Movies The Snyder Cut is real...and it's SPECTACULAR!

[Mercury33]

I can sit through LotR extended cuts no problem. I don’t see a 4 hour run time to be the monumental task some are making it out to be. 

[Joe]

3 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

I can sit through LotR extended cuts no problem. I don’t see a 4 hour run time to be the monumental task some are making it out to be. 

 

It's atrocious and basically cements this movie as a novelty instead of an attempt to actually make a good film. Either way. I will watch it!

[Keyser_Soze]

You heard it here first: Justice League Snyder cut is just as good as LOTR extended cuts!

[johnny]

24 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

I can sit through LotR extended cuts no problem. I don’t see a 4 hour run time to be the monumental task some are making it out to be. 

lotr earns its runtime. 4 hours is not a monumental task when a movie is worth the time. there is nothing about justice league that suggests it needs to be 4 hours or will be worth the runtime. sometimes a movie that is an hour and 50 minutes can feel like an eternity if it’s done really poorly. 

 

but it will be easier to watch a 4 hour movie since we can watch it at home 

[Greatoneshere]

If it helps any, even people who didn't like the movie said the 4 hours flies by from what I've read.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

 

Are we getting an intermission at least like that movie had? How am I supposed to make it through a 4 hour movie in one sitting? I don't know why this movie being 4 hours blows my mind so much, but it really does.

use the pause button on the remote. 

[skillzdadirecta]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

 

Are we getting an intermission at least like that movie had? How am I supposed to make it through a 4 hour movie in one sitting? I don't know why this movie being 4 hours blows my mind so much, but it really does.

I was telling a friend of mine who used to be TV writer but has left the business about this movie and that it was four hours long. Without missing a beat he said "Oh, so the director basically didn't cut ANYTHING?" to which I replied, "Pretty much." When Directors turn in their first cuts to a studio, they're often three plus hours long and then have to be trimmed for time. This is why we get deleted scenes on DVDS and Blurays and extended cuts. Most directors want to cut as little as possible because in their minds, anything that they left in their cut is necessary. Snyder is basically getting the rare opportunity to release a cut of the film as HE sees fit. The problem is that most of the running time of this movie will be used up by excessive slow motion scenes. I'm definitely going to watch this at some point, I just don't know when. I mean... it's FOUR FUCKIN' HOURS.

[Greatoneshere]

People binge shows in one sitting for much longer than four hours, not sure why this is different.

[skillzdadirecta]

13 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

People binge shows in one sitting for much longer than four hours, not sure why this is different.

Because shows are paced differently than movies. Every episode has a begining, middle and end and for serialized shows, they know how to pull you into the next episode with cliffhangers and such. A bloated film can feel endless if it's poorly paced and has a lot of superflous fluff. @johnny hit the nail on the head... you can have a three hour movie that breezes by or a 90 minute film that feels like an eternity. I've seen SHORT films that have worn out their welcomes after 15 minutes. Four hours to sit through one film is asking a LOT and nothing Snyder has ever done has said to me that he can keep a film interesting for that long. It's tough for filmmakers who have mastered the craft, like Tarantino and Scorcese to do so its an especially heavy lift for someone like Snyder.

[Greatoneshere]

3 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Because shows are paced differently than movies. Every episode has a begining, middle and end and for serialized shows, they know how to pull you into the next episode with cliffhangers and such. A bloated film can feel endless if it's poorly paced and has a lot of superflous fluff. @johnny hit the nail on the head... you can have a three hour movie that breezes by or a 90 minute film that feels like an eternity. I've seen SHORT films that have worn out their welcomes after 15 minutes. Four hours to sit through one film is asking a LOT and nothing Snyder has ever done has said to me that he can keep a film interesting for that long. It's tough for filmmakers who have mastered the craft, like Tarantino and Scorcese to do so its an especially heavy lift for someone like Snyder.

 

I agree about pacing, but just hit the pause button? I mean, you can take breaks, who cares? It just doesn't seem like a big deal. It's not like I sat through the Irishman without ever pausing. 

[Brick]

Only four hour film I'm interested in watching any time soon is Lawrence of Arabia. Recorded that while it was playing on TV, so I should watch that soon. 

[Keyser_Soze]

7 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I agree about pacing, but just hit the pause button? I mean, you can take breaks, who cares? It just doesn't seem like a big deal. It's not like I sat through the Irishman without ever pausing. 

 

Because it's a movie you have to stay true to the movie watching experience meaning no pauses, sit your ass down and watch the whole thing from start to finish without stopping. Piss your pants if you have to!

[skillzdadirecta]

13 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I agree about pacing, but just hit the pause button? I mean, you can take breaks, who cares? It just doesn't seem like a big deal. It's not like I sat through the Irishman without ever pausing. 

It's not just about "hitting the pause button"... I mean that's obvious. It's about story structure and pacing of the edit. Things that audiences respond to subconsciously. For example, a good televsion show hooks the viewer and keeps them hooked throughout the episode because the writers know that if you lose the audience over the course of an episode, they can just change the channel. That's why TV shows are written, shot and edited a certain way. ESPECIALLY bingeable shows. Movies are different because filmmakers know that for the most part they have a captive audience... most people aren't going to walk out of a movie they paid money for. What they WILL do is suffer through the movie and or fall asleep and then trash the film after the fact. That's why the first rule of screenwriting is to "start a scene late and get out early". You don't want to test an audiences patience. It's why editors and producers exist... to reign in self indulgent writers and directors who don't want to cut much of anything, but by having that discipline and perspective it leads to a tighter more enjoyable film that MOVES.  TV shows and Movies are two different things.

 

12 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Because it's a movie you have to stay true to the movie watching experience meaning no pauses, sit your ass down and watch the whole thing from start to finish without stopping. Piss your pants if you have to!

I mean movies are designed to be watched in one sitting... which is kind of obnoxious to make film this long without a built in intermission.

[Greatoneshere]

21 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

It's not just about "hitting the pause button"... I mean that's obvious. It's about story structure and pacing of the edit. Things that audiences respond to subconsciously. For example, a good televsion show hooks the viewer and keeps them hooked throughout the episode because the writers know that if you lose the audience over the course of an episode, they can just change the channel. That's why TV shows are written, shot and edited a certain way. ESPECIALLY bingeable shows. Movies are different because filmmakers know that for the most part they have a captive audience... most people aren't going to walk out of a movie they paid money for. What they WILL do is suffer through the movie and or fall asleep and then trash the film after the fact. That's why the first rule of screenwriting is to "start a scene late and get out early". You don't want to test an audiences patience. It's why editors and producers exist... to reign in self indulgent writers and directors who don't want to cut much of anything, but by having that discipline and perspective it leads to a tighter more enjoyable film that MOVES.  TV shows and Movies are two different things.

 

Well yeah of course there are differences but people are worried its 4 hours before its out. We can't make the judgments you are talking about until we see the film. A 4 hour superhero movie can work just fine in theory, it'll all depend on how its done. But to be worried about 4 hours beforehand simply because its 4 hours? That's silly without having seen it first. Perhaps it doesn't work but maybe it does? As I said, even reviews that said the film wasn't great didn't really mind the runtime. 

[johnny]

the ONLY reason i’m worried about the 4 hours is because it is zack snyder. 

[Kal-El814]

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

People binge shows in one sitting for much longer than four hours, not sure why this is different.

 

If Cecil B. DeMille can tell the story of Exodus in less time than it takes someone to make a Justice League movie, whoever’s making Justice League fucked up.

 

2 minutes ago, johnny said:

the ONLY reason i’m worried about the 4 hours is because it is zack snyder. 

 

Also, kidding aside... THIS. I LIKE 300, it’s barely 2 hours long and it feels way longer. I visibly aged during the time that the Watchmen Ultimate Cut takes. Let’s not kid ourselves about whether or not there’s a worthwhile four hour Snyder cut of anything. This isn‘t just, “Snyder bad, grr,” if I heard that the next John Wick movie was four fucking hours long I wouldn’t even think about seeing it in the theater because there’s no way a John Wick movie should be that long.

[Greatoneshere]

17 minutes ago, johnny said:

the ONLY reason i’m worried about the 4 hours is because it is zack snyder. 

 

11 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

Also, kidding aside... THIS. I LIKE 300, it’s barely 2 hours long and it feels way longer. I visibly aged during the time that the Watchmen Ultimate Cut takes. Let’s not kid ourselves about whether or not there’s a worthwhile four hour Snyder cut of anything. This isn‘t just, “Snyder bad, grr,” if I heard that the next John Wick movie was four fucking hours long I wouldn’t even think about seeing it in the theater because there’s no way a John Wick movie should be that long.

 

I mean, I guess, sure. His Watchmen: Director's Cut (which Snyder prefers over the Ultimate Cut) was 3 hours and 10 minutes long and I vastly preferred that over the theatrical cut - but I know that movie is divisive, with some people really liking it and others not (I really like it). Now reviews have complained it didn't need to be 4 hours, so sure, maybe it won't work at 4 hours but we know it didn't work at 2 hours so more time spent building the characters in a large ensemble that's introducing three new heroes (The Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg) would benefit from more time spent on them. And to be fair, while it's still an atrocious movie, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Ultimate Edition is somehow vastly superior over the even shittier theatrical cut of that film, and it also runs 3 hours and 2 minutes. 

 

Also, I would love a 4 hour John Wick movie, but I know I'm weird that way and runtimes don't bother me. More time spent in a universe or world and on characters is almost always a benefit to me, but I'm not particularly obsessed over pace and story structure. I preferred The Hobbit extended editions over the theatrical versions as they make more sense in terms of scene connecting tissue, do more world building, and allow me to spend more time in the world of Middle-Earth. I watched Refn's TV show Too Old To Die Young and multiple episodes are an hour and a half or longer in Refn's style. So I can tolerate a lot, to be fair.

[Kal-El814]

I‘m not opposed to a long movie, I’m opposed to a movie that’s long for the sake of length and not much else. I can’t really think of any action movie that would justify being that long. Even competently shot superhero stuff like Endgame suffers from editing issues that I have to imagine would be ironed out if they weren’t trying to cram three hours worth of movie into an ideally two pound bag.

 

I dunno how to explain it. Wanna binge watch all the Ip Man movies? Yeah, sure. Do I want a 4 hour Ip Man movie? FUCK NO. There’s not a ton of padding in something like The Ten Commandments, and to the extent that there is, the spectacle is the point. I just don’t know that’s possible with superhero movies and I LOVE superhero movies.

 

EDIT - To wit... The LotR Extended cuts? I really like them a lot and generally prefer them to the theatrical cuts, with a couple minor exceptions. You wanna gimmie one long, 3.5 hour Hobbit movie? Yes. There’s no fucking reason for there to be so many of them.

[Joe]

If you think Zack Snyder made a tight 4 hour movie, bless your heart.

[skillzdadirecta]

1 hour ago, johnny said:

the ONLY reason i’m worried about the 4 hours is because it is zack snyder. 

BOOM. Beat me to it. Nothing in his resume says he can sustain interest in a film this long. If anything his work tells me that it's going to be four hours because he has to fit in all of the super slow motion shots that he just HAS to include in every film he does.

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, Kal-El814 said:

I‘m not opposed to a long movie, I’m opposed to a movie that’s long for the sake of length and not much else. I can’t really think of any action movie that would justify being that long. Even competently shot superhero stuff like Endgame suffers from editing issues that I have to imagine would be ironed out if they weren’t trying to cram three hours worth of movie into an ideally two pound bag.

 

I dunno how to explain it. Wanna binge watch all the Ip Man movies? Yeah, sure. Do I want a 4 hour Ip Man movie? FUCK NO. There’s not a ton of padding in something like The Ten Commandments, and to the extent that there is, the spectacle is the point. I just don’t know that’s possible with superhero movies and I LOVE superhero movies.

 

EDIT - To wit... The LotR Extended cuts? I really like them a lot and generally prefer them to the theatrical cuts, with a couple minor exceptions. You wanna gimmie one long, 3.5 hour Hobbit movie? Yes. There’s no fucking reason for there to be so many of them.

 

I guess that's where you and I differ then I suppose. If Ip Man 1-4 was just Ip Man at 8 hours long, I'd watch it. I think action movies can be whatever length they need to be, and that's up to the creative team. You're implying Justice League is 4 hours for the sake of length. I don't think that's per se the case is all I'm saying. Maybe it is? I have to see it first. It just seems artistically limiting to say certain genres can't be certain lengths and others can, especially when so many films are cross-genre films anyway. 4 hours seems long on its face for a film, but this is a movie on a streaming service with chapter titles and an epilogue - it's a bit unique in that regard. Art has no rules in my opinion. If a film about a guy in a bathroom doing his daily routine is 4 hours long but remains compelling, I don't give a shit about story structure or editing or story arcs. If it works, that is. It very well probably wouldn't but I've been surprised before.

 

1 hour ago, Joe said:

If you think Zack Snyder made a tight 4 hour movie, bless your heart.

 

I don't think he made a tight 4 hour movie, but that doesn't mean he made a bloated one either. All I've been saying from the start is worrying about run time before you've seen the thing for no other reason than "man, 4 hours is long" even though plenty of good movies are between 3 and 4 hours seems weird to me. That was the extent of my thoughts in total. I have much bigger concerns with Justice League than its length, which never even registered on my radar.

 

29 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

BOOM. Beat me to it. Nothing in his resume says he can sustain interest in a film this long. If anything his work tells me that it's going to be four hours because he has to fit in all of the super slow motion shots that he just HAS to include in every film he does.

 

Haha, what's wrong with slo-mo shots? I think they're cool . . .  

[cusideabelincoln]

 

6 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

I was telling a friend of mine who used to be TV writer but has left the business about this movie and that it was four hours long. Without missing a beat he said "Oh, so the director basically didn't cut ANYTHING?" to which I replied, "Pretty much." When Directors turn in their first cuts to a studio, they're often three plus hours long and then have to be trimmed for time. This is why we get deleted scenes on DVDS and Blurays and extended cuts. Most directors want to cut as little as possible because in their minds, anything that they left in their cut is necessary. Snyder is basically getting the rare opportunity to release a cut of the film as HE sees fit. The problem is that most of the running time of this movie will be used up by excessive slow motion scenes. I'm definitely going to watch this at some point, I just don't know when. I mean... it's FOUR FUCKIN' HOURS.

 

I've heard Snyder only cut 20 minutes of all footage captured.

 

You know what that means.

 

Justice League: The Snyder Cut: The Director's Cut: Ultimate Extended Edition!

[Kamusha]

This reminds me of the leadup to the first Hobbit movie. There were those who were rightly skeptical about The Hobbit being split into three three hour movies and then there were the fans who tried to be optimistic about it no matter what. Obviously we won't know until Thursday whether the wrong time is justified or not, but sometimes the warning signs are just a bit too obvious.

[Brian]

Fours hours?

 

[Greatoneshere]

33 minutes ago, Komusha said:

This reminds me of the leadup to the first Hobbit movie. There were those who were rightly skeptical about The Hobbit being split into three three hour movies and then there were the fans who tried to be optimistic about it no matter what. Obviously we won't know until Thursday whether the wrong time is justified or not, but sometimes the warning signs are just a bit too obvious.

 

Totally true - but we do know based on the theatrical cut that 2 hours was definitely not enough at the same time. 

[silentbob]

Well if my cousins husband is back early enough. Hoping to get high and watch this on my projector Thursday or it might be Friday in Canada on Crave.

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Totally true - but we do know based on the theatrical cut that 2 hours was definitely not enough at the same time. 

Or, and stick with me, length wasn’t the problem.

[Greatoneshere]

42 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

Or, and stick with me, length wasn’t the problem.

 

Exactly, and I don't think it won't be here either, if there are problems to be had (of which I'm sure there'll be at least some). But 2 hours was kind of a problem in that we needed to spend more time with the characters, I felt.  

[Brick]

12 hours ago, silentbob said:

Well if my cousins husband is back early enough. Hoping to get high and watch this on my projector Thursday or it might be Friday in Canada on Crave.

 

Do we get HBO Max stuff for free on Crave, or will it be paid? I don't think Wonder Woman 1984 was a free video on demand when it came out. 

 

Also don't get why services like HBO Max aren't available in Canada to begin with. 

[Mercury33]

22 hours ago, Brick said:

Only four hour film I'm interested in watching any time soon is Lawrence of Arabia. Recorded that while it was playing on TV, so I should watch that soon. 

This thread is now about how Overrated Lawrence of Arabia is 👀

[Keyser_Soze]

Ya'll need this movie in your life

 

[silentbob]

59 minutes ago, Brick said:

 

Do we get HBO Max stuff for free on Crave, or will it be paid? I don't think Wonder Woman 1984 was a free video on demand when it came out. 

 

Also don't get why services like HBO Max aren't available in Canada to begin with. 

This one is free I guess because of it not getting a theatrical release and being 4hrs long. I just know that I’ve seen advertisements for the past 2 weeks on tv saying “exclusive home” to the Snyder cut. I wish we had HBO Max, but some of their content is already part of Crave and some show up on their cable CTV Sci-Fi channel, like with Raised by Wolves. 

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Ya'll need this movie in your life

 

 

Red Cliff is one of my favorite movies of all time - I have the uncut versoin ("international version") on blu-ray. John Woo crushed it with that film, and yes it's an action film that is 4+ hours long and works. If anyone is interested, just make sure you're seeing the international version and avoid the very cut-up theatrical US version. Amazing, amazing film.

 

Not that most of them are good, but most Bollywood films, including their action films, are usually 3-4+ hours long.

[Brick]

2 hours ago, Mercury33 said:

This thread is now about how Overrated Lawrence of Arabia is 👀

 

Don't tell Wade. If I'm not mistaken it's one of, if not his most favourite films. 

[Greatoneshere]

Zack Snyder's Justice League is now review aggregated on RottenTomatoes, and it so far is the best reviewed DC film of the DCEU except for Wonder Woman and Shazam (yes, better than Man of Steel, Aquaman, and Joker; this movie is currently neck and neck with Birds of Prey). My guess is the scores will drop as more reviews come in.

 

Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)

WWW.ROTTENTOMATOES.COM

---

In ZACK SNYDER'S JUSTICE LEAGUE, determined to ensure Superman's (Henry Cavill) ultimate sacrifice was not in vain, Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) aligns forces with Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) with plans to recruit a team of metahumans to protect the world from an approaching threat of catastrophic proportions. The task proves more difficult than Bruce imagined, as each of the recruits must face the demons of their own...

 

77% so far with 130 reviews in for all critics (with a respectable 6.8/10 average rating), 62% so far with 34 reviews in for top critics (with a 6.2/10 average rating). No audience review scores yet as it isn't out yet until tomorrow.

 

Note, the average ratings are more important than the percentages in terms of getting a better idea of a film's actual quality.