Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBOmax in 2021!

[WebLurker]

Exactly. It doesn't surprise me that he went to college with Michael Bay. They both seem to have unearned egos.

Dunno; whatever ego Bay has, he at least is able to laugh at himself and doesn't seem to take criticism as personally. Snyder, as we've seen, cannot take anyone thinking poorly of his work.

[Castle]

Those are fine criticisms. If you can't make an audience believe in this world, you have failed as the director. Also, to say it was a new approach to superhero films is bogus. Since X-men (or Blade depending on who you ask), superhero movies were constantly going down the dark route. By 2013, it was a tired formula. MCU being light was a response to those dark films in itself. So, really, it's a moot point. I don't think anyone needed plenty of humour, they just needed something that wasn't bleak at occasional points in the movie to make it bearable. Also, no one said it was bad because it wasn't like the MCU, they said it was bad in comparison to the MCU - There's a huge difference.
.

it was not a tired formula because the dark movies had their own style. xmen was dark, but grounded and had realism. blade was dark but gothic , horror-styled and underground. what Snyder did with man of steel had never been done before with Superman or even superhero fantasy since blade was rooted more in vampire lore and xmen was more science fiction. it's funny that you mentioned tired formula but low and behold in 2021 the light hearted comedy formula is what has now become tiring.

the idea that some people said it was bad compared to marvel was ridiculous. man of steel brought more to the comic book films than Marvel was doing and that was a good thing, i think this is why some people loatherd it because man of steel was a reminder of what marvel can never be. when marvel was going down the line of comedy, man of steel was going the other way, we are now almost 8 years in and man of steel is such a striking movie that is always steers up a good debate, which is what true art films should be.

The problems with BvS are what led to JL being so polarizing though? Without those problems, WB would never have been so worried that they got Whedon in to try and save the film. Without Snyder's BvS, we ironically would have never had the Snyder Cut fiasco. It's all very weird. Snyder's JL could very well be a masterpiece, but most signs point in the opposite direction in my opinion. I don't think he has the ability to make anything deeper than shallow. I'm excited for his Army of the Dead movie for that reason - a straight forward zombie action movie should be ideal for him.

And a mistake to bring in whedon, I still remember 2016 like it was yesterday watching all this comic films unfolds, seeing how toxic the media was trying to make BvS, selling the hype that civil war was a ground breaking comic film and not even giving much attention to deadpool but looked how the tables have now turned. 5 years after, dawn of justice is getting it's due with this cut, no one remembers what civil war was about and deadpool 1 will likely be the only deadpool movie that will be a classic

when you think of everything , all the tables have turned out well for Snyder, the only hope now is for his naysayers to pray the movie has LOW RT score since this is what is only needed to prove snyder had always sucked, however I don't think that is going to be enough.

for me, it feels as if his naysayers are scared of how good this film could be. we all already know Snyder got the visual style, but with HBO Max now over seeing it, there is more good that can come out of this than bad.

[Castle]

Exactly. It doesn't surprise me that he went to college with Michael Bay. They both seem to have unearned egos.

Snyder's film style are not like Michael bay. lol. when you take man of steel, sucker punch, watchmen and 300. his film style is very unique and a singularity to him.

if any one went to college with Michael Bay , it will be Kevin Feige and the Russo Brothers. Look at the 3rd act of Man of Steel, Transformers, BvS, Avengers, Age of Ultron, Endgame. you will find more similarities with Avengers and Transformers right to the very last detail of tone, cinematography and VFX.

All what Feige and Bay wanted to do is make cool fun blockbusters. Snyder was always deeper than that even more as a visual director, something that is lacking with Bay and Feige movies.

I will compare Snyder more to Paul Thomas Anderson as a director and as a visual director Snyder is as good as James Cameron.

[Kirby101]

S as a visual director Snyder is as good as James Cameron.

Hardy, har, har, har.

[Castle]

Hardy, har, har, har.

Just a bit of reality from delusion on James vs Zack.

https://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-inspirations/
James Cameron Talks About the Filmmakers That Inspire Him (Like Zack Snyder)

I think i am the one when I see that snyder is about to be vindicated.

before kevin feige blew up new york city in 2012 for fun, Michael bay did that in 2007 both for fun reasons.

if snyder is going to blow up metropolis better be sure he gets the tone right, up the stakes and have the villain who is a terrorist killed. Zod was the same threat level as Miles Quaritch from Avatar cant same the same for Avengers Loki and I dont even remember what happened in transformers. what I know is the city got nuked in the same fun summer blockbuster style as Avengers

[Jack The Tripper]

it was not a tired formula because the dark movies had their own style. xmen was dark, but grounded and had realism. blade was dark but gothic , horror-styled and underground. what Snyder did with man of steel had never been done before with Superman or even superhero fantasy since blade was rooted more in vampire lore and xmen was more science fiction. it's funny that you mentioned tired formula but low and behold in 2021 the light hearted comedy formula is what has now become tiring.

the idea that some people said it was bad compared to marvel was ridiculous. man of steel brought more to the comic book films than Marvel was doing and that was a good thing, i think this is why some people loatherd it because man of steel was a reminder of what marvel can never be. when marvel was going down the line of comedy, man of steel was going the other way, we are now almost 8 years in and man of steel is such a striking movie that is always steers up a good debate, which is what true art films should be.

But the tone was tired. The tone was boring, bland, and most films couldn't make it work - That's part of why Daredevil, Ang Lee's Hulk, Amazing Spider-Man, and other attempts at franchises didn't work - because they just could not figure out how to balance. MoS did better than most, admittedly, but it doesn't mean it's a masterpiece of a film like you suggest. Again, all types of films eventually suffer fatigue - what you are saying is not as smart as you think it is.

You're forgetting that most critics and audience members (especially back then) are just interested in seeing good or enjoyable films. The claim that there's some sort of hive mind bias for MCU movies is ludicrous and something the Snyder cut fans have really pushed. No one thought this when Logan came out, or Deadpool, or Wonder Woman, or Joker. Snyder is just not a great story teller. MoS only strikes up debate between Snyder cut fans and other comic book movie fans, not artists and auteurs. Typical Snyder cult delusion. I mean, surely by that logic, the fact that You are always debating the MCU means it's great art.

And a mistake to bring in whedon, I still remember 2016 like it was yesterday watching all this comic films unfolds, seeing how toxic the media was trying to make BvS, selling the hype that civil war was a ground breaking comic film and not even giving much attention to deadpool but looked how the tables have now turned. 5 years after, dawn of justice is getting it's due with this cut, no one remembers what civil war was about and deadpool 1 will likely be the only deadpool movie that will be a classic

when you think of everything , all the tables have turned out well for Snyder, the only hope now is for his naysayers to pray the movie has LOW RT score since this is what is only needed to prove snyder had always sucked, however I don't think that is going to be enough.

for me, it feels as if his naysayers are scared of how good this film could be. we all already know Snyder got the visual style, but with HBO Max now over seeing it, there is more good that can come out of this than bad.

It was a mistake to bring in anyone to finish that film. There was no way of cutting that already bloated film down. I struggle to see 4 hours of a Snyder movie making it as great as you make out. BvS came out before Civil War - the media didn't care about it in regards to Civil War. You are, as usual, deluded. The media loved Deadpool. It's funny that you like Deadpool though, seeing as it's essentially just an MCU film but R rated.

If Snyder's JL is good, then that's great, it just means another worthwhile comic book adaptation to watch. However, labelling genuine widespread criticism as "haters" and "naysayers" is deluded.

If the film's good, I'm sure naysayers will be fine with it, but it doesn't change the flaws of his previous films. And, at the end of the day, the fact that he can only make a comprehensible film by making it 4 hours is a flaw in and of itself. But again, if it's good, then that's great.

[Jack The Tripper]

Snyder's film style are not like Michael bay. lol. when you take man of steel, sucker punch, watchmen and 300. his film style is very unique and a singularity to him.

if any one went to college with Michael Bay , it will be Kevin Feige and the Russo Brothers. Look at the 3rd act of Man of Steel, Transformers, BvS, Avengers, Age of Ultron, Endgame. you will find more similarities with Avengers and Transformers right to the very last detail of tone, cinematography and VFX.

All what Feige and Bay wanted to do is make cool fun blockbusters. Snyder was always deeper than that even more as a visual director, something that is lacking with Bay and Feige movies.

I will compare Snyder more to Paul Thomas Anderson as a director and as a visual director Snyder is as good as James Cameron.

Yeah, films that are bloated, pretentious (without having earned it), self serious, overlong, and boring may very much be his own signature style, you're right.

Just because Snyder's visual language is "Dark and dull" doesn't make it artistic. It may be opposite to MCU's "Bright and fun" but that isn't a good thing unless he knows what he's doing. He doesn't.

I promise you, nothing Snyder has done has achieved depth. His Watchmen had no depth, and that's hard to achieve with source material as rich as that. BvS couldn't reach the depths of Civil War, MoS couldn't reach the depth of Iron Man, and I sincerely doubt JL will reach the depths of IW/Endgame. Sorry bossman.

Just a bit of reality from delusion on James vs Zack.

https://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-inspirations/
James Cameron Talks About the Filmmakers That Inspire Him (Like Zack Snyder)

I think i am the one when I see that snyder is about to be vindicated.

before kevin feige blew up new york city in 2012 for fun, Michael bay did that in 2007 both for fun reasons.

if snyder is going to blow up metropolis better be sure he gets the tone right, up the stakes and have the villain who is a terrorist killed. Zod was the same threat level as Miles Quaritch from Avatar cant same the same for Avengers Loki and I dont even remember what happened in transformers. what I know is the city got nuked in the same fun summer blockbuster style as Avengers

James Cameron hasn't made a great movie since (at a stretch) Titanic - Forgive me if I don't count his opinion as gospel lmao.

Avatar is also not a great benchmark for your "artistic" argument. Great CGI, but by God, that story was dreadful. And in response to MoS's finale - it was dreadful. Snyder's Superman is one incompetent Kryptonian. I wouldn't mind if he succeeded in making him seem capable and actually interesting in BvS, but he didn't.

[Castle]

Yeah, films that are bloated, pretentious (without having earned it), self serious, overlong, and boring may very much be his own signature style, you're right.

I will keep this objective based on the movie events. I remember all the films to some good extent, avengers and transformers are more bloated and pretentious because they have the same amount of city destruction style and they used the worst story telling to back it up, meaning when you are watching the movie you get more fun thrills. bloated because they have more characters doing the bombastic fighting

Just because Snyder's visual language is "Dark and dull" doesn't make it artistic. It may be opposite to MCU's "Bright and fun" but that isn't a good thing unless he knows what he's doing. He doesn't.

Snyder use of dark visual language is the better film option, when events happens that is enough to destroy a city or the world you use the color tone that matches it, MCU bright and fun is simply dumbing horrific events and that makes things worse. How did other marvel films X2 and DOFP not go for bright and fun colours? or Batman Begins and TDK? sam raimi spiderman movies did not even go as far as bright and fun, Because neither of these movies wanted to water all that stuff.

I promise you, nothing Snyder has done has achieved depth. His Watchmen had no depth, and that's hard to achieve with source material as rich as that. BvS couldn't reach the depths of Civil War, MoS couldn't reach the depth of Iron Man, and I sincerely doubt JL will reach the depths of IW/Endgame. Sorry bossman.

BvS had more depth, it spent more time dealing with the issue of if superman was a threat or not.civil war just jumped to action scenes after some few speeches.

Usually when it comes to comic depth do I ask for Patrick Stewart and Ian MCKellen playing intellectual chess or Fassbender and Mcavoy sitting at the Lincoln steps memorial talking about human rights and the cold war or Christian Bale and Liam Neeson explaining the difference between justice and revenge? no. those are 15-20 years stand alone comic movies with higher story telling standards but I expect more than constant punching matches with a one dimensional plot and terrible cinematography as civil war.

IW is a movie that is mostly VFX and constant mini battles here and there, where is the depth there? Endgame is a greatest hits of marvel. these are fun movies, they dont have the depth of pg 13 days of future past and batman begins that are actually dramatic movies with many themes that MCU has banned in all their films or fail to fully explore and no final CGI mega battles that rivals transformers or avengers. comic book films due to its nature usually only have depth when they lean more drama and BvS for the most part was a drama.

civil war never offered any interesting story depth like this

Avatar is also not a great benchmark for your "artistic" argument. Great CGI, but by God, that story was dreadful.

You're trying hard, but you're delusional man. Sorry.

Avatar is a bigger benchmark than any MCU and DCU movies.

And in response to MoS's finale - it was dreadful. Snyder's Superman is one incompetent Kryptonian. I wouldn't mind if he succeeded in making him seem capable and actually interesting in BvS, but he didn't.

Superman was the only good kyrpotian around to protect earth, avengers has many characters yet they do more damage and face no convincing consequences that superman had to face in BvS. it's not the best story or depth.

[SiegePerilous02]

Can we not keep bringing up James Cameron as some all powerful deity whose word is gospel? He's entitled to his opinion, but the general consensus of Snyder is that he's not an engaging or coherent filmmaker. And that's not just from fanboys or critics, but apathy from the general audience. Like BvS and Watchmen both having big second weekend drops because he lost the room.

He's not a peer to Cameron, who was at least able to create a big audience hit. Even then, it's not like Avatar is very revolutionary in the story or acting department. It was visually innovating and entertaining as an action movie, but it's still full of cliches.

[Jack The Tripper]

I will keep this objective based on the movie events. I remember all the films to some good extent, avengers and transformers are more bloated and pretentious because they have the same amount of city destruction style and they used the worst story telling to back it up, meaning when you are watching the movie you get more fun thrills than fear for your life. that is what bloated and pretentious means. bloated because they even have more characters doing the bombastic fighting

I don't think what you have mentioned insinuates bloating. Bloating, at least to me, refers to films that are overstuffed with (mainly) characters and themes that can't be as fleshed out as intended. This is a flaw in Snyder's movies that many in the general public have pointed out. The problem is that MCU movies aim to be action movies with interesting characters and moments of levity, so it succeeds at doing that in a feature length run time. With Snyder's films they have to be (as studios mandate) trimmed down to a leaner running time. This leads to bloating because they try and fit too much content in to a short amount of time. This also lends itself to my argument about the pretentious nature of Snyder's films - His work tends to address seemingly deep themes, but never has follow through - it's often a big set up, but without proper resolution.

Snyder use of dark visual language or what you call dark and dull is the better film option, when events happens that is enough to destroy a city or the world you use the color tone that matches it, MCU bright and fun is simply dumbing down a horrific events and that makes things worse. How did other marvel films like X2 and DOFP not go for bright and fun colours? or Batman Begins and TDK? sam raimi spiderman movies did not even go as far as bright and fun, Because neither of these movies wanted to water down all that stuff.

Okay, but in MoS, the tones were pretty much only blue and grey. You might say it's grounded, but just because it's the colour of pavement, it doesn't make it so. I'll never say the MCU has incredible cinematography, and it definitely needs better colour grading, but at least there are fun parts to look at. MoS just became buildings shattering and punching. At least in Avengers we got to see superheroes saving people, and we could tell what exactly was happening. MCU isn't dumbing anything down - it just knows that it wants to show more hope, and I think they realise that people don't go to see blockbusters to be depressed.

X2 was set in the snow at a government compound, the locale was not prone to super bright/dynamic imagery. Metropolis, however, had no identity whatsoever. Even DOFP's future scenes had nice bursts of colour via powers, and it should be noted that that movie is quite colourful in its 70s setting. The TDK trilogy did have colour, there wasn't a grey filter or anything put over it and they made sure to make Gotham feel real. Batman Begins was probably the biggest offender in the trilogy as it seems there was a lot of brown used, however the latter 2 films made up for that in abundance. Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy was full of colour and campiness.

BvS had more depth, it spent more time dealing with the issue of if superman was a threat or not.civil war just jumped to action scenes after some few speeches.

Usually when it comes to comic depth do I ask for Patrick Stewart and Ian MCKellen playing intellectual chess or Fassbender and Mcavoy sitting at the Lincoln steps memorial talking about human rights and the cold war or Christian Bale and Liam Neeson explaining the difference between justice and revenge? no. those are 15-20 years stand alone comic movies with higher story telling standards but I expect more than constant punching matches with a one dimensional plot and terrible cinematography as civil war.

Yes but it so often retread these on the nose themes without actually resolving them or making the characters act in a believable way. At no point in the movie did I feel sorry for either of the protagonists, or agree with their points of view: in Batman's case I thought he was just ignoring facts and logic, and in Superman's case it just seemed like he had no real care for the human race. Civil War actually had characters who were believable, and felt like they actually fought for something bigger. Not to mention the fact that the actual fight between the two main protagonists actually had emotional heft and a consequence that felt real. Superman (needlessly) dying and being mourned as this incredible, godly figure was not earned beyond occasionally likening him to Jesus.

IW is a movie that is mostly VFX and constant mini battles here and there, where is the depth there? Endgame is a greatest hits of marvel. these are fun movies, they dont have the depth of pg 13 days of future past and batman begins that are actually dramatic movies with many themes that MCU has banned in all their films and no final CGI mega battles that rivals transformers or avengers. comic book films usually only have depth when they lean more drama and BvS for the most part was a drama.

civil war never offered any interesting story depth like this

I don't understand why VFX in movies is bad when it comes to the MCU but for James Cameron and Avatar it's fine? Also I listed IW and Endgame together because, together is where they get their depth from. The way the characters react to loss and defeat, most of the character arcs in those two movies defeat any of Snyder's DC ones imo. It doesn't matter if something is a drama though, it only matters if it's a GOOD drama, which BvS isn't.

All that scene does is set up a question that doesn't really get explored in any decent or nuanced way. It's just a compilation of news anchors and politicians telling us what the movie is supposed to be about.

Avatar is a bigger benchmark than any MCU and DCU movies.

Let's agree to disagree

I would not call something dreadful that was the most realistic outcome of events.

Superman as an ''dumb kypotian'' makes no sense objectively, he was the only good kyrpotian left to protect earth, avengers has many characters yet they do more damage and face no convincing consequences that superman had to face in BvS. it's not good story telling. civil war consequences was all over after the first act for a more simpler plot already seen in Iron Man 1 and Thor.

It doesn't matter if it's realistic, it matters if it was made/handled well. And I think a lot of people didn't think it was. You can watch something like the Boys to see realistic super powered people done well, MoS and BvS are not it - because at the end of the day they still feature aliens, intergalactic mining machines, a billionaire that dresses as a bat, and a resolution that adds up to "He has a mother too, he must be a decent guy". The world does not seem coherent with realism.

I didn't say he was dumb. I said he was incompetent. There's a difference. I don't think Superman faced any real consequence except the military were keeping an eye on him? He died, yes, but that was not a direct response to him causing damage, it was just Lex Luthor hating him because he had the powers of a God. The public were split on him I guess? Half of the Avengers were made fugitives for going against legislation made to regulate them, I think that's a fair consequence.

Anyway, i think I'm done with this, it's gotten way too off topic regarding this thread, so peace out.

[Castle]

Can we not keep bringing up James Cameron as some all powerful deity whose word is gospel? He's entitled to his opinion, but the general consensus of Snyder is that he's not an engaging or coherent filmmaker. And that's not just from fanboys or critics, but apathy from the general audience. Like BvS and Watchmen both having big second weekend drops because he lost the room.

He's not a peer to Cameron, who was at least able to create a big audience hit. Even then, it's not like Avatar is very revolutionary in the story or acting department. It was visually innovating and entertaining as an action movie, but it's still full of cliches.

James Cameron is one and if not the best visual film director in modern film, Snyder's ranks almost as high.

Avatar is very revolutionary in the story or acting department. It was visually innovating and entertaining as an action movie, but it's still full of cliches.

I will give Avatar revolutionary card for acting , the Navi people were played by human actors. Avatar took motion capture film to better levels after lord of the rings.

Yes Avatar is full of cliches but that is what most superhero movies have been in the last 10 years with a few exceptions, enter Snyder who had a different vision to that.

[SiegePerilous02]

James Cameron is one and if not the best visual film director in modern film, Snyder's ranks almost as high.

The first half of your statement can't really be argued with.

The second half is certainly open for debate. He's

I will give Avatar revolutionary card for acting , the Navi people were played by human actors. Avatar took motion capture film to better levels after lord of the rings.

This is a hilarious statement considering Sam Worthington is the lead and gets most of the screen time.

Yes Avatar is full of cliches but that is what most superhero movies have been in the last 10 years with a few exceptions, enter Snyder who had a different vision to that.

A vision that failed to catch on because it wasn't very coherent or interesting.

Going against the grain doesn't count for much if you don't have the talent to pull it off. Snyder's ambitions far outweigh his talent.

[green_garnish]

James Cameron is one and if not the best visual film director in modern film, Snyder's ranks almost as high

Tbf, I give the article props for the balls to put Snyder in the same list as Kubrick, but still I think the point stands. Snyder is not close to number one in this spot

http://www.tasteofcin********/2014/2...tunning-films/

[Castle]

More on the R Rating, am glad we have this in details because I once tried to explain how r rating works on deadpool/xmen film forums. good to see what I thought is confirmed.



https://collider.com/zack-snyders-ju...hbo-max-movie/
"Here's one piece of information nobody knows: The movie is insane and so epic and is probably rated R — that's one thing I think will happen, that it will be an R-rated version, for sure. We haven't heard from the MPAA, but that's my gut. [...] There's one scene where Batman drops an F-bomb. Cyborg is not too happy with what's going on with his life before he meets the Justice League, and he tends to speak his mind. And Steppenwolf is pretty much just hacking people in half. So [the rating would be due to] violence and profanity, probably both."


As I once said about wolverine just because you drop one f bomb and act in a profane manner, slice people does not mean you will get or not get r rating. the r rating is a lot grayer than that and many studios can take or not take advantage of some of the loops.


Looks like MPAA and the HBO Max folks agreed with what I was saying all along about r rating.

[green_garnish]

F-Bombs and hacking people. So glad to see this puts it on the same level as slasher flicks. So adult and mature!