BvS The BvS Ultimate Cut Thread - Part 1

[The Batman]

Since he won't give an honest answer, I will: To the contrary, the thread needed careful moderation because of fans constantly coming in and slagging skeptics. And it needed to exist because voicing skepticism anywhere else on the forum tended to result in vicious insults and outrage.

This is all correct.

A few fanboys were even put on probation, or were banned from posting in that thread.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

^There's a couple of additional shots during the warehouse rescue. Also, that seems to be case regarding the main fight.

Sweet! Thanks. So we don't see Bats at all in Lexcorp?

 

[Boom]

I do recall some fans having a problem with that thread's existence and not being able to just leave it for its intended members.

 

[Marvolo]

I think I prefer not to have the scene. It would have been interesting to watch and added a layer of complex humanity to Supes but.....to see Superman hear all those cries and ignore them is maybe a bridge too far. I'd rather just assume that Superman is in panic mode and not thinking totally clearly and goes to Batman for help.

Superman cant answer every cry and he shouldnt have to. He shouldnt even try to. Nearly 2 humans die every second of every day. People need to get real about what is required of the character of superman. His sole purpose in life isnt to be a guardian angel for everyone. He is going to ignore cries both by choice and by necessity. Fans need to accept that and get the **** over it.

 

[antovolk]

Sweet! Thanks. So we don't see Bats at all in Lexcorp?

Spoiler

Just that one surveillance shot we see in the trailer. It's an addition to the scene where Luthor comes into the already-ransacked LexCorp.

 

[kguillou]

Superman cant answer every cry and he shouldnt have to. He shouldnt even try to. Nearly 2 humans die every second of every day. People need to get real about what is required of the character of superman. His sole purpose in life isnt to be a guardian angel for everyone. He is going to ignore cries both by choice and by necessity. Fans need to accept that and get the **** over it.

I get what your saying and you're not wrong but...it's just one of those things that I don't think is necessary to explicitly show. Bearing in mind, I'm a big fan of Snyder's more grounded, more complex vision for these characters, seeing Superman actually hear a cry or cries for help and ignoring them is....I dunno a little too dark even if he it is to help his mom. Even Snyder said so, himself and probably why he didn't include it.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I would have loved to see the Lexcorp break in as an actual scene

 

[Da-Scribe]

I get what your saying and you're not wrong but...it's just one of those things that I don't think is necessary to explicitly show. Bearing in mind, I'm a big fan of Snyder's more grounded, more complex vision for these characters, seeing Superman actually hear a cry or cries for help and ignoring them is....I dunno a little too dark even if he it is to help his mom. Even Snyder said so, himself and probably why he didn't include it.

I think it's the sorta thing that works well when you have more time to deal with it. A scene of Superman hearing all these cries, but doing nothing because he can't is a damn great scene. But you can't follow that up with him going to reason with/fight Batman to save his mom. You have to follow it up with an exploration and I just don't think that it would've worked in BvS. It would've just overloaded everything. That's a concept that truthfully deserves its own film.

 

[jmc]

I agree. I posted this in the Positivity Thread a little while back:


What I love so much about BvS and MOS is that ZS does not romanticize the heroes. I believe that if a Superman type being ever showed up, it would turn the world upside down. I love this approach. People would love him, hate him, worship him etc... As much as I enjoy Reeve's Superman, I just don't see a world being so accepting of someone like that. The uncertainty surrounding him among the people and governments would be extremely high. Even with his heroics, people would still be afraid. What if with those types of powers, he ever decided to not use them for good because of some traumatic event he suffers. Bringing in an older, more experienced Batman fits so perfectly with this. Here is someone who has had personal experiences with good people who have turned bad. Couple this with what Superman is capable of and how Batman perceives his career against crime to be a failure, to have lost his faith in the good that is still out there, I found all this to be so interesting.

I also love that, being raised as a human, Superman displays a variety of human emotions. We see Superman doubt his place in the world. Yes, Superman is supposed to be a beacon of hope but I can appreciate the journey it takes to get there. I feel it's disingenuous to have him never waiver, with the reaction he has received from the world and the incidents that have occurred since he has donned the cape. Again, being raised human, I fully expect him to show the full range of emotions over the course of both films. And with this Superman, we see one of the most important traits displayed for the character, endurance. Through all the adversity and mixed reactions he has received, he ultimately endures and continues his fight for humanity. Of course this action is not lost on Batman, it brings him out of his despair and provides hope to him, that there is indeed still good out there.

I can understand some people not taking a liking to Superman and Batman in this film as much as they could or have in the past, because here they are not at their best. It is not until the end when we see both characters rise from the troubles that each of them faced. But until that point, it is at times a dark journey but one that I feel is honest, especially with the world's reaction and the circumstances put on them. It is why I appreciate what was done with this film so much.

Here's the issue. Superman has always been a romanticised character, he's the best possible version of who we are as a species, despite not being one of us and like it or not that's what people like about the character. When you bring him down to this world's level what you're doing is stripping that character of everything that people look up to and aspire to be. Like it or not, that 'S' symbol means a hell of a lot to people in real life and that counts for something when you're telling a story about the character.

The counter argument of course is why should Superman not be allowed to evolve, why should we not challenge who Superman is, and the answer is simply because that's not what people want to see. Making a film about Superman, Batman, spider-Man, whoever it is, comes with certain limitations creatively. It's not fair but that's just the rules you have to play with when you're dealing with these characters. In all honesty, if you want some type of deconstruction of a superhero you're best off leaving Superman alone and finding a character who fits.

In all honesty both MoS and BvS bring up very valid questions about Superman, questions like do we need a Superman, but not once are these answered positively, and that's a huge problem for a character for many people like. If you ask the question 'Does the world need Superman?' you answer that within your story with an emphatic 'Yes'. What is there to grab onto if the answer is, at best, 'maybe'?

These characters, like it or not, are symbols of inspiration. It's easy to make a story that tears down those characters values, it's much harder to write a story that sticks to those values. Anyone who says you can't make a movie in 2016 with a positive perspective of Superman has either a very pessimistic view of the world or is not trying hard enough. There's plenty there to craft a story that is optimistic whilst also asking questions about who the character is, you've just got to embrace the symbol not reject it.

 

[matt47]

Trying to piece those scenes on youtube together with the original cut and it's giving me a headache, I have no idea how the UC plays out

 

[souperman]

Here's the issue. Superman has always been a romanticised character, he's the best possible version of who we are as a species, despite not being one of us and like it or not that's what people like about the character. When you bring him down to this world's level what you're doing is stripping that character of everything that people look up to and aspire to be. Like it or not, that 'S' symbol means a hell of a lot to people in real life and that counts for something when you're telling a story about the character.

What you are saying is that they should not try to show a different aspect or vision of "A" Superman story. But that is the point of BvS. It is a "what if" story. The character and story you describe has already been told...many times. This is a different take on the subject. And to your earlier point of risk...there it is.

The counter argument of course is why should Superman not be allowed to evolve, why should we not challenge who Superman is, and the answer is simply because that's not what people want to see.

This is true for some, no doubt. Which is why we hear the "this is not my Superman/Batman" cries.

Making a film about Superman, Batman, spider-Man, whoever it is, comes with certain limitations creatively. It's not fair but that's just the rules you have to play with when you're dealing with these characters. In all honesty, if you want some type of deconstruction of a superhero you're best off leaving Superman alone and finding a character who fits.

If you are after the "same old" formula superhero film...yes. Maybe some people would have preferred that rendition...but I preferred this version as did a lot of others. I am just a little tired of the same old format and telling... MOS and BvS was refreshing to me.

In all honesty both MoS and BvS bring up very valid questions about Superman, questions like do we need a Superman, but not once are these answered positively, and that's a huge problem for a character for many people like. If you ask the question 'Does the world need Superman?' you answer that within your story with an emphatic 'Yes'. What is there to grab onto if the answer is, at best, 'maybe'?

But that is the point as well. Maybe not answered fast enough for you and others but it is left for us to think about and decide...just like in the film. These ARE philosophical questions that are very difficult to rationalize. There are good points on both sides. Sometimes "maybe" is the best we get. It's not as comfortable as knowing for sure of course. but it is more realistic. WHAT IS THE MONOLITH !

These characters, like it or not, are symbols of inspiration. It's easy to make a story that tears down those characters values, it's much harder to write a story that sticks to those values.

You are correct. They are, but harder to write a story that stick to their "expected values" Really? I think it would have been very easy to go the old standard route and copy a Donner Superman with updated effects. It would have been a real crowed pleaser...maybe. We'll never know for sure. They took a risk.

Anyone who says you can't make a movie in 2016 with a positive perspective of Superman has either a very pessimistic view of the world or is not trying hard enough. There's plenty there to craft a story that is optimistic whilst also asking questions about who the character is, you've just got to embrace the symbol not reject it.

Maybe they could have done as you say, but this vision had some basic needs to fulfill. First they had to make a Superman film to maintain rights I think. Basically a reboot right after SR had done just ok. They must have thought, as many have said, that Superman is TOO goodie goodie to be interesting so they came up with MOS which I think was a pitch from Snyder and Nolan? WB liked the idea and maybe wanted to try something different. While making MOS or at the end, they decided to use it to launch the DCEU and formulated the outline to get to BvS and beyond.

I don't think they are rejecting the symbols. I think they are building them. Maybe slower than some would like but they are building toward the Superheros you want to see on film. Heck, so do I, but I can appreciate the ride to get there too.

It's not the destination, it's the journey.

 

[souperman]

Trying to piece those scenes on youtube together with the original cut and it's giving me a headache, I have no idea how the UC plays out

I didn't see your cut but it will be interesting to hear from you if the UC is close to yours...sans the new scenes of course.

Let us know after you see it.

 

[matt47]

I didn't see your cut but it will be interesting to hear from you if the UC is close to yours...sans the new scenes of course.

Let us know after you see it.

Yeah I can't for the life of me upload it lol

I'm excited for the UC to come out so I can add scenes from it into my cut because mine is only 2 hr 7 mins (Including credits). So if I can add more scenes like those Clark in Gotham, talking to his mom on the phone, post Senate bombing scenes etc. It might only be a 2 hr 30 min movie.

 

[jmc]

Maybe they could have done as you say, but this vision had some basic needs to fulfill. First they had to make a Superman film to maintain rights I think. Basically a reboot right after SR had done just ok. They must have thought, as many have said, that Superman is TOO goodie goodie to be interesting so they came up with MOS which I think was a pitch from Snyder and Nolan? WB liked the idea and maybe wanted to try something different. While making MOS or at the end, they decided to use it to launch the DCEU and formulated the outline to get to BvS and beyond.

I don't think they are rejecting the symbols. I think they are building them. Maybe slower than some would like but they are building toward the Superheros you want to see on film. Heck, so do I, but I can appreciate the ride to get there too.

It's not the destination, it's the journey.

Do you think most people are willing to stick around for 5-6 years waiting to see the Superman they know?

 

[souperman]

Do you think most people are willing to stick around for 5-6 years waiting to see the Superman they know?

They already KNOW him. This is the story of HOW he got to be.

Maybe not most, but enough. Enough to get JL made anyway.

If JL is the payoff and well accepted I think what came before will resonate more.

Some will still be disappointed I am sure. Can't please everyone all the time.

I do hope JL is better for you. It won't change everything, but maybe enough.

Fingers crossed.

 

[Sleiek]

It's not the destination, it's the journey.

Absolutely. And I am enjoying it so far. The destination better be worth it.

 

[jmc]

They already KNOW him. This is the story of HOW he got to be.

Maybe not most, but enough. Enough to get JL made anyway.

If JL is the payoff and well accepted I think what came before will resonate more.

Some will still be disappointed I am sure. Can't please everyone all the time.

I do hope JL is better for you. It won't change everything, but maybe enough.

Fingers crossed.

You understand what I'm saying, right?

 

[Kanye West]

Some of you are exaggerating the negative audience response for this movie.

The critics response was negative but audiences didn't dislike it. The response ranged from "meh" to good.

movies that get a bad audience response don't get ovations at the end. ( all 3 times i went to the theater to see it, it got applause at the end, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd week)

 

[Anita18]

Here's the issue. Superman has always been a romanticised character, he's the best possible version of who we are as a species, despite not being one of us and like it or not that's what people like about the character. When you bring him down to this world's level what you're doing is stripping that character of everything that people look up to and aspire to be. Like it or not, that 'S' symbol means a hell of a lot to people in real life and that counts for something when you're telling a story about the character.

The counter argument of course is why should Superman not be allowed to evolve, why should we not challenge who Superman is, and the answer is simply because that's not what people want to see. Making a film about Superman, Batman, spider-Man, whoever it is, comes with certain limitations creatively. It's not fair but that's just the rules you have to play with when you're dealing with these characters. In all honesty, if you want some type of deconstruction of a superhero you're best off leaving Superman alone and finding a character who fits.

In all honesty both MoS and BvS bring up very valid questions about Superman, questions like do we need a Superman, but not once are these answered positively, and that's a huge problem for a character for many people like. If you ask the question 'Does the world need Superman?' you answer that within your story with an emphatic 'Yes'. What is there to grab onto if the answer is, at best, 'maybe'?

These characters, like it or not, are symbols of inspiration. It's easy to make a story that tears down those characters values, it's much harder to write a story that sticks to those values. Anyone who says you can't make a movie in 2016 with a positive perspective of Superman has either a very pessimistic view of the world or is not trying hard enough. There's plenty there to craft a story that is optimistic whilst also asking questions about who the character is, you've just got to embrace the symbol not reject it.

I think you're conflating darkness of story with darkness of character. (I think this is what WB is having trouble with as well.) There's so much compelling story you can do with a romanticized, ideal character in a world of gray. In fact, it's been done before, very recently, except the character's name was Captain America.

I mean, what's more inspiring that a truly good person who fights and prevails against the darkness? The issue with MoS and BvS was that the dark mood (and general look of the film) overpowered the goodness and light of Superman's character. It pretty much brought him down like seasonal affective disorder. You can't really go too dark in terms of visuals and mood with Superman or Captain America, because everything turns morose and the optimism would stick out like a sore thumb. But there's a lot of heavy stuff that happens in Winter Soldier and Civil War, and there was still space for some lightness and humor. It's not "look how much the entire world sucks, why is he even trying anymore?"

Look, I adore Batman as a character, but not because I relate to him. In fact, we almost have nothing in common besides some detective skills and a stubborn streak. But I adore the character because I find him inspiring - he has every excuse to be a useless, destructive human being, but he channels it in service to others. Despite his darkness and anti-hero qualities, he's here to help.

In terms of relate-ability, I'm much more in line with Steve Rogers (you will almost never find anyone squarer than me, I assure you), and I found Winter Soldier and Civil War to be incredibly compelling films because the whole time, he's fighting to do the right thing despite the world telling him otherwise. I work in an environment where it's easy to get bogged down by BS (helloooo government), but my patience and eternal optimism gets me through. I'm here to help, no matter what, and I refuse to let the world tell me how I should do the right thing. Characters like Captain America and Batman are inspiring figures in that fight, because they continue the work even when the entire world is telling them to stop.

I want Superman to be an inspiring figure too, but first you have to give him a compelling story and something substantial (read: un-punchable) to fight against. What needs to be done is finding the right balance, what Superman chooses to do because he's often presented as a God-like character who can do everything, which he isn't, so you have to choose what he can and cannot do in the constraints of the story.

 

[StormC]

People said the same thing about BVS. "Oh, don't worry, Superman will be Superman this time around." Now we're supposed to believe he's gonna be Superman after he gets killed? Give me a break.

 

[Jedi Arrow]

Hey, so do we know if the violence is the only reason the Ultimate Cut got the R rating? Like, is there an f-bomb dropped in there or something, too? Or is the language and sexual content about the same and the added violence is the only real cause of the upped rating?

 

[Lencho01]

People said the same thing about BVS. "Oh, don't worry, Superman will be Superman this time around." Now we're supposed to believe he's gonna be Superman after he gets killed? Give me a break.

They're taking the Craig James Bond approach. Each film is a new origin story. t:

 

[jmc]

I think you're conflating darkness of story with darkness of character. (I think this is what WB is having trouble with as well.) There's so much compelling story you can do with a romanticized, ideal character in a world of gray. In fact, it's been done before, very recently, except the character's name was Captain America.

I mean, what's more inspiring that a truly good person who fights and prevails against the darkness? The issue with MoS and BvS was that the dark mood (and general look of the film) overpowered the goodness and light of Superman's character. It pretty much brought him down like seasonal affective disorder. You can't really go too dark in terms of visuals and mood with Superman or Captain America, because everything turns morose and the optimism would stick out like a sore thumb. But there's a lot of heavy stuff that happens in Winter Soldier and Civil War, and there was still space for some lightness and humor. It's not "look how much the entire world sucks, why is he even trying anymore?"

Look, I adore Batman as a character, but not because I relate to him. In fact, we almost have nothing in common besides some detective skills and a stubborn streak. But I adore the character because I find him inspiring - he has every excuse to be a useless, destructive human being, but he channels it in service to others. Despite his darkness and anti-hero qualities, he's here to help.

In terms of relate-ability, I'm much more in line with Steve Rogers (you will almost never find anyone squarer than me, I assure you), and I found Winter Soldier and Civil War to be incredibly compelling films because the whole time, he's fighting to do the right thing despite the world telling him otherwise. I work in an environment where it's easy to get bogged down by BS (helloooo government), but my patience and eternal optimism gets me through. I'm here to help, no matter what, and I refuse to let the world tell me how I should do the right thing. Characters like Captain America and Batman are inspiring figures in that fight, because they continue the work even when the entire world is telling them to stop.

I want Superman to be an inspiring figure too, but first you have to give him a compelling story and something substantial (read: un-punchable) to fight against. What needs to be done is finding the right balance, what Superman chooses to do because he's often presented as a God-like character who can do everything, which he isn't, so you have to choose what he can and cannot do in the constraints of the story.

I've got no problem with a character having to fight against the darkness, but I don't think what's happened with this Superman is him having to fight against darkness, it's him being the darkness. It's the shadow that is hovering over him questioning whether he's actually of any value. I don't feel like in two films we've been given a positive answer as to why the world needs a Superman. I've got no issue putting Superman through tests, but I do have issues of not really addressing in detail what's actually good about the character.

As I said before, if you want to bring who he is as a person into question that's very valid, I don't even have a problem with him asking questions of himself, but at the end of the day you have to stop asking those questions and start answering them positively. "Yes, we need a Superman. Yes I'm determined to do this no matter what", that's what matters in the end. If the argument is that we'll get that Superman eventually in the end my rebuttal is I, and many others, are not going to stick around waiting on the basis we'll get there eventually. A long journey does not make a good one. No-one should have to sit through 9 hours of movie just to get something resembling that character, something that could easily have been completed in one movie. This is not television, this is not netflix, it's film, and the vast majority of people want a complete story and complete character journey in one sitting.

 

[souperman]

You understand what I'm saying, right?

yes...and I answered it.

Maybe not most, (people are willing to wait) but enough. Enough to get JL made anyway.

If JL is the payoff and well accepted I think what came before will resonate more.

Some will still be disappointed I am sure. Can't please everyone all the time.

I do hope JL is better for you. It won't change everything, but maybe enough.

Fingers crossed.

 

[souperman]

A long journey does not make a good one. No-one should have to sit through 9 hours of movie just to get something resembling that character, something that could easily have been completed in one movie. This is not television, this is not netflix, it's film, and the vast majority of people want a complete story and complete character journey in one sitting.

That's fine as your opinion. Some are enjoying the agonizing wait !

Your issue is simply as you stated. You are waiting to see what you want rather than enjoying to twists and turns of the journey. Guess you prefer trains or planes but some of us like roadsters driving the winding road.

What do you have better to do?... besides sticking around here talking to us?