Snyder cut MIGHT be released...

[Colossus1980]

I do find it amusing that those who berate the Snyder haters come out with pitchforks and bullying tactics when it comes to the MCU. Look in the mirror?

It's all good. We hate what we hate so defend what you like.

And yes excited about the Snyder cut, more than any upcoming DCEU project at the moment.

[Pinsir]

That just means the well received and popular adaptations will come up with new stuff that will seamlessly fit in with the character, or be true to the spirit of them, and subsequently be folded into the main stuff. It helps that Superman was still "forming" when Kryptonite was invented in a radio early in his career and the major elements that consistently stick around after they are added weren't cemented in wider public consciousness yet. What new stuff did MoS bring to the table that is comparable to any of that stuff? it was pretty much Donner again but with a mix of Byrne and a gritty gloss thrown over.

I would say MoS and Superman's other DCEU appearance are some of the least transformative media renditions of the character (Maybe an addition MoS had to the broader Superman lore is the harder sci-fi Krypton we see in it and see again in Krypton tv series and some of the comics). You can pretty much find everything in MoS in already published Superman stuff, even the 'darker' tone to the 9/11 imagery to killing Zod.

It's more divisive response instead of outright rejection means MoS had potential. I think it's far and away the best of the pre-WW DCEU films. But there has to be more than "it isn't Superman" going on for BvS to go over poorly with a lot of critics and general audiences. it's not like we can entirely say "they were just mad their expectations weren't met" because the film's advertisement didn't hide that it was going to be darker movie.

Even people who like BvS usually don't like the theatrical release though, so when people cite BvS's low RT score, we're really not even talking about the same movie. For Superman specifically, there is a subplot in the film where Superman is framed for murdering a bunch of Malians, but in the original film some people came away with the idea that he actually did kill them when the extended version explained in greater detail that he didn't. People also dislike his dour mood in the film, but eh, Superman is like that a lot in the comics too. People just choose to head cannon those parts away.

[Pinsir]

I do find it amusing that those who berate the Snyder haters come out with pitchforks and bullying tactics when it comes to the MCU. Look in the mirror?

It's all good. We hate what we hate so defend what you like.

I don't get upset when a new MCU film is announced though.

[manwhohaseverything]

I disagree with superman being dour. He is lke that in some of the stories like for tomorrow and earth one. But, largely the guy is very fun. The problem is the character has become too much about the appropriate thing, than the right thing. Superman was always someone with larger than life personality and charm.

[Vordan]

He added, “This movie is basically one and done. This is to … close the loop, to finish the story. Maybe not the whole story, cause he did have like a three to five-picture plan. But this Snyder-verse, I’ll call it, will end with the Snyder Cut. Don’t expect any spinoffs for Batman or with Ben Affleck as Batman or any of that.”

https://www.thewrap.com/how-the-rele...would-podcast/

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Yeah, that's what I expected. I didn't figure WB was going to foot the bill for any additional photography. So, no General Swanick as J'Onn J'Onzz or Green Lantern Corps cameos.

That's fine. I think there's more than enough material there for Snyder to create a finished film that contains most of what he wanted to get across, in the manner in which he wanted to present it. Again, it may not be my preferred version of the DCU, but I'm glad that Snyder is getting an opportunity to put a bow around his trilogy of films, even if he would have liked to have made more. I'm particularly interested to hear the original score that Whedon rejected in favor of Elfman's tired rehash, as well as seeing all the many, many subplots actually fleshed out more than they were in that studio-mandated 2 hour cut.

[SiegePerilous02]

I would say MoS and Superman's other DCEU appearance are some of the least transformative media renditions of the character (Maybe an addition MoS had to the broader Superman lore is the harder sci-fi Krypton we see in it and see again in Krypton tv series and some of the comics). You can pretty much find everything in MoS in already published Superman stuff, even the 'darker' tone to the 9/11 imagery to killing Zod.

It having roots in the comics is kind of a shallow defense. We see in the comic books themselves that different authors can execute similar ideas in different ways. That's why I said this was another Donner rehash with a gritty gloss over it. The execution in the tone, dialogue exchanges, acting, what the camera chooses to focus on, etc. are all variable depending on who the director is. And the divisive reaction came from the execution.

I think Zod's death itself as it plays out in the film is more understandable and better than the comic death. But the fallout in the comic was better explored, the films largely don't do anything with it, leading some to think it was just done for shock value.

Even people who like BvS usually don't like the theatrical release though, so when people cite BvS's low RT score, we're really not even talking about the same movie. For Superman specifically, there is a subplot in the film where Superman is framed for murdering a bunch of Malians, but in the original film some people came away with the idea that he actually did kill them when the extended version explained in greater detail that he didn't. People also dislike his dour mood in the film, but eh, Superman is like that a lot in the comics too. People just choose to head cannon those parts away.

Unfortunately, the theatrical cut is what the majority of the people saw. The DC is more fleshed out, but still has the same tone and plot ideas that were already controversial and didn't have broad appeal that a movie trying to kick start a shared universe should probably have to be successful. From what I saw, there was only confusion in Superman maybe killing the leader who had Lois at gunpoint because it was shot poorly and made it look like Clark obliterated him through a wall.

If Superman gets in a dour mood in the comics, it's usually spread out more. It's a serialized medium that has more variety in arcs, this is a 2 hour film where we get mostly nothing except that. And it turned off people in the audience who never picked up a comic book in their life.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yeah, that's what I expected. I didn't figure WB was going to foot the bill for any additional photography. So, no General Swanick as J'Onn J'Onzz or Green Lantern Corps cameos.

That's fine. I think there's more than enough material there for Snyder to create a finished film that contains most of what he wanted to get across, in the manner in which he wanted to present it. Again, it may not be my preferred version of the DCU, but I'm glad that Snyder is getting an opportunity to put a bow around his trilogy of films, even if he would have liked to have made more. I'm particularly interested to hear the original score that Whedon rejected in favor of Elfman's tired rehash, as well as seeing all the many, many subplots actually fleshed out more than they were in that studio-mandated 2 hour cut.

@bold I remember snyder specifically teasing that. If that wasn't gonna be in the movie it wouldn't have been teased. Maybe the shots are finished, now all they need is to make the guy transform into the big green alien in post production. Maybe it's my wishful thinking. But, that's what i was most looking forward to. It would be a little disappointing. Nonetheless, i agree with your larger point.

[manwhohaseverything]

It having roots in the comics is kind of a shallow defense. We see in the comic books themselves that different authors can execute similar ideas in different ways. That's why I said this was another Donner rehash with a gritty gloss over it. The execution in the tone, dialogue exchanges, acting, what the camera chooses to focus on, etc. are all variable depending on who the director is. And the divisive reaction came from the execution.

I think Zod's death itself as it plays out in the film is more understandable and better than the comic death. But the fallout in the comic was better explored, the films largely don't do anything with it, leading some to think it was just done for shock value.

I can agree with this. It was really not an original plot.Man of steel was entirely a rehash of everything done before, with snyder adding his own leanings and interpretations. A utilitarian pa kent is a wierd concept and reading. I mean i could get that from original siegel and shuster origins. "Help people when right time comes" . But, the character not once exhibited that trait in later comics. Not that i have problem with a philosophy that takes consequences into account . But, People largely didn't get an idea of what the dire consequences of clark coming out without him being ready before hand means.Pa kent says "sky will fall". But, that doesn’t mean the audiences will get the idea of what that means.

@underlined Not sure, i agree with you there. I don't want this superman moping around more cause he protected the world from a genocidal maniac. That scene with pa and clark was enough. He specifically talks about how he can't handle the nightmares from ptsd.

[Lightning Rider]

From what I understand, Snyder's original intent was for Lois Lane to be killed by Darkseid which inflicts enough of an emotional blow to Superman for him to be infected by the Anti-Life Equation and transforms him into the evil Superman we saw in the BvS Knightmare sequence. While I'm not a fan of evil mind-controlled Superman stories, I don't think Snyder's idea was necessarily out of character given that all he would have been doing was combining elements of the Superman TAS's "Son of Darkseid" arc, Kingdom Come and Injustice. This is what Snyder had done in all of his DCEU, remix various ideas that already existed within the history of the characters.

However, all this is moot because, according to Snyder, this was the plot point that Geoff Johns reportedly reigned Snyder in on because he, correctly I think, understood that Snyder hadn't spent enough time in his films to establish Cavill's Superman as a symbol of hope and optimism yet, but was relying too much upon Superman's iconic status. Essentially, Snyder was trying to deconstruct Superman for audiences before they'd had a chance to even see the idealised version.

In other words, Snyder was taking for granted that today's audiences were already intimately familiar with the bright, smiling Donner version from 40 years ago, which wasn't really the case since the last time that version had been seen was in Singer's Superman Returns years earlier, which similarly featured a more brooding mopey version of the character.

I'm sure the Snyder Cut will contain hints to what he originally planned, since it's highly unlikely that Geoff Johns will be in any way involved with this new version (aside from collecting a pay check thanks to his producer's credit, of course). However, there's only so much Snyder can do with the footage he has available. I don't think they have the kind of budget to be able to bring in Henry Cavill to grimace his way through a bunch of new scenes in order to set up sequels that WB has no intention of making now.

Yeah I think that's spot on and probably the point that, if I had to course correct, I would personally recommend. I think there's a way to still make JL work while saving Lois, assuming that Barry changed the timeline by sending his message and didn't just fulfill the prophecy.

[WebLurker]

Though I disagree with your assessment of BVS being a “bad” movie, I can totally understand why a person who didn’t connect with what Snyder was trying to do with superhero being totally uninterested in seeing more of it, especially more of his unvarnished vision like what you saw in the Ultimate Cut of BvS.

Superman being a symbol of fear and uncertainty and Batman killing people with guns aside (and even that's fine if they want to make the characters so), I don't think the problem with Snyder's movies was his vision and themes of a darker take on the world of capes, but that the movies themselves are not well-written and executed, so botching the presentation of the vision. That may sound like backtracking a bit, but I think that Snyder's vision being ill-fitting for the characters is subjective, while his making bad DC movies has a fair objective case behind it.

For myself, I’m just psyched so I can see what the original vision was. The rumors and the teases that Snyder has posted his Vero account has gotten me quite intrigued. I’m personally more excited about this than any upcoming DC film not named The Batman.

Fair enough.

Will the cut be a masterpiece that will be heralded as one of the great magnum opus’s of cinema. Absolutely not. For me, and many others it’s simply about getting closure to an era of DC-On-Film that was...shall we say quite polarizing to say the least.

I'm sure it will be an interesting comparison, if nothing else.

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman being a symbol of fear and uncertainty.

You do know that, superman has the innate capacity to cause great fear. He doesn't even need to try like batman. He is a literally a sentient gun.He chooses to be superman. Therefore he becomes a symbol of hope.


So, superman and fear aren't exactly unconnected. There has always been a side to him that is an absolute beast. He isn't treated like one. He was accepted and loved by parents, his wife, his family, regular working people.. Etc as one of them. As their champion. (Ofcourse there were those that hated him and rejected him) . Therefore he becomes something worth aspiring too. He literally balances that side inorder to be superman.

[kingaliencracker]

DC isn't happy with the news apparently...
https://screenrant.com/justice-leagu...mpaign=SR-FB-P

[charliehustle415]

DC isn't happy with the news apparently...
https://screenrant.com/justice-leagu...mpaign=SR-FB-P

This is the PERFECT time to make a Flashpoint film if they want to explain the continuity craziness in-universe and if they don't want to explain it just reboot the gods damned thing and start over with the Reeve's Batman movie

[Pinsir]

It having roots in the comics is kind of a shallow defense. We see in the comic books themselves that different authors can execute similar ideas in different ways. That's why I said this was another Donner rehash with a gritty gloss over it. The execution in the tone, dialogue exchanges, acting, what the camera chooses to focus on, etc. are all variable depending on who the director is. And the divisive reaction came from the execution.

Keep in mind, I'm just arguing against the idea that "MoS is bad because it doesn't follow the comic." I don't hold the film in high regard, but because so many people echo bad, and frankly, hysterical arguments I found myself defending the film a lot. Those debates actually shaped a lot about how I view media and media criticism.

Unfortunately, the theatrical cut is what the majority of the people saw. The DC is more fleshed out, but still has the same tone and plot ideas that were already controversial and didn't have broad appeal that a movie trying to kick start a shared universe should probably have to be successful.

MoS did very well for a superhero film at the time though.

From what I saw, there was only confusion in Superman maybe killing the leader who had Lois at gunpoint because it was shot poorly and made it look like Clark obliterated him through a wall.

I don't think it was poorly shot, I just think people at the time had slurped the 'Man of Murder' Koolaid and were willing to interpret a vague scene as a murder. I've only seen the theatrical cut once, so I sometimes get confused as to what scenes are in what edition, but when I saw that scene in the film I didn't come away with the idea that he killed a dude. I think in the Extended Cut, he outright says "He didn't kill those men."

If Superman gets in a dour mood in the comics, it's usually spread out more. It's a serialized medium that has more variety in arcs, this is a 2 hour film where we get mostly nothing except that. And it turned off people in the audience who never picked up a comic book in their life.

To be honest, the people I see decrying the dourness of BvS are usually comic fans who get upset that Superman doesn't smile. Yet, his character in BvS isn't that different than how Superman is portrayed in All-Star Superman. In All-Star, Superman is pretty stoic throughout, but I guess because its colourful and Superman does smile occasionally in it, Morrison get's a pass.