JL: THE SNYDER CUT coming to HBO Max

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


Cephus

Sr Member
Snyder shot the movie in 4:3 because of the movement of the characters. Most films have travel going horizontally, right to left or vice versa. He felt that in this movie the movement is more vertical, with the flying & height of Steppenwolf.

His story is that he wanted the movie shot in IMAX format, which is really close to 4:3. Unfortunately, if you look at the cut, it's just not framed that way. There is way more empty space above the character's heads than in the theatrical version. He might have rationalized that story after the fact, but the film was clearly not shot that way intentionally.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Cappy

Active Member
The studio was right about the false hope. I don’t relish in the idea of more Snyder at the helm of the mainstream DCU, but a tangent Knightmare/Injustice universe and I’m there

Not with JJ at the helm. I suspect the DCU does not have much hope for it in the near future. This might be the best
we see for quite some time. Of course if he an those around him have a sudden wave of originality and creativity, there might be hope ?.
 

ScourgiousJinx

Well-Known Member
Presenting a mass appeal movie in 4:3 on purpose for any reason "creative" or otherwise doesn't make sense as a lot of people would be put off by that. Seriously doubt it was an entirely willful artistic decision. In the unlikely event that it was, alienating many viewers just by the format alone was very poor judgement.
 
Last edited:

cboath

Master Member
Meh, the ratio phased me for a bout 15 seconds, at which point I adjusted and just watched it. Not a big deal IMO. If HBO was presenting everything that way, then yeah, i'd be a bit upset. But, one thing, that was ostensibly a freebie because it couldn't make much at 4hrs long, not a real issue in my book.

The MoS and JL stuff just isn't done right IMO. I don't know what right is, I just know it isn't that. The 78 Superman is still, by far, the pinnacle of Superman, and Nolan's Batman the pinnacle for Bats. This incarnation is just a 'no' frankly. Unless WB is just running roughshod over them, it seems DC simply doesn't understand it's own IP.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

CT1138

Sr Member
The 4:3 made no sense to me. It made sense back when 4:3 television screens were the norm. Now they're pretty much all 16:9. It didn't even seem like an artistic decision, because, again, it's a modern movie made for a modern screen and watched by a modern audience. The last time I saw a modern movie filmed in 4:3 was The Lighthouse, but considering the way the movie was filmed, and the time period in which it was set, it made sense for the movie. I actually found it a rather interesting way to film the movie. It wasn't only a movie set in the 1940s, it LOOKED like it was made in the 1940s.

I wasn't particularly bothered by the 4:3 format, but it did seem like an odd decision.
 

HMSwolfe

Sr Member
The 4:3 made no sense to me. It made sense back when 4:3 television screens were the norm. Now they're pretty much all 16:9. It didn't even seem like an artistic decision, because, again, it's a modern movie made for a modern screen and watched by a modern audience. The last time I saw a modern movie filmed in 4:3 was The Lighthouse, but considering the way the movie was filmed, and the time period in which it was set, it made sense for the movie. I actually found it a rather interesting way to film the movie. It wasn't only a movie set in the 1940s, it LOOKED like it was made in the 1940s.

I wasn't particularly bothered by the 4:3 format, but it did seem like an odd decision.
Yeah, regardless of my general reception to The Lighthouse, it really did look like an old film. The (sparse) effects, the lighting, the pacing. I feel it was a rare case where the aspect ratio was justified.
 

Strikerkc

Sr Member
Honestly, I think the 4:3 let him do more with cutting together old footage. I suspect a lot of the footage had crap going on at one end of the screen, or the other, and if you can just lop 1/3 of the width off, it's easier to play with where things are centered, than having to go back and "re-do" all the off screen stuff to make it wide format.

it just said the format was to preserve the integrity of his vision (or something like that); it never specified if it was because he always envisioned it in 4:3, or if he just got 2 months into the process and said "It'd be a lot easier to get my point across if I didn't have to deal with all this **** out at the edges of the scene"

lol
 

AnubisGuard

Sr Member
If you watch any material at all from this version, make it the Flash's introductory scene. It's genuinely great, a wonderful little mini-movie where all of Snyder's fetishes and hangups actually work. The slowmo and needle drop are motivated, it roots the fetishization of superpowers in a real human connection, and it manages more than one tone (comedy and drama!) with ease. A great, great scene that deserves a better movie around it. (Which I would embed, but there's no copy of the full scene on YouTube.)

Here's the full scene.

 

airair

Sr Member
Meh, the ratio phased me for a bout 15 seconds, at which point I adjusted and just watched it. Not a big deal IMO. If HBO was presenting everything that way, then yeah, i'd be a bit upset. But, one thing, that was ostensibly a freebie because it couldn't make much at 4hrs long, not a real issue in my book.

The MoS and JL stuff just isn't done right IMO. I don't know what right is, I just know it isn't that. The 78 Superman is still, by far, the pinnacle of Superman, and Nolan's Batman the pinnacle for Bats. This incarnation is just a 'no' frankly. Unless WB is just running roughshod over them, it seems DC simply doesn't understand it's own IP.

i think Snyder has done his take perfectly for this modern arena. The 1978 superman is redundant now and from a bygone time.

We all have our DVD's and blu rays of the Chris Reeve films so that side of the audience (40+ year olds) is more than catered for. Young kids today are not going to be hooked into the mythology of superman with a guy wearing underwear over his spandex tights.

i remember superman returns which was a homage to Christopher reeve superman and nobody was interested in it. Heck, nobody was interested in superman 4 and that still had Chris Reeve, but definitely has a charm to it.

Man of Steel is actually very similar to the 78 film, it follows almost the exact pattern, except it brings Superman into the real world in a what if scenario.

In a real life scenario, an alien wouldn't be welcomed by all, and though this might hurt people's feelings, its a fact that a spandex costume with underwear is frankly ridiculous in this day and age, unless you are going for pure campy or parody.

We have to let the character evolve, and appreciate each take on the character.
I just watched Tyler Hoechlin in his Superman show, and it clearly takes inspiration from Man of Steel both is some of its tone and aesthetic, but it also delves into some of the Reeve esque material. I think all audiences can be satisfied, as we are getting multiple versions.

I thought the Justice League was fabulous fantasy film making. I hope there is more.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

airair

Sr Member
I only saw Whedon's Justice League once, in the theater, so I honestly can't compare the two that well at this point. I didn't care for Whedon's version, but this version had lots of problems too. I can't say whether it's "better," but at least it's Snyder's version, not some hybrid slapped together.

I'll just highlight a few things that stood out to me:

* I'm not sure this movie passes the "Bechdel test" - where two women have to have a conversation about something other than a man. The scene between Martha and Lois made me think of that in particular, especially since it ended up not even being a conversation between two woman (what purpose did it serve to have it be Martian Manhunter in disguise? Felt problematic to me). I don't recall if any of the Amazons' conversations would pass the Bechdel test - it's possible they did, but I feel like they didn't.

* While the CG wasn't bad in general, it felt like every scene, even those that were presumably actually shot outside, looked fake. I think that's intentional by Snyder, as he's tried to emulate the look of the source comics in other films like The 300 and Watchmen, but it tended to take me out of the movie.

* The writing and tone in general were flaws in both Snyder and Whedon's versions. Snyder goes for very bleak tone - even with the injected humor attempts from the Flash and Aquaman - versus Whedon's more playful overall tone, which is also reflected in the visual color palette of each film. Neither really works that well. It seems no amount of reshoots or editing could really fix the actual writing. The flaws are in the script. But I did enjoy some of the lighter elements in the Snyder cut - at least the Flash and Aquaman seemed to have a bit more character than others, particularly Superman.
Speaking of Superman, I just don't care for his characterization. He just seemed wasted in this movie. Even in the relatively little screen time he had, he felt very flat.

I didn't hate the movie (some parts, I definitely did), but I don't really have too strong of feelings about it. It just exists to me, nothing more.
I feel it's really hard to judge this solely on it's own merits, given that it's attempting to redo a film that someone else took over.

its not attempting to "redo". this is the actual original film shot in 2016 and restored with the vfx fully finished.
the 2017 film was the redo!
 

airair

Sr Member
Glad Synder got to finish his film, the way he always envisioned it.

Problem is, his vision sucked then and it sucks now. This movie exists purely for fan service. Hard not to compare a lot of similarities between the MCI/Thanos storyline. To add terrible CGI, broody emo music and very very weird scenes (singing and sweater sniffing aquaman fans).

Man this was corny.
it was actually written and filmed before Infinity war and Endgame.
 

Bloop

Sr Member
its not attempting to "redo". this is the actual original film shot in 2016 and restored with the vfx fully finished.
the 2017 film was the redo!
That's what "redo" means. Snyder redid the movie that he had planned to do. He started it, couldn't finish it, so re had to redo it. Plus, he reshot scenes, added and changed things he wouldn't have gotten to do if he had simply finished the movie back when he started.
I don't understand why you felt the need to call me out for this.
 

airair

Sr Member
That's what "redo" means. Snyder redid the movie that he had planned to do. He started it, couldn't finish it, so re had to redo it. Plus, he reshot scenes, added and changed things he wouldn't have gotten to do if he had simply finished the movie back when he started.
I don't understand why you felt the need to call me out for this.
He did finish it though apart from vfx. What we saw is the exact film he shot in 2016, albeit with more of his assembly footage.
He shot 100% of principal photography in 2016 and left during post production.


In his interview here he says he only shot 4 minutes of new footage (the joker and martian manhunter footage). So out of 4hrs, 4 minutes is nothing. All the money went on finishing vfx.


Of course, if this came out originally in 2017, it would probably be 2hrs 50 to 3hrs maximum i reckon for cinemas.

Because of streaming we get an extra hour, which is pretty cool.
 

Bloop

Sr Member
He did finish it though apart from vfx. What we saw is the exact film he shot in 2016, albeit with more of his assembly footage.
He shot 100% of principal photography in 2016 and left during post production.


In his interview here he says he only shot 4 minutes of new footage (the joker and martian manhunter footage). So out of 4hrs, 4 minutes is nothing. All the money went on finishing vfx.


Of course, if this came out originally in 2017, it would probably be 2hrs 50 to 3hrs maximum i reckon for cinemas.

Because of streaming we get an extra hour, which is pretty cool.
Still doesn't change that what I said was correct. He redid the movie. He was given the chance to redo something he didn't get to finish. You're arguing semantics. I don't care if you're Zach Snyder himself, you sound dickish by arguing over my *correct* choice of words.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Meerkat67

Member
Zack Snyder should have been shot at birth... he destroyed batman and superman movies

Man of Steel would have also been so much better had Nolan not left production, Nolan left due to a fall out with Snyder..

Snyder means snydey... get rid of him hollywood.
 

Paul Andrew

Sr Member
Zack Snyder should have been shot at birth... he destroyed batman and superman movies

Man of Steel would have also been so much better had Nolan not left production, Nolan left due to a fall out with Snyder..

Snyder means snydey... get rid of him hollywood.
I mean, I'm not a fan of his versions of those characters either, but damn dude. I think we can have these conversations without the offhand infanticide comments.
 

Bloop

Sr Member
Seems like you're the one that can't just say oops I was wrong and let that be that.
Are you talking to me? Because I'm not wrong, and it's such a minor point to get bothered by that airair felt they had to quote me and reply with a two long explanations over one word.

So I'll break it down for you with my own unnecessarily long post: Snyder left the project. Whedon finished the film. The film was released. It was the only version of the film people saw. Snyder was given the chance to do his version of the movie, which was a revision of the previously released theatrical version. He redid the movie. As I said in my original post, "I feel it's really hard to judge this solely on it's own merits, given that it's attempting to redo a film that someone else took over." I don't know how you read that and not understand that I'm saying Whedon took over the movie and completed it in a different way, which Snyder got to redo.

I think it's stupid for people to be focused on one little word, which was correct in context. It shows a lack of comprehension. Instead of a discussion of the actual movie, it's a dumb argument on semantics.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top