Justice League **Spoilers from post 980 onward**

ManOfMystery

Fysh wrote: »

The most interesting comment I've seen in a review is this one, from The Independent:

There was no interest in any Director's cut of Justice League at one point, and look where we are now. If this does well, who knows?

WB may have moved their DC universe on a bit, but from the JL roster it's almost certain that Gadot and Momoa will be back in solo movies (WW3 is in the works and Aquaman 2 shoots this summer) - Affleck is returning as Batman in the Flashpoint movie along with Ezra Miller as Flash, and whilst nothing is in the pipeline officially for Cavill there's also been no announcement that he's out or finished. The only one looking doubtful is Fisher due to the ongoing situation between him and WB over bullying claims, but if Cyborg is as big a draw in this movie as I've read, maybe they'll sort that out. So that's 4 of the 6 Snyder - JL stars returning in their roles in the very near future.

So if there's audience hunger for more, and WB think there's money to be made, I wouldn't rule anything out.

Agent Coulson

If it's a hit on HBO Max and they see a boost in subscribers over the next month or three that's linked to this they may well make the squeals for exclusive HBO Max all these streaming services are throwing billions of dollars at making content this is one of the best IP's in the world so who knows.

The White Wolf

Fysh wrote: »

UK Indo, not Irish. So.... a bit less objectionable?

UK Indo seems to be a rung below the Irish one if that's possible. Their articles are absolute bait.

I just don't know why of all the reviews out there, ranging from the Guardian (positive) to The Hollywood Reporter (negative) that a blurb from that clickbait site would catch your attention....unless, of course, that blurb confirmed an opinion you've already formed.

mikhail

The White Wolf wrote: »

UK Indo seems to be a rung below the Irish one if that's possible. Their articles are absolute bait.

Their articles automatically get flagged on reddit with a "users often report articles from this site for sensational or exaggerated stories" or something of the kind. I can't say I've read it to confirm, but it has a pretty terrible name at this point.

Fysh

The White Wolf wrote: »

UK Indo seems to be a rung below the Irish one if that's possible. Their articles are absolute bait.

I just don't know why of all the reviews out there, ranging from the Guardian (positive) to The Hollywood Reporter (negative) that a blurb from that clickbait site would catch your attention....unless, of course, that blurb confirmed an opinion you've already formed.

I noticed it in passing ( UK Indo is one of few UK news sites that aren't enormously Tory and/or editorially transphobic and/or editorially anti-SNP/Scottish Independence, so is a useful counterweight) and thought it might be of interest because someone upthread had mentioned how many reviews just focused on "it's better than the theatrical release". (I'm also loving how Bradshaw's positive review is accepted at face value despite how often his reviews get cited on this forum as evidence that critics are the worst kind of pox on film because they just don't understand what audiences like Never found him a particularly useful critic myself so I tend not to pay him much mind either way...)

That comment strikes me as a fair question someone might ask about a several-years-later definitive release of the film. Not necessarily something that would put off fans wanting the equivalent of an Ultimate Cut, but still relevant when assessing this version on its own merits IMO.

mikhail

mikhail wrote: »

Their articles automatically get flagged on reddit with a "users often report articles from this site for sensational or exaggerated stories" or something of the kind. I can't say I've read it to confirm, but it has a pretty terrible name at this point.

The reviewer is the stand in for Mark Kermode on his show so I'd consider her a good reviewer as they go. Dunno why it's the part of the review that annoys people tbh. I'd suspect they're all actually intriguing people enough to give it a go. I didn't think I would but I will now, know a fair few who will too. Granted my friends aren't exactly the mainstream audience but I suspect it'll get on reasonably now.

CastorTroy

Looks like it became available a day early?

larchielads

Not widescreen couldn't adjust it either. Might wait til tomorrow see what links are available then

BrookieD

larchielads wrote: »

Not widescreen couldn't adjust it either. Might wait til tomorrow see what links are available then

It will only be in 4:3 AR not 2:35:1 or 16:9

larchielads

BrookieD wrote: »

It will only be in 4:3 AR not 2:35:1 or 16:9

Seriously?? Ah jesus christ snyder. 4 hrs of 4:3 no thanks

ThePott

CastorTroy wrote: »

Looks like it became available a day early?

Where has it been officially released do you know? I've seen it on the high seas alright but wondering where it came from.

Was gonna wait till Friday to watch it but if there's a legal way of watching it now I'd go for it with the day off.

CastorTroy

Can't see any info on where it leaked from. just says it's a HDRip. no source

Headshot

Anyone know what time tomorrow will this be on Sky Cinema?

Caegan

First showing is 7am tomorrow on sky cinema.

Penn

I'm about an hour and twenty in.

Jesus it's tough going so far. And so much slow-mo.... Slow-mo at different speeds, slow-mo mixed with fast-motion, but just slow-mo everywhere.

It doesn't have some of the crap the original had and things are better explained and set up, but an hour and twenty and almost nothing has happened so far.

Agent Coulson

Right about to sit down and watch Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition tonight.


I was thinking of doing them back to back tomorrow but I think that might be a bit to much.

The White Wolf

Penn wrote: »

I'm about an hour and twenty in.

Jesus it's tough going so far. And so much slow-mo.... Slow-mo at different speeds, slow-mo mixed with fast-motion, but just slow-mo everywhere.

It doesn't have some of the crap the original had and things are better explained and set up, but an hour and twenty and almost nothing has happened so far.

Good to know you kept your hand in your pocket anyway, should soften the blow.

johnny_ultimate

Just a note to everyone to make sure your tv doesn’t automatically it to widescreen when you sit down to watch it! It’s an odd if admirable decision from Snyder given the material, but nonetheless 4:3 has its own particular aesthetic quirks and strengths, so it’s the only way to watch it properly.

Very rare to see a blockbuster presented with that aspect ratio (although common in the indie / arthouse space), so think there’ll be a few reports of people attempting to incorrectly adjust for widescreen!

Penn

The White Wolf wrote: »

Good to know you kept your hand in your pocket anyway, should soften the blow.

I could have signed up to the free trial of Now TV and then cancelled it after, but what difference would that make?

The White Wolf

The difference would obviously be streaming views given how important that will be but how and ever.

Penn

The White Wolf wrote: »

The difference would obviously be streaming views given how important that will be but how and ever.

It really won't considering they're not going to be making Justice League 2.

But in the interests of not being a cheap d*ck

Penn

Finished it there.

It's a slog for the first half. Explains things a lot better than the original, but takes way the f*ck too long to do it. A lot of the stupid sh*t that made little sense from the original gets a reasonable setup to explain it, but it's often over-explained, and sometimes in slow-mo. That said I'm almost surprised how similar a lot of it is to the original, and how much I thought would have been Whedon's that was actually from Snyder.

It gets better in the second half. Cyborg was one of the most surprising parts of the original, I thought he was great in it. He gets even better here. That said, Batman feels completely neutered. Obviously there's a power level discrepancy with the rest of the team, but he contributes so little in most of the fights. Even compared to how he is in BvS, his main contribution here is just moving the plot along.

The ending to the Steppenwolf fight was miles better here. Steppenwolf and everything to do with the Mother Boxes in general was far better, though I much prefer his design from the original. The ending got a bit Lord of the Rings. The Knightmare scene was interesting, Jared Leto actually did a decent job bar his stupid laugh. Bruce walking straight out to talk to Martian Manhunter given everything that had just happened was stupid though.

But by far the worst thing was Iris West's car crash, which even Vin Diesel would probably find too ridiculous. Her car accelerates quicker than the Flash.

There's a pretty solid 3 hour movie in there. It's definitely better than the Whedon version and I'd even say it's probably better than BvS (or maybe my expectations were sufficiently lower). But it's certainly not so great that they should give the reins back to Snyder and let him plow on with his original plans. I don't think it would have gone well.

Eduard Khil

Lasted 1 hour and 45 minutes I need a break, enjoying the padding of each character and the catch up of the newer storyline.

Affleck needs to do more Batman he is very entertaining as Bruce Wayne. Will go back for the last 2 and a bit hours later it's been great so far

bigar

I was skeptical and did not believe it would be much different, let alone better. I am glad that I was proven wrong. It is very different, so much so that we can really speak of a completely different movie that was much better.

As mentioned, it can compete with Return of the King for the number of endings.

larchielads

Hows the 4:3 suiting people who have watched it?

Drumpot

Ha, completely different movie, definitely better then the Whedon one.

One disappointment was that they didn’t use the score from BvS. So much crammed into that movie though, loved the flash introduction at the dog place.

Gonna take me some time to digest that as I’m exhausted.

kerplun k

Jez. Fair play to the folks that stayed up past midnight and finished. That’s well beyond me at this stage. Will definitely be breaking this up over the next week or so.

Penn

larchielads wrote: »

Hows the 4:3 suiting people who have watched it?

For the most part you barely notice it tbh. It's not that bad. But then there'll be some scenes where you can't help but wish it was the kind of fullscreen IMAX that Nolan uses.

Snake Plisken

Crazy decision to release it in 4:3 IMAX Ratio especially when most people will we watching on widescreen TV's during the pandemic, that will actually bug me while I watch it on HBO MAX later.

techdiver

I see Sky claim the HD version is 21.6 GB, which I thought was a welcome surprise of a decent bitrate for Sky, but once downloaded it claims to only use 7.7 GB on the disk.

I think I might "source" a better version. I'm not going to feel guilt as I already pay for the source of the movie where anyway. :P

ManOfMystery

I really enjoyed it. It's long for sure, it has some flaws, and it often reverts to those Snyder tropes that for many of us are marmite (the slow-mo, the music, the aesthetics) in that we either love or hate tham as artistic choices.

But overall? Really enjoyable. There's a genuinely good film in there, and the difference between this and Whedon's 2017 version is night and day despite the fact that the overall story structure is not really any difference. It's sitting at 78% on RT at the moment and whilst I often don't agree with the consensus on that site, for once it sounds about right.

The characters are much better fleshed out - both the heroes and villains. There's more elaboration. The stakes feel more real. The film isn't humourless, but it utilises humour better and is less cheesy/cringy than the original cut. Overall, it feels more epic and Snyder's take on the mythology of heroes of the past gives it a very unique depth.

Overall, by the end of the film I had lots of questions - not for Zack Snyder, but for WB. Having seen this, you have to wonder why on earth they oped to make the decisions they did in 2016 - restrict it to 2hrs max, cut out all the great Cyborg stuff, make Steppenwolf totally generic and neutured, remove Darkseid completely, etc. So many questionable choices.

Chris_Heilong

A huge improvement, It is actually a decent film now. I really liked it but did have a few issues, It is too long by maybe a half an hour, some scenes should have been cut back, some of the dialog was fairly stiff which was probably down to not being able to do pick ups and finally the Sound track did not work at all, the music actually ruined some scenes that with better music would have been truly epic. In saying that I am really happy that this film exists.

Drumpot

Are they not allowed to re-use scores from MOS and BvS again or do they have to pay big money to use them on different movies. I really didn’t think much of the main music of the Snyder justice league movie and can’t for the life of me work out why they wouldn’t of used the far superior scores from the other two movies unless it was a money thing.

Also , maybe there needs to be an edit of the OP to include Snyder version as it’s very different to the 2017 TR?

senordingdong

ManOfMystery wrote: »

Overall, by the end of the film I had lots of questions - not for Zack Snyder, but for WB. Having seen this, you have to wonder why on earth they oped to make the decisions they did in 2016 - restrict it to 2hrs max, cut out all the great Cyborg stuff, make Steppenwolf totally generic and neutured, remove Darkseid completely, etc. So many questionable choices.

Was it 'WB' or just Kevin tsujihara?

I liked MOS but I can see why others wouldn't. Then bvs, which admittedly I like alot, did go further down the rabbit hole.
I can understand why they were spooked.

techdiver

senordingdong wrote: »

Was it 'WB' or just Kevin tsujihara?

Yeah from my reading of it was twofold.

1. Tsujihara wanted it shorter for more viewings in a day in the cinema.
2. He wasn't willing to delay as it would have effected his bonus.

Whether you like Snyder or not it does seem that many Hollywood studios are ran by people who haven't a ****ing clue about movies. I always harp back to the Kevin Smith talk about the time he wrote a script for a Superman movie in the early 2000's. The complete idiots like Jon Peters in power at the time were mind boggling. It left me thinking how anything of any worth gets made in Hollywood. It's probably fine for the Spielberg's and Nolan's of the world as they wield quite an amount of power, but for up and coming movies makers it must be soul destroying having these fools butcher your art.

ManOfMystery

senordingdong wrote: »

Was it 'WB' or just Kevin tsujihara?

I liked MOS but I can see why others wouldn't. Then bvs, which admittedly I like alot, did go further down the rabbit hole.
I can understand why they were spooked.

Hard to know, but I assume with any company of that size there is more than one person calling all the shots. Geoff Johns had a lot of input to Whedon's one too.

I loved MOS and liked the BvS UE, but if anything JL seems to have made slightly safer storyline choices than those films.

Sirsok

I really really enjoyed that. Four hours flew by! I finished it with a big smile on my face, and actually wanting to know what is going to happen going forward.

As someone who hated the first one, and DCEU offerings in general (bar Man of Steel), I had to temper my expectations , but this blew me away.

Without looking to deeply into different things, I just simply really enjoyed it.

Drumpot

ManOfMystery wrote: »

Hard to know, but I assume with any company of that size there is more than one person calling all the shots. Geoff Johns had a lot of input to Whedon's one too.

I loved MOS and liked the BvS UE, but if anything JL seems to have made slightly safer storyline choices than those films.

I felt thay way aswell about this JL, he actually held back the reigns and I thought BvS was much darker in many ways.

I’m gonna have to watch this again as I was knackered watching it last night, don’t think I took it all in.

senordingdong

techdiver wrote: »

Yeah from my reading of it was twofold.

1. Tsujihara wanted it shorter for more viewings in a day in the cinema.
2. He wasn't willing to delay as it would have effected his bonus.

Whether you like Snyder or not it does seem that many Hollywood studios are ran by people who haven't a ****ing clue about movies. I always harp back to the Kevin Smith talk about the time he wrote a script for a Superman movie in the early 2000's. The complete idiots like Jon Peters in power at the time were mind boggling. It left me thinking how anything of any worth gets made in Hollywood. It's probably fine for the Spielberg's and Nolan's of the world as they wield quite an amount of power, but for up and coming movies makers it must be soul destroying having these fools butcher your art.

I think it makes the success of the MCU even more significant, Iirc Kevin feige persuaded them to give him the reigns so that he could keep it all on course and free of interference.

ManOfMystery

Feige being a huge comic fan is also a bonus as he was intent on doing the characters justice and not butchering the source material. The MCU has of course taken some liberties, but by and large, they've been extremely faithful in terms of characterisation and aesthetics. It's worked out extremely well for them given how much money the MCU has raked in.

Whereas for the likes of some other execs, it's purely a business exercise and they will try and appeal to what (they think) is popular with the mass audiences regardless if it means ruining a comic book property. Prime example being Jon Peters and his abnormal obsession with getting huge spiders into a movie.

johnny_ultimate

There was never going to be a four hour cut of Justice League released in cinemas, even without the tragic circumstances here. Hollywood doesn’t release four hour films, and there was zero chance of it here after the critically reviled and commercially disappointing Batman v Superman (that a ~$850m grossing film can be considered disappointing is Hollywood economics at its most broken). Snyder would have had to deliver a shorter film.

I personally have zero problems with long films, and think directors should be allowed make a four hour film if they so wish. That, alas, is not the reality of modern Hollywood. If Snyder had finished the project as planned the theatrical cut would not have been this fabled Snyder Cut. The Snyder Cut has been willed into being after the fact, and the film being released today is resolutely not the film that would have been released in 2017. It is purely a product of the film’s troubled production, release and reception.

Brief_Lives

ManOfMystery wrote: »

I really enjoyed it. It's long for sure, it has some flaws, and it often reverts to those Snyder tropes that for many of us are marmite (the slow-mo, the music, the aesthetics) in that we either love or hate tham as artistic choices.

But overall? Really enjoyable. There's a genuinely good film in there, and the difference between this and Whedon's 2017 version is night and day despite the fact that the overall story structure is not really any difference. It's sitting at 78% on RT at the moment and whilst I often don't agree with the consensus on that site, for once it sounds about right.

The characters are much better fleshed out - both the heroes and villains. There's more elaboration. The stakes feel more real. The film isn't humourless, but it utilises humour better and is less cheesy/cringy than the original cut. Overall, it feels more epic and Snyder's take on the mythology of heroes of the past gives it a very unique depth.

Overall, by the end of the film I had lots of questions - not for Zack Snyder, but for WB. Having seen this, you have to wonder why on earth they oped to make the decisions they did in 2016 - restrict it to 2hrs max, cut out all the great Cyborg stuff, make Steppenwolf totally generic and neutured, remove Darkseid completely, etc. So many questionable choices.

I think it is easily DCs best movie to date. What were WB doing releasing that turkey in 2017.

I agree about the slow mo crap, and the big epilogue, but some of the new stuff was genuinely the best thing DC have done, to date (as part of the DCEU, not the christian bale stuff).

there's some real edgy stuff in the movie too, Marvel could never have made this movie.

Chris_Heilong

Brief_Lives wrote: »

I think it is easily DCs best movie to date. What were WB doing releasing that turkey in 2017.

I agree about the slow mo crap, and the big epilogue, but some of the new stuff was genuinely the best thing DC have done, to date (as part of the DCEU, not the christian bale stuff).

there's some real edgy stuff in the movie too, Marvel could never have made this movie.

They wanted the avengers but they were never going to get it.

Snake Plisken

My God that was brilliant! I can see why Deborah Snyder and Christopher Nolan advised Zack not to watch the Joss Whedon cut to see what a mess he made of Zack's project. Also blame the studio for not sticking with Zack's vision and yes it would have been probably between 2 1/2 and 3 hours but I'm sure we would have got this Director's cut on the BluRay.
I do hope it's a massive success on streaming and it is certainly a movie I will go to see when the cinemas re-open and I sure would love to see a Zack's DC Universe continue. Rumours he might direct the next Wonder Woman Movie which, based on the extended scene with the terrorists I'm sure it would be great.
Anyway great to see the fan base win out and we finally got the Snyder cut we deserved!

_CreeD_

techdiver wrote: »

I see Sky claim the HD version is 21.6 GB, which I thought was a welcome surprise of a decent bitrate for Sky, but once downloaded it claims to only use 7.7 GB on the disk.

I think I might "source" a better version. I'm not going to feel guilt as I already pay for the source of the movie where anyway. :P

I was so disappointed when I saw NowTv had the streaming rights here, in an age of 4k/HDR from a director who thrives on strong visuals we get a 720p/SDR 5mbps experience.
Fk.

mloc123

I hated the original version when I saw it in the cinema. But found the new cut very enjoyable. It is slow and self indulgent but a good watch.

It litteraly is a whole new movie.

Penn

Brief_Lives wrote: »

What were WB doing releasing that turkey in 2017.

The most insane part for me is how the final fight differs between the two versions.

The Flash speedforce part was brilliant and worked amazingly well, and then the Cyborg part really capped off his journey in the film too. Those not being in the theatrical version is crazy, and really the only reason why I think comes down to the runtime. Not the runtime of the scene itself, but for Cyborg's part in it to work we need to have seen his mother before, which means an earlier scene of her needs to be in the movie, plus the scene of his father's sacrifice and him dying too, so they probably decided to take all that out. But if you take out Cyborg in the Mother Boxes, then Flash has no reason for his part either so they took it out too. Yet we instead got the Russian family scenes because Whedon seems to like putting faces to some of the people being saved (he did or tried to do the same in both Avengers movies he did, with the waitresses in Avengers 1 and the woman and young boy in Age of Ultron).

Limiting the theatrical version to 2 hours absolutely meant the movie was never going to work as intended, no matter what Whedon or anyone else tried to do with it.

pixelburp

Given we know Synder for extra fun dollars to shoot new material, so we know for sure this cut is what Synder intended? As Johnny Unicron mentioned, no way in hell any studio releases a 4 hour blockbuster these days, so this cut can't have been the original theatrical version. So discounting the Joker material (which AFAIK was very definitely new-new story), and other suspicious elements I wonder how long the original vision was meant to be.

mr_cochise

I have about 1.5 hrs watched and have to stop to go to work and man I wish I didn't have to go to work. It is already a way better movie. It flows better and once I got used to the black bars at the side I thought it looked better.
Steppenwolf looks better and even sounds better. Some of the action has better detail so there is more sense of what is going on.
Looking forward to watching the rest.

yourdeadwright

Where can you watch this ?