Which do you prefer Zack Snyder’s Justice League or Infinity War-Endgame?

[Castle]

There's a lot to unpack here, so I'm gonna do a cliff notes version so as not to waste my time:
.

The implication of serious cinema and art, hugely favours the theory that more mature story telling will give you better art. this is because mature story telling pushing you more and don't restrict your imagination or potential. this has been proven over and over again, it has been proven directly in the comic book genre. Batman and Robin is considered childish by many people, if not everyone, even to the people who enjoy it.

Additionally you can have many kids tales with mature themes where the entire universe has not been dumbed down on film in an unbelievable manner, I still consider Harry Potter, Chronicles of Narnia, To Kill a Mockingbird and Lord of the rings a kids tale, however their movies did not dumb things down to the point they needed to look like cartoons because a studio is manipulating the family friendly narrative.

Half Blood prince is arguably the best fantasy looking movie in cinematography-vfx of the 2000-2010 period. While marvel has the story in comics that can give it this type of style. No MCU film however can look like that on film.

There is a point in comparing MCU to gravity and interstellar, because it does highlight a good critical point. If you think of other comic book directors in their prime, Bryan Singer or Christopher Nolan, they would have opted for those kinds of VFX with their comic films.

About Thanos been realistic we will just have to agree to disagree, If thanos looks realistically we have to come up with a new word for Gollum, You see it is not about Thanos been realistically by your standard as a MCU fan, it is thanos been realistically by general cinema standard, which is why I am using all this films like LOTR, Harry Potter, Gravity as examples. I think the issue here is that MCU film standard is quite a low one in the bigger seas of VFX films, however still has to be considered directly because people are making discussions about it. we should not however deny another comic film like the Snyder Cut that did reach those standard because people are too carried away by Marvel vs DC.

This movie speaks for itself.


This also looked much better on HD TV than YouTube. I cannot say the same for IW/Endgame.

[Rev9]

Ok, but if he could find those other planets, how can he not re-find Earth?

Make a distinction between looking for Anti Life as the ultimate prize, and conquest of worlds out of sheer megalomania.I don't think Darkseid cares either way, and the clue is that the boxes already helped him convert countless sentient beings to be his mindless parademons.So he probably wants anti life ,maybe because it can make him control all lifeforms without needing to go to their planet and subjugate them.He is Darkseid , he will conquer planets even if they don't have anti life.I don't think one precludes the other, AL acquisition is just a bonus to him not some absolute necessity. So even if he lost the boxes, he goes by his primary imperative -conquest for the sheer sake of it. He may conquer any planet he comes across, but he has to have the boxes to detect the planet with the AL, that is a major difference.Considering he has hundreds of thousands of world's traversed with boxes in hand and then another 100,000 to traverse without, does it really surprise one that he cannot pinpoint earth without the boxes but is busy exterminating star systems all over the universe, of which we know he may be speaking of only our known universe,when you add on the possibility that he has traversed alternate universes as well, it becomes easy to see why he left earth to try look for other possible conquests ,he may have presumed he'll land on another planet with AL by crunching the numbers and expecting odds to come good at some point.

[CosmiComic]

Make a distinction between looking for Anti Life as the ultimate prize, and conquest of worlds out of sheer megalomania.I don't think Darkseid cares either way, and the clue is that the boxes already helped him convert countless sentient beings to be his mindless parademons.So he probably wants anti life ,maybe because it can make him control all lifeforms without needing to go to their planet and subjugate them.He is Darkseid , he will conquer planets even if they don't have anti life.I don't think one precludes the other, AL acquisition is just a bonus to him not some absolute necessity. So even if he lost the boxes, he goes by his primary imperative -conquest for the sheer sake of it. He may conquer any planet he comes across, but he has to have the boxes to detect the planet with the AL, that is a major difference.Considering he has hundreds of thousands of world's traversed with boxes in hand and then another 100,000 to traverse without, does it really surprise one that he cannot pinpoint earth without the boxes but is busy exterminating star systems all over the universe, of which we know he may be speaking of only our known universe,when you add on the possibility that he has traversed alternate universes as well, it becomes easy to see why he left earth to try look for other possible conquests ,he may have presumed he'll land on another planet with AL by crunching the numbers and expecting odds to come good at some point.

I see what you're saying, but the movie didn't really show that, and even then, it's hard for me to believe. I didn't even think that whole battle at the beginning was necessary

[Jack The Tripper]

The implication of serious cinema and art, hugely favours the theory that more mature story telling will give you better art. this is because mature story telling pushing you more and don't restrict your imagination or potential. this has been proven over and over again, it has been proven directly in the comic book genre. Batman and Robin is considered childish by many people, it not everyone, even to the people who enjoy it.

Additionally you can have many kids tales with mature themes where the entire universe has not been dumbed down on film in an unbelievable manner, I still consider Harry Potter, Chronicles of Narnia, To Kill a Mockingbird and Lord of the rings a kids tale, however their movies did not dumb things down to the point they needed to look like cartoons because a studio is manipulating the family friendly narrative.

Half Blood prince is arguably the best fantasy looking movie in cinematography-vfx of the 2000-2010 period. While marvel has the story in comics that can give it this type of style. No MCU film however can look like that on film.

There is a point in comparing MCU to gravity and interstellar, because it does highlight a good critical point. If you think of other comic book directors in their prime, Bryan Singer or Christopher Nolan, they would have opted for those kinds of VFX with their comic films.

About Thanos been realistic we will just have to agree to disagree, If thanos looks realistically we have to come up with a new word for Gollum, You see it is not about Thanos been realistically by your standard as a MCU fan, it is thanos been realistically by general cinema standard, which is why I am using all this films like LOTR, Harry Potter, Gravity as examples. I think the issue here is that MCU film standard is quite a low one in the bigger seas of VFX films, however still has to be considered directly because people are making discussions about it. we should not however deny another comic film like the Snyder Cut that did reach those standard because people are too carried away by Marvel vs DC.

This movie speaks for itself.


This also looked much better on HD TV than YouTube. I cannot say the same for IW/Endgame.

I probably won’t be replying after this, so here’s the last thing I’ll say - you haven’t been objective. All the arguments you’ve put in are based on subjectivity and moving goalposts. Thanos and Gollum are entirely different designs and not similar in any way, so their comparison is moot - their movements, expressions, and physicalities are polar opposites. Not to mention that it has nothing to do with the discussion which was to do with Thanos and Darkseid. You said Darkseid was objectively better from a VFX viewpoint but you haven’t proven that, you’ve just turned it into comparing MCU effects (which I said were a mixed bag overall anyway) with other franchises not pertinent to the topic.

[SiegePerilous02]

I don't know if a clip of shirtless Zeus zapping lightning at some other video game characters until they explode should really accompany "serious cinema."

It's just as inherently silly in its own way as all superhero movies. it was still overall entertaining in that regard, oddly because it had a bit more of an MCU flavor than the film that preceded it. But Criterion Collection material this film is not. And that's ok, because I wouldn't say any CBM film is

[The Cool Thatguy]

I don't know if a clip of shirtless Zeus zapping lightning at some other video game characters until they explode should really accompany "serious cinema."

It's just as inherently silly in its own way as all superhero movies. it was still overall entertaining in that regard, oddly because it had a bit more of an MCU flavor than the film that preceded it. But Criterion Collection material this film is not. And that's ok, because I wouldn't say any CBM film is

But they looked like 300 Extras! Thus, serious!

[Kirby101]

so ZSJL was more mature than Engame because there weren't as many jokes?

[CosmiComic]

so ZSJL was more serious than Engame because there weren't as many jokes?

Technically, uh, yeah? But that doesn't make it better than Endgame

[Kirby101]

Technically, uh, yeah? But that doesn't make it better than Endgame

I meant to say mature.

[CosmiComic]

I meant to say mature.

Oh, not really IMO. Idk even know what people mean by mature half the time.

[WebLurker]

- MCU and DCU are not comparable on VFX, to be honest this one is just a lie because Snyder's VFX are notoriously known for been nothing like we have ever seen. Even those that hate Snyder, will say he is a good unique visual film maker, they are not comparable at all. they are as different as salt and sugar.

I think we're mixing up the complete package with the CGI rendering, if that makes any sense. Snyder certain does have his own style in terms of editing the footage together and I would be actually lying if I said that he wasn't skilled at it. He's nowhere near as good as George Lucas was at it all, but he can put together good sequences (say what you will about Batman brutally murdering people in a car chase for the kryptonite, it's a heckuva thrill ride). However, purely from a character design standpoint, Snyder and most of the MCU directors are on the same level (and considering that Snyder thought Nemo-Face was a good design for an imposing villain, he's had his off days); it's just a question of how they use what they got. (Heck, I remember a time when Snyder cave troll Doomnsday was considered a punchline, and I was one of those people who thought it was an okay design and was more hung up on how Luthor's plan to make it made no sense.)

(Also, how does having a unique visual style automatically make a filmmaker "good?" James Gunn and Michael Bay are well known for their signature visual styles, after all and only one of them gets a lot of praise for his craft.)

-The argument for substance is 100% subjective and an argument used only by fans using agape love. While many people can connect to IW/Endgame or even black panther, it does not erase the strong objective POV that that movies VFX range from generic to terrible with nothing ground breaking.

No, it's just a simple observation that VFX age quickly and what was once ground-breaking looks unrealistic and no longer impressive. Put it this way, do you think people will still be watching the Snyderverse movies when the effects have lost their shine, the way we still watch Toy Story, the original Star Trek show, the old Godzilla movies, etc?

-Lion King came out in 1994. the Disney of 1994 is not the Disney of 2021. I think it is more fair to compare Lion King 2019 to IW/Endgame.

You're missing the point; realism isn't always better and cartoony can be used to create mature stories. (Heck, my thing with Snyder is how shallow his DC films are.)

For that matter, modern Disney gave us Zootopia and Raya and the Last Dragon, so they're hardly slacking off in terms of making content with depth.

-While you may think it is a good thing that Gravity and GOTG are different, this narrative completely falls apart when arguing the art of cinema because Gravity has the edge as it is a better artistic movie by miles. one of the reason been, Cauron explored science fiction/fantasy beyond the range of selling toys and going to cinema to have fun. that is what comic films should be aspiring to be.

And yet we live in a society where "Duck Amuck," a short cartoon full of slapstick, has more meaning and depth then a two-hour film about a disturbed man who plotting to murder a sad god.

-https://www.slashfilm.com/vfx-artists-react-to-star-wars-prequels-vfx/
Lucas lost eye on the creativity. the final straw was the 3rd arc of the attack of the clone war battle, when the jedis come to rescue Anakin, Padme and Obiwan. it is completely awful with bad bad that looked very fake. the movie is really shinny and over the top with green screen for no reason. Lucas is a master of visuals, yes. but many masters can overstay their time, Ask Peter Jackson and his Lord of the Rings prequels.

Sure, everyone fails. That said, I'd still put Lucas and Jackson over Snyder in terms of craftsmanship and execution. Heck, whatever flaws the Star Wars prequels had, I will maintain that they were arguably the best plotted story in its franchise to date, and I'd certainly argue that it was a better story then what Snyder came up with for DC.

-I am not going to reharsh Avatar vs Endgame again. Avatar is a superior masterful of a VFX movie to Endgame and I am grading around that curve. the feeling about Snyder characters is more prone to MCU vs DCU than objective story telling. I see this all time. How some MCU fans keep saying DC characters or fox characters were flat, yet they ignore how one dimensional even the leading mcu characters are because MCU story telling is limited and cannot offer much beyond turning many characters to jokes

Like everything case by case. I think that Guardians of the Galaxy had more rounded characters than Avatar or the Snyderverse movies. Conversely, the earlier MCU movies had some pretty weak villains in terms of being underwritten, while a lot of the Fox X-Men movies did pretty well in terms of writing and casting their villains (obvious exceptions like Brian Cox being the only Stryker who was a great character).

-I have to take this back to been objective with Thanos. fans have every right to say people were invested in thanos or the wolf pack from Twilight. however this is not what I am arguing for or against. I am arguing more about the craft of VFX that this two series lacked.

Still, it does seem like gaining viewer investment through story and characters can "paper over" weaker VFX then solid VFX can salvage weak writing and characters. Also, I'm not sure if VFX is the be all end all of good filmmaking.

-Read Roger Egbert's review of the Snyder Cut. he said if Scorsese was to watch the cut he would change his mind about comic book films. that been said, Spielberg is entitled to his opinions as I considered him the greatest film maker of all time. Chris Nolan also said he is a fan of the fast and furious saga. nothing wrong with Great directors liking some cooperate made movies that dont extend the minds beyond fun.

So, then why do you object to them existing or people people finding good craftsmanship in them?

However as for GOTG. I will much rather prefer James Cameron or Chris Nolan opinions on the film. their criticism or dislike was more high intellectual reasons than fuzzy reason to like the movie unlike Spielberg. There is also the reason why Spielberg is known in hollywood as still...the big kid. Nothing wrong with that, but best Spielberg is Saving Private Ryan.

Not so sure about Cameron's perspective, considering how he didn't give Wonder Woman much of a fair shake. Still, I'd take Spielberg's sense of wonder over Synder's nihilism any day. Spielberg is the best at his brand, while Snyder is a poor man's Christopher Nolan but without the hopeful edge.

Though I am force to wonder. if all these directors had to choose like us between IW/Endgame and The Snyder Cut. I don't see them going for IW/Endgame.

Tastes vary. There's also the perception that Hollywood likes "important" stuff above everything else (consider the perception that the Oscars pick stuff that general audiences don't care about). Still, I am curious how much of the Snyder Cut's positive reception was due to it following the theatrical cut and the narrative that Snyder fought the system to see his dream come true? It's unknowable, but I wonder if we'd be so over the moon with it had it gotten to theaters as planned and there was no disaster version to compare it to, if that makes any sense?

[SiegePerilous02]

Not so sure about Cameron's perspective, considering how he didn't give Wonder Woman much of a fair shake.

I love Cameron's stuff a lot (or at least, pre-Avatar stuff), but his "this female lead movie by a female director was not as empowering for women as a film that I, a man, could make" is a bunch of nonsense.

[numberthirty]

I don't know if a clip of shirtless Zeus zapping lightning at some other video game characters until they explode should really accompany "serious cinema."

It's just as inherently silly in its own way as all superhero movies. it was still overall entertaining in that regard, oddly because it had a bit more of an MCU flavor than the film that preceded it. But Criterion Collection material this film is not. And that's ok, because I wouldn't say any CBM film is

But they looked like 300 Extras! Thus, serious!

On the upside...

Serious film makers and film fans probably got a solid chuckle out of that.

[numberthirty]

I think we're mixing up the complete package with the CGI rendering, if that makes any sense. Snyder certain does have his own style in terms of editing the footage together and I would be actually lying if I said that he wasn't skilled at it. He's nowhere near as good as George Lucas was at it all, but he can put together good sequences (say what you will about Batman brutally murdering people in a car chase for the kryptonite, it's a heckuva thrill ride). However, purely from a character design standpoint, Snyder and most of the MCU directors are on the same level (and considering that Snyder thought Nemo-Face was a good design for an imposing villain, he's had his off days); it's just a question of how they use what they got. (Heck, I remember a time when Snyder cave troll Doomnsday was considered a punchline, and I was one of those people who thought it was an okay design and was more hung up on how Luthor's plan to make it made no sense.)

(Also, how does having a unique visual style automatically make a filmmaker "good?" James Gunn and Michael Bay are well known for their signature visual styles, after all and only one of them gets a lot of praise for his craft.)


...

(Completely Serious...)

The film Flash Gordon was a straight up "Wait, Did He Lose A Bet?..." departure in terms of the visual style of that director up until then. Never mind since then.

The idea that he even could be a lesser film maker because he directed that film?

Straight up laughable.

[numberthirty]

...

-Read Roger Egbert's review of the Snyder Cut. he said if Scorsese was to watch the cut he would change his mind about comic book films. that been said, Spielberg is entitled to his opinions as I considered him the greatest film maker of all time. Chris Nolan also said he is a fan of the fast and furious saga. nothing wrong with Great directors liking some cooperate made movies that dont extend the minds beyond fun.


...

You got a direct source there?

Because there seems like a pretty obvious issue with what you are saying happened there.