franchise that they came to blows.

They should have had more origin movies for the characters, and then made the Justice League first IMO. Instead Warner just wanted billion dollar movies straight away.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
22 Jul 2012
Posts
15,885
Location
London
This was about how you can tell everything about a 4hr movie from brief flashes in a 2min trailer - "It looks like the same ****.."
Considering that at least 3.5hrs of the new cut is footage we haven't seen before...

Your response to that was to move the goalposts and make it about the length of the film and didn't really address the original argument.

Name one 4 hour movie that was actually really good. Even 'Return of the King: Directors Cut is flawed
A movie can be very enjoyable and be flawed. Who says this has to be perfect?
Once again, it's a subjective medium and my 'really good' could differ from yours. If I named a film I really enjoyed - flaws and all - and you didn't agree, would your opinion be more valid because you didn't enjoy it as much I did and got hung up on more of it's flaws?

If it takes 4 hours to tell your movie, and it wasn't adapted from a book, it should probably have been a TV show.

... My argument was that TV series are better for long form entertainment and 4 hour movies are too long.

I don't think that's a poor point to make.

It's not a rule, it's just your opinion.
It's how the director wants it to be and you can always take a break and make your own miniseries out of the experience if you're getting numb bum.

And yes, the DCEU was rushed. Nobody disputes that, but that's not what this is about.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,889
I will watch it anyway, I just didn't think the trailer looked dramatically different from what we got 5 years ago.

The problem is that the Justice League movie was so poor and so forgettable, that I probably wouldn't recognise scenes from the original anyway
 
Back
Top Bottom