The Snyder Cut

[Psyren]

The reviewers I trust are starting to put out their takes. While the details vary, the broad consensus appears to be: "Better than the original, still not good, happy a creator fought the studio system to get his vision somewhat realized and won, don't see where we can go from here, Ray Fisher needs more movie roles, can we move on now?"

[Dire_Flumph]

The reviewers I trust are starting to put out their takes. While the details vary, the broad consensus appears to be: "Better than the original, still not good, happy a creator fought the studio system to get his vision somewhat realized and won, don't see where we can go from here, Ray Fisher needs more movie roles, can we move on now?"

Yeah, finished parts 5-epilogue last night, and that's pretty much how I feel. Like Batman v Superman's Director's cut, it's certainly a better, more cohesive film. I watched a few random scenes from the Theatrical Cut afterwards, and you can really see how that version was hacked and cut up in an attempt to make it more like the competition. But it's still not a particularly good one, and some of the Snyderisms in particular really drag it down.

I enjoyed watching the Snyder Cut more than I expected, but I have no interest in seeing things go the direction the epilogue was hinting at, and I'll be just as happy for DC films to ignore all of this going forward. Hopefully whoever is in charge of the next versions of Batman and Superman can take inspiration from something else besides Frank Miller.

[Dragonus45]

So I kind of enjoyed it, and unironically it was kind of good, if long. Good enough that I would actually have been interested in seeing an MCU sprung off from this one. The thing I think about most though is what a theatrical cut made from this one would look like. Pair it down to about two and half hours, perhaps two and fifty. That might have been actually really good.

[Psyren]

So I kind of enjoyed it, and unironically it was kind of good, if long. Good enough that I would actually have been interested in seeing an MCU sprung off from this one. The thing I think about most though is what a theatrical cut made from this one would look like. Pair it down to about two and half hours, perhaps two and fifty. That might have been actually really good.

Nando had some thoughts on that. He highlighted some scenes like the Norwegian chanting at Aquaman, or the Aquaman cologne commercial, or the Amazons taking two minutes to shoot an arrow, that don't really add anything. And of course the trademark Snyder Slow-Mo definitely adds to the runtime.

He also highlighted the epilogue scene as a weak point, which I'll drop in a spoiler:

Spoiler

Show

So we're gearing up to fight Superman. Again. For the third time in four movies, if that stinger goes anywhere.

Does Snyder just... not like Superman? That's rhetorical, no need to answer that.

[Cikomyr2]

I will say that the onyl reason I am enjoying the Snyder Cut is because I consumer about 1 part/night. If I had to swallow it in 1 sitting, it would have been a bloated, inflated boring ass movie.

the pacing of a mini-series is MUCH more suited. Every episode has exposition, a cool fight, a new character to learn, etc...

[Dire_Flumph]

Nando had some thoughts on that. He highlighted some scenes like the Norwegian chanting at Aquaman, or the Aquaman cologne commercial, or the Amazons taking two minutes to shoot an arrow, that don't really add anything. And of course the trademark Snyder Slow-Mo definitely adds to the runtime.

Oh good grief, yes. It got much better after part 2, but the whole first third or so of the movie is filled with redundant scenes even before you get to the slo mo. And I don't think you can really appreciate how over-used the slo mo is until you watch the whole film. Sure, it's used unnecessarily in a bunch of action scenes, but it's also used in scenes with the Flash, slowed down to where barely anything, including Barry, is moving. He doesn't want these big scenes to be kinetic and exciting, he wants you to linger over just how awesome what's on the screen is, but he does it for so many moments that it just becomes redundant. It's like he can't choose what the important moments are, so he decides they all are.

Another thought I had watching the last third was just how poorly used Amy Adams was, even more so than in the Theatrical version. It may be just because I don't like this grimdark-Dark Knight Returns inspired take on Batman, but I really thought a much better idea would have been to have her being the driving force behind getting Diana and Bruce to put the League together to carry on Clark's memory. That would have been a good extension of her role in Man of Steel where she was the one who tracked down Superman originally. Otherwise it just seems like a complete waste of the actress to have her mope about in a few scenes, go for a walk at just the right moment, then disappear for the rest of the movie. We are told a few times how important Lois is between this and BvS, I wish that meant important to the narrative more than just as apparently the only thing keeping Superman sane.

He also highlighted the epilogue scene as a weak point, which I'll drop in a spoiler:

The epilogue is peak Snyder, and he misses the entire point of why the Marvel mid-credit scenes are often so exciting.

Spoiler: The epilogue

Show

The Martian Manhunter tease or extended Legion of Doom setup would have been harmless enough, but the extended "Knightmare" scene just goes on far too long. The worst of it is that long stretch of dialogue where the Joker and Batman throw barbs at each other in a way that further undermines Batman as a character. The Joker I'm sure can't help but try to get under Batman's skin, but having him return in kind by threatening to kill him slowly? It feels forced and indulgent, and all apologies to Jared Leto as an actor, but with all the much better takes on the Joker recently I find nothing particularly interesting about this one.

And guys, if you're trying to sneak past Superman, maybe don't start threatening to kill each other out in the open, okay?

[Dragonus45]

Nando had some thoughts on that. He highlighted some scenes like the Norwegian chanting at Aquaman, or the Aquaman cologne commercial, or the Amazons taking two minutes to shoot an arrow, that don't really add anything. And of course the trademark Snyder Slow-Mo definitely adds to the runtime.

My struggle is that I honestly think those scenes do add a degree of weight, reverence, and sincerity to the story and cutting them feels like a real loss. But yea cut down the slomo a little to make when you do still do it a bit more impactful would help.

He also highlighted the epilogue scene as a weak point, which I'll drop in a spoiler:

Spoiler

Show

So we're gearing up to fight Superman. Again. For the third time in four movies, if that stinger goes anywhere.

Does Snyder just... not like Superman? That's rhetorical, no need to answer that.

Spoiler

Show

Yea that bit hurts, because I feel like Snyder really does have this interesting idea to explore what Superman and the serious risk he brings might mean by making so much of the story about keeping him tethered and connected to humanity but it just has not been getting executed well.

[Psyren]

My struggle is that I honestly think those scenes do add a degree of weight, reverence, and sincerity to the story and cutting them feels like a real loss. But yea cut down the slomo a little to make when you do still do it a bit more impactful would help.

I'm not saying they should be eradicated from existence or anything. They can still be in the director's cut - that's what it's for - but the theatrical cut needs to trim down to essentials.

As one example, Endgame has a scene with Professor Hulk saving people from a building. Fun and builds his character + his current place in the MCU, sure, but in terms of the story being told there it didn't add anything, so it got cut.

Spoiler

Show

Yea that bit hurts, because I feel like Snyder really does have this interesting idea to explore what Superman and the serious risk he brings might mean by making so much of the story about keeping him tethered and connected to humanity but it just has not been getting executed well.

I genuinely think he just wants to skip all this heroism malarkey and go straight for Injustice. (Or maybe The Boys?)

[Trafalgar]

Yesterday, I was thinking about how similar the whole Justice League: Snyder Cut situation is to the Superman: Donner Cut situation. Then I realized that:

Spoiler: Justice League vs Superman I

Show

In Superman I, directed by Richard Donner, Superman flies really fast to turn back time to prevent a bad thing from happening.
In Justice League: The Snyder Cut, the Flash runs really fast to turn back time to prevent a bad thing from happening.

I thought I was really clever to notice this until I realized that:

Spoiler: There are no original ideas in superhero movies!

Show

In X Men: Days of Future Past, Wolverine goes back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.
In Deadpool 2, Deadpool goes back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.
In Avengers: Endgame, the Avengers go back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.

[Dire_Flumph]

I thought I was really clever to notice this until I realized that:

Spoiler: There are no original ideas in superhero movies!

Show

In X Men: Days of Future Past, Wolverine goes back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.
In Deadpool 2, Deadpool goes back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.
In Avengers: Endgame, the Avengers go goes back in time to prevent a bad thing from happening.

I think the JL:SC/Superman The Movie connection was a lot more direct than the others, and I would not be surprised to hear that it was an inspiration for the scene. It also fits into BvS and the unlikely to be seen Justice League 2 in that:

Spoiler

Show

We already know Barry was going to travel back in time anyway from when he appeared in the Batcave in BvS. Setting up one end of your time travel two movies early would at least be something newer for superhero films.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Dire_Flumph

Spoiler

Show

We already know Barry was going to travel back in time anyway from when he appeared in the Batcave in BvS.

Spoiler

Show

Wait, what? That was Barry?

That scene confused me completely, because I had no idea that was Barry. At least now I know.

And for me, that scene exemplifies the overdone effects in these movies. Both the visuals and audio were so distorted I had no idea who the character was, what he was saying or what his importance was supposed to be. It may have been obvious to DC fans, but it made absolutely no sense to me.

[Clertar]

I think the JL:SC/Superman The Movie connection was a lot more direct than the others, and I would not be surprised to hear that it was an inspiration for the scene. It also fits into BvS and the unlikely to be seen Justice League 2 in that:

Spoiler

Show

We already know Barry was going to travel back in time anyway from when he appeared in the Batcave in BvS. Setting up one end of your time travel two movies early would at least be something newer for superhero films.

I find it more similar to the use of the Time Stone in the MCU, for example by Thanos at the end of Infinity War with Vision. In Superman, the time reversal is used to go back to a previous status quo, and go through parts of the movie doing them differently (proper time travel). In IW and the Snyder Cut, time reversal is used to undo one single event, seconds after it happened.

[Dire_Flumph]

I find it more similar to the use of the Time Stone in the MCU, for example by Thanos at the end of Infinity War with Vision. In Superman, the time reversal is used to go back to a previous status quo, and go through parts of the movie doing them differently (proper time travel). In IW and the Snyder Cut, time reversal is used to undo one single event, seconds after it happened.

Hadn't thought of the villainous version in Infinity War with Thanos, I can see that. I was thinking more of the scene in Superman the Movie where he flies around the Earth, going back far enough to rescue Lois before she fell into the fissure. We see everything else reversing, but I didn't get the impression he was going back to fix all that stuff, because he already did earlier, just to save Lois, the one thing he failed to do. I suppose he might have destroyed the missile offscreen after reversing time, I just didn't get that from what was shown.

Just seemed similar in the fact that the Hero fails to do something then has to break a rule to go back in time and fix their failure.

[BloodSquirrel]

I'm not saying they should be eradicated from existence or anything. They can still be in the director's cut - that's what it's for - but the theatrical cut needs to trim down to essentials.

The problem is, the movie sort of does need them. They are essential. The overall product works much better with the slower, heavier pacing that gives all of the thousand things being introduced time to breath. Yes, you could make a movie with roughly the same plot in two hours, but you'd have to commit to a very different mood and style.

That's why, although I enjoyed the Synder cut much more than I expected, I can't pat Snyder on the back too much. He made a four hour movie that maybe could have been cut down to three and a half hours, but just doesn't work when you try to trim too away too much of it. If you're willing to watch a four hour movie, it's pretty decent. But if you find the slow-mo scenes and the chanting and the "Flash screws around saving a woman" too trying on your patience, and try to speed everything up, you wind up with the Whedon cut where everything feels insubstantial.

It's a problem that's baked very much into the fabric of the film. Snyder is not very economical with his screen time, but that doesn't just mean he has a bunch of scenes that you can cut- it means that the "essential" scenes don't pack everything that's needed in them. Other, more efficient filmmakers will have one scene do multiple things- introduce one of the characters while also moving the plot forward- that lets them pack more into a 2-hour runtime. They know how to get the most impact from the fewest lines of dialog. Infinity War, for example, is very good at that- the scene where the Guardians meet Thor does an excellent job of giving all of the characters a chance to show off their personalities while also delivering exposition while also moving the plot forward by setting the different characters on their paths.

I think you either need to commit to the four hour version of this movie, or you need a much deeper re-structuring and re-writing to make a shorter version not feel like it's missing something. Yes, sometimes a director's cut is just more indulgent than the theatrical cut, but in this case, the theatrical cut plain ol' doesn't work.

[Peelee]

In IW and the Snyder Cut, time reversal is used to undo one single event, seconds after it happened.

Oh, so they ripped off Galaxy Quest?

[Fyraltari]

In IW and the Snyder Cut, time reversal is used to undo one single event, seconds after it happened.

Oh, so they ripped off Galaxy Quest?

With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in the doomed world you have created.

[Psyren]

That's why, although I enjoyed the Synder cut much more than I expected, I can't pat Snyder on the back too much. He made a four hour movie that maybe could have been cut down to three and a half hours, but just doesn't work when you try to trim too away too much of it. If you're willing to watch a four hour movie, it's pretty decent. But if you find the slow-mo scenes and the chanting and the "Flash screws around saving a woman" too trying on your patience, and try to speed everything up, you wind up with the Whedon cut where everything feels insubstantial.

It's a problem that's baked very much into the fabric of the film. Snyder is not very economical with his screen time, but that doesn't just mean he has a bunch of scenes that you can cut- it means that the "essential" scenes don't pack everything that's needed in them. Other, more efficient filmmakers will have one scene do multiple things- introduce one of the characters while also moving the plot forward- that lets them pack more into a 2-hour runtime. They know how to get the most impact from the fewest lines of dialog. Infinity War, for example, is very good at that- the scene where the Guardians meet Thor does an excellent job of giving all of the characters a chance to show off their personalities while also delivering exposition while also moving the plot forward by setting the different characters on their paths.

I think you either need to commit to the four hour version of this movie, or you need a much deeper re-structuring and re-writing to make a shorter version not feel like it's missing something. Yes, sometimes a director's cut is just more indulgent than the theatrical cut, but in this case, the theatrical cut plain ol' doesn't work.

I don't buy the idea that it's impossible to get a theatrical cut of this thing without turning it into Josstice League. I'm sure some fan is going to do exactly that once the hype has died down a bit, if not WB themselves.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by BloodSquirrel
But if you find the slow-mo scenes and the chanting…too trying on your patience….

I had enough slow-mo and chanting just from the trailer. Not sure how I would survive four more minutes of that, much less four solid hours.

Originally Posted by BloodSquirrel
Yes, sometimes a director's cut is just more indulgent than the theatrical cut….

If by indulgent you mean self-indulgent, then yes. This just screams self-indulgence from the director.

[Peelee]

Saw the Ryan George cut. I felt it had an appropriate amount of not-Thanos, not-Ultron, and slow motion.

[Palanan]

Has anyone mentioned the Colbert Cut?

Easily my favorite version.

[Psyren]

Has anyone mentioned the Colbert Cut?

Easily my favorite version.

Ha! Amazing

In tangentially related news, the worst thing about the Snydercut continues to be its angrier fans.

[Kitten Champion]

Ha! Amazing

In tangentially related news, the worst thing about the Snydercut continues to be its angrier fans.

*Sigh*

This is one of the many reasons no one should take audience scores seriously. Still, this is even more nonsensical than those other stupid review bombs, trying to sink the new She-Ra or Captain Marvel RT scores - for instance - was at least directly aimed at those works. These Snyder-fans are acting like toddlers who were told by their parents they can't have what they wanted so then decide to throw a tantrum and break their sibling's toys, they're just hurting an unrelated third party (in this case Western Kaiju fans) and their parents are not any more disposed to take them seriously.

[Peelee]

Has anyone mentioned the Colbert Cut?

Easily my favorite version.

While that was pretty good... I don't think Colbert quite knows what the teens are up to now that it's no longer the 90s.

[Lord Raziere]

While that was pretty good... I don't think Colbert quite knows what the teens are up to now that it's no longer the 90s.

I mean speaking as someone born in the 90's so younger than those people....I found the pointing out those three being incredibly similar funny. just in a "historical comic book humor" way.

[Zevox]

In tangentially related news, the worst thing about the Snydercut continues to be its angrier fans.

Honestly, I just find the news in there that Warner Brothers doesn't intend to continue doing Snyder movies encouraging. His fans got their last hurrah here, which is good for them, but I'd have been pretty discouraged if they took whatever degree of success this manages to get as a reason to put him back on a bunch of their superhero films again.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Peelee
While that was pretty good... I don't think Colbert quite knows what the teens are up to now that it's no longer the 90s.

Can you elaborate? Not sure what you mean here.

[Traab]

I honestly feel like the entire DCEU suffers from one primary issue that everything else builds off of. They got into the game late after seeing the mcu hit it big, then rushed to catch up which ruined the foundations the mcu built to ramp up to its big finale. I get it, they didnt want to be perpetually a phase or two behind the mcu because that would invite even more ripoff copycat comments, but by rushing it all the way they did, they caught up more or less timeline wise to the mcu but ruined all enjoyment of the grand finale. We neither know nor have reason to care, about most of the characters involved. Batman was a washout because of the endless changes to who is the actor in the suit as well as tone changes in its films. Superman was just tone deaf movie after panned film and again has been through so many reboots its absurd. Im honestly surprised tom holland being a part of the mcu worked out so well after we went through THREE VERSIONS with toby garfield then him each playing a different spiderman personality. Probably more a testament to his acting ability and the writing he got than anything else. The Flash and Cyborg are just... THERE. At least aquaman and wonder woman got a decent intro film to establish them. But yeah, a rush to ride the comic universe popularity wave caused most of the problems and that poisoned the well for fan support. Not every marvel movie was a hit. There were a couple of real clunkers in there, but in general the series built up enough goodwill to ignore them with solid universe and character building films that gradually brought everyone together.

[Peelee]

Can you elaborate? Not sure what you mean here.

I don't think teenagers these days say "hey do you want to go hang out at the mall?" with nearly as much frequency as last millennium.

[Keltest]

I don't think teenagers these days say "hey do you want to go hang out at the mall?" with nearly as much frequency as last millennium.

I dont think anybody has said that for the past year, TBF. This isnt a teenager specific thing.

[Tyndmyr]

Honestly, I just find the news in there that Warner Brothers doesn't intend to continue doing Snyder movies encouraging. His fans got their last hurrah here, which is good for them, but I'd have been pretty discouraged if they took whatever degree of success this manages to get as a reason to put him back on a bunch of their superhero films again.

It's logical on their part. What they have hasn't been super amazing. Changing it up is pretty much required.

Oddly, the Joss version of Justice League is remaining canon, not the Snyder version. Kind of a confusing mess, I guess?

I honestly feel like the entire DCEU suffers from one primary issue that everything else builds off of. They got into the game late after seeing the mcu hit it big, then rushed to catch up which ruined the foundations the mcu built to ramp up to its big finale.

I'm in full agreement. Avengers was the sixth MCU film released. This let them build solidly into that being a great film. We mostly knew the characters, and most of those stand as excellent films in their own right. Sure, the Hulk is dodgy, but one meh film out of six? Not at all bad.

Justice League was the fifth film in the DCU. In addition, Suicide Squad did nothing to set up JL, instead attempting to be a copy of Guardians of the Galaxy(seriously, the color choices, the music, the filming style, it was attempting to be exactly that). So, they ended up with 3 setup films instead of five, and most of those felt rushed.