I kinda don't mind this. I like the idea of the Snyder cut sending us off into a darker timeline that is totally incompatible with what the subsequent DC movies have done and are doing. It leaves us in the position to ask "What if?" and imagine our own resolutions to it. (On a side note, I recently finished watching
Dark Matter. It's been a very long time since a show has left me on such a brazen cliffhanger. And while it's frustrating, it's kinda nice to have a serialized story remain unfinished. It tests me to ask myself if I really care how it ends.)
I wonder if that wasn't ultimately one of Warner Bros.' biggest sticking points with Snyder. I can see the execs looking at a cliffhanger ending for
Justice League and saying, "Oh no, not 2 or 3 more movies of this shit! This completely derails all the plans that we have for doing more solo movies, future Harley Quinn projects, expanding the Bat-family, etc."
I can't say I have much of a reaction to the video. It's fine. Slightly pretentious but not obnoxiously so.
I feel like you could sum up most of Snyder's filmography with that line: Slightly pretentious but not obnoxiously so. I really like the visuals in that video but the song choice, like many of Snyder's song choices, make me say, "Oh, get over yourself!" At the same time, it's hard to hold it against him because pretentious Snyder seems so good natured and doesn't really demand to be TAKEN SERIOUSLY like pretentious Nolan movies do.
What I find interesting about Snyder, and I can't think of any other filmmaker that evokes this response from me, is that I don't
dislike his movies but I do
disagree with his movies. Like, he makes a fantastic looking movie that seems to say, "This is what Superman is," or, "This is what
Watchmen is." And I'm like, "No, you're wrong." It's not a judgment on quality but a philosophical dispute. Perhaps the reason why I like
Sucker Punch is because it's not based on anything so I don't have any grounds on which to disagree with the movie's viewpoint.
I guess part of it is that a lot of movies feel very homogenized. There's a school of thought on how movies should be made and everyone operates within that framework, regardless of how personal the material or idiosyncratic the director. But in a Snyder movie, I can't shake the feeling that
this is Snyder's viewpoint. Most movies pretend to present an objective viewpoint of the world that they're depicting. But Snyder is just filling every movie with his ideas and his impulses for what he thinks might be cool.
It just occurred to me that it totally makes sense that Snyder is such a big Leonard Cohen fan. Cohen's lyrics are really cool but I'm not sure that they add up to much if you try to parse them out literally. "First We Take Manhattan" refuses to make sense for more than a couple lines at a time but the song conveys a feeling that's going to vary quite a bit depending on the listener.
Well, yeah, but it was also already done by Snyder in Batman v. Superman. And Chris Nolan beat both of them to it in The Dark Knight Rises. It's not a huge deal, but it's slightly derivative at this point. But it's not something that would kill a movie it's used in, either.
That's a little different. It's one thing to just have a statue of a superhero within the narrative of the movie. But in this case, we're looking at 2 very similar sequences of a montage of statues of all the heroes existing outside of any literal narrative within the movie.
The Mother Box trailer for
Zack Snyder's Justice League:
The closing credits for Joss Whedon's
The Avengers: Age of Ultron:
So there is a new tweet by Ray Fisher that gives us some more specific detail:
"Play Cyborg like Quasimodo"? I'm not sure what's supposed to be problematic about that. The analogy makes sense to me. They're both characters that hide in the shadows because they're self-conscious about their deformity, whether it's a hunched back or being a half-robot man.
So he is claiming that Cyborg was supposed to be the central character of the Snyder version?
That's been a fairly common rumor ever since speculation about the Snyder cut began.
Also, what scene was there to "highlight the existence of Cyborg's penis"? I could see that being a very inappropriate joke from Whedon, but doubt that was the actual reason. Not excusable, but perhaps not as bad as it really was.
Yeah, I've got no idea what he's talking about either. It's certainly nothing that showed up in the theatrical cut. Maybe it's one of the crappy Whedon jokes that got cut, like all the dialogue between Batman & the cat burglar on the roof at the beginning. (Some scenes got excised. Maybe this scene got circumcised!

)
He also claimed that all black people were removed? Yeah, it was pretty scarce to begin with -- but wasn't just about everyone Snyder cast still in it? Wasn't General Swanwick (as Martian Manhunter) added in after the Snyder version was approved, and not during the original run?
I'm not sure about General Swanwick. But Iris West was completely edited out of the theatrical cut. And I imagine that Joe Morton's character originally had a lot more screentime.
Oh, and Fisher claims that WB lied about Whedon being Snyder's pick to replace him.
Does it really count as a lie if no one believed them to begin with?
Is he wrong about Canada as a whole? I see you are from Ontario which has similar demographics to America, but Wikipedia says Canada overall is 3.5% black. And for the record it says Vancouver is 1% black, around 45% south and east Asian and 49% White. But of course what we don't know is the racial breakdown of the working actors and extras in Vancouver.
But given that Vancouver is standing in for Metropolis, it would make more sense from a demographic perspective for the cast to resemble the racial breakdown of an eastern U.S. city like New York or Chicago rather than Vancouver, Canada.