I didn't have a chance to read the entire article, nor did I think everyone was going to be nitpicky about it. I chose it because it was one of the only articles I could find from a reputable source that had an accurate timetable for the reshoots.
Reading and understanding the whole article is the opposite of nitpicking. To nitpick means to focus on small details at the expense of the whole, and that's kinda what you did -- you took the report of the shooting schedule out of context and came to the conclusion that it meant the exact opposite of what the article actually said it meant. Statistics are meaningless without context.
Besides, it's an interesting article in its own right. I recommend reading it in full.
Alternatively, Jett from
Batman-on-Film (which has been around for a while) emphatically reiterates that Whedon coming on-board will largely reshape the film. In other words, the film that Zack Snyder was planning when filming began in April of 2016 is
not going to be the same film audiences will be seeing when it opens, if it doesn't get pushed back to 2018.
Which is not at all unusual. Like I said, creativity is a process. Stories don't instantly spring into being in complete form and remain immutable from the beginning to the end of their production -- they evolve through trial and error and experimentation. Scripts get rewritten countless times in pre-production and during production. Films are often significantly transformed in editing.
Heck, as a rule, you don't
want your finished creation to be exactly what you were planning when you started. You want it to be
better than that. When you're just starting, you haven't yet put your ideas to the test, haven't discovered what parts actually work and what parts don't. You haven't yet made the serendipitous discoveries and lucky accidents that happen along the way and give you new insights. In the case of a collaborative production like filmmaking, you haven't yet discovered the new possibilities that the actors and other co-creators will bring to the table. All of that transforms the work while it's being made, and ideally makes it better.
Elfman's hiring signifies a change in tone and direction.
Changing the composer doesn't mean changing the story. Alex North did a whole score for
2001 that Kubrick ditched, but the rest of the film wasn't changed as a result, as far as I know. Sometimes a reshoot leads to a change of composer for scheduling reasons, like when Alexandre Desplat was unavailable for
Rogue One rescoring and Michael Giacchino took over, but I don't see why the cause and effect would go the other way. Yes, it's a change in tone -- a changed score always is -- but that doesn't mean the entire film is being redone. If anything, it means it doesn't have to be. You can transform a film massively with a different score or a different edit, even without reshoots. (Look at Ridley Scott's
Legend.)
This really goes back to Warner Bros.' course correction they initiated last year after Batman v Superman received negative reviews and a polarizing response from fans.
Which is all the more reason why it's illogical to think that process of change has only just started now with the reshoots. It's been going on since before the film even started shooting. That's one thing that's pointed out in the
Forbes article, that this process of reconsideration and adjustment has been ongoing throughout the film rather than being some sudden afterthought.
Let's face it. I'm sure Snyder had a rough cut he presented to the studio, they didn't like it and so he got replaced - just like Holkenberg got replaced.
This is both very wrong and deeply insensitive. Snyder left the project because of a terrible family tragedy. Before that happened, he had
already decided what reshoots the film needed and had asked Joss Whedon to write the new scenes that he wanted. When he decided that helping his family cope with a tragic loss was more important, he stepped back and Whedon agreed to direct the new scenes and do the final edit -- but he was following through on a decision that Snyder had already made.
Let's be clear -- I think Joss Whedon is a vastly better filmmaker than Zack Snyder. I would love it if this fantasy of all of Snyder's work being tossed out in favor of a full-on Whedon movie were true. But I know that it's a completely nonsensical notion, factually incorrect and logistically impossible. It's blowing a normal, pre-planned part of the filmmaking process absurdly out of proportion in the name of wishful thinking.
It would be one thing if the reshoots were minor - like how Patty Jenkins reshot only one scene for Wonder Woman - but 8 weeks is far more significant than that.
Yes. Reshoots happen. Sometimes they are larger than others. Creative works get revised, often heavily, before they are deemed ready. This is not anomalous. Creating stuff takes work. It doesn't just instantly fall into place right at the start.
First of all, this is a major motion picture studio. When it comes to expense, cost is irrelevant.
Yes, which is exactly why it is
routine for movies on this level to have extensive reshoots. It's why they plan from the start to have such reshoots, why they budget and schedule for them
in advance. Like I already said, this exact same conversation has happened with virtually every major tentpole movie for the past couple of years -- certainly with every DCEU movie from BvS onward.
Here's something that makes this situation a bit different than most occurrences where reshoots take place: the original director of the film has been fired.
Again, that is a complete lie. He chose to walk away to deal with a personal tragedy. You should be ashamed of yourself for twisting that to fit your conspiracy theory.
