-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Rejoice! Zac Synder's Justice League Will Now Be A Full 4 Hour Movie Instead of a Mini Series
- Thread starter Star-Lord
- Start date
To put it in perspective, both Avengers Endgame and BvS Ultimate Edition are about 3 hours long, and yet the latter certainly felt a lot longer watching it. And that's because the way Endgame is paced there's a lot of beats meant to suck you in and let you ignore the time passing. In contrast BvS spends most of its time building slow with the UE's added time only going to said slow build, and there's good lengths where I could just feel the seconds dripping by.
Looking back it reminds me of Blade Runner 2049...except BR is a sci-fi noir, while BvS is (meant to be) a superhero blockbuster.
And it would have been 6 hours if the producers didn´t interfere.
Kermode is a weirdo. He despises Snyder and went on long rants against him that accidentally, let´s hope, descend into ableism but is into really kinky shit otherwise.
His review will be one of the few that are destined to be interesting as it might end up being the most negative review this film will get.
I don't think there's a problem with having a four hour movie but Snyder is not the man I'd trust to make it.
Famous last words.
There's no such thing as a good or bad film. You cracked it!
I can't help thinking these 4 hour cut is filled with lots of flashback, like you're probably gonna get 15minute of backstory for each of the heroes at least. I can't see how they'll add Joker into the story otherwise
Objectivist Superman is just one of those things that boils my blood on a level that I really can't express. It's one of the stupidest, most tone-deaf things you could possibly do with Superman. Batman? I could see Batman as a Randian objectivist. Bruce Wayne is a rich asshole who thinks he knows best.
It's a fundamental misreading of Clark Kent's character to interpret him as a Randian scumbag.
It's a fundamental misreading of Clark Kent's character to interpret him as a Randian scumbag.
More likely they'll be flash forwards to the edgy bad future ala BvS, I'm expecting they just mad-max up Joker. Though I'll be interested to know what the logic is that Joker is still alive in a future where Batman is shooting criminals anyway.
I think you've misinterpreted those movies if you think Superman is presented as an objectivist. It's not about Superman and what he stands for; it's about the cynicism that's apparent all around us in this world at this moment, which is manifested in both Bruce Wayne and Lex Luthor.
Yes and no. Bats and Sups are all fully introduced at this stage. So is WW but there is new Amazons/Old Gods lore in the film. Flash and Aquaman won´t have their origin shown for example and new characters like Atom, Crispus Allen or Martian Manhunter are just bit parts. The film was always designed to give other directors room to breathe and Aquaman and Flash were the immediate sequels. Cyborg and Darkseid will get thorough origin stories though. Even BvS will get a flashback to continue with the theme of recontextualizing the endings of the last film and there are flash forward and parallel dimension bits. The real 3rd act is the craziest shit Snyder ever put on screen so far... It made WB so afraid that most of it ended up in the trash in 2017. Long story short. The nonlinear storytelling in Snyder´s last 3 DC films (WM counts) will make a full return. The Motherbox on Themiscyra awakens 22 minutes into JLA 2017. It will be at the 1-hour mark this time to give you an idea of how this is paced. Expect the unexpected.
Superman No 1 1939. His parents tell him to hide who he is until he is ready:
I can do this all day. Note the name MARY and he is called a babe on top of that. A biblical term. The religious imagery in Superman is as old as Superman. It will come back with vengeance in March. Having a devout Christian work on Superman films certainly lead to unmissable imagery.
Edit: Someone counted his smiles so far and every time a joke is made in MoS and BvS. Anyway. The last shot of adult Clark in MoS.
BvS also documents that he has been saving people for the 18/19 months he was on the job without a stop. Even outside of the montages. That´s why Parry´s suggested headline End of Love Affair With Man In the Sky? hits so hard. Half the planet loves him. (Nearly) All of it does at the end.
And here is another cool easter egg. Damn was UC BvS a well-made movie:
Last edited:
Snyder himself is the cynic here, he made a Superman who views altruism as an imposition and only involves himself in affairs because someone he cares about is in danger.
Superman is not a "lonely god", he's a dorky guy from Kansas trying to do the right thing with the powers available to him. I get none of that from Snyder's grim, put-upon interpretation of the character, in any of the films he's used him in.
Think of it this way: making a Superman who never smiles and considers humanity (aside from his chosen few allies) to be beneath him is like making a Spider-Man who doesn't crack jokes while fighting villains - that was literally used as a sign in the comics that there was something wrong with Peter before we found out he had been body-jacked by a villain.
Snyder is indeed cynical. You don't get any disagreement from me. If I had to interpret his worldview, sometimes one needs a wake-up call and see how grim the world truly is, on the cusp of falling at the lowest point of one's life, to truly make a change. As opposed to being content with the status quo that drives us more and more into the abyss slowly but steadily. Superman is a pop culture icon that has endured for more than 80 years and, similar to how times change, he should also be subject to change. In the hands of who is another question.
And to be fair, you do get scenes where Superman is trying to help the lower class as Clark Kent, something the media institutions of this world apparently couldn't care less about. Whereas Batman, a billionaire vigilante, is the one who is terrorizing the slums of Gotham.
This strikes me as pretty far off the mark. Superman acting to help people he personally cares about in Batman V Superman is a demonstration of him acting by impulse, doing what feels right to him. He's not forming a master plan or canvassing the globe for problems, but when he sees someone in trouble (like the oil rig crew in Man of Steel) he leaps in to help. Superman is uncomfortable and unhappy in those shots that frame him as being "above humanity," which are directly connected to how his actions are being politicized and revered. The films present a "lonely god" interpretation of the character in order to reject it.
i think a lot of movies are bad but i'm not mad that they exist the way people here are
People are mad that a universe they like was flushed down the toilet in their opinion. It's normal.
It's purely projection to describe that hypothetical segment of ERA and then just assert that it's the same people who don't like the Snyderverse.
No official date yet, but there have been sites saying it was coming in March... which doesn't make sense as they want people to sub to HBO Max to watch it. Realistically, I'd guess the 4K Blu-Ray will be out in the summer.
no, people being so mad at a film existing that they shit on the idea of making a fancy director's cut across a dozen threads is not normal, actually. if i posted in every mcu thread sneering "I can't believe there are people anticipating this crap" i'd cop a ban pretty quick
I would buy this interpretation if we were ever shown Superman challenging it by acting differently, by showing the audience a better way. Superman looking bored or uncomfortable in those scenes feels less like a rejection of the lonely god ideal and more like he's frustrated humanity needs him in the first place. This is why I say Snyder's Superman feels like someone who views altruism as an imposition.
Snyder's cynicism, as we've seen in his love of Randian fiction that presents the rich and powerful as the arbiters of the continued safety and development of the world, makes him portray Superman as a character we better be grateful for, rather than someone the world can count on. He feels like someone who goes "ugh, fine" when he sees someone who needs saving, rather than someone who actively wants to make the world a better place.
A cornerstone of Randian fiction is the idea that the rich and powerful are super important and the world NEEDS them and wouldn't you be sorry if they decided to stop helping you? And Snyder really seems to have internalized this idea so much that it's bled into the way he views, interprets, and writes Clark Kent.
Snyder wanted to cut this film into 2 parts and release them back to back like Matrix 2 and 3 or many Japanese releases. All sorts of things made that impossible of course. JL: Part 2, which he and the actors & crew were under contract for, and the TBA 5th DCEU film by Zack Snyder are still other (dream) projects.
The film releasing in March is JL: Part 1 of ?/3. Outside of the new Knightmare sequence. No paperwork exists for film 5 and no finished script for film 4.
Chris Terrio further moved on from Snyder to the Batfleck script. The overall arc is mapped out though.
Snyder still insists that this is the 3rd film in a 5 part series regardless of what happens next. Budgeting and making the 2 sequels is and isn´t complicated but that is a topic for another day.
the rich and powerful, aka the literal actual villain of the film, represented by a person literally threatened by the idea that their inherited power that they see as deserved is threatened by a man not beholden to the interests of the rich, powerful and elite and seen as undeserved. And Superman, a character who saves people out of his own desire rather than because of an imposed will of another is the representation of imposed altruism because he broods and feels discomfort at the idolization placed is his feet by others... damn...
I don't understand this Randian read, either. There is a character in BvS who's powerful, wants acknowledgment, and thinks people will be sorry they didn't respect/listen to him, and it's Lex Luthor. That the safety and future of the world is in the hands of Superman is the fundamental conceit of superhero fiction. Snyder very loudly declares that the model for wielding that ultimate power should be Jesus Christ, which is about the most anti-objectivist thesis possible.
I assume WB will not release this the same day as Godzilla vs. Kong. In which case the release date would be March 5th, 12, or 19th.
From what I've seen recently, part 4 would've been Man of Steel 2 and then part 5 would've been a Justice League sequel split into two releases. So I guess technically a six-film series overall.
Eh, I can see the Randian take. Superman is a great man who wants to do great things, but Lex is trying to deny him his right to act as his own judgement directs. Lex uses lies and subterfuge to try and drag Superman down, and doesn't confront him as an equal.
It all gets muddled because Snyder also shovels a bunch of religious subtext in, and his Superman is presented more as someone who feels a tremendous sense of obligation, rather than desire to help, but after his take on Rorschach, it can't be discounted.
It all gets muddled because Snyder also shovels a bunch of religious subtext in, and his Superman is presented more as someone who feels a tremendous sense of obligation, rather than desire to help, but after his take on Rorschach, it can't be discounted.
Hey man, thanks for recommending this movie, I hadn't even heard of it before your post. I just watched it on youtube and I loved it! I don't really have much to say because I only just finished it a few minutes ago and I'm still reeling from the experience, but I already know this is one of those films that'll stay in my mind for a long time. Oh, and I certainly don't think it's too long, I'd actually like to see that 6h cut now lol. I think arbitrarily deciding how long a movie is allowed to be is ridiculous, I've seen the same kind of sentiments when a movie is "too short" and it's just as silly.
Well ok then, 4hrs. If the movie can hold my attention for that long, great. If not I'll just pause it halfway and either comeback to it later or not at all. I do however prefer this over it being drip fed to us over 4 weeks or so, there is no way they'd make it a mini series and then not have a weekly release.
Agreeing with this. I'll like to add there's two objectivist characters in BvS and neither of them are Superman. Talking about Batman and Lex
Cecil B. Demile would have loved to work in the streaming age. A platform for his 9 hour Cleopatra Director's Cut.
Snyder's interest in Rand is completely clouding your judgement on his movies. I've seen this a lot. Those who don't like him take that piece of information, twist his themes in reverse, and feed their confirmation bias against him.
I think her philosophy inspires Snyder's work, but in no way does that mean he follows it himself or projects that into the heroes of his films.
Plus - If you've ever actually listened to him discuss Rand, then you know his love of the Fountainhead is somewhat overstated.
On a podcast with Ken Levine of all people he described her as someone who 'drank her own koolaid' which you, take that as you will
I'm sorry, but no. I can't view his scowling, put-upon Superman as anything other than a personification of Randian ideals, because the movies give me no reason to. He has no heart. He doesn't care about anyone other than Lois and his mother. There isn't a single scene of adult Clark in either of Snyder's solo-directed films that shows the altruism and compassion Superman is known for. He's always unpleasant, uncomfortable, unhappy, as if being a hero is wasting his time.
I'm not on the same level of BvS hate as most people here, but I will say this. The most surprising thing about BvS to me is the budget; because when you watch Man of Steel and BvS back to back, Man of Steel looks like a *much* more expensive movie. There's absolutely shittons of action sequences and special effects in MoS from start to finish, but most of BvS is slow paced and takes place in the real world. I'm sure the casting costs were much higher because they were paying for several more leads, but it is striking.
I'm not sure how you can say that after he slobbered all over Rorschach for three hours.
Snyder's Lex is Randian, but not a good example of objectivism. He's too governed by emotion. He's a Randian villain - Toohey or James Taggart or the like.
This is always massively overstated.
Rorschach is made a lot cooler in the film, but then like - so does everyone. Night Owl if anything is the character who gets the most 'improvement' over his comic counterpart. Is 'slobbering' over Night Owl Randian too?
I think it's less an obsession with Rorschach than you imply
I'm glad you enjoyed it :D! Sion Sono has a ton of fantastic films to enjoy whenever you feel like you're up for more.
Point taken. He does basically miss the point on almost every character in that movie.
He doesn't really slobber over Night Owl so much as refuse to fully commit to having a "hero" who doesn't meet his hypermasculine heroic ideal. There's definitely more weird stuff floating around in his head than just objectivism, for sure.
I'm in for this. Justice League worked on a so-bad-its-good level, and found myself thoroughly enjoyed while watching. I'm in for a four hour version all the way.
Its just so crazy why the hell not right?
Its just so crazy why the hell not right?
