Jump to content

Snyder cut is happening


Recommended Posts

There's a long list on there. I've read that they're still negotiating with service providers. I had thought about if it was worth dropping HBO of of our bill for HBO Max. Worked out for us that we got Max as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As long as this cut gives us more sexy shots of Gal Gadot, I'll be happy.

It's alright, Seth. I still think you Rose to the occasion.

Relax yourselves, I was being intentionally dramatic because Im sick of Star Wars.

With all the individual platforms it's absolutely about trying to nab viewers. And Fan service is terrifying new way to go about it. It's like market testing on steroids.

 

 

Few questions I have are these:

 

1. How do we know that this was not in some sort of contract all along? Snyder was relieved of duty, but something unprecedented like this doesn't just come out of no where. I have to wonder if part of the negotiation for Snyder's exit (in addition to his personal tragedy) was he retained rights to do his cut at some point. I said it earlier, but I think this situation was similar to what led to the Superman II Donner cut, and it would make sense to me that Snyder may have learned from that experience, so he had negotiated terms where he could do his own version, if he were removed.

 

2. Toxic fandom: exactly what does that mean in your view, Tank? Now, I am going to discount the crazies out there that send producers writers directors and actors death threats. By any measure, those people are simply sick in the head. I think it is very unfair to lump people who just happen to be passionate over the things they are fans of with sickos like that. At this site, we are all fans of something. And who, exactly, gets to be the arbiter of who is toxic? What are the criteria?

 

3. HBO MAX is putting all that money into this Snyder cut, and I think it will actually be a lot more than the $30 million some are saying. There's a lot to consider, including renegotiation of salaries of the actors, and Snyder himself isn't going to do this for free. It may even be twice or more than that. Now, if HBO Max is willing to put that kind of funding into the Snyder cut, I have to question are they going to just stop there? Is it possible that this is a pilot of sorts to move future DCEU movies to HBO MAX for exclusive streaming?

 

4. I fail to see how HBO Max is some kind of win for toxic fans, if there is such a thing, anyway? We are in an age now that we can't believe hype because there are social media influencers for hire to manufacture hype. We also live in an age where studio executives seem to have the final say on big tent pole movies, anyway, and the last thing those guys even care about is pleasing fandom. I see this Snyder Cut being funded by HBO as strictly a business decision. Based on what I have read, there's up to some 4+ hours of footage, and depending how far they want to take it, they could even have re-shoots or film new footage altogether. That costs money, and I don't think HBO is going to throw it away, if they don't think there is a) a market for it, b) they aren't going to turn a profit. If one were to accept the theory that toxic fans are primarily responsible for this cut getting made, honestly do you think there are enough of them to be worthwhile? No, I think there has to be a lot more going on there, and it all comes to money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a long list on there. I've read that they're still negotiating with service providers. I had thought about if it was worth dropping HBO of of our bill for HBO Max. Worked out for us that we got Max as well.

I see theyve added a lot. We dont have HBO (or cable at all) but we got an email a while ago saying that HBO Max wasnt free for subscribers under our company. But that was maybe just a negotiation tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this at all? I was under the impression the "Snyder cut" was a cut of the movie that existed which the studio then hacked up? I mean if you have to spend 30 mil and possibly shoot new scenes, that isn't a new cut of the movie. You are flat out changing the movie.

 

As for toxic fandom, like most things there are levels. I don't think anyone in insinuating that every person who put out the Snyder cut hashtag is some ass who like chases actresses off of social media. Something like this is an offshoot of that though, the idea that the movie belongs to the fans. And by that I mean a certain subset of fans who feel they themselves are the "real" fans and others aren;t. The whole idea of gatekeeping a franchise. Now this isn't exactly that either but its heading in that direction.

 

This whole idea I just hate. I mean this movie didn't come out that long ago and now they are going to put out another version and have people pay again. Its one thing is decades later you put out a new version of the movie but this close just rubs me the wrong way. Its like "hey, pay for this movie!" then a short time later "ok, we know that movie we charged you for sucks, here is a the good version, pay for that now" Its why despite the fact that I loved the LOTR movies I never bought or even watched the Extended Editions. The idea that they'd put out multiple versions of the movie so near each other just rubbed me the wrong way.

 

When you get crappy food at a restaurant and send it back so the bring you a different dish they don't charge you for both dishes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this at all? I was under the impression the "Snyder cut" was a cut of the movie that existed which the studio then hacked up? I mean if you have to spend 30 mil and possibly shoot new scenes, that isn't a new cut of the movie. You are flat out changing the movie.

 

 

The Snyder cut doesn't yet exist because Snyder was still filming the movie when he left the production. When Whedon took over, a lot of things were rewritten, reshot, and reedited. Snyder never finished his movie, Whedon did, so there was never a version of the film to Zack Snyder's intended vision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People that have seen it say that it is pretty good. Maybe pretty good means better than the theatrical cut.

 

You have to look at it this way. The rain we got the Justice League we did was because Warner Bros management stepped in and said no we need something more Marvel like. While I don't think JL should have been 3 1/2 hours, it shouldn't have been the 2 that we got. Now that WB is under new management, maybe someone saw the cut and thought that it was good enough to finish. It's also a possible litmus test of how WB proceeds with the DCEU.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't get this at all? I was under the impression the "Snyder cut" was a cut of the movie that existed which the studio then hacked up? I mean if you have to spend 30 mil and possibly shoot new scenes, that isn't a new cut of the movie. You are flat out changing the movie.

 

 

The Snyder cut doesn't yet exist because Snyder was still filming the movie when he left the production. When Whedon took over, a lot of things were rewritten, reshot, and reedited. Snyder never finished his movie, Whedon did, so there was never a version of the film to Zack Snyder's intended vision.
Actors have come out saying there was stuff they filmed that ended up in the cutting room floor. The cinematographer for Snyder said that the first three trailers was all them. Everything after was redone. Snyder said he shot over four hours of material. Whedon didn't shoot enough to earn a director's credit. He did shoot enough to add to what was left of what was cut.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't get this at all? I was under the impression the "Snyder cut" was a cut of the movie that existed which the studio then hacked up? I mean if you have to spend 30 mil and possibly shoot new scenes, that isn't a new cut of the movie. You are flat out changing the movie.

 

 

The Snyder cut doesn't yet exist because Snyder was still filming the movie when he left the production. When Whedon took over, a lot of things were rewritten, reshot, and reedited. Snyder never finished his movie, Whedon did, so there was never a version of the film to Zack Snyder's intended vision.

 

Oh ok, this makes a bit more sense now. I forgot about how that all went down with Snyder. Im not really a fan and stopped giving these movies a chance after Batman vs Superman. Now that you mention it I do remember some of this though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly...this is why I said I am all for this. It makes no sense to have someone write the first 3 chapters of a book, (MoS, BvS and what was supposed to be JL part 1) and then for the 4th and final chapter you bring someone else in to change it all up, condense chapters 3 and 4 (JL 1 and 2 were spliced together to make a 2-hour JL) just to match the other book that was released before (Marvel's Avengers.)

 

This is a different situation from say, if Lucasfilm had decided in 2019 to hire a different writer/director to reshoot scenes and re-edit TLJ after its 2017 theatrical run just because of the fan backlash. Love it or hate it, RJ made TLJ as he saw fit and it is what we got and that's that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't get this at all? I was under the impression the "Snyder cut" was a cut of the movie that existed which the studio then hacked up? I mean if you have to spend 30 mil and possibly shoot new scenes, that isn't a new cut of the movie. You are flat out changing the movie.

 

 

The Snyder cut doesn't yet exist because Snyder was still filming the movie when he left the production. When Whedon took over, a lot of things were rewritten, reshot, and reedited. Snyder never finished his movie, Whedon did, so there was never a version of the film to Zack Snyder's intended vision.

 

From what I understand, there are many cuts of a film, during the various stages of creating it. I wonder if there is some very rough cut that was different from the theatrical version, with no FX or voice overs, that some people are confusing as a Snyder cut?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Snyder cut doesn't yet exist because Snyder was still filming the movie when he left the production. When Whedon took over, a lot of things were rewritten, reshot, and reedited. Snyder never finished his movie, Whedon did, so there was never a version of the film to Zack Snyder's intended vision.

Most people who are saying it's the superior version or have "seen" it are looking at his original script. The insiders who claim that have probably seen an assembly edit of his material before reshoots-- which is a cut of raw footage for timing and pacing and hasn't been finished. There's conflicting reports of where and when in the process Snyder had to go.

 

That said, if there had been a finished movie's worth of footage, they wouldn't have hired Whedon to come in and take over. There's a lot of movies over-seen in post by different directors. Lucas actually directed Jurassic Park in post, true little known fact!

 

If they are just finishing what Snyder had done, it would still cost a pretty penny.

 

Few questions I have are these:

 

1. How do we know that this was not in some sort of contract all along? Snyder was relieved of duty, but something unprecedented like this doesn't just come out of no where. I have to wonder if part of the negotiation for Snyder's exit (in addition to his personal tragedy) was he retained rights to do his cut at some point. I said it earlier, but I think this situation was similar to what led to the Superman II Donner cut, and it would make sense to me that Snyder may have learned from that experience, so he had negotiated terms where he could do his own version, if he were removed.

The DGA has pretty set rules when it comes to accreditation. Snyder could have very well have contracted for a DVD release of his version of the film, while the studio got final cut approval for theatrical release. That's actually pretty common-- but once he exited the project, that deal would have likely been voided. He would have paid out signing away his credit to any footage he shot tat might be used in the final cut once another director took over. For Whedon to be the credited director, the union wouldn't allow for Snyder to still have a director deal.

 

That said, Synder's departure wasn't contentious-- like say what has happened on the SW movies. His kid died, and he built their movie universe, so if there was no bad blood, he could negotiate a new deal if the studio thought it would make them money.

 

That's what it always comes down to-- money.

 

2. Toxic fandom: exactly what does that mean in your view, Tank? Now, I am going to discount the crazies out there that send producers writers directors and actors death threats. By any measure, those people are simply sick in the head. I think it is very unfair to lump people who just happen to be passionate over the things they are fans of with sickos like that. At this site, we are all fans of something. And who, exactly, gets to be the arbiter of who is toxic? What are the criteria?

I attribute "toxic" behavior to fans who base their criticism of an entry in their beloved franchise in some form of politicized rhetoric and hate, and work double time to be the loudest voice on the internet despite rarely being the biggest.

 

Some people could call my hatred of the PT toxic, lord knows I have been complaining about it on the internet for half my life. I generally frame my disdain via filmmaking criteria, or comparisons to the OT. Toxic, to me, is bullying Rose Tran off social media because her character was a "feminist agenda" or starting a million online petitions to get Kathleen Kennedy fired because she keeps casting female leads in SW films, or decided that the new SW films suck because they are OMG OBVIOUSLY POLITICIZED.

 

I personally don't love fan-babies who cry foul because SW does something they don't like, but at the same time, that could be me with the PT.

 

In relation to the DCU movies, I haven't seen many people on here or real life who like any of the movies. BvsS specifically seemed to have a very bro-y contingent of fans. I also admit that I am making a generalization for the humor... but there is a subset of geek culture that is very BRO, mysoginistic, and gross. It's the same subset of fans behind gamergate, and they are part of most fan cultures. Again, generalizing a bit, because any one of us could fit into any one of these individually, but if you made a Venn Diagram, there is a sect of fandom that is just gross.

 

3. HBO MAX is putting all that money into this Snyder cut, and I think it will actually be a lot more than the $30 million some are saying. There's a lot to consider, including renegotiation of salaries of the actors, and Snyder himself isn't going to do this for free. It may even be twice or more than that. Now, if HBO Max is willing to put that kind of funding into the Snyder cut, I have to question are they going to just stop there? Is it possible that this is a pilot of sorts to move future DCEU movies to HBO MAX for exclusive streaming?

 

4. I fail to see how HBO Max is some kind of win for toxic fans, if there is such a thing, anyway? We are in an age now that we can't believe hype because there are social media influencers for hire to manufacture hype. We also live in an age where studio executives seem to have the final say on big tent pole movies, anyway, and the last thing those guys even care about is pleasing fandom. I see this Snyder Cut being funded by HBO as strictly a business decision. Based on what I have read, there's up to some 4+ hours of footage, and depending how far they want to take it, they could even have re-shoots or film new footage altogether. That costs money, and I don't think HBO is going to throw it away, if they don't think there is a) a market for it, b) they aren't going to turn a profit. If one were to accept the theory that toxic fans are primarily responsible for this cut getting made, honestly do you think there are enough of them to be worthwhile? No, I think there has to be a lot more going on there, and it all comes to money.

Without knowing the exact plans or budgets, it's hard to say. All I know is that any decision they make will be because they have some sort of model or plans that makes them think they will make money. They wouldn't spend any real amount of money on fan service if they didn't think it would bring a return.

 

Exactly...this is why I said I am all for this. It makes no sense to have someone write the first 3 chapters of a book, (MoS, BvS and what was supposed to be JL part 1) and then for the 4th and final chapter you bring someone else in to change it all up, condense chapters 3 and 4 (JL 1 and 2 were spliced together to make a 2-hour JL) just to match the other book that was released before (Marvel's Avengers.)

 

This is a different situation from say, if Lucasfilm had decided in 2019 to hire a different writer/director to reshoot scenes and re-edit TLJ after its 2017 theatrical run just because of the fan backlash. Love it or hate it, RJ made TLJ as he saw fit and it is what we got and that's that.

It IS the same thing. Even when there is a singular writer/director movies of this size are made by committee. Whedon left the Marvel fold after having things forced on him for the bigger universe in Age of Ultron. Like I said above, Snyder wasn't forced out over creative, he left because his kid died. The studio still made same shoddy decisions in his absence, but they didn't owe him anything. If there was goodwill with both parties, and the studio thought it could make them money, they'll do it.

 

Had JL made Avengers Endgame style money, they wouldn't be doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think is really an example of toxic fandom. However the idea that fans can say "we dont like what we got, give us something else" and then get it has some not so great repurcussions potentially down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's levels.

 

Star Trek fans getting TOS a third season after a letter writing campiagn-- good.

 

Fanboys breaking the internet because Green Lantern's costume looks weird forcing SC to re-render half the effects in the movie-- okay? I guess?

 

Online petitions to have a new Game of Thrones season made or telling Rose Tran she should die on Twitter-- bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's levels.

 

Star Trek fans getting TOS a third season after a letter writing campiagn-- good.

 

Fanboys breaking the internet because Green Lantern's costume looks weird forcing SC to re-render half the effects in the movie-- okay? I guess?

 

Online petitions to have a new Game of Thrones season made or telling Rose Tran she should die on Twitter-- bad.

The stuff with Kelly Marie Tran is it's own level, that was despicable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahah-- I totally didn't realize I conflated her real name and character name.

I had to think a moment before replying I was like "Kelly Rose Tran"? "Rose Marie Tran"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One big thing to consider is that a decent portion of the worst of fandom isnt even fandom. You have a significant number of Russian bots trying to sow discord, and a decent percentage of the anti-Tran stuff was Russian bots. So it makes toxic fandom seem way worse than it really is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and I question the idea that people who do send or promote despicable messages like that are even fans. They are mentally ill (I'm not being ironic there, seriously that is sick).

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's levels.

 

Star Trek fans getting TOS a third season after a letter writing campiagn-- good.

 

Fanboys breaking the internet because Green Lantern's costume looks weird forcing SC to re-render half the effects in the movie-- okay? I guess?

 

Online petitions to have a new Game of Thrones season made or telling Rose Tran she should die on Twitter-- bad.

Good examples, Tank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One big thing to consider is that a decent portion of the worst of fandom isnt even fandom. You have a significant number of Russian bots trying to sow discord, and a decent percentage of the anti-Tran stuff was Russian bots. So it makes toxic fandom seem way worse than it really is.

Which is all the more reason studios shouldn't pander to it. I really don't mean to bring it up again, but... you know all those memes where people have had bots write script pages? TROS feeks lije they did this then actually shot it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure there were Russian bots and other things with the Kelly Marie Tran stuff but you can't dismiss it as all being done by that. There 100% is an insidious, awful part of fandom.

 

As for the majority of fans I think we just need to watch ourselves and not feed into it. We all love Star Wars or other franchises and it can incite emotions when we truly don't like something. We just need to check it thought, not take it personal, not make it personal against the people who made the movie or whatever we don;t like. I think this board is pretty much devoid of that kinda thing now but that wasn't always the case.

 

Alot of this started with the PT. Some people were so mad and they didn't just dislike the movies. They were mad at people who did like the movies. Like I'd come here and be pro PT and people wouldn't just argue with me, they were mad at me that I liked the PT. It was like I did something to them personally.

 

I get that the vast majority of those people didn't go on to become harrassers of Kelly or others. But I would bet that everyone who did go on to become one of those asses started just being mad online. For some people it's not a far leap to go from a place like tis and saying "F George Lucas, he raped my childhood!" to then when they had the ability to actually communicate with Kelly to say equally terrible things to her.

 

So really all Im saying is it's ok to dislike or even hate a movie and to come here or anywhere and talk about it. Just gotta remember that whoever made that movie didn't do it to you personally. They tried their hardest. So if you hate TLJ thats fine and you can tear the movie a new one but don't say "F Rian Johnson" because thats moronic. And without that kinda of anger echoing around the internet you wouldn;t then have that small percentage who take it to the next level and become truly toxic.

 

Like I said, its not really a big problem on this board any more. So its not like Im calling anyone out who is here now. Just talking in general and saying you dont get that !% of fans who become truly toxic without that larger group of fans who are so angry for the toxic group to emerge from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was that angry PT guy. I still hate them, but I have backed off attacking people who do.

 

I got a taste of the other side after writing a well-known franchise icon and getting a metric ton of hate mail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just here to say that this whole thing is an awful idea. Only because it appeased the worst trolls and now teaches them all that their awful behavior will actually get them what they want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...