|
Post by brownstones on Nov 22, 2017 19:04:01 GMT
No? One was the superman phone intro, the other was a Batman story into, and then we get a Zack opening montage Are you kidding? They did everything in their power to sweep BvS under the rug according to everyone I've talked to. Idk, didn't seem like that to me, but oh well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 19:05:37 GMT
Are you kidding? They did everything in their power to sweep BvS under the rug according to everyone I've talked to. Idk, didn't seem like that to me, but oh well. They called Superman in a beacon of hope. Yet from I'm sitting, everyone and their dog hated Superman in BvS.
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Nov 22, 2017 19:21:38 GMT
I'd buy that for a Dollar. We will never see it alas, maybe an extended edition to boost BR sales.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Nov 22, 2017 19:25:14 GMT
A lot of these scenes would have helped, no question...especially the added reasoning for resurrecting Superman and the added motivation for Steppenwolf.
But none of them should have been written by Snyder because he isn't a good storyteller.
- Ma Kent giving the same speech as in MoS is great. Clark almost attacking civilians isn't. - Bruce atoning for the lives he's taken is great. Bruce then saying the only way to do it is to die, isn't.
Willing to die Batman (which we got in the final cut) is not the same as Suicidal Batman...a prime example of Snyder's misconception of the themes.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2017 19:26:45 GMT
But it didn't end up in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Nov 22, 2017 19:30:07 GMT
Unfiltered Snyder is why the DCEU is dumpster fire. Unfiltered Snyder is why WB is in the mess they're in to begin with. Unfiltered Snyder is why the DCEU is commonly regarded as a shitfest. Yet Snyder's original version, most of it, tells a more rounded story than the actually released version. But a badly told, rounded story is still badly told. I would rather the one we got with rougher edges, but with better storytelling and characterizations.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2017 19:33:55 GMT
But the author says that the original cut told a more rounded story than the actually released film, and there's no way to dismiss such a claim as you have not seen it for yourself - nobody here has. Other people involved in production, including the DP, says Snyder's original version told a better story. And on another note - "Talentless" and "hack" pretty much mean the exact same thing, one or the other is enough to classify a person. Yes, I can. I've seen Snyder's other work and I've seen how he ruined Superman and Batman. Previous creative decisions are all I need to know that unfiltered Snyder is never how a film should be made. In fact, no film should ever be directed by Snyder. Of course they're saying he told a better story. They're being nice because his recent family tragedy. Whedon > Snyder, with no exceptions. You have the right to your opinions, but I think it is in good taste to suggest that the only reason why some are saying Snyder's cut told a better story is because of his recent family tragedy, let's leave Snyder's family out of this discussion. We should just talk about his skills as a filmmaker, nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 22, 2017 19:35:06 GMT
Idk, didn't seem like that to me, but oh well. They called Superman in a beacon of hope. Yet from I'm sitting, everyone and their dog hated Superman in BvS.not so in the movie, especially in all the savior imagery scenes where he saves the day including sacrificing himself.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 22, 2017 19:35:43 GMT
Yet Snyder's original version, most of it, tells a more rounded story than the actually released version. But a badly told, rounded story is still badly told. I would rather the one we got with rougher edges, but with better storytelling and characterizations. Well you make a fair point, I'm not sure if this is true or not but wasn't Snyder's original cut or one version of it deemed to unwatchable by Warner brass? Too many stories going on with this rocky production.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Nov 22, 2017 19:45:55 GMT
But a badly told, rounded story is still badly told. I would rather the one we got with rougher edges, but with better storytelling and characterizations. Well you make a fair point, I'm not sure if this is true or not but wasn't Snyder's original cut or one version of it deemed to unwatchable by Warner brass? Too many stories going on with this rocky production. I think the "unwatchable" part is one of the major stories floating out there. I think the biggest hindrance for all of this was the running time mandate. Like I said above, a lot of those scenes would have helped. Particularly with my own personal criticisms (Steppenwolf was an anchor with no depth, and they decided to bring Superman back too quickly). I can almost guarantee that Joss would have left in a few of those scenes if running time wasn't a concern...probably with tweaked dialogue. But like I mention above...at least two of those scenes show how Snyder doesn't really get the characters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 19:59:39 GMT
But it didn't end up in the movie. Yes, thank God. But if Snyder had his way, this would be just another example of him blatantly disrespecting the character.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:02:28 GMT
Yes, I can. I've seen Snyder's other work and I've seen how he ruined Superman and Batman. Previous creative decisions are all I need to know that unfiltered Snyder is never how a film should be made. In fact, no film should ever be directed by Snyder. Of course they're saying he told a better story. They're being nice because his recent family tragedy. Whedon > Snyder, with no exceptions. You have the right to your opinions, but I think it is in good taste to suggest that the only reason why some are saying Snyder's cut told a better story is because of his recent family tragedy, let's leave Snyder's family out of this discussion. We should just talk about his skills as a filmmaker, nothing else. His skills as a filmmaker are next to nonexistent. He missed the point of Watchmen and butchered it beyond recognition. He missed the point of Superman and butchered the character beyond recognition. He missed the point of Batman and Wonder Woman and butchered both beyond recognition. Oh, yeah, and he thought it would be a great idea to cut Wonder Woman off from her own universe by destroying it off-screen in the first five minutes of her own debute movie.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Nov 22, 2017 20:03:03 GMT
You know they could have still trimmed the scene down, right? Again, I'm talking about the Kent stuff, not civilian angle. Snyder wouldn't have trimmed it down. He doesn't give a shit about the ACTUAL target audience Superman is intended for. All he sees is a big destructive force he can have ram through buildings and cause as much carnage as the villains. You'll never convince me that Superman saving civilians in this film wasn't something the studio MADE Snyder do or one of Whedon's additions. I did kind of chuckle when Superman pauses the fight at the end and goes "Civilians!" Reminded me of the "That part of the city is unpopulated" lines from BvS. Still, that's more on the first two films for making Superman stopping a fight to help people seem tacked on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:04:45 GMT
A lot of these scenes would have helped, no question...especially the added reasoning for resurrecting Superman and the added motivation for Steppenwolf. But none of them should have been written by Snyder because he isn't a good storyteller. - Ma Kent giving the same speech as in MoS is great. Clark almost attacking civilians isn't. - Bruce atoning for the lives he's taken is great. Bruce then saying the only way to do it is to die, isn't. Willing to die Batman (which we got in the final cut) is not the same as Suicidal Batman...a prime example of Snyder's misconception of the themes. THANK YOU!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:06:16 GMT
Snyder wouldn't have trimmed it down. He doesn't give a shit about the ACTUAL target audience Superman is intended for. All he sees is a big destructive force he can have ram through buildings and cause as much carnage as the villains. You'll never convince me that Superman saving civilians in this film wasn't something the studio MADE Snyder do or one of Whedon's additions. I did kind of chuckle when Superman pauses the fight at the end and goes "Civilians!" Reminded me of the "That part of the city is unpopulated" lines from BvS. Still, that's more on the first two films for making Superman stopping a fight to help people seem tacked on. Exactly. He's never cared who got hurt in his fights before. The only reason to make him care now is to appease fans.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Nov 22, 2017 20:15:58 GMT
Tristan's Journal, come on man, there was no need for insulting weirdraptor's intelligence.
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Nov 22, 2017 20:20:26 GMT
Idk, didn't seem like that to me, but oh well. They called Superman in a beacon of hope. Yet from I'm sitting, everyone and their dog hated Superman in BvS. The problem in BvS was that Snyder wanted people to feel sorry for Superman, which is fine I suppose, but what they need to show was people also liking the dude, to have that shift seen, rather than assumed shift.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:24:21 GMT
They called Superman in a beacon of hope. Yet from I'm sitting, everyone and their dog hated Superman in BvS. The problem in BvS was that Snyder wanted people to feel sorry for Superman, which is fine I suppose, but what they need to show was people also liking the dude, to have that shift seen, rather than assumed shift. Superman in and of himself is a sympathetic character. Just having controversy, even 50/50 would be enough to get audience sympathy had they created a Superman most people could like to begin with. I didn't even feel bad when he died. I can't feel anything for this Superman and can't see how anyone could. Don't make excuses for them. Poor delivery is poor delivery.
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Nov 22, 2017 20:27:24 GMT
The problem in BvS was that Snyder wanted people to feel sorry for Superman, which is fine I suppose, but what they need to show was people also liking the dude, to have that shift seen, rather than assumed shift. Superman in and of himself is a sympathetic character. Just having controversy, even 50/50 would be enough to get audience sympathy had they created a Superman most people could like to begin with. I didn't even feel bad when he died. I can't feel anything for this Superman and can't see how anyone could. Don't make excuses for them. Poor delivery is poor delivery. What excuses? I'm just saying they didn't show what they needed to show.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Nov 22, 2017 20:41:47 GMT
A lot of these scenes would have helped, no question...especially the added reasoning for resurrecting Superman and the added motivation for Steppenwolf. But none of them should have been written by Snyder because he isn't a good storyteller. - Ma Kent giving the same speech as in MoS is great. Clark almost attacking civilians isn't. - Bruce atoning for the lives he's taken is great. Bruce then saying the only way to do it is to die, isn't. Willing to die Batman (which we got in the final cut) is not the same as Suicidal Batman...a prime example of Snyder's misconception of the themes. THANK YOU! The frustrating part is that overall, things just need a minor tweak...throughout all of the Snyder DCEU films. - Superman feeling like an outsider and being ostracized is great. Him questioning saving people isn't. - The Kents being scared about what will happen to him if he is revealed is great. No clarification that he should do it anyway isn't (I am a defender of the "Should I let them die?" scene in MoS, because I don't see Pa's response as a "Yes definitely" but as an "Of course not, but I'm just terrified for you.") - Killing Zod....isn't great. But is an interesting story choice if you really show how that impacted him. - Batman and Superman not seeing eye to eye is great. Them fighting to the death isn't. - Superman facing real threats to his life is great. Killing him in his second movie isn't.
|
|