It was a mostly hate relationship for me on the DCEU, but the one bright spot in it was Affleck’s Batman (and Wonder Woman, until WW1984 just about killed all of the good will the first film earned), who was done a massive disservice by the way the entire extended universe was developed. The theatrical cut was, though, bad enough to get me on board with seeing whatever it is that Snyder had in mind for it. That, and the idea of an R-rated “Batman” film is fairly intriguing as well.
The main draw for this will definitely be Affleck, though. I’m still much more interested in what he’s doing with Batman than what Reeves is doing. Hopefully if this does well enough it can restart the DCEU and allow room for both Affleck and Pattinson to do their thing as the character.
I’m going to put on my grumpy cynic hat for a moment…
I don’t understand the obsession with the Snyder Cut. Man of Steel suggested he didn’t really understand Superman. Batman V Superman suggested that he hates superheroes and was a bloated, self-indulgent mess. So his four hour cut of Justice League is sure to take all these issues and blow them all the way up.
I know that the Snyder Cut has become some kind of rallying point for the vision of the artist but all I can sat to that is; Zack Snyder, seriously? This is a filmmaker who’s entire filmography has been based around remakes and adaptions. His only original film, Sucker Punch, was an indulgent mess (seeing a theme here). His biggest skill seems to be recreating comic panels and matching music to a scene but falls down on things like story and character. He really isn’t the filmmaker to be championing artistic vision.
From where I’m sitting the DCEU/ Words of DC didn’t start making good film (Wonder Woman, Aquaman & Shazam) until Snyder was out the way. Rather than building on this progress this feels like such a regressive move.
I haven’t seen the original cut of Justice League so I’m not defending it. I simply don’t believe there’s a good cut to be salvaged from this mess of a production.
I’m going to play Statler to your Waldorf by agreeing 100 percent. What we need is two hours less of Justice League, not two hours more. And even if the current plans for the DCEU seem rudderless ( “Multiverse” = “throw every idea at the wall and see what sticks”) the one thing we already know is what didn’t work, ie. Snyder’s “vision.”
If I wanted 4 hours of nihilism and despair, I’ve got cable news for close to free.
In their defence, the rudderless approach now is intentional, going back to letting film-makers make a film they want rather than* Insist all follow a loosely connected story
To be clear, I’m generally in favor of a “try anything and don’t worry if it connects” approach as I believe, with the notable and impressive exception of the MCU, multi-franchise continuity discourages creativity and is pretty much what ruined comic books, over the long haul.
But I don’t for a moment believe the DCEU is taking the “multiverse” approach to inspire creativity. They did it because many films and many years in, the “suits” still have no idea yet what formula if any will end up working.
TBH, I think the Snyder cut will be forgotten a week after it drops, and they’ve been just off making The Flash for 15 years now so I’ll believe it when I see it at this point.
Although I have to backtrack again - while I would watch a tv Bond, adapting Fleming much closer to the books, well, very close to the book, it would certainly not work on the big screen to have different incarnations.
I have to disagree, as a life-long Superman fan. Sure, MOS goes for a different take on the character, but it actually is interested in developing a Superman for these times, in which the emergence of such a powerful force indeed would provoke controversy, even hatred.
In fact, MOS and BvS, made years before our current political messes, seem prescient now.
I do not like every choice Snyder made, but I definitely cannot accuse him of having no artistic vision. He clearly has one, and it dares to offend. Which already makes me like him all the more. (Full disclosure: I was not a huge fan of WW, could not stand the horrible CGI mess of Aquaman, did enjoy, however, Shazam although it went on for far too long for such a flimsy concept).
Now, Whedon (horrible fall from grace, by the way, what a terrible human being if the accusations are true, and there’s no reason why they should not be) maybe was called into a bad situation with JUSTICE LEAGUE. But what he did with it was such a disappointing, boring mess that it resembled QUANTUM OF SOLACE being turned into a Steven Seagal video premiere.
I´m sure I will consider Snyder´s JL too long, bloated and self-important anyway, but I would not be surprised to find the whole story being told there to be an interesting addition and summation of his first two films, with a worthy look at the way these superheroes reflect the society we´re living in today.
Maybe there’s a problem with the direction of the DC cinema franchise in general?
From the start Marvel’s success was a template and a benchmark - but Marvel had Spider-Man and the X-Men as icebreakers, both franchises dealing for a large part with young protagonists somehow ‘different’. They had their target audience already halfway in the bag.
When Iron Man then kicked off the Marvel run it was with a distinct air of satire that since never entirely left, regardless of the drama and tragedy. The Marvel films simply didn’t fall for their own pathos.
DC came from the other end of the spectrum with Batman. They had already ridiculed their own hero to the point of ‘nipple gate’ - and nearly destroyed him. Nolan’s Batman then came with the premise of ‘seriousness’ - though not necessarily with a lack of humour - and went from success to success on that foundation. It’s the tale of a guy facing his trauma and finally escaping it.
This basic self importance seems to pervade the entire venture in all its incarnations now. The DC films are just not the feel good films Marvel’s are. When there’s a funny line you can clearly see how it was put there to lift the spirits at least a little. That doesn’t mean there cannot be serious undertones in a superhero film - they just need to be balanced in a way the audience is aware they are watching a good show rather than a deeply existential drama.
Case in point: compare nearly any Marvel trailer with any trailer for MOS, BvS or JL - even WW: it’s always the same good-humoured inconsequential popcorn fluff of CGI artistry in Marvel’s camp (sic). Versus end-of-days gloom in the DC corner. The tone, the noise, even the colours telegraph: this is serious.
Could be. DC’s personnel is made up largely of people with a calling. Adults who carry heavy on their responsibility. Marvel’s adults are still basically juveniles having a good time in their costumes.
I was originally not a big fan of cutting Tony Stark’s alcohol problem from the films - but in this context it may have been one of the best decisions they made. To ultimately adopt, regardless of the circumstances, a positive outlook and philosophy. It probably wouldn’t work with all of Marvel’s heroes. But for the purposes of the films they picked the right approach.
