• Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

The Snyder Cut

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
Oct 15, 2011
9,021
8,245
16,325
Nowhere










One of the things I find fascinating about these comparisons is the realestate of the shots. I first noticed the disparity on the shot where Diana lands back in and blocks that first bullet fedora man shot at the hostages. The shot was the same in the SC as the WC but with the left and right cut out. At that point I wondered if the shots they kept were all the same, that they took out the sides of the frame for the 3:4 aspect ratio, so I looked at each shot much closer and, sure enough, that was not the case. In some shots it's evident that there is more on the top and bottom while the things on the left and right are still the same in both. The zoom in's are intentional and not, as I was kinda concerned for, the same shots but with the sides cut off.
 
Last edited:

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
One of the things I find fascinating about these comparisons is the realestate of the shots. I first noticed the disparity on the shot where Diana lands back in and blocks that first bullet fedora man shot at the hostages. The shot was the same in the SC as the WC but with the left and right cut out. At that point I wondered if the shots they kept were all the same, that they took out the sides of the frame for the 3:4 aspect ratio, so I looked at each shot much closer and, sure enough, that was not the case. In some shots it's evident that there is more on the top and bottom while the things on the left and right are still the same in both. The zoom in's are intentional and not, as I was kinda concerned for, the same shots but with the sides cut off.
Yeah that's... you didn't have to look that hard. You should've just asked yourself what Snyder would have to gain by cropping his own footage even further than it already was to preserve an IMAX/Academy ratio, that couldn't have been gained by simply having shot the film in the intended aspect ratio to begin with to have more detail on the top and bottom of the screen. The answer is Nothing. He'd have gained Nothing by cutting out more of his film from the screen after the WC already butchered footage from a 5-hour assembly cut, so of course Snyder would have added more of what he shot to ZSJL, not less.

Related: Disney+ making the dumb decision to stream The Simpsons at a cropped widescreen ratio of 16:9 is what killed the visual gags the show had when watched in classic 4:3.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
What even is that video? There's... no end to how terrible the take is.

1. Context: The guy took down his Attack on Titan critique vid instead of keeping it. So either he has terrible takes, or he can be browbeaten by fandoms or response vids into removing the video. Bad sign.

2. He goes into this "Snyder is a fan of Ayn Rand" hot take that clouds the rest of his judgment and doesn't allow him to see anything else, immediately assigning politics to a director that legit said "Ayn Rand drank her own kool-aid" and he only likes The Fountainhead out of all her works. Same energy as people who've never read "1984" calling everything they don't like Orwellian. Also, Brad Bird is right over there. Yeah, the dude who made The Incredibles? He is Randian. Snyder's just some guy who posted a "Vote Biden" video on his twitter and got some Republican yahoos' knickers in a twist because they maintained some illusion he was "better than that" (read: one of them). Ayn Rand's whole thing is that a hero puts his own happiness as moral purpose and reason is the only thing guiding him. Meanwhile Superman does the right thing because it's right but without imposing his will on others, Wonder Woman similarly fights to protect those who can't fight for themselves, and ZSJL's Bruce operates "strictly on faith, not on reason" as part of his redemption and is proven right for it, while his attitude across BvS was clearly being condemned as the (pun) batsh*t lunacy that it was; he thought his own "logic/reason" was absolute and Alfred kept dunking on him for going off the deep end.

3. "Faceless hordes of enemies mean communism is bad". Urrrrrr.... one, Steppenwolf/Darkseid has control over the hordes. In 300, Xerxes had control over the horde. In Legend of the Guardians, it was Nyra. Two, the whole point of communist ideology is that no one is another's master, and there are no social strata or overruling "state", much less people huddling under the power of (thereby granting control to) a single individual. Whether or not one considers the historical existence of failed communist nations or gets into a tweetfest of whether they were "truly" communist or not, or notes trends in American filmmaking of "blaming everything bad on communism", it's not in a Snyder film and it's not exemplified by "faceless hordes for heroes to punch" so that conversation doesn't belong here.

Was this energy being devoted to Loki and his control of the Chitauri in Avengers? They're a horde that no lie, all die en masse when a nuke hits their mothership because they all have a collective brain and no identity separate from each other. They even have masks to hide their faces and the only time they take it off is to screech incoherently. They're a mindless horde with no culture and no setting other than "warmongering" that serve only to help their master subjugate the whole world, or other worlds, or other races. See also: Laufey and the Frost Giants. Malekith and the Dark Elves. Whiplash and the Hammer Drones. Killian and the Extremis Soldiers. Ultron and the Sentries. Hive and the Primitives. Red Skull and HYDRA. Hela and the Berserkers. Thanos and the Outriders. Thanos and the Outriders, again. There's a pattern here, and it's not from Snyder! Most of the MCU and a season of Agents of Shield is "leader of hordes"!

Anyway, the subtext of the Mother Boxes' Unity and Parademons is basically full text when Diana says that Darkseid forces people to follow his rule by denying their individual will, and that's not communism: that's called authoritarianism and fascism. Legend of the Guardians was about how bad fascism is and the horrors of war compared to the sanitized stories told to children. BvS was about how bad American imperialism is and how the rich (especially the xenophobic rich) pervert the justice system and manipulate the downtrodden into fighting against each other and against their own interests so the rich maintain their own power. Man of Steel ends with Supes crashing a military surveillance satellite.

If anything, Snyder movies are a masterclass in how obvious he can make something and still end up with people intentionally misconstruing him to impose their opinion that he's a Right Wing Nut Job That Hates Women And Worships At The Altar Of Objectivism. I mean, Joss Whedon is right over there, being an actual ass who hates women. People could try dedicating a few videos tearing him down for his actual behaviors instead of going after Snyder for what they fantasize he's up to just because he made a movie they didn't like.

4. Something something Snyder chose the final conflict to take place in Chernobyl, Chernobyl failed because "communism bad". No, Chernobyl failed because the deputy chief engineer Anatoly Dyatlov failed to follow safety protocols and forced the employees to operate the plant before everything was completely ready. Flouting safety regulations at the cost of human lives is something that recently happened with Boeing's 737 Max planes; two fatal crashes within half a year of each other owed to a failure in their automated MCAS, because Boeing wanted to save money by not adequately training their pilots, not buying the additional safety features that would have alerted the pilots to the errors beforehand, and laying off their senior engineers because those engineers were too expensive.

What I'm saying is these types of corner cuts and failures happen plenty under capitalism, because of capitalism. F off with the "communism bad".

How does anyone get "Zack Snyder hates communism and it shows in his movies" when BvS is about not one, but two billionaires getting big baby rage mad that an immigrant raised by working-class parents is showing them up and overturning what little sense of power and control they have over the world? At least Bruce saw sense, particularly because his rage was from Lex manipulating his existing issues. Lex proper never got over himself.

5. The union of the motherboxes is called the Unity, and the villain wants this, therefore Snyder thinks union is bad? I mean, it's not like the entire plot of the movie revolves around the various heroes uniting to stop the bad guy, with some narration about how all the different races of the world united against Darkseid/Uxas the first time,

it's not like Bruce literally says "I don't care how many demons he's fought in how many hells. He's never fought us. Not us United",

it's not like the tagline of the movie was #UsUnited,

it's not like the only reason ZSJL even exists is because of the collaboration, nay, the unity of different writers, actors, points of view, whereas we got Josstice League from Whedon putting himself above others to where he refused to even listen to Ray Fisher on the grounds of, "I wouldn't even listen to RDJ, why would I listen to you?",

it's not like Steppenwolf shows up and calls out the world as being "too divided to fight as one" and calls that out as a weakness because different races are in conflict with each other, which is the reason he got two of the motherboxes to begin with (Amazons were isolated, would have fared better if they had the help of Atlanteans and Men -- and the same goes for the Atlanteans who had legit subpar defenses because Orm was using their soldiers for anti-surface propaganda),

it's not like Steppenwolf fights in favor of a "unity" that, no joke, forces the entire environment to change to suit one single ruler and strips all others of their identity and consciousness, rendering them slaves, and he's defeated by the good guys who unite without sacrificing their internal identity and instead celebrating their differences, and they are all instrumental in the world being saved. It's not "Superman, Black Robot Superman, Rich Powerless Superman, Fast Superman, and Superwoman" with a cameo from "Pyrophobic Green Superman" at the end. It's "alien from another planet", "humanitarian billionaire vigilante", "demigoddess", "mixed-race Pacific Islander", "god of technology", and "a very handsome Jewish boy who ice-skates competitively",

it's not like Cyborg's character line in his trailer and in the movie is "I'm not broken, and I'm not alone".

Maybe the fact that this person associated "communism" with an authoritarian dictator out to strip everyone of their free will means that person has a terrible opinion on communism, not the director?

It's not up to one person to force everyone else how to be. This is why Superman doesn't rule over the entire Earth as its god. This is why Cyborg doesn't cause an immediate upheaval of the economy right after giving that single woman an extra $100K to her bank account.

6. Another bad Jonathan Kent take, when will it end? Jonathan wants to keep his son, a minor with powers he doesn't know the limits of, safe from xenophobia and the various three-letter agencies that would otherwise take him away and deny his human rights to experiment on and control him, and they would do it based off of nothing but the circumstances of his birth and the slightest evidence that he'd be useful to them as an "asset" to assert their interest on others, disguising their acts as heroism by "protecting" the masses from him and "listening to their concerns". Given the military's insistence on watching "where he hangs his cape" in MoS and the absolute reaming he got from the media in BvS, yeah, Jonathan was kinda right. In fact, given Clark's age at the time, Jonathan was 100% right. The only right time for Clark to become Superman was when he was already an adult, with control of his powers, an alliance with someone he could trust (Lois Lane, who agreed not to out his identity as Clark Kent), and a good-looking outfit plus no way they would trace Kal-El the Kryptonian to proud old lady Martha Kent, thus no way to endanger her.

P.S. Since when does a Maybe mean Yes? Maybe means Maybe. It's not a Yes or a No. If you tried to make sexual overtures at anyone based off of "They said maybe, and that wasn't a No, so it was obviously a Yes," that'd be ridiculous. So why is Jonathan Kent's Maybe being taken like a Yes? That video guy should change his name to Just Rapist. Clearly, asserting to know a total stranger's worldview, social life, and/or personal opinions off of one visual work is a fair and just thing to do.
 
Last edited:

RedNether

"Sorry, but I don't lose."
Premium
Jul 21, 2017
158
300
970
27
What even is that video? There's... no end to how terrible the take is.

1. Context: The guy took down his Attack on Titan critique vid instead of keeping it. So either he has terrible takes, or he can be browbeaten by fandoms or response vids into removing the video. Bad sign.

2. He goes into this "Snyder is a fan of Ayn Rand" hot take that clouds the rest of his judgment and doesn't allow him to see anything else, immediately assigning politics to a director that legit said "Ayn Rand drank her own kool-aid" and he only likes The Fountainhead out of all her works. Same energy as people who've never read "1984" calling everything they don't like Orwellian. Also, Brad Bird is right over there. Yeah, the dude who made The Incredibles? He is Randian. Snyder's just some guy who posted a "Vote Biden" video on his twitter and got some Republican yahoos' knickers in a twist because they maintained some illusion he was "better than that" (read: one of them). Ayn Rand's whole thing is that a hero puts his own happiness as moral purpose and reason is the only thing guiding him. Meanwhile Superman does the right thing because it's right but without imposing his will on others, Wonder Woman similarly fights to protect those who can't fight for themselves, and ZSJL's Bruce operates "strictly on faith, not on reason" as part of his redemption and is proven right for it, while his attitude across BvS was clearly being condemned as the (pun) batsh*t lunacy that it was; he thought his own "logic/reason" was absolute and Alfred kept dunking on him for going off the deep end.

3. "Faceless hordes of enemies mean communism is bad". Urrrrrr.... one, Steppenwolf/Darkseid has control over the hordes. In 300, Xerxes had control over the horde. In Legend of the Guardians, it was Nyra. Two, the whole point of communist ideology is that no one is another's master, and there are no social strata or overruling "state", much less people huddling under the power of (thereby granting control to) a single individual. Whether or not one considers the historical existence of failed communist nations or gets into a tweetfest of whether they were "truly" communist or not, or notes trends in American filmmaking of "blaming everything bad on communism", it's not in a Snyder film and it's not exemplified by "faceless hordes for heroes to punch" so that conversation doesn't belong here.

Was this energy being devoted to Loki and his control of the Chitauri in Avengers? They're a horde that no lie, all die en masse when a nuke hits their mothership because they all have a collective brain and no identity separate from each other. They even have masks to hide their faces and the only time they take it off is to screech incoherently. They're a mindless horde with no culture and no setting other than "warmongering" that serve only to help their master subjugate the whole world, or other worlds, or other races. See also: Laufey and the Frost Giants. Malekith and the Dark Elves. Whiplash and the Hammer Drones. Killian and the Extremis Soldiers. Ultron and the Sentries. Hive and the Primitives. Red Skull and HYDRA. Hela and the Berserkers. Thanos and the Outriders. Thanos and the Outriders, again. There's a pattern here, and it's not from Snyder! Most of the MCU and a season of Agents of Shield is "leader of hordes"!

Anyway, the subtext of the Mother Boxes' Unity and Parademons is basically full text when Diana says that Darkseid forces people to follow his rule by denying their individual will, and that's not communism: that's called authoritarianism and fascism. Legend of the Guardians was about how bad fascism is and the horrors of war compared to the sanitized stories told to children. BvS was about how bad American imperialism is and how the rich (especially the xenophobic rich) pervert the justice system and manipulate the downtrodden into fighting against each other and against their own interests so the rich maintain their own power. Man of Steel ends with Supes crashing a military surveillance satellite.

If anything, Snyder movies are a masterclass in how obvious he can make something and still end up with people intentionally misconstruing him to impose their opinion that he's a Right Wing Nut Job That Hates Women And Worships At The Altar Of Objectivism. I mean, Joss Whedon is right over there, being an actual ass who hates women. People could try dedicating a few videos tearing him down for his actual behaviors instead of going after Snyder for what they fantasize he's up to just because he made a movie they didn't like.

4. Something something Snyder chose the final conflict to take place in Chernobyl, Chernobyl failed because "communism bad". No, Chernobyl failed because the deputy chief engineer Anatoly Dyatlov failed to follow safety protocols and forced the employees to operate the plant before everything was completely ready. Flouting safety regulations at the cost of human lives is something that recently happened with Boeing's 737 Max planes; two fatal crashes within half a year of each other owed to a failure in their automated MCAS, because Boeing wanted to save money by not adequately training their pilots, not buying the additional safety features that would have alerted the pilots to the errors beforehand, and laying off their senior engineers because those engineers were too expensive.

What I'm saying is these types of corner cuts and failures happen plenty under capitalism, because of capitalism. F off with the "communism bad".

How does anyone get "Zack Snyder hates communism and it shows in his movies" when BvS is about not one, but two billionaires getting big baby rage mad that an immigrant raised by working-class parents is showing them up and overturning what little sense of power and control they have over the world? At least Bruce saw sense, particularly because his rage was from Lex manipulating his existing issues. Lex proper never got over himself.

5. The union of the motherboxes is called the Unity, and the villain wants this, therefore Snyder thinks union is bad? I mean, it's not like the entire plot of the movie revolves around the various heroes uniting to stop the bad guy, with some narration about how all the different races of the world united against Darkseid/Uxas the first time,

it's not like Bruce literally says "I don't care how many demons he's fought in how many hells. He's never fought us. Not us United",

it's not like the tagline of the movie was #UsUnited,

it's not like the only reason ZSJL even exists is because of the collaboration, nay, the unity of different writers, actors, points of view, whereas we got Josstice League from Whedon putting himself above others to where he refused to even listen to Ray Fisher on the grounds of, "I wouldn't even listen to RDJ, why would I listen to you?",

it's not like Steppenwolf shows up and calls out the world as being "too divided to fight as one" and calls that out as a weakness because different races are in conflict with each other, which is the reason he got two of the motherboxes to begin with (Amazons were isolated, would have fared better if they had the help of Atlanteans and Men -- and the same goes for the Atlanteans who had legit subpar defenses because Orm was using their soldiers for anti-surface propaganda),

it's not like Steppenwolf fights in favor of a "unity" that, no joke, forces the entire environment to change to suit one single ruler and strips all others of their identity and consciousness, rendering them slaves, and he's defeated by the good guys who unite without sacrificing their internal identity and instead celebrating their differences, and they are all instrumental in the world being saved. It's not "Superman, Black Robot Superman, Rich Powerless Superman, Fast Superman, and Superwoman" with a cameo from "Pyrophobic Green Superman" at the end. It's "alien from another planet", "humanitarian billionaire vigilante", "demigoddess", "mixed-race Pacific Islander", "god of technology", and "a very handsome Jewish boy who ice-skates competitively",

it's not like Cyborg's character line in his trailer and in the movie is "I'm not broken, and I'm not alone".

Maybe the fact that this person associated "communism" with an authoritarian dictator out to strip everyone of their free will means that person has a terrible opinion on communism, not the director?

It's not up to one person to force everyone else how to be. This is why Superman doesn't rule over the entire Earth as its god. This is why Cyborg doesn't cause an immediate upheaval of the economy right after giving that single woman an extra $100K to her bank account.

6. Another bad Jonathan Kent take, when will it end? Jonathan wants to keep his son, a minor with powers he doesn't know the limits of, safe from xenophobia and the various three-letter agencies that would otherwise take him away and deny his human rights to experiment on and control him, and they would do it based off of nothing but the circumstances of his birth and the slightest evidence that he'd be useful to them as an "asset" to assert their interest on others, disguising their acts as heroism by "protecting" the masses from him and "listening to their concerns". Given the military's insistence on watching "where he hangs his cape" in MoS and the absolute reaming he got from the media in BvS, yeah, Jonathan was kinda right. In fact, given Clark's age at the time, Jonathan was 100% right. The only right time for Clark to become Superman was when he was already an adult, with control of his powers, an alliance with someone he could trust (Lois Lane, who agreed not to out his identity as Clark Kent), and a good-looking outfit plus no way they would trace Kal-El the Kryptonian to proud old lady Martha Kent, thus no way to endanger her.

P.S. Since when does a Maybe mean Yes? Maybe means Maybe. It's not a Yes or a No. If you tried to make sexual overtures at anyone based off of "They said maybe, and that wasn't a No, so it was obviously a Yes," that'd be ridiculous. So why is Jonathan Kent's Maybe being taken like a Yes? That video guy should change his name to Just Rapist. Clearly, asserting to know a total stranger's worldview, social life, and/or personal opinions off of one visual work is a fair and just thing to do.
Welcome to my world Morgan, at the risk of actually being crass. I've had to deal with 8 years of this bullshit, and it's actually not just me.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
Welcome to my world Morgan, at the risk of actually being crass. I've had to deal with 8 years of this bullshit, and it's actually not just me.
Thanks, I hate it here.

It just baffles me how people think they can assign politics to someone they don't know personally just off of their fictional work as an excuse to not like them, and then, I guarantee you, in the same breath, "separate the art from the artist" when it comes to Woody Allen, or more relevantly to Snyder, Joss frickin Whedon. People feel like they're in such a moral high ground to hate Snyder and his work that they think it's okay to say he killed his own daughter just to get out of having to direct 2017 Justice League, meanwhile these other genuinely terrible directors are still skating by with the good will of stuff they did ~30 years ago. That's the world we live in. Damn, do I hate it.



As an aside, because I can't get over the "Jonathan and Martha are bad parents" bit, it's a really stupid take to dislike Superman just because his parents somehow didn't sufficiently inculcate him into being a good person. The entire point of his story in this iteration is that he's born from an alien race that have their life roles genetically coded into them, gets free will instead, and additionally chooses to do right when he can get away with all the wrongs, not because his parents impressed on him the Savior trope on fear of punishment or their personal disappointment, but because he feels he has a responsibility to the world with the powers that he has. He operates from a deontological standpoint. Additionally, his parents respect his life choices and despite being flawed people like literally everyone else in the world, give him the best advice they can, that reinforces that what acts he does as a grown man are his choices to make and not impositions, that he'll have to hold himself accountable for even when no one else has that power over him.

"I don't blame you, son. It'd be a huge burden for anyone to carry, but you're not just anyone, Clark, and I have to believe that you were sent here for a reason. All these changes you're going through, one day your going to think of them as a blessing and when that day comes, you're going to have to make a choice. A choice for whether to stand proud before the human race, or not."

"Somewhere out there, you have another father too, who gave you another name. And he sent you here for a reason, Clark, and even if it takes the rest of your life, you owe it to yourself to find out what that reason is."

"You just have to decide what kind of man you wanna grow up to be, Clark. Because, whoever that man is, good character or bad, he’s…he’s gonna change the world."


There's even the additional dialogue in BvS where Jonathan tells Clark that he won't be able to foresee every single consequence of actions he takes in the name of doing the right thing, and that he'll have to wrestle with the feeling of being hailed as a hero but ultimately feeling inadequate and haunted by the ramifications of his actions. It's the exact thing doctors, first responders, firefighters, anyone working in rescue or human service fields have to deal with. That they could make their best attempt to save a life and still end up losing one. That feeling of guilt at not being able to save everyone all the time has to be wrestled with and ultimately overcome for the sake of the people that will need help in the future, and it probably affects Clark tenfold because he knows he's not just human, and so quitting wouldn't lessen his feeling of responsibility and subsequent guilt because as far as he knows, no one else has the power he does. (And that's why we have the Justice League, so that no hero suffers the burden of saving everyone alone.)

Instead people are still upset Supes killed Zod. Y'know, the militaristic dictator willing to genocide a whole world and who spits 1:1 Nazi rhetoric about "[severing] the degenerative bloodlines" for the continued prosperity of his "superior" race. We're supposed to feel bad for that guy getting his neck snapped because people think Superman not killing is an absolute rule of his character. He's also not allowed to say that Krypton, a eugenicist society that brought its own destruction from its practices, "had its chance". And Clark's actions and words somehow stem from Jonathan and Martha being "bad parents".

Next thing you know, "Narcissistic Parents are Good, Actually" might become a sincerely-held, "uncontroversial statement" in those circles because vicariously living through your children and solely raising them as a proxy to challenge society with values that you yourself don't have to practice and catch flak for but want the credit for "creating" is, well, good. At best it embraces a trap-like "no-win" scenario for the child where the parent totally wants to raise them into a "successful person" without sacrificing their own status as the infallible ideal that the child will always revere and therefore never surpass. Actually, that's not At Best, because that's the Parent supposing that they're God. The point is if you want your kid to be Better Than You, that will come with some level of acceptance that You Are Not Perfect, but that's not a bad thing, that's just how evolution works. But yeah, because Jonathan and Martha are themselves not moral paragons, somehow this disqualifies Clark from being a hero. Clark still goes to them for guidance, whether in real life or in his own mental "Fortress of Solitude", so, whatever.

It'd be funny if it weren't people pathetically tattling on themselves that they believe a hero can only ever come from "superhuman genes" and "absolutely perfect, 100% morally good parenting". Pretty sure something that rigid disqualifies Clark's parents in Smallville, and I'm thinking specifically of the episode where Martha puts "upholding the law" over "doing the right thing" on the matter of whether Clark should save undocumented immigrants from the murderous slaver exploiting them.

But I dunno, maybe these are the people that unironically love Superman Returns and its reinforcement that Jor-El totally knew he was sending his own child to Earth as a literal "Gift to Humanity" first and foremost, with the interest of his son's welfare and saving him from the exploding planet at second place. Or they would love Smallville, with its sociopathic A.I. Jor-El that enforced seemingly contradictory demands of Clark and wanted him to "Rule [humans] with strength", and did things like: painfully branded the S symbol on Clark's chest; brainwashed a woman into being Kara then disintegrated her when she no longer served her purpose; strangled Jonathan to force Clark to comply with his demands; similarly brainwashed, imprisoned, or depowered Clark himself as punishment; cut off all communication with Clark right after telling him to search for magical stones on threat of an apocalypse; then, incredibly hypocritically gets on Clark's case for his willingness to kill a Lex clone to save Lois after being himself responsible for so many deaths including Jonathan's or Lana's given the timeline and he wanted Clark to kill Lex himself in season, I dunno, five?

I'm just saying, there's a really good reason for why MoS had Jor-El and Lara's individual dreams and suppositions of Clark being an "outcast" or "a god to [humans]" go unacknowledged by Clark (since he's a baby then), and Clark only hears exactly what Jor-El wants from him after he's an adult, and Jonathan similarly doesn't pressure Clark to attain all the answers to his questions immediately when he's a teenage boy wrestling with himself as it is already. Despite Jor-El's wants, Jonathan would be the one to actually raise Clark, and Earth would be the planet Clark is actually living in. Protecting him as a child first and foremost was priority, and raising him to want to do good for goodness's sake with a healthy understanding of consequences and the foundations to an unshakeable sense of identity was paramount. A teenage Clark being thrust into the public before his time, lambasted by the media like he was in BvS, or experimented on to the point where he'd be twisted by human cruelty would have messed him up.
 
Last edited:

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
Hollywood Reporter:

Biggest OOF moments in no particular order of severity:
  • Joss Whedon harassing Gal Gadot, threatening her career, and talking smack about Patty Jenkins, saying he'd make her (Gadot) look stupid was a true event. "Joss was bragging that he's had it out with Gal. He told her he's the writer and she's going to shut up and say the lines and he can make her look incredibly stupid in this movie."
  • Geoff Johns doesn't believe Black women can change their hairstyles from day to day and presents this as enough of a serious continuity issue that he'd tell a Black woman to her face that that is not a thing that happens.
  • Geoff Johns doesn't think a light-skinned (White) alien can have a dark-skinned (Black) grandparent or vice-versa. Because, y'know, it's not like Jenni Ognats exists in the Flash Family as Barry Allen's granddaughter or anything.
  • Whedon "sent out an email asking for questions, comments or "fulsome praise,"" but like every other pusillanimous amateur writer, only wanted the praise. "It feels like I'm taking notes right now, and I don't like taking notes from anybody — not even Robert Downey Jr.," he said, even though he asked for feedback and got feedback.
  • According to Geoff Johns, Jon Berg, and Toby Emmerich, Black men can't ever be angry about perfectly valid reasons to be angry. The cure for this is to not give them much screentime.
  • Geoff Johns told Fisher to play Cyborg like Quasimodo.
  • It's really important to some random executive's child that Cyborg say "Booyah" even though he never said that as a catchphrase until the animated Teen Titans with the Puffy AmiYumi opening theme, but if that kid grew up on Teen Titans, which debuted in 2003, then they should be pretty old now, don't ya think?
Place your bets on what announcement WB is going to pull to deflect from this trade report:

1) Aquaman 2 update
2) Black Adam or Shazam sequel update
3) The Flash plus Batfleck and BatKeaton update
4) Deathstroke show on HBOMax
 
Last edited:

RedNether

"Sorry, but I don't lose."
Premium
Jul 21, 2017
158
300
970
27
Hollywood Reporter:

Biggest OOF moments in no particular order of severity:
  • Joss Whedon harassing Gal Gadot, threatening her career, and talking smack about Patty Jenkins, saying he'd make her (Gadot) look stupid was a true event. "Joss was bragging that he's had it out with Gal. He told her he's the writer and she's going to shut up and say the lines and he can make her look incredibly stupid in this movie."
  • Geoff Johns doesn't believe Black women can change their hairstyles from day to day and presents this as enough of a serious continuity issue that he'd tell a Black woman to her face that that is not a thing that happens.
  • Geoff Johns doesn't think a light-skinned (White) alien can have a dark-skinned (Black) grandparent or vice-versa. Because, y'know, it's not like Jenni Ognats exists in the Flash Family as Barry Allen's granddaughter or anything.
  • Whedon "sent out an email asking for questions, comments or "fulsome praise,"" but like every other pusillanimous amateur writer, only wanted the praise. "It feels like I'm taking notes right now, and I don't like taking notes from anybody — not even Robert Downey Jr.," he said, even though he asked for feedback and got feedback.
  • According to Geoff Johns, Jon Berg, and Toby Emmerich, Black men can't ever be angry about perfectly valid reasons to be angry. The cure for this is to not give them much screentime.
  • Geoff Johns told Fisher to play Cyborg like Quasimodo.
  • It's really important to some random executive's child that Cyborg say "Booyah" even though he never said that as a catchphrase until the animated Teen Titans with the Puffy AmiYumi opening theme, but if that kid grew up on Teen Titans, which debuted in 2003, then they should be pretty old now, don't ya think?
Place your bets on what announcement WB is going to pull to deflect from this trade report:

1) Aquaman 2 update
2) Black Adam or Shazam sequel update
3) The Flash plus Batfleck and BatKeaton update
4) Deathstroke show on HBOMax
Definitely not Deathstroke show, they want to erase the Snyderverse not make people even more aware of it than they already are.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
Definitely not Deathstroke show, they want to erase the Snyderverse not make people even more aware of it than they already are.
On the one hand, you have a point.

On the other hand, Aquaman 2 and the untitled Wonder Woman sequel would already be reminding us, given that Wan, Jenkins, and Snyder worked with each other to keep things mostly consistent between BvS/JL and the heroes' respective solo films: hence why Snyder only shows Atlantean outposts and the Mother Box temple in his movie, not Atlantis in full, because he respected what Wan was trying to do and left the worldbuilding to the solo movie. Wan even showed a test cut of Aquaman directly to Snyder even though it finished after Snyder left JL2017. Same with Wonder Woman, in which Snyder only shows Amazons outside of Themiscyra's main city and did minimal worldbuilding in that location and instead showed them in outer temples, massive open fields, etc. Snyder even had script credits in the first film, producer credit on the first film and its sequel, and Patty Jenkins stated that “I think that all of us DC directors tossed [the theatrical cut of Justice League] out just as much as the fans did, [...] I felt that that version contradicted my first movie in many ways, and [WW84] which I was already in production on," and "I don’t recognize half of these characters. I’m not sure what’s going on."

Deathstroke already featured in JL2017's end credits, so they at least can maintain the illusion that the 2017 version is "canon to the multiverse" or whatever, even though... it's not.

So I mean, if they wanted to stop reminding us of the Justice League and the Snyderverse that everyone was already aware of since at least 2015, these other movies have got to go, including Ezra Miller as The Flash.
 
Last edited:

RedNether

"Sorry, but I don't lose."
Premium
Jul 21, 2017
158
300
970
27
On the one hand, you have a point.

On the other hand, Aquaman 2 and the untitled Wonder Woman sequel would already be reminding us, given that Wan, Jenkins, and Snyder worked with each other to keep things mostly consistent between BvS/JL and the heroes' respective solo films: hence why Snyder only shows Atlantean outposts and the Mother Box temple in his movie, not Atlantis in full, because he respected what Wan was trying to do and left the worldbuilding to the solo movie. Wan even showed a test cut of Aquaman directly to Snyder even though it finished after Snyder left JL2017. Same with Wonder Woman, in which Snyder only shows Amazons outside of Themiscyra's main city and did minimal worldbuilding in that location and instead showed them in outer temples, massive open fields, etc. Snyder even had script credits in the first film, producer credit on the first film and its sequel, and Patty Jenkins stated that “I think that all of us DC directors tossed [the theatrical cut of Justice League] out just as much as the fans did, [...] I felt that that version contradicted my first movie in many ways, and [WW84] which I was already in production on," and "I don’t recognize half of these characters. I’m not sure what’s going on."

Deathstroke already featured in JL2017's end credits, so they at least can maintain the illusion that the 2017 version is "canon to the multiverse" or whatever, even though... it's not.

So I mean, if they wanted to stop reminding us of the Justice League and the Snyderverse that everyone was already aware of since at least 2015, these other movies have got to go, including Ezra Miller as The Flash.
Well, it's an Ambush Bug movie (whichever superhero that is).
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,563
6,157
14,165
NY,Ny
You must be registered for see medias

@Morgan
Just Write's views aren't my own. I just liked his other content so I was curious what he thought.

I'm more neutral to the Snyderverse myself. I haven't seen the Snyder cut yet but I liked Man of Steel and kinda liked BvS. BvS felt like a more ambitious Iron man 2.

@RedNether Ambush Bug is a D-list superhero who can teleport. He's a more comedic character who actually became a tv reporter. He was apart of the Channel 52 news network.

I'd make him an alternate take on Jimmy Olsen. He became a superhero on his own universe abd got stuck on ours. He teams up with our Jimmy Olsen to get home.

There's a sitcom in there. I'd watch it.
 
Last edited:

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
Well, it's an Ambush Bug movie (whichever superhero that is).
What the hell is Ambush Bug? I'm inclined to pre-emptively dismiss it if it's a hero mentioned by WeGotThisCovered, since they're usually trash at actual breaking news that isn't directly sourced from the person they namedrop or sourced from the trades (Hollywood Reporter, Vanity Fair, etc.)

I do know WB wants an Hourman movie, even though Hourman is a supporting role in other heroes' stories at best and his most recent comics run was ~20+ years ago.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935

Vanity Fair:

There's a lot to this interview, but I'm posting up my favorite excerpts. Read the interview in full anyway!

“The 2017 theatrical cut was an act of vandalism,Terrio said. “Zack may be too much of a gentleman to say that, but I’m not.

“If you took 30 minutes out of Argo, as they were from Batman/Superman, it would make zero sense at all. Critics would say, ‘what a lazy screenplay,’ because the characters don’t have motivations and it’s not coherent,” Terrio said. “And I would agree with them.”

What did you want to avoid?

I didn’t want to make it a sitcom joke that Batman and Superman are trying to kill each other. If I’m going to work on this movie, it’s going to be dark and operatic, and it’s going to be uncomfortable. Zack and I come from very different approaches to filmmaking, but I immediately liked him because he isn’t cynical and he wears his heart on his sleeve. I’m cynical enough for any room that I enter into.

“[It] wasn’t called Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice by me.... It just sounds self-important and clueless in a way.”

What was your relationship with Zack?

Good. I have nothing whatsoever bad to say about Zack. He has a skill set that I don’t have, as a visualist. And he has a contagious excitement—that when you describe a scene, he almost can’t contain himself and he just wants to go draw it or paint it. Zack never for a second turned his back on me or doubted my work.

After Batman/Superman, many of my Hollywood friends just stopped talking to me because they sort of thought that somehow I was complicit in this very public failure of a studio film. You learn pretty quickly who your real friends are and who your air-kiss Hollywood friends are. Zack could not have been more supportive and never stopped believing that together, we were going to create this big, epic DC world.

Do you feel like the title, and the cuts for length, made it harder for people to appreciate things that did work in Batman v Superman?

That’s exactly right. The audience has to know that they’re in good hands. The minute that you lose them from a story point of view, they lose the desire to look at it generously. Once the critics decide a movie is incoherent, it’s just a pile-on. Then they attack everything. There’s a line at the beginning of the film where a warlord says to Lois Lane, “They didn’t tell me the interview was with a lady.” And Lois replies, “I’m not a lady, I’m a journalist.” So one reviewer held up this line as proof positive of my stupidity and my inability to write Lois, or to write at all.

Well, the character of Lois in the movie was inspired by the journalist , who was of course killed in Syria. She was one of the most intrepid journalists who ever lived, in my opinion. And there’s a story in Vanity Fair, ” [by Marie Brenner], and the line that Lois says is almost exactly the line that was in that article, where a Chechen warlord said he wouldn’t shake her hand because she was a woman. Marie Colvin replied, “There is no woman in this room, only a journalist.” So that line was my tribute to her. But then in the pile-on, a line like that is held as proof positive that I don’t understand either women or journalists or human beings, and that I’m a ****ty writer.

The studio seemed to take this position after BvS that my writing was too dark and that this was their problem. But what they didn’t mention was that, for example, in the draft of the Batman/Superman script that W.B. had developed—[which was] the draft I was handed when I joined the project—Batman was not only branding criminals with a bat brand, he also ended the movie by branding Lex Luthor.

[...]

What else did you push back against?

I’m the one who had been saying that we can’t make a joke out of Superman raining hell upon Black African Muslim characters in the desert, as Lois promises that Superman is not going to go easy on them because they punched her. But somehow I’m the person with the dark sensibility? I wanted to say, “I’ve been saving you from yourselves! I’ve been working with the director to bring a voice of conscience and sanity to the almost perversely dark film you’ve been developing for years, but I’m the problem here?”

Right before the time of Batman/Superman, I was asked to attend an event in New York where the cast and filmmakers were paraded in front of a room of investors at the Time Warner Center, I guess to convince them that their money was in good hands.

[...]

These guys were in charge because they controlled the money at the very top of the pyramid. They were making big decisions—not the film executives we’re talking about, but Wall Street guys. One guy, who I can only describe as the man who Central Casting sends you when you’re trying to cast Douchebag #1, pulled me aside and started telling me how to write Batman.

“I was not consulted on the order of the films, even though I was the person writing Justice League.

Did you have many interactions with the actors?

I wasn’t invited to the set, but obviously I know Ben, and I got to know Ray Fisher. We developed Cyborg together. Ray came to my apartment in the East Village, and he and I just would take long walks and talk about Cyborg and the responsibility of putting the first Black DC superhero in a movie onscreen. That was a big responsibility that we both understood and took very seriously. Remember, this was before Black Panther. There obviously have been some Black superheroes over the years, but none depicted with such a budget and such scale and in such a mainstream way.

Cyborg is the one character who can’t disguise himself. He lives in his skin. His otherness is a constant fact of his life. And that to me—and Ray and I discussed this—speaks about being a Black man in America. You cannot remove the otherness that people force upon you. And therefore Cyborg—when he becomes the hero that he always should have been and was meant to be, that felt like something really strong that we wanted the world to see.

When the Snyders left the project, that was effectively the end of your involvement. Is that right?

That’s right. I would only hear occasional reports about the reshoot. I didn’t realize how much of the film was going to be changed—or vandalized, in my opinion. It became clear as I spoke to various actors that it was a wholesale dismantling of what had been there before. I did not hear from anyone who said it was a pleasant experience.

When did you watch [Joss's] version of Justice League?

I was in L.A. at the time working on Star Wars [The Rise of Skywalker]. I was on the west side of Los Angeles working with J.J. [Abrams] at the time, and I drove to the studio and I sat down and watched it a couple of weeks before release. I immediately called my lawyer and said, “I want to take my name off the film.” [The lawyer] then called Warner Bros. and told them that I wanted to do that.

Why didn’t you?

Prints had already been struck or hard drives burned or however they deliver movies these days. The elements were on their way, and to remove my name they would have had to restrike the prints or redo the digital copies, and the film could be delayed. It would be an international scandal and news story. So I shut up and I said nothing publicly. I’ve never said anything about Justice League since then, but the movie doesn’t represent my work.

What happened after that?

As far as I know, I wasn’t invited to the premiere, and I never watched the film again.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: V's patron

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
It's an interesting read.
It is. If it wasn't obvious before, it's getting clearer now that WB has a Management issue and the culture in their workplace hasn't changed and in fact gotten even more toxic over time. No one that's worked in that DC franchise of films has anything nice to say about their involvement. David Ayer, Patty Jenkins, Todd Phillips, Cathy Yan, Chris Terrio, Ray Fisher, Nadria Tucker, all of them have been very up-front about the issues at WB, and this has not been happening with this amount of frequency in other studios.

At worst, Marvel Studios's end, Joss Whedon complained about their control over Age of Ultron but he's an asshat. Edgar Wright left the Ant-Man project, but Wright is still an otherwise good director that isn't hurting for work. The only project in their MCU lineup that didn't pan out was the Inhumans movie, and that was Ike Perlmutter being himself, notorious for holding back specific properties solely due to his own bigotry (refusing a Black Widow solo movie just because Catwoman bombed decades ago). Even then, they got their terrible show to debut in theaters as a special event, and Ike left. Marvel TV had Jeph Loeb and his infamous ‘Nobody cares about Chinese people and Asian people. There were three previous Marvel movies, a trilogy called Blade that was made where Wesley Snipes killed 200 Asians each movie. Nobody gives a sh*t so don’t write about Nobu and Gao.' which was a thing he said that no one disputed, back when Daredevil was a thing. They treated Peter Shinkoda horribly.

But even with Marvel's b.s., WB tries really hard to look even worse. Instead of WB revising itself, they throw out hit-pieces against whoever it is that's talking smack about them. They release literal Fake News stories about movies they aren't planning with actors they never consulted (that Frosty the Snowman-- Oh, sorry, the Untitled Snowman Comedy). They rush out announcements to other films that are then canned because they have no conviction behind them. Expect that JJ Abrams and Ta-Nehisi Coates Superman movie to go nowhere. Ava DuVernay's New Gods certainly didn't, and they announced their thing before Marvel announced The Eternals, meanwhile The Eternals is going smoothly. They smear an already-maligned director to say he was controlling an actor's speech, in a conspiracy bid to control DCEU, and keep him constantly on the defensive to disavow "toxic fans" while they protect the reputation of already existing executives and personalities despite their actual abuse-against-people scandals. WB should have a constant reminder over their heads that their previous CEO took advantage of a young autistic woman and trafficked her and should be putting out consistent disclaimers every time one of their own representatives and execs talk.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: V's patron

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,563
6,157
14,165
NY,Ny
It is. If it wasn't obvious before, it's getting clearer now that WB has a Management issue and the culture in their workplace hasn't changed and in fact gotten even more toxic over time. No one that's worked in that DC franchise of films has anything nice to say about their involvement. David Ayer, Patty Jenkins, Todd Phillips, Cathy Yan, Chris Terrio, Ray Fisher, Nadria Tucker, all of them have been very up-front about the issues at WB, and this has not been happening with this amount of frequency in other studios.

At worst, Marvel Studios's end, Joss Whedon complained about their control over Age of Ultron but he's an asshat. Edgar Wright left the Ant-Man project, but Wright is still an otherwise good director that isn't hurting for work. The only project in their MCU lineup that didn't pan out was the Inhumans movie, and that was Ike Perlmutter being himself, notorious for holding back specific properties solely due to his own bigotry (refusing a Black Widow solo movie just because Catwoman bombed decades ago). Even then, they got their terrible show to debut in theaters as a special event, and Ike left. Marvel TV had Jeph Loeb and his infamous ‘Nobody cares about Chinese people and Asian people. There were three previous Marvel movies, a trilogy called Blade that was made where Wesley Snipes killed 200 Asians each movie. Nobody gives a sh*t so don’t write about Nobu and Gao.' which was a thing he said that no one disputed, back when Daredevil was a thing. They treated Peter Shinkoda horribly.

But even with Marvel's b.s., WB tries really hard to look even worse. Instead of WB revising itself, they throw out hit-pieces against whoever it is that's talking smack about them. They release literal Fake News stories about movies they aren't planning with actors they never consulted (that Frosty the Snowman-- Oh, sorry, the Untitled Snowman Comedy). They rush out announcements to other films that are then canned because they have no conviction behind them. Expect that JJ Abrams and Ta-Nehisi Coates Superman movie to go nowhere. Ava DuVernay's New Gods certainly didn't, and they announced their thing before Marvel announced The Eternals, meanwhile The Eternals is going smoothly. They smear an already-maligned director to say he was controlling an actor's speech, in a conspiracy bid to control DCEU, and keep him constantly on the defensive to disavow "toxic fans" while they protect the reputation of already existing executives and personalities despite their actual abuse-against-people scandals. WB should have a constant reminder over their heads that their previous CEO took advantage of a young autistic woman and trafficked her and should be putting out consistent disclaimers every time one of their own representatives and execs talk.
Terrio's article was pretty damning. WB wanted to catch up with Marvel so bad they cut off their nose to spite their face. Most of my problems with the Snyderverse get explained away here. Even if I would've preferred Crisis on Two Earths or Injustice League as a phase 1 threat.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
863
1,188
2,935
Terrio's article was pretty damning. WB wanted to catch up with Marvel so bad they cut off their nose to spite their face. Most of my problems with the Snyderverse get explained away here. Even if I would've preferred Crisis on Two Earths or Injustice League as a phase 1 threat.
You know what'd really fix the Snyderverse?

If Snyder actually got to do what was originally planned. He had the pacing set out already. Even before BvS had an Ultimate cut.

The rumors were around in 2015 or prior, that BvS came in two parts: Enter the Knight, and Dawn of Justice.

You must be registered for see images


We no longer have this slate of intended films, but this screenshot tracks with the idea that BvS wasn't intended to be BvS straight from the beginning. Russell Crowe told Digital Spy in an interview that at least one MoS sequel was in the works, and he would reprise his role as Jor-El. He never showed up again in these movies and only exists as repeated voice lines. "I think once they made the decision because originally [...] there was a number of Superman movies. But I think they made the decision to jump past those and go to the idea of Batman and Superman in the same film. So, no, I didn't have any discussions about that."

Snyder talked about Man of Steel 2 in terms of, "after Man of Steel finished and we started talking about what would be in the next movie, I started subtly mentioning that it would be cool if he faced Batman. [...] Maybe at the end of the second movie, some Kryptonite gets delivered to Bruce Wayne's house or something."

So, MoS2 was still a Clark-centric movie and how the world received him, Jor-El would still have a physical presence to provide counsel for his son, and Bruce got a cameo at the end when he gets a shipment of Kryptonite. Instead, all of those plans were scrapped to fast-track the Marvel formula and copycat them. The criticism of how BvS was basically a Batman story/Death of Superman/TDKR/whatever all crushed together, fits in retrospect, because it was true.

We should've gotten MoS 2. We should have gotten Enter the Knight as the "Batman origin" to expand on his sequel hook cameo in the previous film and have the Bats vs Supes confrontation. We should have then followed with Dawn of Justice to fit Wonder Woman's appearance and the setups of the Justice League as we know them. Then we could get the Justice League as best as it would have worked with these other set-up movies. By now, we'd be seeing Justice Leagues 2 and 3, with Superman inspiring all of Man's forces, Aquaman Uniting the Seven Kingdoms, Wonder Woman leading the Amazons of Themyscira against Darkseid. The entire planet becomes the Justice League. That was "too dark"? That's an Endgame level spectacle without having just "Wakandans fight, sorcerers get busy holding some water" contrivances.

But what's happened, happened. We have the films we have. The Ultimate Edition of BvS is the best version of that movie we could get given David Goyer's initial treatments and WB placing some events in that movie as non-negotiable (as Terrio said, they prioritized the costly VFX and none of the character building or nuanced moments). Seriously though, punching Lois? Lois making light of Superman beating up Black African Muslims? Batman branding Lex at the end and reversing his character development?

WB has had problems. Man, I need to do back to whenever I said it in Page 2 - 3 of this thread. I'm gonna quote myself and reformat for emphasis.

Zack was hired by WB/DC with Watchmen, 300, Dawn of the Dead, and Sucker Punch under his belt. It's not like he sprung his vision onto everyone out of nowhere. WB and DC have been "darker than Marvel" for years before these recent movies in every way they could find.

Marvel didn't cross over their property with the infamously gory Mortal Kombat series for a videogame, that was DC.
The Injustice series isn't a Marvel invention, that's WB.
Did Marvel chase Winter Soldier money and ground their movies because the Russos made Winter Soldier a hit? No, that's DC chasing Nolan/TDK money.
Is Kevin Feige or someone similar constantly pushing for character deaths, shock value stories with dysfunctional heroes for the sake of having them, and showing clear favoritism on which Marvel characters are killed off or not based on his nostalgic personal preferences? Not that I know of, that was Dan DiDio over in DC doing that.
Even in Marvel Comics, massive missteps like Speedball turning into Penance, or everything around HydraCap are the fault of someone like Mark Millar or Nick Spencer pitching the idea up and then promptly got made fun of later on.

The gritty take DC acts like they "never intended" was in motion long before Snyder was on board to do MoS, and all he's done for them is MoS and BvS.

And we get all this stuff.

Additional things since I was looking for a reason not to close on this note:

Fabian Wagner has spoken.

IndieWire:

Wagner was one of the first to clearly and publicly state that Whedon rewrote and reshot most of the movie, throwing out of the original material. (Jean-Philippe Gossart is credited as both the second unit director of photography and additional director of photography on “Justice League.)
It’s an interesting collaboration. I always [had] been a fan of Zack’s movies, and his usual DP Larry Fong. He’s such a visual, creative director, who is obviously filled with ideas. He’s a real trendsetter. When I first met with him, he had the whole movie storyboarded. He’s also a great artist when it comes to drawing. He took me through the whole movie. He knows what he wants, but is very open to other ideas and listens to you.
I always say Zack doesn’t make movies to a certain time frame. He takes the time he takes to make his movies. This was always going to be a long movie. You have six superheroes with backstories. That’s why you’d call a two-hour version kind of a massacre.
It had to be an odd experience for you when “Justice League” hit theaters. You’re the credited cinematographer, you’re proud of your work, and something like 75 percent is footage you didn’t shoot. You even did an interview with the American Society of Cinematographers. There had to be a little bit of weirdness when it came out, right?

I did that interview, and I’m doing it again now actually. Because by the time I did the interview, I hadn’t seen the movie. I was talking about the movie the way we’d shot it, but I hadn’t seen the final version. Yes, and it was very strange. It was a very devastating experience.

There was two things. I was thinking about Zack, and all the horrible things he’s went through, and then obviously, I knew the movie I shot with Zack and I knew what Zack was going to do with it. I could see the movie Zack had in his head. So to see that movie, and to see the color grade and everything we aimed for and that we did in our rushes [dailies were generated with a predetermined color grade and timing], for example, was completely different. Yeah, I was devastated.

This was a huge movie for me. It was an amazing experience to work with the Snyders and the whole team. I had a great time on that set, so to watch that movie was horrible.
I’ve always been speaking up for Zack and his work, and all those things coincided. When the movement first started, I openly said, I thought it was great, but I didn’t think it’d go anywhere. And then it went on, and on. I think it’s about the fans. If I can make someone happy by showing a picture from a Zack Snyder set, then yeah, let’s do it. But to your question, I’m not sure at what point and how it happened. It was probably just all these things coming together.

Edit: I'd like to amend my statement at the beginning of the post. What'd really fix the Snyderverse is not just if Snyder got to finish his vision, but the directors around that same time got to realize their visions as well. It's not just his movies suffering at the hands of WB.

We should've gotten Patty Jenkins's Wonder Woman without that laughable third-act CGI-fest that wasted so much money to deliver a subpar resolution to the conflict.

We should've gotten a Flash movie directed by Rick Famuyiwa with Cyborg in the supporting role as he and the Flash investigated police misconduct.

We should've gotten a Batman vs Deathstroke film treated like a psychological thriller. I'll still accept the Matt Reeves version because Robert Pattinson's acting is great (see: Tenet, The Lighthouse), but still. Affleck's health clearly suffered from the stress of the movie reshoots and consistent executive meddling.

We should've gotten DuVernay's New Gods to expand on Darkseid with Barda and Scott being the central focus, and gotten more movies out of that concept.

We should've gotten The Trench as a horror film in the Aquaman universe by James Wan.

Still, we have the films we have. There's no telling if WB will get their heads on straight enough to treat their next movies and their staff properly.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: V's patron