Justice League - restarting the thread 1 1

[paperheart]

any chance we can get the cherry picked positive reviews re-posted? i'm having difficulty finding them.

[comicquant]

Just now, paperheart said:

any chance we can get the cherry picked positive reviews re-posted? i'm having difficulty finding them.

Where did you find positive reviews???

[Bosco685]

5 hours ago, paperheart said:

any chance we can get the cherry picked positive reviews re-posted? i'm having difficulty finding them.

Hey now! All cherries were picked and posted, my little rotten tomato. We’ll use better fertilizer with you going forward.

[Jaydogrules]

Since we are talking budget numbers again, $250MM was the number floated BEFORE the re-shoots, so to get to the $300MM that is the consensus figure now, that means $50MM was spent on re-shoots.

That's what you call "incompetent film making".

-J.

[ComicConnoisseur]

I notice when I see the Justice League promos they are focusing on Aquaman much more now. Looks like DC/Warner knows now that promoting Jason Momoa instead of Ben Affleck for DC Universe movies is a smarter long-term plan.

I

I think it is a smart decision on DC's part. 

Edited December 1, 2017 by ComicConnoisseur

[Bosco685]

There's been some interesting chatter the past few days about the situation behind the scenes why there was never a thought to change the Justice League release date in order to make a better packaged movie. Everyone is referencing back to The Wrap, and an exclusive article submitted about the pending merger. It comes down to WB CEO Kevin Tsujihara and President Toby Emmerich were worried about losing out on bonuses, post-merger.

How ‘Justice League’ Became a ‘Frankenstein’ (Exclusive)

Quote

“Justice League” had a lot of enemies: a looming corporate merger, a family tragedy, an internal clash between light and dark themes. But its greatest enemy was time.

 

After the disappointment of “Batman v Superman,” the individual with deep knowledge of Warner Bros. said studio executives repeatedly went to Silverman to suggest removing Snyder from “Justice League.” The individual said DC President Jon Berg was sent to the set for the better part of a year to oversee the production out of budget concerns.

 

This is the part comic-book fans probably might not care about, but it’s crucial: In October of 2016, Warner Bros. announced plans to merge with AT&T, and the companies began sizing up each other’s assets and liabilities.

Moving the date of a tentpole film like “Justice League” could have projected weakness. A hit would project strength. And Warner Bros. expected a hit.

 

One executive told TheWrap Tsujihara and Emmerich “wanted to preserve their bonuses they would be paid before the merger,” and were worried that “if they pushed the movie, then their bonuses would have been pushed to the following year and they might not still be at the studio.”

 

Another knowledgeable insider said that at the highest levels of Warner Bros., bonuses are awarded “for making good decisions.” If delaying a film is the right decision, an executive could be rewarded for it.

 

“I think Warner Bros. biggest misstep was not pushing the release of ‘Justice League’ when Snyder had to step aside,” the executive told TheWrap.

 

[drotto]

10 hours ago, comicquant said:

If anything WB should use it to test their overall understanding of the market.  I think it goes without saying a release of Snyder's original cut would get a lot of attention.  Especially in the "underdog" context this has played out to be.  I'm not a fan of Synder's but I can't say it wouldn't put a smile on my face if critics liked his cut more than the release...

At this point releasing a Snyder version depends on two things.  First there are conflicting reports on if a copy exists and if it exists how complete is that copy. If it's 95% plus filmed you may be able to make something work, if not how do you reasonably fill those holes.  It is reasonable to assume Snyder had his own reshoots planned, and those never got done. Therefore a complete and polished 100% Snyder version does not exist, but a pre-reshoot cut probably does in some unfinished form.  There was that reported executive viewing in the early summer, but that would be a very early, somewhat rough, incomplete cut. Remember BvS ultimate cut basically existed before the theatrical cut, that is not the case here. There was also some waves about getting  Ayers version of SS, and we know that will never happen.

 

Next is it all comes down to money and likely profits.  If WB is indeed going to lose money on JL as some have reported in the 50 to 100 million range, can that money be recouped by putting out the Snyder cut?  This depends on if a workable cut exists, and based on  how complete it is, what it would cost to finish.  A effects person who supposedly worked on JL already said don't expect the mustasch to get fixed for the bluray.  So knowing that and considering WB may be losing money on the film, the profit marginon for the bluray must be very high if they would consider spending many millions more. There is no way to put an exact figure on finishing Snyder's version. If it was only 5 or 6 million, maybe.  Another 20 million, don't hold your breath.

 

As a final though, would putting out a very different version of JL look bad from a PR standpoint.  Yes it would make some hardcore fans happy, but if the version was truly better it would make it very clear how much management and Whedon screwed up. It would highlight how mismanaged the DCEU has been. That would start yet another round of WB sucks.

Edited December 1, 2017 by drotto

[Gatsby77]

1 hour ago, drotto said:

At this point releasing a Snyder version depends on two things.  First there are conflicting reports on if a copy exists and if it exists how complete is that copy. If it's 95% plus filmed you may be able to make something work, if not how do you reasonably fill those holes.  It is reasonable to assume Snyder had his own reshoots planned, and those never got done. Therefore a complete and polished 100% Snyder version does not exist, but a pre-reshoot cut probably does in some unfinished form.  There was that reported executive viewing in the early summer, but that would be a very early, somewhat rough, incomplete cut. Remember BvS ultimate cut basically existed before the theatrical cut, that is not the case here. There was also some waves about getting  Ayers version of SS, and we know that will never happen.

 

Next is it all comes down to money and likely profits.  If WB is indeed going to lose money on JL as some have reported in the 50 to 100 million range, can that money be recouped by putting out the Snyder cut?  This depends on if a workable cut exists, and based on  how complete it is, what it would cost to finish.  A effects person who supposedly worked on JL already said don't expect the mustasch to get fixed for the bluray.  So knowing that and considering WB may be losing money on the film, the profit marginon for the bluray must be very high if they would consider spending many millions more. There is no way to put an exact figure on finishing Snyder's version. If it was only 5 or 6 million, maybe.  Another 20 million, don't hold your breath.

 

As a final though, would putting out a very different version of JL look bad from a PR standpoint.  Yes it would make some hardcore fans happy, but if the version was truly better it would make it very clear how much management and Whedon screwed up. It would highlight how mismanaged the DCEU has been. That would start yet another round of WB sucks.

There's another, subtler aspect to this too.

Beyond whether enough of a different finished cut exists, and how it would look to feature a now-recast Iris West.

If it becomes clear at a certain point that Justice League will ultimately lose money (particularly in this fiscal year), Warner Bros. may want to maximize that on-paper loss for tax purposes. The tax advantages of writing off the project as a major loss may well outweigh the projected profits from polishing and releasing an alternate version.

[Broke as a Joke]

I really think WB thought the positive momentum from Wonder Woman would carry over to JL.  It didn't.  Now they are stuck with a storyline nobody really cares about. 

Also, WB campaigning Director Cuts as the savior for a bad movie is becoming tedious.  Most Director Cuts come out years later and now with the DCEU we get them almost immediately because the movies are so negatively acclaimed.  I don't think that is what they are hoping for, as it doesn't allow them to double dip on DVD/Blu Ray sales. 

[drotto]

3 minutes ago, Broke as a Joke said:

I really think WB thought the positive momentum from Wonder Woman would carry over to JL.  It didn't.  Now they are stuck with a storyline nobody really cares about. 

Also, WB campaigning Director Cuts as the savior for a bad movie is becoming tedious.  Most Director Cuts come out years later and now with the DCEU we get them almost immediately because the movies are so negatively acclaimed.  I don't think that is what they are hoping for, as it doesn't allow them to double dip on DVD/Blu Ray sales. 

Furthermore, most recent director cuts I have seen usually contain multiple versions of the film for one slightly higher price.

[Gatsby77]

Agreed.

I couldn't care less about Director's Cuts.

The only ones I remember seeing and/or thinking were superior to the theatrical version were Blade Runner (I forget which version) and Aliens (the TV version with the 18 extra minutes or so).

I've never seen (nor sought out) the Donner cut of Superman II, the Daredevil movie, BvS, etc.

These are fanboy curiosities -- cute little addenda to the *true* versions that most folks saw the first time in the theater.

Further, the few times I saw actual director's cuts in theatrical re-releases, I found them to be inferior to the original versions (looking at you: Star Wars Original Trilogy and Donnie Darko).

Donnie Darko was particularly egregious, as it over-explained everything as if the audience wasn't smart enough to get it the first time. (Which we were.)

[bane]

35 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Agreed.

I couldn't care less about Director's Cuts.

The only ones I remember seeing and/or thinking were superior to the theatrical version were Blade Runner (I forget which version) and Aliens (the TV version with the 18 extra minutes or so).

I've never seen (nor sought out) the Donner cut of Superman II, the Daredevil movie, BvS, etc.

These are fanboy curiosities -- cute little addenda to the *true* versions that most folks saw the first time in the theater.

Further, the few times I saw actual director's cuts in theatrical re-releases, I found them to be inferior to the original versions (looking at you: Star Wars Original Trilogy and Donnie Darko).

Donnie Darko was particularly egregious, as it over-explained everything as if the audience wasn't smart enough to get it the first time. (Which we were.)

I disagree.

 

Blade Runner - Director's Cut, removing the voice over and the happy ending made the movie so much better, deeper.

 

Aliens - Extended run time, gives you a better idea of the station in full operation before it all went to hell along with a couple other scenes. Sure you could say about this one.

 

Terminator 2 - Sarah's dream sequence with Kyle Reese further enforces her nightmares of preventing Skynet. More importantly the whole scene of John resetting the switch this adds much more character building to him then cutting the whole scene out.

 

BvS - I thought it gave the film more depth.

 

The Abyss - the extra scenes made sooooo much more sense at the end then the theatrical version.

 

When it doesn't work ?

 

Payback - the original theatrical release is leaps and bounds then the directors cut by Brian Helgeland, when I watched the latter I can certainly see why the studio stepped in a edited the whole thing.

Edited December 1, 2017 by bane

[media_junkie]

Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut.

The Director's Cut turned an unwatchable mess into a glorious movie.

[Chip Cataldo]

I love The Abyss. One of my absolute favorites. 

[revat]

51 minutes ago, media_junkie said:

Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut.

The Director's Cut turned an unwatchable mess into a glorious movie.

Good call. 

But I would also say that when a studio wants to make a big studio expensive movie, and wants to hire a director to make that movie, they are hiring them to make a commercially viable movie, which includes working within time and budget constraints.  And a part of being a good director is making that work (though I do get that sometimes a studio makes cuts and ruins movies)

[Gatsby77]

22 minutes ago, revat said:

But I would also say that when a studio wants to make a big studio expensive movie, and wants to hire a director to make that movie, they are hiring them to make a commercially viable movie, which includes working within time and budget constraints.  And a part of being a good director is making that work (though I do get that sometimes a studio makes cuts and ruins movies)

True.

Also - X-Men (2000) had more characters than Justice League, had the same sort of "gathering the team" origin ethos (without the benefit of earlier films), and clocked in at just 1:44 -- more than 15 minutes shorter than Justice League.

So it's not like it can't be done.

 

[paperheart]

good news out of China. 3rd Friday only down 55%. $100MM now a lock there, maybe $110MM; although overshadowed by Coco's 2nd Friday up almost 4x from opening day.

[Bosco685]

5 hours ago, bane said:

I disagree.

 

Blade Runner - Director's Cut, removing the voice over and the happy ending made the movie so much better, deeper.

 

Aliens - Extended run time, gives you a better idea of the station in full operation before it all went to hell along with a couple other scenes. Sure you could say about this one.

 

Terminator 2 - Sarah's dream sequence with Kyle Reese further enforces her nightmares of preventing Skynet. More importantly the whole scene of John resetting the switch this adds much more character building to him then cutting the whole scene out.

 

BvS - I thought it gave the film more depth.

 

The Abyss - the extra scenes made sooooo much more sense at the end then the theatrical version.

 

When it doesn't work ?

 

Payback - the original theatrical release is leaps and bounds then the directors cut by Brian Helgeland, when I watched the latter I can certainly see why the studio stepped in a edited the whole thing.

Amen to that!

Blade Runner Final Cut and Director's Cut seem the better way to go.

5 hours ago, media_junkie said:

Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut.

The Director's Cut turned an unwatchable mess into a glorious movie.

Outstanding movie! I have the three-version blu-ray. I always watch just the director's cut.

[Bosco685]

6 hours ago, drotto said:

Furthermore, most recent director cuts I have seen usually contain multiple versions of the film for one slightly higher price.

Such as?

Batman v Superman Ultimate Cut came out at $22.95 on Amazon, which contained the Blu-Ray/DVD/Digital copy along with the Theatrical Cut. Yet the price was in line with any normally priced new blu-ray.

 

[drotto]

2 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Such as?

Batman v Superman Ultimate Cut came out at $22.95 on Amazon, which contained the Blu-Ray/DVD/Digital copy along with the Theatrical Cut. Yet the price was in line with any normally priced new blu-ray.

 

Just badly worded.  In most cases when you buy the more expensive director's cut you also get the other versions included in some format included at that higher price point.