Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Ar-Pharazon, May 20, 2020.
Siri, what is “projecting”?
He comes across as likeable in his live commentaries and a Director that actors like. Honestly speaking I'm not a fan of his movies and they have left me shaking my head but he makes pretty moving pictures and i'm on the hype train for this 4 Hour Justice League.
How WB handled Justice League was pretty terrible. They rushed even the reshoots just so execs could all get their bonuses that would be paid before the merger with AT&T. When I watched the movie at the cinema it was an OK movie but when I rewatched it a few weeks ago back to back with MOS and BVS it was so glaringly and painfully different to what Snyder was doing.
I'm a little mixed on this notion of a 4 hour Justice League. Whenever I've seen an extended version of a Snyder movie, it's pretty much always been worse. (Admittedly, I haven't seen the extended cut of Sucker Punch.) The extended material in Watchmen added nothing. The extended cut of Batman v. Superman added a few bits that clarified some of the plotlines, particularly the stuff with Superman being blamed for that African village getting massacred at the beginning. But, while that plotline now made more sense, it still wasn't good and it dragged down the pacing of the film.
What I'm not clear on is whether this 4 hour cut will also be incorporating story elements that were originally going to be in the sequel back when it was supposed to be a 2-part movie like Infinity War/Endgame.
Nothing can redeem Sucker Punch, that movie is beyond terrible in every respect. However, I strongly disagree with you about Watchmen and BvS; the Watchmen director's edition fleshes out the characters so much more, and the BvS Ultimate Edition turns a very aggressive movie into an extremely strong one, albeit one that takes a time investment to watch.
Bad example; The First Avenger was a quality film/debut, and its core--Chris Evans and a well-developed story character--made a more successful sequel/interest possible. That was not the case with Shazam at all.
I guess we just have to agree to be complete opposites. Particularly since Sucker Punch is actually my favorite Snyder movie. (Sometimes Batman v. Superman takes the top spot for me but that has an unfair advantage that every movie featuring Batman has.)
Speak for yourself - Shazam was very well received. In fact Shazam has 90% on RT while First Avenger has 80%. Your argument has literally 0 basis other than your personal tastes in comic book movies.
Superman has trials--he is not a camp counselor in a cape. Without his own struggles and problems, he's hollow. The language of character building in films that are trying to place characters in a world audiences can relate to--logically had Clark deal with his not being human. Its a plot that has been explored in the comics for decades, only on film, its played realistically.
What? Batman is supposed to be incredibly intelligent, so he--like many years of his comic book counterpart--used his intellect to give himself a chance against Superman. Again it was logical. There's no conflict if Superman is incapable of being out-thought. Its the kind of "Superman wins at everything" characterization you're referring to that made him utterly irrelevant during the heart of the Weisinger era, which DC would wisely work to change at the tail end of the Silver Age.
...and you have no story, no matter who he's facing.
No, he has delivered the most consistently, creatively strong run of DC films ever produced, right next to the Nolan Bat-films. The Salkind's Superman movies were more miss than hit, and the Burton/Schumacher Bat-movies were awful from start to finish.
Awwww, I like the Burton movies. That makes me sad.
Still, could be worse. My nose could be gushing blood.
(I don't mean to be trotting out that clip every time. But it's just one of my all-time favorite movie quotes.)
I used to love the Burton Bat movies as a teenager. I watched Returns recently and ah.... what the? Awful.
I used to love them both, possibly preferring Returns if anything. But the last time I watched it, maybe 15 years ago, I felt it had aged very badly. My wife, who’s casual about this genre and hadn’t seen it before, reckoned it was only marginally more convincing than the Adam West movie.
I should rewatch the first one, as I recall it being less goofy than Returns.
Batman 1989 is a very good Batman movie directed by Tim Burton. Batman Returns is a very good Tim Burton movie that happens to occasionally have Batman in it.
Very good Batman movie except for the fact that Batman kills a bunch of people?
I feel like the "no killing" rule became emblazoned in a lot of people's minds with The Animated Series. Shit, Batman ran around wielding a gun in his initial comic appearances in the late '30s and early '40s and he whacked plenty of bad guys.
I had occasion to say this in another thread the other day, and I'll say it again here: Batman Returns remains the best Batman movie ever.
I'll add that Tim Burton is the kind of cinematic artist Zack Snyder only wishes he could be, someone with a genuine personal vision beyond "grimdark hurhur."
I disagree. Bother of them make movies that look exactly the same with every release.
"Range" is not the same as "artistry." Burton has a style and a sensibility distinctly his own, born of a unique perspective and worldview. Snyder is an arrested adolescent who thinks that "dark" equals "deep."
Nonsense, Burton's "vision" was a sideshow.
Burton had a platonic hard on for Vincent Price.
They made a movie together when Tim was a kid.
Separate names with a comma.