Justice League Zack Snyder Directing Justice League - Part 6

[heatvision38]

Reading this thread and decided to quote this post , as an example. So what you are saying is that the people who don’t like snyder’s Abominations are part of the “mass audience’ while the few diehard fans of his are what , serious cinephiles ? Talk about living in an imaginary world , let me guess every critic who hates snyder’s “films” (and trust me European critics hate them way more than Americans) is also a mainstream viewer who can’t grasp snyder’s genius ?

If something was loved by a minority of people relative to the masses, then it would be correct to say it was not loved my the mainstream audience. That is definitional, not a judgment of those who did not like it.

 

[GothamBat]

I've said it many times but I myself didn't like Man of Steel. I was actually on the Snyder hating bandwagon and wanted him gone for the sequel. Although I think it was more due to the power of suggestion than anything else. With everyone saying how much he sucks and me personally disliking the movie, I just kind of drank the koolaid there and adopted that mindset. I didn't post about it on forums or anything but I was kind of like "yeah he's lame and he sucks" mentally

To me, BvS fixed what MoS got wrong. The cinematography and color grading were on point and there was no longer any shaky, hand-held shots. That was my biggest complaint about Man of Steel. Horrible choice to have basically the whole movie be like that. They explored interesting questions and dilemmas. The seemingly empty platitudes of Johnathan Kent actually played a concrete role in the story. They used action and spectacle more sparingly rather than having explosions and punching every 12 seconds. They opened up the DC universe and started exploring it's components... And so on. They actually retroactively made me like Man of Steel more because it laid some really solid groundwork for a lot of stuff: Bruce's anger towards Clark, the creation of Kryptonite, The scout ship being used by Lex to further his plan, Zod's dead body being used as a weapon ect.

I liked the TC and loved the UC.

 

[kguillou]

I've said it many times but I myself didn't like Man of Steel. I was actually on the Snyder hating bandwagon and wanted him gone for the sequel. Although I think it was more due to the power of suggestion than anything else. With everyone saying how much he sucks and me personally disliking the movie, I just kind of drank the koolaid there and adopted that mindset. I didn't post about it on forums or anything but I was kind of like "yeah he's lame and he sucks" mentally

To me, BvS fixed what MoS got wrong. The cinematography and color grading were on point and there was no longer any shaky, hand-held shots. That was my biggest complaint about Man of Steel. Horrible choice to have basically the whole movie be like that. They explored interesting questions and dilemmas. The seemingly empty platitudes of Johnathan Kent actually played a concrete role in the story. They used action and spectacle more sparingly rather than having explosions and punching every 12 seconds. They opened up the DC universe and started exploring it's components... And so on. They actually retroactively made me like Man of Steel more because it laid some really solid groundwork for a lot of stuff: Bruce's anger towards Clark, the creation of Kryptonite, The scout ship being used by Lex to further his plan, Zod's dead body being used as a weapon ect.

I liked the TC and loved the UC.

Interesting perspective, dude. I think people like you are a rarity.

It seemed like a lot of people turned on Zack with BvS, even people who liked MoS. Its a hard to film to digest, especially on first watch. I can remember vididly my realtime reaction to BvS. I LOVED the first half hour, the opening sequences, the introduction Of Affleck's Bruce and Irons' Alfred, their chemistry, the world building, the ramifications of MoS being a major political story here, I was really digging it all. Then around the point of the Knightmare sequence it all went haywire. The Knightmare sequence confused the F out of me, then the film's editing went completely to s*** to the point where I had no idea what was going on...then there was Batman killing which really upset me...and then Superman's sequence at the Capital and seeing him just stand in the fire looking around blankly confounded me and then there was the big titular fight. The Batman/ Superman fight was so damn brutal and unrelenting on Batman's end, it made my stomach churn. I remember thinking, "man this is beautifully shot, but this isn't BATMAN, why is he being so brutally violent towards Superman?"

I left the theater feeling betrayed and conflicted about my fandom for Snyder as a filmmaker. And then, after months went by and the movie stuck in my head and I finally got to rewatch it but the UE this time, the real version of the movie, it was an almost transformative experience. I was so elated and happy and felt like everything just clicked for me this time. I still had some issues and still do with the movie but it eventually went from being one of the most disappointing cbms of my life to one of my top 5 favs of all time.

 

[GothamBat]

You talking about the brutality of the fight just reminded me of how much I loved it. I love that Zack made the fight dirty and brutal and uncomfortable for the viewer at points. None of that clean, neat, sterile stuff. It was rough, raw, painful, emotionally charged. I also love that they had the balls to make Batman the winner. It was such a smart decision because Superman sans-kryptonite gas is by default the winner. We know that. So having him win, subdue and almost kill Superman made so much sense. Batman won. But we know Superman is his superior. It's somehow the "they both win" cop out but it's clever and ballsy... Which boggles my mind. Terrio you brilliant son of a *****.

Oh and I absolutely adore the scene of Clark in the courtroom enveloped by flames. Perfect performance by Cavill imo. I love the juxtaposition. He experiences absolutely no physical pain due to his invulnerability and yet he's emotionally devastated. Physically, he can't be harmed and the flames don't even phase him so he's forced to be an onlooker on all the destruction and death around him. That really came across in his performance. He closes his eyes, shakes his head, looks down... Much more poignant imo than if he started freaking out or weeping or whatever. A more internalized emotional reaction always comes across as more heart-wrenching to me.

I was thinking (and this is really random) but the appearance of horses seem to punctuate all the major tragedies in BvS. It doesn't feel like a coincidence. The horse in the mist after what's essentially Metropolis' 911, the horse at the capitol after the bomb goes off, and at the end horses pulling the cart at Clark's funeral. Not to mention Pa Kent's story about the Lang farm being flooded and the horses drowning. Then at the beginning of Justice League, we would have seen Bruce on horseback riding in Iceland looking for Arthur. This would be really subtle but expected when it comes to Snyder's proclivity for allegorical story-telling but what if that scene (that we never got to see) was meant to symbolize the dark times being over? He pats the horse, gets off and doesn't need it anymore, thus putting an end to that visual and allegorical motif and with it, the dark times and the tragedy. Just some food for thought.

 

[2kt09]

Interesting perspective, dude. I think people like you are a rarity.

It seemed like a lot of people turned on Zack with BvS, even people who liked MoS. Its a hard to film to digest, especially on first watch. I can remember vididly my realtime reaction to BvS. I LOVED the first half hour, the opening sequences, the introduction Of Affleck's Bruce and Irons' Alfred, their chemistry, the world building, the ramifications of MoS being a major political story here, I was really digging it all. Then around the point of the Knightmare sequence it all went haywire. The Knightmare sequence confused the F out of me, then the film's editing went completely to s*** to the point where I had no idea what was going on...then there was Batman killing which really upset me...and then Superman's sequence at the Capital and seeing him just stand in the fire looking around blankly confounded me and then there was the big titular fight. The fight was so damn brutal and unrelenting on Batman's end, it made my stomach churn. I remember thinking, "man this is beautifully shot, but this isn't BATMAN, why is he being so brutally violent towards Superman?"

I left the theater feeling betrayed and conflicted about my fandom for Snyder. And then, after months went by and the movie stuck in my head and I finally got the rewatch it but the UE this time, the real version of the movie, it was an almost transformative experience. I was so elated and happy and felt like everything just clicked for me. I still had some issues and still do with the movie but it eventually went from being one of the most disappointing cbms of my life to one of my top 5 favs of all time.

Lol, is this confession time? I'm more inclined toward GBat's sentiments. MoS wasn't a movie I appreciated until after I checked out some video essays. As a movie, itself, it's still too much of a drag and I would rather watch WW in a heartbeat. There were lessons to be learned and BvS learned them. The rapidly edited 1/3 of the movie, notwithstanding, which the UE just shocked me in terms of how much better the flow is. It is quite literally the rest of the movie.

 

[kguillou]

You talking about the brutality of the fight just reminded me of how much I loved it. I love that Zack made the fight dirty and brutal and uncomfortable for the viewer at points. None of that clean, neat, sterile stuff. It was rough, raw, painful, emotionally charged. I also love that they had the balls to make Batman the winner. It was such a smart decision because Superman sans-kryptonite gas is by default the winner. We know that. So having him win, subdue and almost kill Superman made so much sense. Batman won. But we know Superman is his superior. It's somehow the "they both win" cop out but it's clever and ballsy... Which boggles my mind. Terrio you brilliant son of a *****.

Oh and I absolutely adore the scene of Clark in the courtroom enveloped by flames. Perfect performance by Cavill imo. I love the juxtaposition. He experiences absolutely no physical pain due to his invulnerability and yet he's emotionally devastated. Physically, he can't be harmed and the flames don't even phase him so he's forced to be an onlooker on all the destruction and death around him. That really came across in his performance. He closes his eyes, shakes his head, looks down... Much more poignant imo than if he started freaking out or weeping or whatever. A more internalized emotional reaction always comes across as more heart-wrenching to me.

I was thinking (and this is really random) but the appearance of horses seem to punctuate all the major tragedies in BvS. It doesn't feel like a coincidence. The horse in the mist after what's essentially Metropolis' 911, the horse at the capitol after the bomb goes off, and at the end horses pulling the cart at Clark's funeral. Not to mention Pa Kent's story about the Lang farm being flooded and the horses drowning. Then at the beginning of Justice League, we would have seen Bruce on horseback riding in Iceland looking for Arthur. This would be really subtle but expected when it comes to Snyder's proclivity for allegorical story-telling but what if that scene (that we never got to see) was meant to symbolize the dark times being over? He pats the horse, gets off and doesn't need it anymore, thus putting an end to that visual and allegorical motif and with it, the dark times and the tragedy. Just some food for thought.

I agree, its just that the first time watching it it didn't come across as clearly.Watching it on home video I was able to pause and look closely and actually see Cavill's facial acting as he's reacting to the death around him. You can actually see tears in his eyes and how broken he is by it. But again, its not...totally clear the first time and I imagine many people were like "wtf? why's he just standing there looking numb?"

A lot of people believe that Snyder held Cavill's performance back and directed him to act like a brick wall but I think Snyder deliberately asked Henry for a subdued, internalized performance. I think he instructed Henry to show more with his face than his words. He wanted this Superman to be the strong silent type, a man of little words but his presence and demeanor speak volumes. If you look at the Superman deleted scene in the scout ship from JL, its the same idea. The look on Henry's face as he looks at his suit, some could look at that scene and say "yup, this is the same minimalist bulls*** Snyder always pulls with Henry" but if you look and I mean really look at Henry's facial acting, the subtle ticks in his face, in his eyes, it tells you everything you need to know about what he's thinking when he's looking at his old costume.

 

[GothamBat]

Lol, is this confession time? I'm more inclined toward GBat's sentiments.

Gbat = Gangsta bat

 

[idiot09]

Amazing post guys, I really liked GBat's post about the horses.

Two years ago I saw this movie, and it changed my life. I walked out confused, but excited and this feeling of raw energy, this feeling of "I just saw something special". I liked the TC, but the UC is up there for me as one of the best CBM's ever made.

And I've been so happy to see the outpouring of support for these film. Never ever believe we are some small minority. Most people see a movie and say "ehh it was good" and never talk or think about it again. But BvS left an impression, and is loved by many many people all around the world, and it left such a profound impact, people are still showing their support and love. That's rare, and special.

https://***********/CinemaCure/status/977734385234399232

This video makes me emotional. Thank you Zack.

 

[heatvision38]

Oh and I absolutely adore the scene of Clark in the courtroom enveloped by flames. Perfect performance by Cavill imo. I love the juxtaposition. He experiences absolutely no physical pain due to his invulnerability and yet he's emotionally devastated. Physically, he can't be harmed and the flames don't even phase him so he's forced to be an onlooker on all the destruction and death around him. That really came across in his performance. He closes his eyes, shakes his head, looks down... Much more poignant imo than if he started freaking out or weeping or whatever. A more internalized emotional reaction always comes across as more heart-wrenching to me.

I liked this too. If you grew up with such raw power, and only got more invulnerable as you continued to mature, the kinds of fight or flight or defensive reactions we all have, would Superman have them? If you flicked something at someone's face, they are going to flinch or blink. It's instinctive. Would Clark do the same thing? I love any scene (in any live version of the character) where Clark, even in the public Clark persona, does things that other people would not do, acts of bravery or courage or assertiveness because instinctively, regardless of what he's wearing, glasses or not, he can't be physically harmed, like even in the public Clark persona, Clark can't help but let his true self shine through at times (eg, not taking crap from Lex Luthor when meek Clark Kent reporter is interviewing him for a story).

So, all this is to say that the bombing scene you described, it's interesting that Superman isn't just unharmed physically, he is still in the same exact position, standing exactly where he already was. Even the people outside the building, they all had a visceral reaction and tried to shield or protect themselves in any way. Clark, who was right in the middle of it, doesn't even budge. How does someone hear that sound, see all the carnage around him, not even budge? It's just a fascinating aspect of how Superman experiences the world compared to everyone else. You see it again with the Trinity hero pose when fighting Doomsday. WW is in warrior pose with her sword and shield, Batman has his grenade launcher at the ready, and Superman is just standing there in a somewhat relaxed posture. I love those little bits.

 

[Johnglen]

Wow dude. Boy did you completely misread that guy's post. He literally said Snyder makes NICHE films not tailored towards mainstream audiences. I mean, that's pretty much a given and a common agreed consensus, I thought. Mass audiences would not like the tone and subject matter in his films nor his style of direction. Period. Its true.

Nowhere in the guy's post did he insult the intelligence of people who don't like his movies. He literally said that he loves the films and understands why others dont and "its not the audience's fault" which is stance I take as well. I love Snyder's films as this alternate, darker, more artsy take on DC material but can completely understand how this doesn't have the appeal to masses or even some DC fans who were probably taken aback by his characterizations.

I think a lot of people who like Zack Snyder's work get unfairly labeled as fanatics who worship him when we simply, you know, enjoy the guy's work. I guess people who hate the guy so much just cannot comprehend how anyone could possibly like his movies.

Snyder doesn’t make niche films. The dawn of the dead remake wasn’t niche, 300 wasn’t niche, the watchmen wasn’t niche (never mind that it was a big bo failure and Alan Moore hated it, it was meant to be a big blockbuster film) . Snyder is not a director that is used to making niche films no matter how many people want to believe that , he is just a blockbuster director who makes bad films and because of the quality of his films(which are intended to be huge blockbusters) they usually fail at the bo or , at least, underperform. We aren’t talking about aronofsky here. Actually Snyder is a dudebro guy and his movies stink of this.

 

[GothamBat]

Amazing post guys, I really liked GBat's post about the horses.[/IMG]

I learned there's even one more puzzle piece to supplement the horse motif. We see horses right before the very first tragedy in Africa. Python and his team rush towards the village... You guessed it... on horseback. Right when tragedy strikes, Anatoli kills all those innocents, we see him on horseback, travelling to the site of the tragedy. He could have been travelling by car or riding a motorcycle like Anatoli and his men... but he wasn't.

And holy crap I was just looking up "Lex and Senator Finch" and came across this image. Look at what's on Lex's desk. This in the scene where Finch would seal her own fate by crossing Lex.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Bought MOS again on 4K and so had to watch it, love that movie, such an under rated CBM.

Bought BvS too and will be watching that next. After JL I was worried I wouldn't enjoy these movies anymore, thankfully that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[kguillou]

Snyder doesn’t make niche films. The dawn of the dead remake wasn’t niche, 300 wasn’t niche, the watchmen wasn’t niche (never mind that it was a big bo failure and Alan Moore hated it, it was meant to be a big blockbuster film) . Snyder is not a director that is used to making niche films no matter how many people want to believe that , he is just a blockbuster director who makes bad films and because of the quality of his films(which are intended to be huge blockbusters) they usually fail at the bo or , at least, underperform. We aren’t talking about aronofsky here. Actually Snyder is a dudebro guy and his movie stick of this.

Okie dokie man. I'm sorry that his films do nothing for you, your certainly not the only one but theres a lot of people who would vehemently disagree with your objective statement that he makes bad movies. A lot of people have been deeply moved by his films and see them as some of the cream of the genre's crop. I know this may sound like blashphemy to you but it is what it is and everyone's entitled to their opinions. So we'll leave it at that.

 

[Micromind]

I learned there's even one more puzzle piece to supplement the horse motif. We see horses right before the very first tragedy in Africa. Python and his team rush towards the village... You guessed it... on horseback. Right when tragedy strikes, Anatoli kills all those innocents, we see him on horseback, travelling to the site of the tragedy. He could have been travelling by car or riding a motorcycle like Anatoli and his men... but he wasn't.

And holy crap I was just looking up "Lex and Senator Finch" and came across this image. Look at what's on Lex's desk. This in the scene where Finch would seal her own fate by crossing Lex.

Yeah, we had seen that One leg Horse in Lex's Luthors room. And there's a horse driven carriage taking Clark's coffin in Smallville.

Edit: You have already mentioned that in your earlier post.

 

[GothamBat]

Yeah, we had seen that One leg Horse in Lex's Luthors room. And there's a horse driven carriage taking Clark's coffin in Smallville.

I already addressed the horses at Clark's funeral

 

[idiot09]

 

[GothamBat]

Jinx! Just posted it in the lounge

 

[kguillou]

Lawd, I will miss this man's cinematography.

 

[heatvision38]

Snyder doesn’t make niche films. The dawn of the dead remake wasn’t niche, 300 wasn’t niche, the watchmen wasn’t niche (never mind that it was a big bo failure and Alan Moore hated it, it was meant to be a big blockbuster film) . Snyder is not a director that is used to making niche films no matter how many people want to believe that , he is just a blockbuster director who makes bad films and because of the quality of his films(which are intended to be huge blockbusters) they usually fail at the bo or , at least, underperform. We aren’t talking about aronofsky here. Actually Snyder is a dudebro guy and his movie stick of this.

I think that's what people struggle with, he has made big money movies, but he applies his own personal sensibilities, which, when he has more control, we see do not jive with the masses. In that sense, his movies are more niche. Cost or size of a movie shouldn't have anything to do with that. Niche just means it connects with a specific group. Dawn of the Dead was probably his most straight forward movie. After that, he became increasingly specific with his vision. Not everyone loves his vision. He is not a blockbuster director who makes "bad" films as that would imply that taste isn't subjective.

 

[Johnglen]

Okie dokie man. I'm sorry that his films do nothing for you, your certainly not the only one but theres a lot of people who would vehemently disagree with your objective statement that he makes bad movies. A lot of people have been deeply moved by his films and see them as some of the cream of the genre's crop. I know this may sound like blashphemy to you but it is what it is and everyone's entitled to their opinions. So we'll leave it at that.

This isnt an arguement about the quality of snyder’s films, this is about people defending Snyder with the excuse that his films are “niche”, “not for mainstream audiences” and similar ....stuff, to put it politely , like that implying that most people don’t get.....Snyder’s genius.

 

[misslane38]

This isnt an arguement about the quality of snyder’s films, this is about people defending Snyder with the excuse that his films are “niche”, “not for mainstream audiences” and similar ....stuff, to put it politely , like that implying that most people don’t get.....Snyder’s genius.

I don't really know if it's all about getting it or not getting it. Sometimes his movies are just darker and more cerebral, which some people just don't like to watch in large numbers. Just because someone can get something or understand something, doesn't mean they want to experience it. I know I could get or understand horror movies, but that doesn't make me want to pay money to see them or make me a fan of them.

 

[Micromind]

This isnt an arguement about the quality of snyder’s films, this is about people defending Snyder with the excuse that his films are “niche”, “not for mainstream audiences” and similar ....stuff, to put it politely , like that implying that most people don’t get.....Snyder’s genius.

Snyder has a certain way of telling a story, he may not be any genius but he is certainly not a 'dudebro' director who makes bad movies, his movies are not what I would call "family entertainers", but they have sub-texts and layers.

 

[heatvision38]

This isnt an arguement about the quality of snyder’s films, this is about people defending Snyder with the excuse that his films are “niche”, “not for mainstream audiences” and similar ....stuff, to put it politely , like that implying that most people don’t get.....Snyder’s genius.

I think that's you reading into it. Some may believe that, others just believe that the way he creates a story speaks to them, so in that sense, he may be a genius, or whatever you call it, to them. That doesn't imply that others who do not like him are unintelligent... though I will say that many of the issues people brought up with BvS are evidence of people not understanding aspects of the film, but taste is still subjective... and I will also point out that the degree of vitriol spewed towards this person by many, towards a man by all accounts is a respected and beloved individual by all those who have worked with him and speak glowingly of him, which makes you wonder, why do people let it bother them so much?

So that brings me to this: why does this bother you? Why do you assume that people calling his sensibilities niche upset you? If people did believe he is some misunderstood genius, why do you care? It doesn't reduce your intelligence. You can simply disagree with that viewpoint. When Prometheus came out, I saw a fair amount of people saying that those who did not like the movie simply did not get it. I've seen the same with TLJ. I can accept that. People have their point of view. I don't feel my intelligence being threatened.

 

[kguillou]

Here's the thing, there are extremists on both sides. Ive seen a fair amount of pro Snyder or pro DCEU people insult people who dont like the DC movies as being dumb or the films are "too intelligent for you" or "not like that Marvel bubblegum." They're out there and I don't associate myself with those brand of fans. The problem is the people who hate Snyder see us all like those people and assume us liking the movies makes us braindead and assume we feel we're part of some elite. I dont think any of us regular posters on here subscribe to that notion. I think the majority of us here like Snyder's movies because they speak to us and scratch that itch that other cbms just arent scratching. We are a NICHE audience that Snyder's style and sensibilities play to.

I'm sure Snyder WANTED his movies to play to a large audience, I'm sure Denis Villaneuve WANTED Bladerunner 2049 to be a massive hit and skyrocket his career but despite good reviews and wide theater release, that movie only played to a niche audience. A lot of regular moviegoers were bored by it and didnt like it, but the movie has ardent fans who talk about it and write essays and editorials and videos analyzing the movie's meanings and undercurrents....just like....some of Snyder's movies.

Thats a niche audience. Only a niche love the movies and keep the conversation going about it.

 

[GothamBat]

wonder what this scene was going to be