BvS The BvS Ultimate Cut Thread - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]514225[/split]

 

[Superman2007]

Curious to hear everyone's thoughts on what they want from the upcoming 3hr Ultimate Cut version of the film. What kind of scenes are you hoping get put back in? What are you expecting of it? Do you think it will change your opinion of the film?

 

[Flint Marko]

Yeah,but the point the person who originally brought it up was saying that this film would have worked in the pre-Avengers world.Bear in mind,TDK came out in 2008 much before the audiences got used to the Marvel movies.What that poster said was people have gotten used to a different type of movies so now BvS is not being accepted.

Look no one is saying this movie is perfect.Ofcourse it has flaws.Like other movies.The thing is for a lot of people though,a major criticism of this movie has been its tone and its adult ways of dealing with the themes.Now I dont know much,but arent we allowed to have different types of movies?Nobody blames TDK for having the adult themes and dark tone.Because it came out before Marvel movies and Avengers(and I want to make it clear,I love the marvel movies and Avengers,my favourite being Winter Soldier).While others had different complaints many had the complaint of it being a dark movie with few moments of levity.

Thats the point my friend.Many(not all) people have criticized this movie for being different.The point being made was this movie came out in a wrong time.A time where Marvel type movies are the norm.Unlike TDK.Nobody is saying Snyder is as good as Nolan.Ofcourse not.But to treat him as a stupid man who just understands action is a huge disservice too.

The general audience's taste doesn't dramatically shift within such a relatively short amount of time. That defies common sense. Also, let's keep in mind that the sequel to TDK came out after the Avengers and was unanimously praised by critics and audiences, making over a billion dollars.

Had BvS been a good movie (because it wasn't, most would agree) it would have gone over just fine with audiences. I don't think that those making this claim would argue that the movie is perfect, but the argument is severely downplaying the movies notable flaws and pointing the finger at the audience when there's legitimately no evidence to support this claim. I've never seen a fanbase blame other people for not "getting" their movie on such a wide scale. Again, it's reductive and intellectually dishonest.

Curious to hear everyone's thoughts on what they want from the upcoming 3hr Ultimate Cut version of the film. What kind of scenes are you hoping get put back in? What are you expecting of it? Do you think it will change your opinion of the film?

More Clark Kent/Superman. I'd say the biggest flaw of the DCEU thus far is their handling of this character so any more footage featuring him that would work towards making him a character as opposed to an icon or a symbol would go a long way in helping reframe my view of the film. I don't think I'll come out liking it, and for that reason I won't be buying the UC until the price comes down, but I'd be interested to see how much more he's given.

If it turns out that this cut helps the movie a good bit, much like the Directors Cut of Daredevil, I'll be interested in checking it out.

 

[idiot09]

The general audience's taste doesn't dramatically shift within such a relatively short amount of time. That defies common sense. Also, let's keep in mind that the sequel to TDK came out after the Avengers and was unanimously praised by critics and audiences, making over a billion dollars.

Had BvS been a good movie (because it wasn't, most would agree) it would have gone over just fine with audiences. I don't think that those making this claim would argue that the movie is perfect, but the argument is severely downplaying the movies notable flaws and pointing the finger at the audience when there's legitimately no evidence to support this claim. I've never seen a fanbase blame other people for not "getting" their movie on such a wide scale. Again, it's reductive and intellectually dishonest.

This is what I replied to another post.

""I mean look at the reviews from BvS :

"If only the film actually had depth, along with a little levity to lighten the bulk in the script, the visual murk and the sonic overkill."

"the net experience isn't much fun."

"Blunt, humorless, and baffling"

"Rather than escapism and sensory exhilaration, viewers get down in the mire with protagonists who grimace, scowl and wince their way through heroics with the joyless determination of shift workers "

"A joyless slog."

All taken from the first page of Rotten Tomatoes.Sure as Ive said many times,the film has flaws but many people have critisized this movie for its tone,which I just cant understand.Critisize the characterisation,plot or storytelling.Thats fine.But a movie is allowed to have its own tone.But for many as you see above,that isnt the case.And that my friend,is my point.I am not arguing BvS is a masterpiece which is misunderstood by stupid people,I am saying it has been critisized for something which it shouldnt be.""

I hope this makes it clearer.I am not saying people hate this movie because they dont "get it".I am saying a lot of people critisized this movie for its tone and for being dark.And I provided examples of it.You should realise this my friend,I am on your side,and I am trying to showcase the hypocrisy of some people who hate this movie for something(its tone) but dont for other movies.

My point is you cant criticise a movie for being too funny or too serious.Films have a right to choose how they tell their story.If you dont like this film because it was incoherent,had bad characterization,writing or storytelling,thats completely fine.You have a right to that opinion.But when people complain about this movie saying stuff like "its humorless" ,thats not a criticism.

 

[idiot09]

More Clark Kent/Superman. I'd say the biggest flaw of the DCEU thus far is their handling of this character so any more footage featuring him that would work towards making him a character as opposed to an icon or a symbol would go a long way in helping reframe my view of the film. I don't think I'll come out liking it, and for that reason I won't be buying the UC until the price comes down, but I'd be interested to see how much more he's given.

If it turns out that this cut helps the movie a good bit, much like the Directors Cut of Daredevil, I'll be interested in checking it out.

You will be pleasantly surprised mate.

I saw the extended clips and read some of the reviews.Without spoiling anything,there is much more Clark.There are some very poignant character moments,and there are moments of Superman doing Superman things.Lex gets more spotlight and his plan makes a lot more sense now,he is basically shown much more as a master manipulator,Lois's subplot makes a lot more sense now.And a few other character moments and action scenes.

From what Ive heard the pacing is a lot better in this edition,scenes get some room to breathe and the editing is not choppy like the TC.If you have some money,you should definetly check it out.

 

[_Superman_]

The general audience's taste doesn't dramatically shift within such a relatively short amount of time. That defies common sense. Also, let's keep in mind that the sequel to TDK came out after the Avengers and was unanimously praised by critics and audiences, making over a billion dollars.

Had BvS been a good movie (because it wasn't, most would agree) it would have gone over just fine with audiences. I don't think that those making this claim would argue that the movie is perfect, but the argument is severely downplaying the movies notable flaws and pointing the finger at the audience when there's legitimately no evidence to support this claim. I've never seen a fanbase blame other people for not "getting" their movie on such a wide scale. Again, it's reductive and intellectually dishonest.



More Clark Kent/Superman. I'd say the biggest flaw of the DCEU thus far is their handling of this character so any more footage featuring him that would work towards making him a character as opposed to an icon or a symbol would go a long way in helping reframe my view of the film. I don't think I'll come out liking it, and for that reason I won't be buying the UC until the price comes down, but I'd be interested to see how much more he's given.

If it turns out that this cut helps the movie a good bit, much like the Directors Cut of Daredevil, I'll be interested in checking it out.

What are you talking about the movie went over very well with the general public. If you look at other sites that aren't comic book forums (ex. Facebook, YouTube, etc) they pretty much thought the movie was very good. It is more or less some comic fans who had a problem with it.

 

[obredaan]

What are you talking about the movie went over very well with the general public. If you look at other sites that aren't comic book forums (ex. Facebook, YouTube, etc) they pretty much thought the movie was very good. It is more or less some comic fans who had a problem with it.

BvS scored a 'B' over at cinemascore. Which is the same score audiences gave Green Lantern. To put that in perspective, Not a single Transformers movie got lower than a B+. Its the lowest rated Batman movie with the exception of Batman and Robin according to the general audience.

 

[gdw]

Haven't noticed people advertising it like that. Everyone said if you didn't like/hated the film, UE won't change your opinion. But people screamed for Superman helping people in the aftermath of the bombing and they got it. It was filmed. It's in the movie. UE succeeds the most in:
1) Explaining Luthor's plan to create controversy around Superman;
2) Giving Clark motivation to rough Batman up a bit in their fight;
3) Makes Superman a true good guy in the film. Now it's not Wonder Woman.
There's more minor stuff, that fleshes out characters, or beauty shots, but those above are, IMO, biggest improvements.

These, along with the editing/pacing (also apparently vastly improved by the UC) are the BIGGEST criticisms the film got. Especially from the actual critics.

The characterizations, and dour tone, were the remaining main criticisms, though not as universally cited as the above. These seem to be the main things that the UC did NOT change (it couldn't as it's still the same characters and tone, though clearer motivations do recontextualize characterizations, and improve them in that respect.)

In other words, if critics saw the UC originally, it would have almost completely changed the critical reception.

There would STILL have been those complaining about the lack of hope, and optimism, especially int he shadow of Marvel, but it most certainly would NOT have been viewed anywhere NEAR as unfavorably as it was.

Instead, we now have the UC being viewed only in the shadow of the TC. Even those who may have thought the UC a great film, if too dour, will now only be able to see it tainted by reflections of the TC we got.

 

[idiot09]

BvS scored a 'B' over at cinemascore. Which is the same score audiences gave Green Lantern. To put that in perspective, Not a single Transformers movie got lower than a B+. Its the lowest rated Batman movie with the exception of Batman and Robin according to the general audience.

BvS has an audience score of 3.6/5 on rottentomatoes,7/10 on metacritic and 7/10 on Imdb.For me BvS was panned by the critics and was divided amongst fans.Some loved it,some liked it,some hated it.But it isnt a universal disaster like GL or Batman and Robin.

 

[hildenburg]

You can't criticise a movie for being too funny or too serious. Films have a right to choose how they tell their story.

Thank you! Well said.

 

[idiot09]

These, along with the editing/pacing (also apparently vastly improved by the UC) are the BIGGEST criticisms the film got. Especially from the actual critics.

The characterizations, and dour tone, were the remaining main criticisms, though not as universally cited as the above. These seem to be the main things that the UC did NOT change (it couldn't as it's still the same characters and tone, though clearer motivations do recontextualize characterizations, and improve them in that respect.)

In other words, if critics saw the UC originally, it would have almost completely changed the critical reception.

There would STILL have been those complaining about the lack of hope, and optimism, especially int he shadow of Marvel, but it most certainly would NOT have been viewed anywhere NEAR as unfavorably as it was.

Instead, we now have the UC being viewed only in the shadow of the TC. Even those who may have thought the UC a great film, if too dour, will now only be able to see it tainted by reflections of the TC we got.

Considering these issues are going to get fixed,would you now see this movie being better than MOS?

For me slightly yes.Slightly better.And considering that,I think if BvS UC was released in theatres the RT could have been more 50s or even 60s rather than the utter disaster it is now.

what do you think?

 

[Flint Marko]

This is what I replied to another post.

""I mean look at the reviews from BvS :

"If only the film actually had depth, along with a little levity to lighten the bulk in the script, the visual murk and the sonic overkill."

"the net experience isn't much fun."

"Blunt, humorless, and baffling"

"Rather than escapism and sensory exhilaration, viewers get down in the mire with protagonists who grimace, scowl and wince their way through heroics with the joyless determination of shift workers "

"A joyless slog."

All taken from the first page of Rotten Tomatoes.Sure as Ive said many times,the film has flaws but many people have critisized this movie for its tone,which I just cant understand.Critisize the characterisation,plot or storytelling.Thats fine.But a movie is allowed to have its own tone.But for many as you see above,that isnt the case.And that my friend,is my point.I am not arguing BvS is a masterpiece which is misunderstood by stupid people,I am saying it has been critisized for something which it shouldnt be.""

I hope this makes it clearer.I am not saying people hate this movie because they dont "get it".I am saying a lot of people critisized this movie for its tone and for being dark.And I provided examples of it.You should realise this my friend,I am on your side,and I am trying to showcase the hypocrisy of some people who hate this movie for something(its tone) but dont for other movies.

My point is you cant criticise a movie for being too funny or too serious.Films have a right to choose how they tell their story.If you dont like this film because it was incoherent,had bad characterization,writing or storytelling,thats completely fine.You have a right to that opinion.But when people complain about this movie saying stuff like "its humorless" ,thats not a criticism.

I actually do feel that you can adequately criticize a movie for it's tone if it isn't earned; in this case, the movie was overtly dour and serious when it had no reason to be. The story was silly, the characters weren't engaging, so a lighter tone would have at least made the experience more palatable. Better? Probably not, but it would have been just a regular slog as opposed to a joyless slog

But, to the larger point, that isn't why the movie didn't go over well with audiences. If we can agree on that then we're on the same page. Just to take step back and clarify why I have been arguing this for a few pages now (and a long time on this website), I'm just sick of people here arguing over "tone" as if that's what makes or breaks a movie.

You will be pleasantly surprised mate.

I saw the extended clips and read some of the reviews.Without spoiling anything,there is much more Clark.There are some very poignant character moments,and there are moments of Superman doing Superman things.Lex gets more spotlight and his plan makes a lot more sense now,he is basically shown much more as a master manipulator,Lois's subplot makes a lot more sense now.And a few other character moments and action scenes.

From what Ive heard the pacing is a lot better in this edition,scenes get some room to breathe and the editing is not choppy like the TC.If you have some money,you should definetly check it out.

You've honestly piqued my interest more than anything else I've heard regarding this UC. My biggest complaints were Clark, Lex, and Lois (I honestly despise the latter two characters as presented in the film).

If the film is as improved as you say it is, whoever edited the TC should never work again.

 

[Erzengel]

CBM that scored lower than a 3.6 audience score on RT is the following:

Spider-Man 3
Green Lantern
Fantastic Four (2015)

CBM that scored lower than a 7/10 audience score on metacritic are the following:

Iron Man 2 & 3
Green Lantern
Spider-Man 3
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Fantastic Four (2015)
The Wolverine
X-Men: Wolverine Origins

CBM that scored lower than a 7/10 audience score on IMDB are the following:

Captain America: The First Avenger
The Incredible Hulk
Green Lantern
Spider-Man 3
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Fantastic Four (2015)
The Wolverine
X-Men: Wolverine Origins

I think there are some outliers such as Captain America and the Wolverine but the fact that the same movies keep popping, points that it's closer to the bottom than the top. And the score has been dropping for BvS since it debuted.

 

[gdw]

The general audience's taste doesn't dramatically shift within such a relatively short amount of time. That defies common sense. Also, let's keep in mind that the sequel to TDK came out after the Avengers and was unanimously praised by critics and audiences, making over a billion dollars.

. . .

Um, yes, they DO shift that dramatically, as we can see from the general tone of the genre as a whole.

Yes, TDKR came out POST Avengers, but trends have overlap, AND it was part of an already WILDLY successful franchise. Similar to how DoFP was also part of a long running very successful franchise with a lot of that established tone.
However, DoFP was FAR closer in tone to the other Marvel films than any of the Nolan Bat films.

Also, TDKR was NOT unanimously praised. It was the MOST criticized film in the trilogy, but was still a huge financial success.

BvS also brought in a TONNE of money at the BO. Not passing a billion does not mean it was a BO failure.
It also did FAR better BO numbers than DoFP.

The main difference (speaking to BO numbers, not critical reception) from the studio's pov, would budget and marketing expenses. WB spent WAY more than Fox did on DoFP.

 

[kguillou]

Well, look, in light of the UE and how it is apparently the full film, we can pretty much agree that the theatrical version is incomplete and a bit incoherent since a chunk of it was taken out. Aside from the tone and narrative direction, a big point of contention was that it just wasn't a good film because of its schizophrenic editing and pacing. Now, that we have a cut that supposedly puts the editing and pacing issues to bed, the big question is does this movie now work as a film. As a coherent, well acted, well directed film, despite how you may feel about the tone of the movie and its interpretation of the characters. I think that opens a fascinating dialogue.

 

[Flint Marko]

Um, yes, they DO shift that dramatically, as we can see from the general tone of the genre as a whole.

Yes, TDKR came out POST Avengers, but trends have overlap, AND it was part of an already WILDLY successful franchise. Similar to how DoFP was also part of a long running very successful franchise with a lot of that established tone.
However, DoFP was FAR closer in tone to the other Marvel films than any of the Nolan Bat films.

Also, TDKR was NOT unanimously praised. It was the MOST criticized film in the trilogy, but was still a huge financial success.

BvS also brought in a TONNE of money at the BO. Not passing a billion does not mean it was a BO failure.
It also did FAR better BO numbers than DoFP.

The main difference (speaking to BO numbers, not critical reception) from the studio's pov, would budget and marketing expenses. WB spent WAY more than Fox did on DoFP.

Pretty much everyone agrees TDKR is the weakest of the trilogy (based on the contents of the film itself), but it was still praised because most people also agree that it's a pretty good movie.

Are you honestly going to suggest that, had TDKT came out after the Avengers, it wouldn't be near as well-received as it was previously? I hope you aren't, because that is complete nonsense.

 

[gdw]

Considering these issues are going to get fixed,would you now see this movie being better than MOS?

For me slightly yes.Slightly better.And considering that,I think if BvS UC was released in theatres the RT could have been more 50s or even 60s rather than the utter disaster it is now.

what do you think?

Oh, I think the RT score would have been in the 70s, minimum. Possibly even 80s.

I was a fan of MOS, and thoroughly enjoyed BvS. I could CLEARLY see the extended cut in the TC. It screamed of a film that had FAR too much fat trimmed, and even a good chunk of meat, but the core shone through none the less.

From what I've heard, the UC is ALMOST everything I could have wanted, expected, and hoped for, in terms of what I felt was "missing" from the TC.

In fact, I'd say they only real things I wish they did, that it sounds like they did not, are the "searching" for Martha part of the scene on the roof with Lex, and something hinting at Bruce being influenced by something (Darkseid perhaps) that pushes him far enough to not care about all the people he kills.
The latter was more of a pipe dream to make the Bat0murder a bit more palatable.
That part still pisses me off.

It's one thing to want this Batman to be worn, and at the end of his rope; it's another thing to push him to the point that the Joker has won. The moment Bruce kills, he's lost. Period. That's one of the greatest on going sources of drama and conflict for the character, and is part of the core of his burden and pathos.

Also, if he's willing to drive over random criminal's heads, how the **** has is the Joker still alive?

 

[obredaan]

BvS has an audience score of 3.6/5 on rottentomatoes,7/10 on metacritic and 7/10 on Imdb.For me BvS was panned by the critics and was divided amongst fans.Some loved it,some liked it,some hated it.But it isnt a universal disaster like GL or Batman and Robin.

Those are websites that have random people adding fake scores.

Cinemascore polls people as they walk out of the film. Much more precise than those sites you listed. RT for example, BvS had 4.5/5 audience score with over 100,000 votes prior to the film even being released so you can't even look at the RT audience score as a true barometer for how people reacted to the film. Cinemascore is far more legit than those websites when gauging what audiences felt about the film.

 

[STARMAN]

Seriousness isn't the problem. Dreariness is. I speak only for myself. I found these characters dull. I did not engage with these characters and found them lifeless thus giving off a tone that is susceptible to criticism.

 

[gdw]

Pretty much everyone agrees TDKR is the weakest of the trilogy (based on the contents of the film itself), but it was still praised because most people also agree that it's a pretty good movie.

Are you honestly going to suggest that, had TDKT came out after the Avengers, it wouldn't be near as well-received as it was previously? I hope you aren't, because that is complete nonsense.

I do not know HOW it would be received.
I think there are elements, and approaches, that would be laughed at, absolutely. That doesn't mean, as films, the don't hold up, or aren't fantastic, but the general audience, and critical, reception, I think it would be definitely be DIFFERENT, I just don't know how. You can't know how it would be received, but we can be fairly certain ti would be different.

It's simply a different context to release those films today, or even just post Avengers.

I THINK Batman Begins would have gotten an interesting response. It certainly would be viewed as going in a VERY different direction from Marvel, the same way Marvel films were viewed as going in a VERY different direction than Begins when they started coming out.

 

[Boom]

Seriousness isn't the problem. Dreariness is. I speak only for myself. I found these characters dull. I did not engage with these characters and found them lifeless thus giving off a tone that is susceptible to criticism.

Dull, and predominantly joyless.

Look, heroes shouldn't appear joyful during joyless situations. Superman shouldn't be all smiles as buildings are getting leveled. But you've got to allow that character some emotional wins. This movie suggests that many people are actually supportive of Superman, yet it's almost all universally off-screen. We need to see more of that. Have him talk the suicidal teen down from the ledge. Have him interact with the family stranded on top of their drowned home. The character should be allowed to be happy from time to time.

 

[gdw]

CBM that scored lower than a 3.6 audience score on RT is the following:

Spider-Man 3
Green Lantern
Fantastic Four (2015)

CBM that scored lower than a 7/10 audience score on metacritic are the following:

Iron Man 2 & 3
Green Lantern
Spider-Man 3
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Fantastic Four (2015)
The Wolverine
X-Men: Wolverine Origins

CBM that scored lower than a 7/10 audience score on IMDB are the following:

Captain America: The First Avenger
The Incredible Hulk
Green Lantern
Spider-Man 3
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Fantastic Four (2015)
The Wolverine
X-Men: Wolverine Origins

I think there are some outliers such as Captain America and the Wolverine but the fact that the same movies keep popping, points that it's closer to the bottom than the top. And the score has been dropping for BvS since it debuted.

So, instead of comparing it to films that got the SAME, or similar scores, you've exclusively cherry picked only those BELOW BvS for comparison?

I'm not saying the company will be exclusively shining examples, but it would be FAR more honest to compare to other films that received the SAME score, or at least in the same RANGE. Not just exclusively BELOW it.

So, let's compare to other CB films that were in the 3-4 range for RT score, and 6-8/10 on Metacritic and IMDB.

THAT would be the appropriate comparison. I don't have those comparisons though, and I don't know hoe much better they will look, if at all. Just saying they would be the way to compare WITHOUT being disingenuous.

 

[Flint Marko]

Seriousness isn't the problem. Dreariness is. I speak only for myself. I found these characters dull. I did not engage with these characters and found them lifeless thus giving off a tone that is susceptible to criticism.

A thousand times this. It goes back to what I said in a previous post: the story was silly, the characters weren't engaging, so a lighter tone would have at least made the experience more palatable.

I do not know HOW it would be received.
I think there are elements, and approaches, that would be laughed at, absolutely. That doesn't mean, as films, the don't hold up, or aren't fantastic, but the general audience, and critical, reception, I think it would be definitely be DIFFERENT, I just don't know how. You can't know how it would be received, but we can be fairly certain ti would be different.

It's simply a different context to release those films today, or even just post Avengers.

I THINK Batman Begins would have gotten an interesting response. It certainly would be viewed as going in a VERY different direction from Marvel, the same way Marvel films were viewed as going in a VERY different direction than Begins when they started coming out.

It wouldn't have been received that differently. There's obviously no way to know for sure, I don't have a crystal ball, but I'd bet my bottom dollar on it.

TDKT were all good to great movies and would be praised no matter what context they were released in. BvS, on the other hand, is not a good movie would not have been praised no matter what context it was released in.

 

[Boom]

Considering the Nolan films are strongly-made films with likable characters, I imagine the reception would be similar now to what it was then. Hell, maybe better, considering how against-the-grain and fresh those films would be from the current mold.

They're good movies, one is legitimately great. Tone doesn't take anything away from that.

 

[Erzengel]

Those are websites that have random people adding fake scores.

Cinemascore polls people as they walk out of the film. Much more precise than those sites you listed. RT for example, BvS had 4.5/5 audience score with over 100,000 votes prior to the film even being released so you can't even look at the RT audience score as a true barometer for how people reacted to the film. Cinemascore is far more legit than those websites when gauging what audiences felt about the film.

I do agree that there are people who manufacture scores for this but if youyou averaged RT, IMDB and metacritic audience score, the only movies that would be lower would be Iron Man 2, Fantastic Four (2015), Wolverine Origins, Green Lantern, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Spider-Man and The Wolverine.

The fact that even with a original 4.5/5 audience score that it still fell to a point where the aforementioned films are kinda shows how this movie kinda rates.