Page 47 of 48 FirstFirst ... 37434445464748 LastLast
Results 691 to 705 of 719
  1. #691
    (formerly "Superman") JAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    1,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    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.
    Possibly. But how much lighter would it have been, really? That's hard to know before seeing what was cut out.

    As for BvS - I do agree that it's better, but (for me) only slightly. I still found it to be a mess, if a slightly more organized mess.

    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.
    That's a good point about bonuses - I knew that, but I'd forgotten. On the one hand, if they guys getting bonuses knew they'd be fired, I can see why they did it - even if I still think it was utterly stupid. But on the other, if they didn't know... you'd think a smart decision leaving them in the driver's seat of the company would be more lucrative in the long run than bonuses and then getting fired. They need a new bonus system, imo - knowing WB, that one's probably from the 90's. lol

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    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.
    Putting my cynical hat on now: he knows that as long as he stokes that fire, he's got an audience that will follow him out of loyalty just for that. It's good business and it's safe, because it's not like WB is going to punch back - there's no good that can come of it.

    But, setting said hat aside.. given that WB used the death of his daughter to kick him off of JL, I also don't totally blame him for doing what he's doing, either.
    Hear my new CD "Love The World Away", available on iTunes, Google Music, Spotify, Shazam, and Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N5XYV..._waESybX1C0RXK via @amazon
    www.jamiekelleymusic.com
    TV interview here: https://snjtoday.com/snj-today-hotline-jamie-kelley/

  2. #692
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAK View Post
    Possibly. But how much lighter would it have been, really? That's hard to know before seeing what was cut out.

    As for BvS - I do agree that it's better, but (for me) only slightly. I still found it to be a mess, if a slightly more organized mess.
    I think, it would have been more soft rock. than hard rock snyder likes to go for, normally . If you know what i am saying.
    Snyder likes to go epic. The hope never dies thing is from zack snyder. That isn't joss whedon's forte. He never does something like that normally.

    This video attracted me to the movie. But, the thing i got in movies felt like a fake superman.I can get mistakes in writing. But, fake goodness was just unbearable to sit through. Superman should be genuine.always.

  3. #693
    Mighty Member Robanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    1,421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    His account,his time.he does what he pleases.same for the crowd.
    Sure, but so long as he does so, he clearly shows he isn't done with DC and he's trying to stir up enough support to make that a reality. Zack isn't letting go, so no, not everyone understands it's over.

    Don't get me wrong, I understand why he can't, but that doesn't really change that he's fanning the flames to get what he wants.

  4. #694
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    Sure, but so long as he does so, he clearly shows he isn't done with DC and he's trying to stir up enough support to make that a reality. Zack isn't letting go, so no, not everyone understands it's over.

    Don't get me wrong, I understand why he can't, but that doesn't really change that he's fanning the flames to get what he wants.
    Sure, he might want to get jl cut released. I mean, it's only fair. He worked hard on it. His name is on the credit as he is The director. But its not his movie. And his personal tragedy was dragged in. Other than that, i don't think he is coming back.

  5. #695
    Mighty Member Robanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    1,421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Sure, he might want to get jl cut released. I mean, it's only fair. He worked hard on it. His name is on the credit as he is The director. But its not his movie. And his personal tragedy was dragged in. Other than that, i don't think he is coming back.
    He was hired to do a job and his employer was dissatisfied with his work. There's nothing "fair" about it. He did a lot of the work and as per the rules that Snyder is very much aware of, his name must be on it unless he go full Alan Smithee. Those are the rules of engagement in filmmaking. That Snyder has to deal with it is fair, not that he get a pass to complete a project his employer terminated. People work hard on things that never see the light of day all the time. Look no further than video game development. A lot of stuff gets cancelled and never sees the light of day. It's only unfair if the employees didn't get fairly compensated for their labor, which given the size of WB, I think we'd have heard of should they not have. I understand how awful that may feel, but keep in mind that every filmmaker in Hollywood is under those same constraints when making films backed by production studios.

    WB using his family tragedy was deplorable and a completely different matter. For that, Snyder and his family has my sympathy, but that doesn't mean what happened with Justice League was unfair. He got hired to do a job, was given a great deal of control and after two installments he didn't deliver what they expected and was sacked. That's the exact same situation everyone in the film industry works under. If anything, that he wasn't immediately replaced following BvS's massive under-performance showed they actually were quite generous to him. The product continued to not reflect the direction WB wanted and they sacked him. Does it suck? Oh, absolutely. Is it fair? Yes. That's what work-for-hire entails.

    I'm not arguing that it doesn't suck for Snyder. He's a creative person and he got a project he cared a great deal yanked away from him. It sucks a metric ton despite my dissatisfaction with his work, but WB has no financial, moral or creative obligation to finish the project given their dissatisfaction with it as well.

    Look up Adobe Voco. There's a lot of work that went into that software and it ended up being just a neat tech demo. That project had a great deal of employees and a director in charge of guiding its development. It may-or-may-not be dead (likely is) and we will likely never get to view the fruit of thousands of hours of labor. It's not unfair, it's the contract every one of those developers signed when they began working for Adobe, much as Zack signed when he began working for WB. He got the opportunity to be the man who united Batman and Superman as well as debut Wonder Woman in live action. He just missed the mark when he got his shot. "Fair" means you have the opportunity to fail too. He did. It happens, and it sucks, but he did. I will never not have sympathy for the dude given his tragedy or that he had what was likely a dream project taken from him. I genuinely feel bad for him on that front, but I also understand that he was working with other people's money, IP and time and they decided they didn't like what he was doing. It's fair to sever ties at that point as long as he was compensated, which so long as he had a contract with them, he was.

    How dare you get me to side with a faceless corporation. lol
    Last edited by Robanker; 11-20-2019 at 10:09 PM.

  6. #696
    Mighty Member Lokimaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    He was hired to do a job and his employer was dissatisfied with his work. There's nothing "fair" about it. He did a lot of the work and as per the rules that Snyder is very much aware of, his name must be on it unless he go full Alan Smithee. Those are the rules of engagement in filmmaking. That Snyder has to deal with it is fair, not that he get a pass to complete a project his employer terminated. People work hard on things that never see the light of day all the time. Look no further than video game development. A lot of stuff gets cancelled and never sees the light of day. It's only unfair if the employees didn't get fairly compensated for their labor, which given the size of WB, I think we'd have heard of should they not have. I understand how awful that may feel, but keep in mind that every filmmaker in Hollywood is under those same constraints when making films backed by production studios.

    WB using his family tragedy was deplorable and a completely different matter. For that, Snyder and his family has my sympathy, but that doesn't mean what happened with Justice League was unfair. He got hired to do a job, was given a great deal of control and after two installments he didn't deliver what they expected and was sacked. That's the exact same situation everyone in the film industry works under. If anything, that he wasn't immediately replaced following BvS's massive under-performance showed they actually were quite generous to him. The product continued to not reflect the direction WB wanted and they sacked him. Does it suck? Oh, absolutely. Is it fair? Yes. That's what work-for-hire entails.

    I'm not arguing that it doesn't suck for Snyder. He's a creative person and he got a project he cared a great deal yanked away from him. It sucks a metric ton despite my dissatisfaction with his work, but WB has no financial, moral or creative obligation to finish the project given their dissatisfaction with it as well.

    Look up Adobe Voco. There's a lot of work that went into that software and it ended up being just a neat tech demo. That project had a great deal of employees and a director in charge of guiding its development. It may-or-may-not be dead (likely is) and we will likely never get to view the fruit of thousands of hours of labor. It's not unfair, it's the contract every one of those developers signed when they began working for Adobe, much as Zack signed when he began working for WB. He got the opportunity to be the man who united Batman and Superman as well as debut Wonder Woman in live action. He just missed the mark when he got his shot. "Fair" means you have the opportunity to fail too. He did. It happens, and it sucks, but he did. I will never not have sympathy for the dude given his tragedy or that he had what was likely a dream project taken from him. I genuinely feel bad for him on that front, but I also understand that he was working with other people's money, IP and time and they decided they didn't like what he was doing. It's fair to sever ties at that point as long as he was compensated, which so long as he had a contract with them, he was.

    How dare you get me to side with a faceless corporation. lol
    But the thing is He did his Job, they just got greedy. Both his movies made Money cold hard Cash and would have made more if they hadn't interfered. How would you like for you name to be dragged through the mud for things that weren't your fault?

    This reminds me of the video game Resistance: Fall of Man from Insomniac. First game was Great if Basic but was wildly popular with fans because of the Insanely fun Weapons System. With Resistance two they tried to chase the Call of Duty/Halo bandwagon and while the game was good if didn't have that Spark that Made Resistance so good Plus they Restricted you to only carrying two weapons at a time which was STUPID. Resistance 3 bombed even though it's the best freaking game in the series. They went away from what they had originally created that was unique to chase what was popular at the time and ended up alienating the fans the first game had garnered so by the time they went back to what made the first game successful the fans had moved on. Thus no more Resistance.

  7. #697
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    He was hired to do a job and his employer was dissatisfied with his work. There's nothing "fair" about it. He did a lot of the work and as per the rules that Snyder is very much aware of, his name must be on it unless he go full Alan Smithee. Those are the rules of engagement in filmmaking. That Snyder has to deal with it is fair, not that he get a pass to complete a project his employer terminated. People work hard on things that never see the light of day all the time. Look no further than video game development. A lot of stuff gets cancelled and never sees the light of day. It's only unfair if the employees didn't get fairly compensated for their labor, which given the size of WB, I think we'd have heard of should they not have. I understand how awful that may feel, but keep in mind that every filmmaker in Hollywood is under those same constraints when making films backed by production studios.

    WB using his family tragedy was deplorable and a completely different matter. For that, Snyder and his family has my sympathy, but that doesn't mean what happened with Justice League was unfair. He got hired to do a job, was given a great deal of control and after two installments he didn't deliver what they expected and was sacked. That's the exact same situation everyone in the film industry works under. If anything, that he wasn't immediately replaced following BvS's massive under-performance showed they actually were quite generous to him. The product continued to not reflect the direction WB wanted and they sacked him. Does it suck? Oh, absolutely. Is it fair? Yes. That's what work-for-hire entails.

    I'm not arguing that it doesn't suck for Snyder. He's a creative person and he got a project he cared a great deal yanked away from him. It sucks a metric ton despite my dissatisfaction with his work, but WB has no financial, moral or creative obligation to finish the project given their dissatisfaction with it as well.

    Look up Adobe Voco. There's a lot of work that went into that software and it ended up being just a neat tech demo. That project had a great deal of employees and a director in charge of guiding its development. It may-or-may-not be dead (likely is) and we will likely never get to view the fruit of thousands of hours of labor. It's not unfair, it's the contract every one of those developers signed when they began working for Adobe, much as Zack signed when he began working for WB. He got the opportunity to be the man who united Batman and Superman as well as debut Wonder Woman in live action. He just missed the mark when he got his shot. "Fair" means you have the opportunity to fail too. He did. It happens, and it sucks, but he did. I will never not have sympathy for the dude given his tragedy or that he had what was likely a dream project taken from him. I genuinely feel bad for him on that front, but I also understand that he was working with other people's money, IP and time and they decided they didn't like what he was doing. It's fair to sever ties at that point as long as he was compensated, which so long as he had a contract with them, he was.

    How dare you get me to side with a faceless corporation. lol
    We don't know the nitty-gritty. But if i have to make a call then. there is a procedure to termination. Especially, a director. Nothing to me suggets that it was followed. Otherwise, the wouldn't have needed to put his name on it. It was the rule. It's not like they wanted that. They had to. He is the director.Not joss whedon even with the reshoots. Yet the released movie isn't his. This is'nt an outright scrapping a project. This is something else. This similar to josh trank and fantastic 4 situation. Director says its not his movie. The studio still gives him credit.

    As for missing his mark.there are people who hate his movie, understandably. And there are those who love it. The others might me majority. But, i don't know that. All i know is both bvs, mos did make its money back. Jl could have as well. If they hadn't bloated it up,budgetwise. They got greedy for their bonus and threw the entire dc brand under the bus.

    As for snyder, i think the reason He posts pictures is because his fans want him to. He posts it on vero. A relatively smaller site with not so many accounts. He doesn't do it on twitter or Facebook. The other reason he can't move on might be, this: the whole ordeal is connected to death of his daughter now. That's pretty heavy.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 11-21-2019 at 02:47 AM.

  8. #698
    Astonishing Member Vordan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    3,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lokimaru View Post
    But the thing is He did his Job, they just got greedy. Both his movies made Money cold hard Cash and would have made more if they hadn't interfered. How would you like for you name to be dragged through the mud for things that weren't your fault?

    This reminds me of the video game Resistance: Fall of Man from Insomniac. First game was Great if Basic but was wildly popular with fans because of the Insanely fun Weapons System. With Resistance two they tried to chase the Call of Duty/Halo bandwagon and while the game was good if didn't have that Spark that Made Resistance so good Plus they Restricted you to only carrying two weapons at a time which was STUPID. Resistance 3 bombed even though it's the best freaking game in the series. They went away from what they had originally created that was unique to chase what was popular at the time and ended up alienating the fans the first game had garnered so by the time they went back to what made the first game successful the fans had moved on. Thus no more Resistance.
    Except BvS was the big under-performer and that was the movie that was the most “pure” Snyder. I see a lot of Snyder fans claiming this, that the majority of people were somehow on board with Snyder’s take and that’s simply not true. BvS has one of the biggest box office drops of all time, people were lured in by the hype of seeing Superman and Batman, but what they saw was so awful that it killed BvS’s long term sales. Snyder’s JL was going to flop just like BvS flopped and only the most hardcore Snyder fans have convinced themselves that THIS time Snyder was going to make a well received DC movie that would break a billion. He was not, he was going to double down like he did from MOS to BvS. It’s fine if you’re a fan of his take but it was not popular with the mainstream and there was never going to be some magical movie that would cause everyone to do a total 180 and embrace his take.

    Also Aquaman and Shazam are both very much not in the Snyder mood and frankly neither was WW. Those are the big successes of the DCEU, so this idea that the majority of DC fans were only there for Snyder is false. The DC films are doing fine to better without him.
    Last edited by Vordan; 11-21-2019 at 08:28 AM.

  9. #699
    Mighty Member Lokimaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vordan View Post
    Except BvS was the big under-performer and that was the movie that was the most ďpureĒ Snyder. I see a lot of Snyder fans claiming this, that the majority of people were somehow on board with Snyderís take and thatís simply not true. BvS has one of the biggest box office drops of all time, people were lured in by the hype of seeing Superman and Batman, but what they saw was so awful that it killed BvSís long term sales. Snyderís JL was going to flop just like BvS flopped and only the most hardcore Snyder fans have convinced themselves that THIS time Snyder was going to make a well received DC movie that would break a billion. He was not, he was going to double down like he did from MOS to BvS. Itís fine if youíre a fan of his take but it was not popular with the mainstream and there was never going to be some magical movie that would cause everyone to do a total 180 and embrace his take.

    Also Aquaman and Shazam are both very much not in the Snyder mood and frankly neither was WW. Those are the big successes of the DCEU, so this idea that the majority of DC fans were only there for Snyder is false. The DC films are doing fine to better without him.
    One of the big hits against the movie was that it felt disjointed because it skipped a lot of info This was the studio's doing cause in their great wisdom felt the fans would want more Batman so they trimmed all of meat out of the Superman side of the story to focus on the Batman side leaving the audience confused about Motivations. With the release of the Director's cut of the Movie all of the motivations and plot holes were filled in hense why people fight so hard for Snyder's Version of Justice League. All of Zack Snyder's Director's cuts have been Superior to the theatrical versions. This is an established FACT.

  10. #700
    Astonishing Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lokimaru View Post
    All of Zack Snyder's Director's cuts have been Superior to the theatrical versions. This is an established FACT.
    I'll let this comment stew for a moment.

    I mean, yeah, director's BvS is better than theatrical, but it didn't transform a bad movie into a good one. It's just less bad.

  11. #701
    Mighty Member Adekis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DochaDocha View Post
    I'll let this comment stew for a moment.

    I mean, yeah, director's BvS is better than theatrical, but it didn't transform a bad movie into a good one. It's just less bad.
    I both agree and disagree with this? I wholeheartedly agree that the Ultimate cut didn't change the movie from a bad one into a good one. It just shed more light on what was already there.

    But I still liked Batman v. Superman in theaters. I just liked it more when I saw the Ultimate cut.
    "You know the deal, Metropolis. Treat people right or expect a visit from me."

  12. #702
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DochaDocha View Post
    I'll let this comment stew for a moment.

    I mean, yeah, director's BvS is better than theatrical, but it didn't transform a bad movie into a good one. It's just less bad.
    from an objective technical standpoint without the notions of what batman or superman is.what are your issues with the movie?

  13. #703
    Mighty Member Adekis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    from an objective technical standpoint without the notions of what batman or superman is.what are your issues with the movie?
    I don't honestly know that any reading of BvS, negative or positive, can manage to exist without some baggage about who the characters are "supposed" to be. After all, I really like the movie, but my reading has a lot of comparison to how the characters are "supposed" to be or usually are as well.
    "You know the deal, Metropolis. Treat people right or expect a visit from me."

  14. #704
    Astonishing Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    from an objective technical standpoint without the notions of what batman or superman is.what are your issues with the movie?
    To be fair, I can't be objective about this movie. I will always see it as a hijacked Superman sequel, and one with so much studio interference that all landed on the pro-Batman side that I will never like it. I'm like Catelyn Stark, and the movie is Jon Snow; I resent what it represents. I made sure to watch this in a way that ensured WB didn't get any additional money by my viewing it.

    With that out of the way, it's just not my cup of tea, and I largely agree with the negative hot takes about it. Maybe it's like The Last Jedi, in which if I ignored the IP behind it I'd be okay, but since the whole reason I'd watch the movie is the IP then it's a tremendous disappointment.

    So to anyone who liked the movie, I respect your opinion, but to me it just is no good. And feel free to make fun of me for not hating Green Lantern even though 85% of the free world thinks it's like the worst Hollywood dumpster fire.

    EDIT: I should add that from the moment the movie was announced, I knew I was never going to like.

  15. #705
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DochaDocha View Post
    I'll let this comment stew for a moment.

    I mean, yeah, director's BvS is better than theatrical, but it didn't transform a bad movie into a good one. It's just less bad.
    I think if the director's cut had been released into theaters, it would have been reviewed a bit more kindly and maybe made a bit more money. But not much.

    Actually since it was R-rated, it may have made even less because less people would bring their kids to it. Which is not what you want in a movie featuring any of these characters, but especially Superman and the big debut of Wonder Woman. And ultimately, it's still a largely joyless movie where one of the most iconic heroes in the world is a nutcase and plots to murder the other one, and the only redeeming element in the film (Wonder Woman) is also the most superfluous.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •