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

[BeastieRunner]

You can make a poll about Buffy vs Twilight and twilight will win, however it does not necessarily mean twilight can even come close to buffy as an art work. if this was not a forum but an actual film/TV class that is meant to have scholastic credibility.

I'm going to have to pull rank on you on this.

In my current film class, my students ripped on ZSJL for looking and feeling like a wanna-be 90s grimdark fest. "Slow-mo hasn't been cool since the Matrix." Snyder appears to mainly have niche fans in their 30s and 40s that want all supers to be like that late 80s early 90s grimdark stuff. Snyder is just another popcorn movie director just like Michael Bay. He has not done ANYTHING in the realm of winning an Oscar nor an MTV movie award.

Even Michael Bay has a golden popcorn.

For the majority of the Oscars, the highest grossing film usually won best picture. The "art film with thin plot but great performances / technical aspects" winning is a recent phenomenon.

Objectively speaking, you should know that.

That is a really dumb argument for a fellow cinephile to make given the history of the Oscars. And the history of Snyder films and the accolades both Infinity War and Endgame won. Don't the Russo's have some "prestige" awards amongst their "popular" awards? Does Snyder even have either of those?

[Rincewind]

Regardless of you saying anything is removal of bias being laughable, bias is irrelevant with this poll. It's an opinion-based poll. Which of the two movies the person voting prefers. It doesn't matter why they prefer it.

This is genuinely hilarious. On page 39, Castle is now trying to argue that the Poll titled "Which do you prefer ZS Justice League or Infinity War/Endgame?" in a thread titled "Which do you prefer Zack Snyder’s Justice League or Infinity War-Endgame?" is not actually about which you prefer ZS Justice League or Infinity War/Endgame. It's now about technical aspects. Any true cinephile knows that the words "Which do you prefer ZS Justice League or Infinity War/Endgame?" clearly means "from a technical standpoint only, Zach Snyder is a genius and the MCU sucks." Only a complete fool would thing that "Which do you prefer ZS Justice League or Infinity War/Endgame?" means "Which do you prefer ZS Justice League or Infinity War/Endgame?"

[Jack The Tripper]

I have seen that notion before I don't think "widely considered bad" is an accurate assessment of their gripes on those films. The people mad at MCU Spiderman and Thor are mostly mad characterizations not really the quality of the movie, For Spiderman they feel he is too connected to Iron Man and for Thor he has too much of personality change and he feels too close 616 Hercules. While I feel their complaints are some what valid and you can't completely dismiss them they never actually describe the actual movies themselves as bad movies overall just bad adaptions of the source material.

At this point MCU is clearly its own unique thing I don't think 616 source material really matters as much anymore other than as general guide line, I think biggest nail in that coffin is Sharon Carter who is the Power broker now. Tony Stark and Black Widow is dead, Steve Rogers is old, Hulk is smart and calm. If this doesn't scream not 616 stories I don't know what does. All of that is long winded way of saying people need to look at this like an alternate reality take. As comic fan I can't get mad at people who want closer reverence/following of the source material but as with fan with common sense if you can't understand Spiderman 3, Amazing Spiderman 1 & 2 effect on Spiderman franchise or Thor 1 & 2 effect on Franchise I can't take your point of view too seriously. The lack of success of the movies before lead push of those properties to have to be something different.

PS- I know you weren't disagreeing with my post I just saw the opening to talk about MCU Thor and Spiderman. Plus you have been killing liking it in this thread I have been smashing the imaginary like button your posts.

Hahaha thanks mate. And yeah, I think people should be looking at all of these films (DCEU included) as different versions of the characters.

[chicago_bastard]

My take of why Snyder Cut should be regarded higher over IW/Endgame is why we originally had the Oscars Academy Awards.

The Academy Awards Zack Snyder never even came close to getting nominated for?

While we're at it, let's take a look at Snyder's accolades:

Academy Awards: 0

Golden Globes: 0

BAFTAs: 0

Prices at Cannes, Venice, Berlin, or any other major film festival: 0

Directors guild awards: 0

Important critics awards: 0

So neither critics nor other filmmakers seem to believe this guy is a cinematic genius. Aren't these the people who should be sopposed to have scholastic credibility? (that was a rhetorical question by the way)

The only people who worship Snyder belong to the small group of his devoted fanbase who happen to know very little about filmmaking, otherwise they wouldn't idolize someone as mediocre as him. Snyder and sophistication in the same sentence has to be some insider joke. But as you even had the nerve to compare him to Lynch I have to assume you are serious...

[Jack The Tripper]

Please stop deflecting the topic, it's funny you used two words like hate and delusion when you know truthfully does not apply to me. Nothing I said about how creative marvel got less with with the Disney buyout is a lie or hate. Also saying I am delusional of pointing the truth that marvel did say, there can not do r movies beyond deadpool 3 and how it is fact, that Thor Ragnarok became a comedy because marvel felt stuck about the direction to go after the two films is not a delusional lie. Here I will wipe the delusion with factual reality. this.

https://www.comicbookmovie.com/marve...0709#gs.zsrajo
This is where the creative control of marvel changed forever. This is even a cbr proof, of the nature of why Thor 3 became a comedy. Maybe you can also call CBR writers here delusional. lol

https://www.cbr.com/thor-ragnarok-comedy/

Please stop trying to insulting me by saying I am deluded or a hater, when you know well what I am saying is hardly a lie.



Again, it is another fact that Howard Strak's many bad decisions affected tony even after he was long gone but his legacy was always there to make sure tony's life became collateral damage to them, which on paper should complicate Tony's views of him as father. The factual story of Iron Man 2 centers around Rouke's Whiplash having a strong Dislike for the Stark family that started with Howard Stark screwing his father by accusing him of espionage and had him deported, but Howard had a bigger goal which was to get sole credit for the Arc Reactor, because Howard was a ruthless business man, However as Rouke said, MCU barely cared for tackling that entire story line deeply This is factual proof.

https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/mickey...ing-iron-man-2
On a good given day, this story line should have measured up the the story of Road To Perdition , another comic book story that centres around the fractured relationship between fathers and sons of two different families caught up in feud. It's laughable that you call me a hater and delusional and here I am discussing the MCU story arcs even deeper than anyone here, because I do actually care and wanted them to better.

Lastly CS Lewis and IW/Emdgame are not comparable. CS Lewis works are beloved classics taken very seriously in literature and art. CS Lewis work is prove why dumbed down fiction does not work because CS Lewis wrote the Narnia series in the opposite direction, you may not find any fantasy novels with more human themes and symbolism than CS Lews Narnia stories.

Something Snyder obviously must have seen because I don't think it is all coincidence, how Snyder uses many symbols like Superman being a Christ like figure or Diana been a Greek like goddess or Angel of love, justice and compassion sent to help mankind, which is how CS Lewis saw the Lion's character Aslan in the series. If memory is on my side was supposed to be a reference to the bible's referral to God as the Lion of Tribe of Judah.


IW/Endgame barely has the sophistication of Snyder or Lewis, because neither Leiws or Snyder bought into the narrative that fantasy or comic book films are just baseless popcorn kids entertainment with no substance or compelling themes, even though kids still rightfully made a large part of their audience.

We should give due to people who are breaking the status quo of what is mostly wrongly expected in comic films or fantasy. The Snyder Cut has that more than IW/ Endgame. There is just so many evidence now, I just gave another one. while some on the endgame can can dismiss them, it cant actually be dismissed in a fair debate. because those evidences will matter a lot.

Pretty sure Kevin Feige has been left to do what he wants by Disney. On top of that, clearly they are not stifled by Disney seeing as Disney had purchased Marvel prior to the Netflix shows. Obviously, that division was not headed by Feige, yet still proves that Disney is not necessarily the thing getting in the way of R ratings.

Just because something has gone the route of comedy as opposed to "epic fantasy" featuring bloodshed and LotR influence does not mean it has lost artistic credibility. This is a moot point. For example, Taika Waititi's other films such as Hunt for the Wilderpeople, Jojo Rabbit, and Boy are all mainly comedies, yet still relevant as Art. So is Ragnarok, seeing as it actually featured some stunning visuals, great designs, a great score, and a no holds barred approach. Whilst actually mixing the sci fi aspects and fantasy aspects pretty well, although not perfectly. Not to mention, it was pretty funny for the most part, so it succeeded as a comedy - the artistic vision of the Director, Taika Waititi.

If you are bringing up Tony Stark's relationship with his father as a badly done plot point, don't then shift your point to what Vanko's relationship with Howard Stark was. It doesn't help your point. Although I do agree Iron Man 2 could have handled it better, it was one of the better parts in that movie. Peter Quill's relationship with Yondu is a better representation of this argument though, seeing as that one had layers that were unexpectedly poignant and effective, especially when regarding the themes of GotG Volume 2 as a whole. Also funnily enough, Iron Man 2 was shot before Disney bought Marvel, so that does not help your point regarding Disney/creative control.

I don't recall any scenes of Wonder Woman that Snyder made actually portraying her like a Greek Goddess or Angel of Love? That sounds more like Patty jenkins' first Wonder Woman movie to me in all honesty. Also isn't WW based off of Greek Gods anyway? Or at least has been made to over recent years in the comics? It's as baked into her character as Steve Rogers being a WW2 soldier.

Anyway, regarding Superman being a christ like figure - it's so surface level. The elements we have are death, resurrection and the Crucifixion pose. There are of course elements of government being wary of him, however this is rendered pointless when it is revealed that Luthor is the one pulling the strings. Jesus also did not play a part in the destruction of a whole city (not commenting on whether that was bad or good btw). As far as the bible tells us, Mary and Joseph were encouraging of Jesus' helping people in matters such as life and death, where Ma and Pa Kent weren't exactly encouraging. Not to mention his sacrifice was against a big grey monster made by Lex Luthor, not the public. I'm not exactly a religious scholar but it seems the references to Jesus are so surface level that they really aren't all that interesting and are, unfortunately without detail or depth.

Just for the hell of it let's mention how this stacks up in the five film plan for Superman:

MoS - Clark begins his role as Messiah
BvS - Clark sacrifices himself for humanity
JL - Clark is resurrected (not by his own means, but by the rest of the League), he hits out immediately and attacks. Fine I guess. Stops another threat that I guess is not as difficult to beat as the previous threat. At this point the Christ comparison stops I guess because in the bible, Jesus ceases living on the physical plaine.
JL 2 - Clark turns evil due to Lois being killed, wiping out most of Earth and/or turning it into a policed world for Darkseid. Okay. Is the Jesus stuff just gone now?
JL3 - Clark Full on fights the remaining heroes, ready to kill every last one until time travel so that Lois can't die, therefore not turning him into killing machine.

The Christ motif seems to just completely stop. I know it's unfair to judge unmade films, but what's the point of making a Christ allegory (that has no real similarities to Christ) if this Messiah is going to turn into the Demon because one person has been killed by Darkseid (I guess the Devil in all of this). It's weird, inconsistent, and badly plotted. Honestly though, I think Christ/Religious metaphors have been done to death at this point. It's one of the oldest stories in existence, and has been done to death in media (I hope that doesn't offend anyone here - I hope I'm not implying your beliefs aren't valid).

What do the other's in the team represent? Did he stop at Superman? Flash is an allegory for... the millenial? I guess batman could be David in David vs Goliath, but the wealth kind of undermines that. Maybe he's Judas, who then turns into Peter. Cyborg of course has the theme of being disabled means you aren't broken which is good on the surface, but goddamn of course he isn't broken! The guy can literally make money for the poor, stop nukes anywhere in the world. He helps a good person and then says "**** the World" when he's asked to save it. Why? Does he not realise that woman and her kids live on the world too? It's inconsistent. It's surface level. If Superman wasn't killed prematurely in BvS, I think we could have gotten a way better film that focussed on Cyborg more. Everything was undermined by the resurrection story line.

Say what you want about IW/Endgame, but it seems pretty obvious to me that the ideas it wanted to get across - Extremist views, family issues (Gamora/Nebula/Thanos), friendship (Steve and Tony particularly), sacrifice (Thanos/Tony/Nat), dealing with death and defeat, and most importantly the human struggle against impossible odds - were done consistently well. Forget your problems with VFX and artistic vision, and focus on the actual content of the story.

[CosmiComic]

Say what you want about IW/Endgame, but it seems pretty obvious to me that the ideas it wanted to get across - Extremist views, family issues (Gamora/Nebula/Thanos), friendship (Steve and Tony particularly), sacrifice (Thanos/Tony/Nat), dealing with death and defeat, and most importantly the human struggle against impossible odds - were done consistently well. Forget your problems with VFX and artistic vision, and focus on the actual content.

Exactly. IW/Endgame delivered on the themes. What does Superman even have to do with Jesus?

[Jack The Tripper]

Exactly. IW/Endgame delivered on the themes. What does Superman even have to do with Jesus?

That's the worst thing - there could be a good Jesus allegory there (although again, Jesus metaphors to me are derivative and are rarely interesting). But, unfortunately, it has only ever worked best with Superman from the comics - Snyder's world is far too drowned in adolescent fantasy that it immediately scuppers any hope we have of caring for this world. There's not one single part of this fictional world that feels like it deserves saving, because the people in it seem so outlandish and far removed from our own. The MCU has done as good a job as its comic counterpart of representing "the world outside your window". A problem I have with Snyder's DC movies is that none of the locales or environment offer anything but window dressing, therefore i don't care about them. Metropolis is destroyed and afterwards we only see it in context of the MoS battle, In Kansas we only spend time on the Kent farm apart from the fight. In Gotham we only spend time with Batman. Snyder Cut improved on this by having Cyborg be a part of the University and spending time in the city, however there just wasn't enough of it for me. The MCU has always been lucky in that it didn't have to create new places - it is essentially our Earth. That's my opinion on it anyway.

[CosmiComic]

That's the worst thing - there could be a good Jesus allegory there (although again, Jesus metaphors to me are derivative and are rarely interesting). But, unfortunately, it has only ever worked best with Superman from the comics - Snyder's world is far too drowned in adolescent fantasy that it immediately scuppers any hope we have of caring for this world. There's not one single part of this fictional world that feels like it deserves saving, because the people in it seem so outlandish and far removed from our own. The MCU has done as good a job as its comic counterpart of representing "the world outside your window". A problem I have with Snyder's DC movies is that none of the locales or environment offer anything but window dressing, therefore i don't care about them. Metropolis is destroyed and afterwards we only see it in context of the MoS battle, In Kansas we only spend time on the Kent farm apart from the fight. In Gotham we only spend time with Batman. Snyder Cut improved on this by having Cyborg be a part of the University and spending time in the city, however there just wasn't enough of it for me. The MCU has always been lucky in that it didn't have to create new places - it is essentially our Earth. That's my opinion on it anyway.

Even other versions of Metropolis and Gotham had character. And the fictional locations in the MCU, like Wakanda, sokovia and Madripoor, had character too. But we barely saw Snyder Superman saving people in Metropolis. It was wiped out in MoS and after that we didn't get a lot

[WebLurker]

1/2

Please stop deflecting the topic, it's funny you used two words like hate and delusion when you know truthfully does not apply to me. Nothing I said about how creative marvel got less with with the Disney buyout is a lie or hate. Also saying I am delusional of pointing the truth that marvel did say, there can not do r movies beyond deadpool 3 and how it is fact, that Thor Ragnarok became a comedy because marvel felt stuck about the direction to go after the two films is not a delusional lie. Here I will wipe the delusion with factual reality. this.

This is where the creative control of marvel changed forever. This is even a cbr proof, of the nature of why Thor 3 became a comedy. Maybe you can also call CBR writers here delusional. lol

Please stop trying to insulting me by saying I am deluded or a hater, when you know well what I am saying is hardly a lie.

Look, I'm a writer by trade (if not by formal employment at this time). I know that word choice, subtle nuances between synonyms, and all that are important when spilling ink on anything. Since you don't me, I'll also go on record that I don't write stuff I don't believe in. So, no, I don't know that you're not saying lies. However, I do know for an absolute fact that I think your biases cloud your conclusions and that your appeals to craftsmanship and technique to prove your position are not only unconvincing, but suggest that you don't really understand the subject.

Also, your "evidence" is crap. Bob Iger's testimony makes it clear that he and Michael Eisner realized that Disney's properties could be more then one thing and that diversity of branding was a good thing. The CBR article is speculation with little to no facts to back it up (e.g. citing the filmmakers r.e. their stated intents). The question of whether Rangarok's tone was a response to the reception of previous films in the series could be an interesting topic (esp. considering how WB's attempt to do the same after the Snyderverse movies didn't get the reception they wanted fell flat at first), but that's not really the point here.

Again, it is another fact that Howard Strak's many bad decisions affected tony even after he was long gone but his legacy was always there to make sure tony's life became collateral damage to them, which on paper should complicate Tony's views of him as father. The factual story of Iron Man 2 centers around Rouke's Whiplash having a strong Dislike for the Stark family that started with Howard Stark screwing his father by accusing him of espionage and had him deported, but Howard had a bigger goal which was to get sole credit for the Arc Reactor, because Howard was a ruthless business man, However as Rouke said, MCU barely cared for tackling that entire story line deeply This is factual proof.

Mickey Rourke's complaint was about his character being flattened in the mandated edits, not about how they handled the subplot about Tony's father, so is not relevant. Iron Man 2 is one of the messiest MCU movies to date, that's not up for debate (I would argue that it's more watchable then some of the other badly-made movies in the genre, e.g. The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Batman v Superman, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but that's another topic). However, even granted that Iron Man 2 isn't a masterpiece, that does not change the fact that Tony's troubled relationship with his father was a central piece to the film (since it was his father's research that had the new element and that is used to also show Tony getting a better understanding of his father and starting to let go of his life-long resentment, which set up the climax of Civil War). Also, one bad movie doesn't prove that the multi-film story arc is ruined.

For that matter, even if we were to accept that Tony's relationship with his father was not the main crux of his story arc, that's missing that Tony also has the extremely well-fleshed out story arc regarding his struggles with overcoming his shortcomings, that literally runs through all his appearances from beginning to end. Just because the Snyder Cut allegedly had a good father/son story, that doesn't mean that's the only story worth telling or that can be told well (and I'd point out that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 had already done that long before Snyder).

[WebLurker]

2/2

On a good given day, this story line should have measured up the the story of Road To Perdition , another comic book story that centres around the fractured relationship between fathers and sons of two different families caught up in feud.

So this one wasn't as good as comic story XYZ. Sometimes you get a Civil War or Big Hero 6 that's considered better then the source material, other times it doesn't pan out. Marvel Studios has arguably had more successes then failures, but all studios get both.

It's laughable that you call me a hater and delusional and here I am discussing the MCU story arcs even deeper than anyone here, because I do actually care and wanted them to better.

Can't say that I think you are. You want to talk writing quality, why not start with the adaptation process (e.g. how the story is revised to work better with the new medium) or how the movies do or do not advance the characters (consider Iron Man, since you seem esp. interested in him), or how the different movies change their style, tone, to fit the different characters/franchises/stories/whatever (for example, how Thor: Ragnarok is different from Guardians of the Galaxy).

Lastly CS Lewis and IW/Emdgame are not comparable.

To be fair, not much is -- although there is a lot of good stuff that's not on Lewis's level.

CS Lewis works are beloved classics taken very seriously in literature and art. CS Lewis work is prove why dumbed down fiction does not work because CS Lewis wrote the Narnia series in the opposite direction, you may not find any fantasy novels with more human themes and symbolism than CS Lews Narnia stories.

Yeah, Lewis was a master of the craft and knew how to be profound.

Something Snyder obviously must have seen because I don't think it is all coincidence, how Snyder uses many symbols like Superman being a Christ like figure or Diana been a Greek like goddess or Angel of love, justice and compassion sent to help mankind, which is how CS Lewis saw the Lion's character Aslan in the series. If memory is on my side was supposed to be a reference to the bible's referral to God as the Lion of Tribe of Judah.

Snyder is nowhere near Lewis's level of writing. In fact, I find it ironic that your citing Snyder for using symbolism when that's something he generally fails at. So, Synder codes Superman to be symbolic of Christ. That's all well and good, except he does nothing with it. It doesn't tie into the story (which would be a no-brainer, given how Snyder tries to characterize Superman as a god in terms of how he fits into the world and what everyone sees him as), we don't get any insight into what Superman thinks of being a Christ figure, and none of his character development (such as it is) has anything to do with Christ symbolism or themes.

To provide a counterexample of how character symbolism works in a well-written story that uses it to enhance the themes, read Superman Smashes the Klan. That takes Superman's symbolism of the immigrant and uses to explore the themes of racism and discrimination from a different angle then the core story as well as the idea to build his story arc around.

It seems to be a running problem with Snyder that the surface level is all that you get. Across his movies, he takes iconography from the comics -- Batman's Dark Knight Returns armor, the black Superman suit -- without any consideration as to what they mean and symbolize and just drops them in because "it's what the source material did" without any consideration as to whether they work in his story or how to repurpose them for his take.

IW/Endgame barely has the sophistication of Snyder or Lewis, because neither Leiws or Snyder bought into the narrative that fantasy or comic book films are just baseless popcorn kids entertainment with no substance or compelling themes, even though kids still rightfully made a large part of their audience.

Here's an exercise (you want to argue about film craftsmanship). I maintain that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is one of the most well-written and mature/adult/whatever comic book movies I've seen. Conversely, I think that BvS is one of the most badly written and childish/immature/whatever other adjectives you want to comic book movies out there. All you need to do is compare how Guardians sets up its main theme and filters everything through that. The story is constructed to communicate that, all the character arcs relate to this in one way or another, and the pacing is lean and mean. Conversely, BvS doesn't know what it wants to be, the story arcs are all over the place, and there's a lot of excess fat hanging off the bones (I do think that the extended cut makes this worse, but it's kind of a pick your poison between less bloat or fewer plot holes). To get started, consider how Guardians of the Galaxy's final scene caps everything off that we've seen, bringing all the story arcs to fruition, while BvS's ending says nothing about the story we just saw (beyond asking us to buy tickets for the next film). You can reverse engineer everything from there.

(Also, stated before, Snyder is not on the level of Lewis. Do not @ me on this; I know writing.)

We should give due to people who are breaking the status quo of what is mostly wrongly expected in comic films or fantasy. The Snyder Cut has that more than IW/ Endgame. There is just so many evidence now, I just gave another one. while some on the endgame can can dismiss them, it cant actually be dismissed in a fair debate. because those evidences will matter a lot.

To be perfectly candid, I have to agree with the other poster that Snyder has more in common with Michael Bay -- distinctive style, emphasis on visuals, and total confidence in how they do stuff (although I think that Bay edges him out in terms of quality of visuals, sometimes choppy editing be damned). Maybe that's okay, maybe not, but I really feel the opinion that Snyder is a top-tier filmmaker who's pushing the envelope in terms of the craft just doesn't cut it.

[Castle]

I'm going to have to pull rank on you on this.

In my current film class, my students ripped on ZSJL for looking and feeling like a wanna-be 90s grimdark fest. "Slow-mo hasn't been cool since the Matrix." Snyder appears to mainly have niche fans in their 30s and 40s that want all supers to be like that late 80s early 90s grimdark stuff. Snyder is just another popcorn movie director just like Michael Bay. He has not done ANYTHING in the realm of winning an Oscar nor an MTV movie award.

Even Michael Bay has a golden popcorn.

For the majority of the Oscars, the highest grossing film usually won best picture. The "art film with thin plot but great performances / technical aspects" winning is a recent phenomenon.

Objectively speaking, you should know that.

That is a really dumb argument for a fellow cinephile to make given the history of the Oscars. And the history of Snyder films and the accolades both Infinity War and Endgame won. Don't the Russo's have some "prestige" awards amongst their "popular" awards? Does Snyder even have either of those?

We all have stories, of our professional film experiences, I can tell you a story when I went to a film seminar and someone brought up RDJ in MCU movies, and the speaker laughed and told him to use better films to talk about RDJ and I would not forget in her words...not Iron Man 3. The point is the students in you class may not like Snyder, however they can still call Snyder, a Bad artist, to be torn apart because they hate his style. this is completely still different from The Russos here, because they are making movies they never really truly made.

if you were still to ask your students which work is more credible, they will still chose the Snyder Cut because he at least he does his own homework, they just feel it is bad, With The Russos , your students will and would see them as plagiarisers, directly copying off past MCU movies. which in school is worse. Michael Bay ma be y a bad director to many people but he is not part of plagiarism. Every MCU movie including IW/Engame is done the same way and is the same thing, all directors do is crosss I's and T's, the way a student just signs their name after someone else like a cheerleader or a rally girl did their home work for the jock and the boy they are crushing on, this is plagiarism and that alone can get you expelled from school. Your students, I guarantee you, will know that. it is better to get an F and fail than be accused correctly that you copied another person or your wok is similar to another student in the most uncanny manner.

My comments with the Oscars are not dumb. right now if IW/Endgame and Snyder Cut where to go head to head at the Oscars and they had to choose one just on merit without their useless politics or getting powerful people to turn the tides, The Snyder Cut will beat IW/Endgame in VFX, Cinematography, Costume Design, art direction and Sound Mixing. Ray Fisher will get nominated over everyone else in the acting department, Snyder will get a directing nomination over the russos because his movie is far less cooperate and the Oscars they hate big big big cooperate movies in big categories , this is the reason why only people like Cameron and Peter Jackson with billion dollar movies can win for directing and picture , they are the exception.

The Snyder Cut will get a best picture nomination over IW/Endgame because the tone of the film is taken far more seriously and more adult friendly and the Oscars also have a history for nominating mostly R comic films with a far serious tone to in major categories like Screenplay, acting, best picture. Logan, Joker and Road to Perdition is the factual proof of that, not to mention this films were more artistically guarded with 2 of the directors (Mangold and Philips) have spoken out about why films like IW/Endgame are problematic to them as filmmakers themselves. they all would have wanted the same maximum freedom Snyder got from HBO max when he returned to make the cut.

[numberthirty]

...

The Snyder Cut will get a best picture nomination over IW/Endgame because the tone of the film is taken far more seriously and more adult friendly and the Oscars also have a history for nominating mostly R comic films with a far serious tone to in major categories like Screenplay, acting, best picture. Logan, Joker and Road to Prediction is the factual proof of that, not to mention this films were more artistically driven with 2 of the directors (Mangold and Philips) have spoken out about why films like IW/Endgame are problematic to them as filmmaker themselves.

That statement is what someone believes.

Meanwhile, out in the rest of the world?

I don't really see the bulk of the folks describe the film as "Serious..."/"More Adult Friendly..."

As for Logan/Joker/Road To Perdition...

They are in a different category than Snyder's JL.

Certainly not proof that a lesser film like JL will do X/Y/Z.

[Castle]

Pretty sure Kevin Feige has been left to do what he wants by Disney. On top of that, clearly they are not stifled by Disney seeing as Disney had purchased Marvel prior to the Netflix shows. Obviously, that division was not headed by Feige, yet still proves that Disney is not necessarily the thing getting in the way of R ratings.
.

I think some of the issues we are struggling with here, some don't want to accept the reality of what some things are and it is starting to bug me, respectfully I dont know what the goal is in repeating what some know is not the case, such as Disney let fiege do what he wants. No they dont. I 70% bought in 2020 when Feige said, MCU can do R after they got xmen back, but I think in 2021, Fiege change of mind is because Disney overruled that, that is the only truthful explanation. Also this light stuff with marvel makes no sense because Fiege knows the comics are not always light hearted. this is a truth because Fiege is credited in all the first 3 xmen movies as a producer and executive producer even in X-men 3 and Disney can still not do any of those films. He, Feige has never produced any of those types of film at Disney. There is not one MCU film that looks like those films....not one because those films are not comedies and no where near as bizarrely kid friendly as the Feige's own produced films. Unless Feige has a twin or a clone, then I cannot see any other explanation here.

The problem with comedy within comic books is the same problem with video games movies trying to have a credible plot. this is the most basic generic definition of what is expected in a comic book, after almost 100 years of comic existing , light hearted comedy is now the lowest standard to judge a comic book movie. I think it is even a far lower standard than excepting comic book characters to fight. a comedy is not bad, I love comedies. Annie Hall is a comedy, been a lightered watered down driven comic film as a comedy is what seem to the issue, because those movies exist only for 1 thing to get kids toys and this is again, not the greatest part of why people are artistically invested in the art of cinema, in spite of the movie genre. It's Hilarious because I watched the Allen vs Farrow documentary, one thing they said was part of Woody Allen's charm is that many of his movies were intellectual comic geniuses this is not the definition of MCU comedy. it could be, but Disney would not allow that and this is why their comedy get so many backlash even when Thor Ragnarok can clock at 93% on RT.

Wonder Woman's made only a cameo in BvS, However that themes of diana goddess of love , justice and compassion is seen in the Snyder Cut. She is actually even humanized and feels relatable to Cyborg than Bruce or Flash who are the humans but at the same time we still see her show the side of her, that we can all feel, despite that compassion and justice thing, she is a god among humans. Reason I called her more Angelic sent to earth to protect the helpless.

I will not go deep again about superman as a Christ figure because I have done so already on other thread but now, you are getting subjective. you are saying it is surface level because you are an MCU fan, however, the objective truth is that, Snyder made.... put that in,Some MCU fans are free not to like it because well..it is DC but what they are not free to do, is say it was not there at all or just made zero sceneon the basis that MCU is not capable of that kind of story telling. you cannot fault Snyder for Fiege's own failures not to have that at in his own films. That will be bias.

I liked it a alot...the Christ figure theme.





Despite you not liking it, I think this scene captured the themes in what is supposed to be the most understandable way as possible. it is a bigger part not to ignore than any family issues or themes you think happened in IW/Endgame, I think you may confusing that with an X-Men stuff because those were the only marvel stories with that actually made you cared the human and social aspect of comic books beyond the action and explosions. this however is the main draw of IW/Endgame, action and explosions. Snyder did something above that with all the 3 films he made with DC.

[Surf]

To be perfectly candid, I have to agree with the other poster that Snyder has more in common with Michael Bay -- distinctive style, emphasis on visuals, and total confidence in how they do stuff (although I think that Bay edges him out in terms of quality of visuals, sometimes choppy editing be damned). Maybe that's okay, maybe not, but I really feel the opinion that Snyder is a top-tier filmmaker who's pushing the envelope in terms of the craft just doesn't cut it.

They both are definitely two sides of the same, I can take a pretty, action filled snapshot coin.

Take away Bay's hard on for the military and he would be Zach Snyder.

That said Snyder jumped on the IP adaptation train and became the conductor whereas Bay hitched a ride down the line.

Your mileage will vary but neither of them jive with what I think 'cool' is.

If I'm comparing their works as in flowers from the **** it would be The Rock vs. Dawn of the Dead. The Rock I guess?

What was the question lol?

[Username taken]

They both are definitely two sides of the same, I can take a pretty, action filled snapshot coin.

Take away Bay's hard on for the military and he would be Zach Snyder.

That said Snyder jumped on the IP adaptation train and became the conductor whereas Bay hitched a ride down the line.

Your mileage will vary but neither of them jive with what I think 'cool' is.

If I'm comparing their works as in flowers from the **** it would be The Rock vs. Dawn of the Dead. The Rock I guess?

What was the question lol?

LOL..Bay and Snyder are two sides of the same coin.

Unlike Bay, Snyder has done VERY little original work (apart from Sucker Punch and that Owl movie, all his films have been adaptations and remakes).

He belongs to the big bombastic type film maker group like Michael Bay.

And personally, I prefer The Rock to the Dawn of the Dead remake