Zack Snyder on his critics: "You're living in an f-ing dreamworld!"

[manwhohaseverything]

yeah if WB cave in to their demands, what next once they get their JL cut? And will WB invest more $$ to finish the VFX and make all the Snyder fans happy? Or will they just release it unfinish? Does WB think the cut can make them real $?

If audiences didn't care before, Why now?

Answered above, there is enough people to get it trending. There might be more enough to be curious. They are only hoping realistically a streaming service release.

[JAK]

Well, jl movie could have at the very least broken even because it wouldn't have needed the joss whedon reshoots. The reshoot over bloated the budget. The people who know Snyder's style instantly understood it wasn't his movie and didn't bother to revisit. But, those can be easily mitagated by the guys who liked it. But they weren't enough for the bloated budget. the lip and bad cgi didn't help either. At the very least snyder would have been able to finish the movie he started. Snyder could have had a trilogy. Wb could have just asked him to step out for darkseid. Asked someone high profile jl2. If there was negativity, in the mean time they could have buit the jl members like they are doing now, including superman. Because superman would have been much more optimistic by the end. Instead, for getting a small bonus they just threw jl and dc brand as whole under the bus.

It might have had less expense, but that wasn't really my point; I don't think the audience was there either way - and in fact I think the talk of changes (and WW's movie) are what gave the film the audience it even had.

And, depending on what the movie would have looked like, WB is completely within their rights to've not let Snyder continue if they thought it'd hurt the brand more. Snyder's fans can absolutely voice their displeasure that he didn't get to finish, but those two aren't the same thing, if you know what I mean. But when you think about it, there was supposed to be a JL2 and that was scrapped, and BvS got heavily edited... so in the end, Snyder really wouldn't have been able to "finish his vision" regardless, because it was already a hacked-up mess by the time JL was in full production swing.

My point, though, is that audiences were done with the DCEU at that point, and nothing short of a visible shake-up was going to give people the desire to go back. It took fresh directorial faces and directions to make that happen. And there was a lot of press/media about JL that talked about it being the start of that turn - so I think that call wasn't necessarily a bad one, even as bad as the movie is.

yeah if WB cave in to their demands, what next once they get their JL cut? And will WB invest more $$ to finish the VFX and make all the Snyder fans happy? Or will they just release it unfinish? Does WB think the cut can make them real $?

If audiences didn't care before, Why now?

I have to be honest... if I was WB, I wouldn't put more money into it. If they want to build on goodwill with the Snyder folks, though, they could just release the footage as-shot (green screen, etc) to basically make the film "open source". Now, there are a million legal reasons why they'd never do that - I'm just saying that it would be a way for them to technically "do it" and save vfx money.

[stargazer01]

I have to be honest... if I was WB, I wouldn't put more money into it. If they want to build on goodwill with the Snyder folks, though, they could just release the footage as-shot (green screen, etc) to basically make the film "open source". Now, there are a million legal reasons why they'd never do that - I'm just saying that it would be a way for them to technically "do it" and save vfx money.

Well Wb already lost $ with the JL movie, so it makes No sense to invest more millions to please an small fanbase..

[Robanker]

Again, only darkseid arc(which includes superman getting antilife equationed because of lois's perceived death) would be cut short. Jl members coming together. Cyborgs origin and his struggle with machine side. Also the death silas stone by steppenwolf. Barry's struggle as freak to find a place to belong. His struggle with his dad in jail would have been different. Superman's impact on these guys would have been portrayed differently. Superman's resurrection by using the codex. Superman's new outlook on things. Steppenwolf as a villain(backstory and all) and his defeat would have been different. Things overall would be different stroywise.

It just reminds me of every hockey game I've ever been to where the hometown team is losing by like four goals and there's one diehard who angrily claps when they put one goal in and says "alright, good let's do it again."

For what it's worth, I have zero faith in Snyder's vision, but even if I was a die hard fan I think I'd be distancing myself from it at this point because even the best case scenario is an open wound. It's been all-but-stated that Snyder's first part was going to conclude with an evil Superman and part two was to be the resolution, or at best he's the end boss of part one and only just comes to his senses by the end. It's more of the same nonsense and I'm glad we've been spared it. His vision was a poor one.

[manwhohaseverything]

It might have had less expense, but that wasn't really my point; I don't think the audience was there either way - and in fact I think the talk of changes (and WW's movie) are what gave the film the audience it even had.

And, depending on what the movie would have looked like, WB is completely within their rights to've not let Snyder continue if they thought it'd hurt the brand more. Snyder's fans can absolutely voice their displeasure that he didn't get to finish, but those two aren't the same thing, if you know what I mean. But when you think about it, there was supposed to be a JL2 and that was scrapped, and BvS got heavily edited... so in the end, Snyder really wouldn't have been able to "finish his vision" regardless, because it was already a hacked-up mess by the time JL was in full production swing.

My point, though, is that audiences were done with the DCEU at that point, and nothing short of a visible shake-up was going to give people the desire to go back. It took fresh directorial faces and directions to make that happen. And there was a lot of press/media about JL that talked about it being the start of that turn - so I think that call wasn't necessarily a bad one, even as bad as the movie is.
.

I don't believe that. Audiences were there for it to get to 600mil.if that's the range it would made its money back and made profit. I am including guys who will be detractors going out. Those guys that would have came back and stayed. JL was meant to be a lighter linear movie with dry humour(superman style) and they had teen like barry. The problem is they wanted an action comedy with quips. Well, they got it. At the expense of the movie itself . Zack's jl wasn't going to be a hated as bvs is. It would have been more liked than mos. Regardless of what people say he does try to take into what audiences say.he did try to remove the death toll in bvs. But, he just doesn't get what they are saying. He can only make a movie with his leanings. As i said, you can't hate kirby for not drawing like alex ross. Actually, they (dc) did that nonesense as well. They basically redrew kirby's superman if i remember that's shitty. Kirby superman with eyebrows was really cool.

They can, if they were being honest. But, they basically dragged Snyder's duaghter in. That's deplorable. They also said "it's still zack snyder movie". if were really honest, it might have been a pr disaster and they could gotten into trouble with directors guild (i believe. I could be wrong) . Its sad that no one the industry cared. They claim to be progressive with metoo and what not. But, this is what goes on behind,smh!

As for jl, i have replied earlier only Darkseid's arc would have been an open plot thread. Finishing his vision might not have been possible. But, finishing the arc superman (since, darkseid plot is part of the second) in a hopeful note was definitely possible as well as finishing a movie that he worked hard on. They could have easily bought time for that found a new name, amicably parted ways.

[manwhohaseverything]

It just reminds me of every hockey game I've ever been to where the hometown team is losing by like four goals and there's one diehard who angrily claps when they put one goal in and says "alright, good let's do it again."

For what it's worth, I have zero faith in Snyder's vision, but even if I was a die hard fan I think I'd be distancing myself from it at this point because even the best case scenario is an open wound. It's been all-but-stated that Snyder's first part was going to conclude with an evil Superman and part two was to be the resolution, or at best he's the end boss of part one and only just comes to his senses by the end. It's more of the same nonsense and I'm glad we've been spared it. His vision was a poor one.

@underlined your assumptions are'nt the movie.if it comes true it has merits.you are welcome to presume the worst.
how would an evil superman be possible in the first part if the climax was steppenwolf getting beheaded and his head getting lauched into the feet of darkseid?i have not pushed my opinions on you.so dude,kindly do the same if that was meant for me.i am far from a snyder fanboy.but,the detractors are the majority here.i am just rooting for the underdog.

[manwhohaseverything]

Well Wb already lost $ with the JL movie, so it makes No sense to invest more millions to please an small fanbase..

they only lost money because they played a gamble.again,they no its an uphill battle and most likely won't win.but,it does'nt matter it's about trying.what's the harm?a couple of tweets and retweets.The community has itself from what i know has been doing some good campaigns like suicide prevention.so,they aren't idiots,fools,cultist..etc.this is'nt at you.this is me addressing general annoyance people have of snyder fans or the fans of the old direction.

[JAK]

I don't believe that. Audiences were there for it to get to 600mil.if that's the range it would made its money back and made profit. I am including guys who will be detractors going out. Those guys that would have came back and stayed. JL was meant to be a lighter linear movie with dry humour(superman style) and they had teen like barry. The problem is they wanted an action comedy with quips. Well, they got it. At the expense of the movie itself . Zack's jl wasn't going to be a hated as bvs is. It would have been more liked than mos. Regardless of what people say he does try to take into what audiences say.he did try to remove the death toll in bvs. But, he just doesn't get what they are saying. He can only make a movie with his leanings. As i said, you can't hate kirby for not drawing like alex ross. Actually, they (dc) did that nonesense as well. They basically redrew kirby's superman if i remember that's shitty. Kirby superman with eyebrows was really cool.

I'll tell you right now - if Snyder hadn't been replaced by Whedon, I still would never have seen JL. But none of that really matters (I mean, it does, but not for this), because my point was about the pattern that JL shows. BvS had a strong beginning but then dropped off. JL didn't even get that - which means that the majority of audiences (at least the ones JL would be targeting) weren't interested in going at all. That's a huge indicator of the franchise's status at the point of JL's release (meaning everything before JL). Depending on which version of what people say Snyder's JL was supposed to be that we would have had in the theater, it would have either made no difference at all or (in the case of the evil Superman scenario) done even worse.

I'm not so sure they wanted a quip fest exactly - I think they wanted a lighter tone, so they brought in Whedon, and they got what they got because of him. Kinda like Snyder, but in reverse?

They can, if they were being honest. But, they basically dragged Snyder's duaghter in. That's deplorable. They also said "it's still zack snyder movie". if were really honest, it might have been a pr disaster and they could gotten into trouble with directors guild (i believe. I could be wrong) . Its sad that no one the industry cared. They claim to be progressive with metoo and what not. But, this is what goes on behind,smh!

I absolutely agree on bringing Snyder's daughter into it - that wasn't just dirty, it was unconscionable. There's no excuse for that crap. As for it still being labeled as Snyder's movie, etc, a lot of that likely has to do with contracts and not wanting to be sued by Snyder (which I would have done in his shoes for them using his daughter, but still) for "loss of income" by removing him completely. I know a lot of people who only went to see it after I told them it wasn't as bad as BvS, and that Superman actually had a backbone (my snark for the DCEU was quite fierce at the time, I'm very tame now by comparison) - and if I'd been in WB's shoes and could have done things without legal worry, I'd have booted Snyder and saved JL for the following year. But that may have been more expensive than doing what they did, which may be why they didn't.

And I agree on their headfakes to progressivism: it's always been hollow and all about money. Not that certain people aren't absolutely genuine, but I'm speaking overall of the industry as a whole.

As for jl, i have replied earlier only Darkseid's arc would have been an open plot thread. Finishing his vision might not have been possible. But, finishing the arc superman (since, darkseid plot is part of the second) in a hopeful note was definitely possible as well as finishing a movie that he worked hard on. They could have easily bought time for that found a new name, amicably parted ways.

Possibly. If the Snyder Cut ever sees the light of day (in whatever form it's in), we'll likely know more of why they did what they did. I get the impression that WB was done with all the negative publicity at that point, and just wanted to wash their hands of most of it. Amicability may not have been on their minds at the time (for better or worse).

[manwhohaseverything]

I'll tell you right now - if Snyder hadn't been replaced by Whedon, I still would never have seen JL. But none of that really matters (I mean, it does, but not for this), because my point was about the pattern that JL shows. BvS had a strong beginning but then dropped off. JL didn't even get that - which means that the majority of audiences (at least the ones JL would be targeting) weren't interested in going at all. That's a huge indicator of the franchise's status at the point of JL's release (meaning everything before JL). Depending on which version of what people say Snyder's JL was supposed to be that we would have had in the theater, it would have either made no difference at all or (in the case of the evil Superman scenario) done even worse.

I'm not so sure they wanted a quip fest exactly - I think they wanted a lighter tone, so they brought in Whedon, and they got what they got because of him. Kinda like Snyder, but in reverse?



I absolutely agree on bringing Snyder's daughter into it - that wasn't just dirty, it was unconscionable. There's no excuse for that crap. As for it still being labeled as Snyder's movie, etc, a lot of that likely has to do with contracts and not wanting to be sued by Snyder (which I would have done in his shoes for them using his daughter, but still) for "loss of income" by removing him completely. I know a lot of people who only went to see it after I told them it wasn't as bad as BvS, and that Superman actually had a backbone (my snark for the DCEU was quite fierce at the time, I'm very tame now by comparison) - and if I'd been in WB's shoes and could have done things without legal worry, I'd have booted Snyder and saved JL for the following year. But that may have been more expensive than doing what they did, which may be why they didn't.

And I agree on their headfakes to progressivism: it's always been hollow and all about money. Not that certain people aren't absolutely genuine, but I'm speaking overall of the industry as a whole.

I didn't say bvs didn't have an impact.All i said was JL could have made it's money back with snyder cut because of lack of bloated budget,lighter tone[(for audiences that got turned off) snyder was gonna implement,finished cgi and people who liked the old direction not tuning out.I was pretty turned of by jl.I did'nt go for repeat,superman felt fake to me.I didn't like that.Bvs was jarring and confusing.Clark got no screen time in theatrical version.So,i didn't feel anything when superman died in theatrical.i was upset cause man of steel was cool.it wasn't mind blowing like maxfleischer cartoons was for me.the ultimate cut managed to fix that.

i know that's why they used snyder's name in credit.But,people did get suckered in.But,the reason they didn't split at beginning wasn't because of it costing too much.No,the exec would get a bonus if the wb passed a certain threshold number regarding box office an year over all.so,they needed to release jl that year itself.they got their bonuses.jl dispite being a failure pushed their overall box office.
here,sources
https://batman-news.com/2017/11/29/j...r-warner-bros/
https://www.thewrap.com/justice-leag...-wonder-woman/
these are said to be the reason.

[Vordan]

I just don't know what the Snyder cut people are expecting because his cut was obviously half a story; you don't get the conclusion even if it's finished. It's going to be an expensive cliffhanger they have no intention of following up on.

I'm sure they'll just demand the next installment which will not be made.

You are correct. I’ve already seen them planning on hashtagging #BringZackBack although that got derailed by Cavill staying silent and now they’re fighting about whether Cavill “deserves” to be brought back.

[manwhohaseverything]

You are correct. I’ve already seen them planning on hashtagging #BringZackBack although that got derailed by Cavill staying silent and now they’re fighting about whether Cavill “deserves” to be brought back.

Cavill says he is still superman.Check the dceu superman appreciation thread.As for,the #BringZackBack those are the people that are being too 'optimistic'.Everybody pretty much understands,zack is done.

[Robanker]

Cavill says he is still superman.Check the dceu superman appreciation thread.As for,the #BringZackBack those are the people that are being too 'optimistic'.Everybody pretty much understands,zack is done.

Considering he takes to social media every few days to stoke the flames of his fandom, no, a lot don't believe he's done because he isn't. He won't let go and until he does neither will that crowd. They'll die on that hill.

[manwhohaseverything]

Considering he takes to social media every few days to stoke the flames of his fandom, no, a lot don't believe he's done because he isn't. He won't let go and until he does neither will that crowd. They'll die on that hill.

His account,his time.he does what he pleases.same for the crowd.

[Vordan]

Considering he takes to social media every few days to stoke the flames of his fandom, no, a lot don't believe he's done because he isn't. He won't let go and until he does neither will that crowd. They'll die on that hill.

It’s pretty much the opposite of Affleck. Affleck wanted out but WB wanted him to stay and it took Reeves coming in and putting his foot down for Affleck to be able to leave. Cavill wants to stay but WB wants him replaced, so it all depends on what the next director wants.

[manwhohaseverything]

It’s pretty much the opposite of Affleck. Affleck wanted out but WB wanted him to stay and it took Reeves coming in and putting his foot down for Affleck to be able to leave. Cavill wants to stay but WB wants him replaced, so it all depends on what the next director wants.

@robbanker means snyder, not cavill.cavil does'nt have twitter