The SnyderCut is Definitely... A Snyder Cut
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 มี.ค. 2021
- The first 1000 people to use the link in my description will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/justwrite03211
Support the channel: / justwrite
In this video, I look at how the SnyderCut does and does not conform to Zack Snyder's usual style of filmmaking and storytelling.
Follow me on twitter: / sagehyden
Maggie Mae Fish's Snyder Series: • Superman Won't Save th...
Curio's Snyder Video: • Zack Snyder: A World B...
Music:
“Electric Mantis - Daybreak | Majestic Color”
ow.ly/G7gg30iypqm
Other music by Epidemic Sound. - บันเทิง
Save Martha!
Save Martian
@@Deondre_Clark lol
Ofcourse Maggie is here.
I got so amped when he mentioned your vids - literally yelled “YES EXACTLY!”
SAVE MY MARTHA!!!
>Diana gets some water...in slow motion
AAEEEYAYAAAYEEEEEYYAHHHEYAHAHYYYYYEEEEAAAAAAA
Add a yoodle LOLOLOL
and we have a winner!!
I snort laughed at this
If you watched it with captioning, as I did, you will have noted that the leitmotif accompanying Diana was forever referred to as "Ancient Lamentations," which cracked me up
It made me think of music that would have been cut from the effortlessly superior movie "Gladiator"
By the fourth or fifth time it was used I was completely taken out of the moment. By the tenth time it was now comedic, like an eagle screech in a cartoon.
The minute Ayn Rand came into the conversation about 2000+ things about his style made sense and an audible *oh god damnit* may have happened.
People hyper analyze this shit about Snyder lol. He’s a good, down to earth guy with no agenda except making good movies he’s passionate about, and raising money for suicide prevention 🤦🏾♂️
@@BabyYodie Nobody who subscribes to Randian philosophy is imo a "good guy" movie aside
@@SparkleDeluxe_minecrafter That says more about you that it does about him.
@@BabyYodie It very clear people like Snyder does have interest on Ayn rand. He himself express about it. All of his movies share the same theme
He famously express desire to make an adaptation of a book call fountain head which is a famous Ayn Rand novel about individualism over society
@@thinhvo3893 While I don't personally fuck with Ayn Rand and disagree with her, I don't subscribe to the ideology that anyone that gains inspiration from her philosophy for art is automatically a stain on the face of the planet. For fucks sake, it's art. People have made movies on the confederacy and KKK. That doesn't mean they are politically aligned with those ideas. Sure he's depicted individualist takes on characters, that doesn't mean he's not collectivist simultaneously in other aspects of REAL life (i.e. Helping AFSP - a suicide prevention mutual aid group). People forget that you can be individualist in the sense of improving the self while shedding your ego, which only strengthens your collectivist nature (ex. Superman finding himself so he can be the best hero he can be for the planet)
Snyder himself in a recent interview has publicly denounced an alt-right Snyder cut movement group. With that in mind, I wouldn't throw him a category demonizing him for reading Ayn Rand's Fountainhead and painting fictional characters in a way that showcase the healing of an individual and finding the meaning of one's own purpose. When I watch a Snyder film, I don't scan for Ayn Rand philosophy being pushed through an agenda because it's not there for ill intent. Just enjoy life and enjoy good movies. If they aren't enjoyable, live your life somewhere else without hating on another for no justified reason.
It's funny, my introduction to Ayn Rand's ideology was Bioshock, and that games is literally about how it doesn't work.
Snyder doesn't subscribe to Ayn Rand's philosophy either
@@danield.8233 He seems pretty close to it, though.
@@luciacuevas611 From what I've seen from a debate further up in the comment section, he doesn't think well of Ayn Rand, but does take inspiration from her philosophy which is fine, inspiration is different from advocation.
@@greekswaglord-dathistoryla201 I was unaware of that nuance. Still, I do find many toxic ideas being displayed in his works, despite him seeming to be a pretty good guy.
@@luciacuevas611 Or hear me out know, people misinterpreted his movies as containing toxic views by selective reading instead of using context present in the film, for example all the Ayn Rand stuff. Prior to Zack wanting to direct an adaptation of The Foundation people never even criticized him as an Objectivist (he isn't), that is subscribing to Ayn Rand's views. Now as you just saw people are reading the film to fit that narrative lens. Ayn Rand hates mercy because people don't deserve it, Cyborg gives a struggle single mother money in an act of mercy, and it is framed as Victor doing the right noble thing.
I’m glad someone else appreciates Steppenwolf’s portal sound effect 😂
It's supposed to be a boom tube because it makes an earth shattering kaboom. Where's the kaboom!?
@@kr1spness it's there. it builds up to silence, then boom.
The only missing thing they should have worked hard to incorporate into the movie is the super mario ate a mushroom sound... it is soo close :D It could have been that he drinks something and then blom-blom-blom-blom... super mario music :D
There was this really bad superhero show called Powers some years back, and that should had a similarly dumb sound effect for teleportation. The dude basically made a Skype notification sound every time he teleported, which really undermined any time he tried to be serious.
I like Superman superman breaking the sound barrier.
Wow, your thoughts here about the loss of individual identity and Snyder’s anxieties about communism are wildly insightful. To quote an infamous philosopher, “I didn’t notice it, but my brain did.”
Would you like to try a pizza roll?
Yeah the guy pretty much have an obsession with Ayn rand objectivism even though he himself called her crazy
@@thinhvo3893 he probably likes her ideas conceptually more than in actuality but i could be wrong
@@themediumcheese probably. Snyder also publicly against trump but that probably doesn't mean much
Christopher Hitchens said of libertarianism that “I have always found it quaint, and rather touching, that there is a movement in the US that thinks Americans are not yet selfish enough.”
The Dawn of the Dead cigarette sequence had me laughing out loud.
It seemed like a Snyder parody to me
it isn't funny, u stupid
@@kokomolucian lo, its fucking hilarious and ridiculous.
@@TheUltimateWriterNZ you are unnable to understand Snyder's mind, you just mediocre
@@kokomolucian Lmao dude, stop simping for Snyder, he is a mediocre director at best, especially in the themes he presents, hes not some misunderstood genius, nowhere near it. If you're going to be pretentious at least have good taste.
This is kinda why I wished Wonder woman was the foil to Batman in the movie. She's lived for so long and witnessed so many tragedies that it would make sense for her to not really aspire to be a God that can solely execute justice for all of humanity. And because of all the things she's been through, she still chooses to be optimistic and empathetic rather than becoming a distant martyr. I feel like out of all the characters, she's the one with the least to prove to anyone. Human connections seem to play a big part in her character, and they anchor her from losing her identity as Diana. She'd understand Batman's ideology but choose not to follow it because she's seen how that isn't always the best route. I really wished they had pushed for that, it would have made Batman & superman's interactions with her be more interesting.
to be fair I wish we'd seen some of Wonder Woman's War-Weariness in her sequel instead of cutting to 80s montage. I mean the original idea for Wonder Woman was meant to start with the Crimean War, what a cool movie that would've been, but i mean besides that, there are SO many conflicts and interesting geopolitical crises in which you can put Wonder Woman in the midst of, while also including her list of villains. But no, we got the most boring 80s flick with no stakes, so it doesnt really mesh well with the Wonder Woman we see in BvS because we've only seen her go through tough circumstances in WW1 and nothing else, nothing to show her long passage of time
Sage: Ayn Rand is a terrible, just terrible-
Me: person
Sage: author
Me: right, that too
I find it very curious that Batman in this movie is not (as usually) a detective, a thinker, a strategist. He doesn't have a plan, he tells Alfred to have faith, he has dreams of the future...
Was he not the one who created the plan for the final battle? Let alone the one who recruited heroes to the League in the first place?
1. Plans the entire assault in the final battle
2. Finds aquaman who is diffcult to find
3. Builds gauntlets that was able to withstand an enraged superman's heat vision
4. Makes everyone realise y superman shld be brought back(the reason of steppenwolf not coming when silas activated)
5. Stubborn when cyborg says the system senses danger and when aquaman is pessimastic on ressurcting superman
6. Single handedly destroying the parademon army
Ya... batman doesnt do this
@@BruceWayne-xq7bbpeople seriously underrate the fact that BATMAN ALONE destroyed the whole parademon army basically LOL! The other were busy getting to the unity while he tanked EVERYTHING lol. Absolute beast!
I haven't seen batman since it was christian bale, and I dont like this new batman. He look fat and chubby (Ben Affleck is just a bigger dude i guess)
@@Softlol read dark knight returns
Tat batman is bulky... see bruce wayne training scene in bvs...
This guy looks like he can be batman... bale is a thin guy
17:02 I can't help but notice an irony in a director who's villains are usually faceless, identity-consuming hordes, writing a movie where every important character is basically the same character.
Interesting.
There are many fine ways to see the hypocrisy of Snyder. Like how the united action of an angry, faceless mass of people gave him another chance to make a failure of a film. Where as his work within the film industry was of too low a quality and he was let go.
Aye Rand would not approve. But then again she was on Social Security and Medicare when she died soooo........ (who gives a shit)
@@andrewt9128 Snyder is a brilliant director, far better at telling stories than Russo brothers. But admittedly, Russo brothers are MUCH funnier, and that's where the money is these days. Disney plays it smart, whereas WB can't make up their damn minds.
@@qy72hund Definitely disagree on him being a good director or storyteller.
@@andrewt9128 His only issues are that he doesn't tell stories in a linear manner and his tone is often pessimistic.
These aren't "bad" in the sense that he's a bad director. It's only "bad" in a business sense, because it appeals to fewer people (compared to other recent comic book movies). But in all fairness, he did bring in a lot of money for WB lol.
This is literally the only video on Zack Snyder's Justice League I've seen that make's mention of Whedon's hamfisted awkward comedy bits and doesn't mention the "brunch" joke at all.
I'd recommend you watch Filmento's video on the Snyder Cut
It became quite infamous, but for me nothing will surpass the moment when Flash fell on Wonder Woman's breasts like I was watching a crappy harem anime.
Scene which btw Gal Gadot refused to film. I wonder why... xP
you should mauler video of zack snyder
What I find strange about the Brunch joke is, while not being funny as it is, is bewildering. How is Brunch some odd confusing concept? All it is is a meal that is typically later than a stereotypical North American breakfast (usually between 5/6 am to 8/9 am) but before the stereotypical Lunch (usually around 12 pm and 2/3 pm).
@@mainstreetsaint36 it’s not that deep
For some reason they put a jaguar roar sound effect in the bomb explosion at the museum. That's my favorite sound in this movie.
I didn't hear no roar
Same thing done during the car chase scene in Terminator 3. Haunts me to this day
@@pathogenlvmusic why would they do that?!? It was so distracting and when I saw the original cut in theaters people started laughing
OMG thank you I thought I was crazy haha
I remember that! It was just in the 2017 version though, not the 2021 cut
Could you imagine a snyder warhammer 40k movie? The levels of edginess would destroy our reality
OMG why did you have to type that? A person is sleeping beside me and I'm trynna choke a laughter as hard as I can!! XD
He works well with grim, dark tone stuff, I think he'd smash a 40k movie :D the stories are particularly complex, and the action is a big focus
The 40k fanbase would literralt wet their pants.
@@karldunne5703 40k is a satire of ultranationalism, religious fundamentalism, Snyder would 100% miss the point has he did with every other project and play it straight. It would be Starship Troopers but unironic
@@olavops1000 The irony in that being that Starship Troopers the novel is unironically pro-fascist, and the movie is anti-fascist satire.
I think you're completely right about the advantages of a lack of character development. Robin D. Laws is one today's foremost proponents of the distinction between "dramatic hero" and "iconic hero". Hollywood loves dramatic heroes, but a lot of genre-fiction - and definitely super-heroes - tend towards iconic heroes. Here's RDLs phrasing:
"While a dramatic hero follows a character arc in which he is changed by his experience of the world (examples: Orpheus, King Lear, Ben Braddock), an iconic hero undertakes tasks (often serially) and changes the world, restoring order to it, by remaining true to his essential self."
Failing to understand this has lead to a lot of questionable choices in movies and tv, and is probably the reason Hollywood loves Origin Stories so much.
In defense of Snyder in Guardians of Ga'hoole that was part of the book
Yeah. 99% of the shit this guy puts at Snyder’s feet we’re creative choice made by other people. James Gunn wrote the Dawn of the Dead script. Frank Miller did the designs of the Immortals in his comic book. Chernobyl was used because its one of the few places in the world that’s city that’s abandoned. That was a studio note after the backlash Man of Steel received for all the death and destruction.
I am 99.9% sure that the funny sound effect is the same effect as Crash Bandicoot leaving a level area in Crash Bandicoot: Warped
I know It!
I thought that sounded familiar!!!
No wonder the Cyborg and Flash stuff were the best parts of the movie
@CPM3 what?
let's say "the ones that have been less massacred" Still a couple of dumbs
@Ben Magnez the best character in the movie is Alfred. the rest are nonsensical, overpowered, illogical and incongruent. Cyborg can talk to the machines but does not stop the laser that killed his father or activate it when steppenwolf was in front of it... also he can control missiles and doesn't launch a nuclear attack to steppenwoilf location? Dumb! Flash needs the suit but... when he save the sausage... sorry, the girl, only his shoes gets destroyed (also there's no way the the owner of the dog house hasn't see him outside.) He can (conveniently) reverse time (twice) that make me question "why doesn't he reverse the time even more? maybe before the first come of Steppenwolf? He could have saved a lot of amazons. Or before superman death... or..." Dumb as well... I can go on forever man.
@@coolvibesradio3267 You really have to ask why superheroes wouldn't just nuke Russia? This doesn't make sense because how would nuking the motherboxes help? How are they supposed to deactivate them if the boxes are inside a radioactive mushroom cloud? And for that matter, if Steppenwolf could just walk into Chernobyl it's safe to assume nukes are useless against him? Did you actually watch the movie? All these things you are asking are answered in the movie.
@@RevolutionaryLoser you're wrong. when they fight for the first time batman injured steppenwolf with a machine gun so it make sense that a missile attack can at least slow it down. you can use non nuclear missiles if you want but remember that superman can survive the nuke (bvs) and it's safe to assume that being with similar powers (WW and AM) can do it too. but even if you want to assume that he can't do that (but the movie says and shows that he can) why didn't he saved his father? why didn't he activated the laser when steppenwolf was in front of it?
I had no idea he directed Legend of the Guardians. I'm freaking out rn. I loved that movie.
You are still allowed to love that, you know?
He toned down certain aspects from the books. This is what I've heard from fans of the book series.
@@adamf.charles5857 I never meant to imply otherwise
@@hunterweeks6091 they think you were trying to diss Zach lol they’re insecure
@@ninjanibba4259 apparently lol
(I apologize in advance for dealing with a delicate subject here) What i find curious is that all the tragedy about Zack's daughter inspired a whole movement to release his vision of Justice League AND also called their fans to support the fight against suicide prevention, to support organizations and to talk about other issues about mental health, one of the biggest invisible evils of society today...
Which is pretty ironic because that contradicts everything objetivism stands for.
apology accepted
I mean didnt Zack say he was liberal, not Objectivist?
The Snyder Cut is honestly just evidence that he should be making miniseries or tv shows instead of movies
amen
Cinematic gametrailers
He epitomizes the phrase "Style over Substance."
If he was a co-director or in charge of cinematography, every project he was on would be amazing. The feeling he delivers truly is incredible, he just...overdoes it sometimes.
I feel similar about JJ Abrams, though I feel Snyder can at least direct on his own, even with the aforementioned notes.
Now that they have HBO max, I can see Warner sending him to that particular Phantom Zone.
None of the heroes in Snyder's Justice League really seems to like the world. Sure, they may care about specific individuals like how Superman cares about Martha and Lois, but they don't really care if the rest of the world blows up as long as the ones they care about are fine.
In fact, Superman cares so little about the world that he turns completely evil after the person he does care about dies. And I know people are going to say that it's the premise of Injustice, but it's not. In Injustice, Superman's goal is still to protect the world, but he becomes a tyrant because he loses faith in people. He's trying to create order at the expense of freedom and self determination. He takes away people's rights because he doesn't think people can be trusted to make the right decision. He's still trying to protect people, but in a twisted way. In Snyder's nightmare future, Superman is a genocidal enforcer for Darkseid.
And I understood that Joker death in Injustice did not make him evil, but 'revealed' to him a 'better' way: "What if we just killed the bad guys?"
Kingdom Come also played with this idea, though somewhat more subtly; Lois and her unborn child are still fridged, though
Well, they do seem pretty ok with saving the people in the tunnels. They aren’t the happiest fellas ever, sure, but I wouldn’t say they don’t give a shit about the world apart from their families. They do. Remember Cyborg giving money to that random woman? And about that, don’t forget that Superman becoming genocidal is caused by the Anti-Life Equation. It isn’t just a decision he makes. Lois’ death momentarily broke his spirit, allowing Darkseid to do his magic. Without him and Anti-Life, Supes would’ve surely been depressed, but he would’ve most likely come back to his senses.
This said, I do agree with the fact that Lois has been made way too important for him. But then again... the Donner movies weren’t any different in this regard. Reeve’s Supes straight out broke the space time continuum and almost allowed Zod to rule the world because of Lois.
Cyborg did say "F the world" if I remember correctly, but I do agree with Rick Blaine's comment above mine comment.
@@Ovan61 Yeah, but it’s pretty clear that he didn’t really mean it.
@@rickblaine9670 these people have only read particular stories (I.e. injustice without realizing Darkseid’s whole anti-life arc in these movies), and follow an echo chamber without accepting other perspectives so they don’t realize you’re right in saying this. They just want to add a political level to their reasoning as to why to hate Snyder, acting as if he hates collectivism and solely embraces individualism.
Why can’t people do both? For gods sakes, he’s pushed AFSP as an organization out into the masses and raised almost a million for suicide prevention! That’s likely more collective contribution than any shit-talkers of his have done in correlation to their level of platform
Also... "Im not broken. And I'm not alone." Thats the final line in the movie before the action ends. Unity is the theme.
You don't need to lose your individuality to be part of a working team.
That's one of the big points of this video.
No, because it’s those individualistic parts about yourselves that is the plus side of that team. Each bringing their own talents and expertise to solve a problem. The entire idea of Justice League (in comic and animation) is like that: super people from around the world lending their powers and skills to defend the world.
@@silentdrew7636
No? JW paints it as some sort of contradiction Snyder didn’t account for when it’s literally the point of the movie.
@@APinchofBazel exactly. That's because JW is explicitly against individualism. While most individualist are totally fine with cooperating with people as long as they don't give up their individuality in the process. He conflates individualism with atomism.
@@AnthonyMazzarella I'm guessing you meant to write 'conflates' but I have no idea how you got atomism...
Snyder should just be tapped to do a film for a Ditko-created character, but not the whole universe. Heck, just have him make a Mr. A movie. He'd stay true to that character's depiction, and it doesn't have to screw with anyone else.
This is probably why Snyder loved Rorschach since he's based on The Question, who is a Ditko creation.
@@SirLuquent rorshach was supposed to be a more brutal version of the question you shouldn't root for and snyder butchered the not rooting part he is going to do worse with the question he always butchers the source material
@Erik Kemeey yeah the right winger misogynist is sympathic the author himself has said you aren't supposed to like rorshach
@Erik Kemeey I didn't call Zack Snyder a misogynist and Alan Moore hates people who tell him rorshach is a cool and badass character he is a parody of the question you couldn't even get what my comment was saying I doubt you understood the novel
I'm a simple man. I see Ayn Rand trashing, I click like.
And a good man, too.
Me too. I clicked like shortly after he started explaining who Rand was.
Not just because yeah, Rand is awful and so are people who idolise her. But also because it made so much clearer exactly _why_ I hate Snyder's interpretations of superheroes.
Nothing's better than a gool ol' dump on Rand in the morning!
None of Snyder's superhero films have Randian themes, most of them involve people sacrificing themselves for others. T
@@Mantis42 ??? Everything is Randian down to choice of movie adaptation. Batman V Superman was based off of the comic of the same name by Frank Miller who himself claimed that the comic was inspired by Rand. Batman has been for a long time the ultimate Randian hero. Randian heroes have been done before with incredible success (Brad Bird has Randian themes in his stories), but it is extremely difficult because you are purposely writing flat characters. This is writing a superhero film on obxiously hard mode and that's why often it really doesn't pan out.
I think the whole progression of Man of Steel, BvS and JL show a slow rejection of Randian ideas, not an embrace of them. But hey, agree to disagree.
That sounds more like it.
I have the exact opposite feeling about how not stereotyped Snyder's characters are.
In this trilogy, Bruce Wayne is slipping from heroism to dirty vigilantism almost becoming a criminal by demonizing someone.
Clark Kent is a lost farm boy, emotional and hypersensitive, he is first lacking the mental strength needed with his powers.
His two fathers are presenting different moral paradigms, helping mankind if it's worth it on one side, and on the other one, waiting to grow up and learning to choose wisely in good accordance with his heart.
After 3 movies, he has evolved to some sort of teenager, barely linked to the world by his mother and girlfriend, he isn't perfect at all.
Diana is the same unperfect person, kind and strong, but recluse and stuck in the past.
Barry Allen is a ADHD figure, no friends, self sacrificing for his dad.
Victor Stone is angry, burnt by his self hatred turned against his dad.
The theme i like the most about Snyder's stories is that he demystifies dogmas, legacies, ideologies. Darkseid is annihilating worlds by destroying freewill.
Lex Luthor is denying people meaning, and treats everyone as a mean.
The different fathers of the movies are consistent in a simple (in a sense pure) kind love, not asking for worth nor destiny, insisting that the key to a happy meaningful life is sincere choice.
That's why Snyder's insists on the pluralism of the earth army during the first war against Darkseid.
He wants to make the baroque apology of diverse sincere good willingess.
Like a sort of Sistine Chapel, but ok too many slow motions. ;)
We don't see Batman slipping it is just stated that he is like this the first time we see him.
And why it is stupid that Superman is a 33 year old teenager I hopefully don't need to explain.
@@jonasderkum528 Bruce Wayne is killing people, he denies Superman any “humanity”. He is so obsessed with what he thinks would be one his last “achievements” ie kill a “threat” that he does not doubt nor does he try to foresee what may be the real intentions of Lex Luthor despite Alfred’s many warnings.
@@jonasderkum528 It is original and accurate in a sense to present an immature Clark Kent, he is an “abomination” to the kryptonian genetic driven choice of society that led them to their end. With recent technologies, teenage period seems to stretch more and more generation after generation. Interestingly MRIf shows deep remodeling in the prefrontal cortex especially its links with our primitive central brain. It is objectivation that becoming an adult needs cutting literally with emotional dogmas given by education. It means that it requires time, doubt and choice. So no, showing an immature character especially for the most powerful being on earth does not seem “stupid”. The real world is complicated, simple ideology does not fit. The “Cyborg could end poverty on earth” presented in the video is also too simple and lacks realism.
@@karelknightmare6712 In the comics Superman usually has a long lifespan, so it makes sense to me that he's still in his teens at 33. And he is at least 30 years younger, physically, than Bruce Wayne in the Batman Beyond era.
oh you self righteous arse superman is poorly written not a thematic enigma
Okay, so HEAR ME OUT. I almost always agree with Sage’s takes, but I actually disagree with the majority of this video.
I would argue that Snyder seems to have changed a lot in recent years. I 100% agree with your points about Snyder’s earlier films, which I used to dislike along with his politics, but after watching the ultimate edition of BvS and his cut of JL, I’ve shifted a bit.
I think a really great example of this is the fact that he really made it clear that Lex Luther was a Mark Zuckerberg-esq character that Ayn Rand would have actually made a hero. Superman also chooses to reject the hyper-individualistic/selfish advice his adopted parents gave him. The message of both JL and BvS is about unity and joining together, and emphasizes how the heroes could not have stopped Doomsday/Stepenwolf alone. While I get what you were saying about the red-scare stuff in his films, I think the parademons are not meant to be read that way. Like you could just as easily draw a comparison between them and Q-annon/Trump supporters. If anything, its more a warning on mindlessly following a single leader (which is more fascism than communism).
Its also worth noting that Snyder chose not to move forward with a Fountainhead film and openly endorsed Biden last year (I know libertarians are different from Republicans, but most libertarians tend to vote for and support conservatives). Plus, in JL he was much more respectful of the female characters, greatly expanded the roles of the characters of color, and he was the one who originally casted Ezra Miller (a queer actor) for Flash. All of which is to say, that I don’t think he is particularly all that bigoted anymore, at least that’s not the vibe I get.
This is the comment I've been looking for. I also would like to add that it was Snyder's idea of casting the Hawaiian-German Jason Momoa, as he thought a mixed race actor would better convey the idea of Aquaman's origin, as well as his ties to the ocean (kinda surface level motivation there, but he's gt the spirit). I actually wrote a similar comment that I'm gonna share here, because I don't think Snyder is an objectivist.
"I usually like your videos, but there's a lot of things here that I can't help but call bullshit on. Let me preface by saying that I am not a Snyder fan, I think he's movies are decent to good at best, I simply find issues with a lot of the things people are criticizing him for. Firstly, he is not actually an objectivist or an Ayn Rand-style libertarian. The guy has adopted like four kids, raised funds and directed ads for charity. He does not just care for himself. I don't actually know where this factoid has come from, because he has not really expressed any such ideas publically. The one that comes closest is the fact that he likes The Fountainhead, and even then it's not like he's agreeing with the ideology presented in that book. He just likes the way it portrays the creative process (www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/batman-v-superman-married-creative-874799?)
. I have never found any source of him actually praising Objectivism nor Ayn Rand, though I haven't found anything where he denies doing so either, so who knows.
That may be why people keep looking in his movies for proof of this, but they often confuse Randian Libertarianism with Neo-conservatism (I get that there's some overlap there). Even then, I don't see that much evidence for either of those ideologies being present in his films.
Even though you technically bring up a lot of good arguments in your analysis of 300 and some of it's borderline fascist themes, you're forgetting that almost the entire movie is propaganda even in the world the movie is set in. And some people have read the Persians as the Americans and the Spartans as the middle Easterners, a reading that actually think holds up, even if I'm not fully convinced. (300 also happens to be the only movie mentioned here, besides Sucker Punch, that Snyder actually wrote, though he did come up with the story of Justice League.)
Now about Dawn of the Dead, I can't really get behind the idea that the zombies are symbols of American who have lost their patriotism and religion. For being an early Snyder movie, there's a surprising lack of religious imagery in the movie and I only see evidence of the opposite. The survivers in the mall aren't very religious (in fact there's a scene where they have to organize a funeral but don't really know how to give it the levity of a church). The survivers have sex out of wedlock, there's a couple who are keeping their pregnacy a secret, because the baby is slowly turning into a zombie that kills some (or one, not sure) of the characters (an message for abortion if I ever saw one, albeit a bit misguided). There's also a middle-aged, atheist gay man, who while not being a main character, survives relatively long in a movie like this. (Sideline, I always thought the scene where he tells his origin story was more poking fun at the homophobes who are forced to listen.)
Also, wouldn't a religious message kind of invalidate the argument that Snyder make movies with Randian themes? Rand was notoriously anti-religion and and an outspoken opponent of "the American way of life". And when you bring up Justice League being anti-communist with the plot of creating "unity" between three boxes, I think you're reaching a bit, especially since Darkseid at one point states that taking over worlds is easy because of the inhabitant's infighting.
"
I would recommend you give his earlier films a rewatch. I think that what has actually changed about his films is that he's simply gotten better about getting his point across. Just Write says that Dawn of the Dead is made to promote christian worldviews, but the only character shown agreeing with that is one who starts out as an antagonist and learns to be more accepting of people in the long run. Meanwhile, one of the protagonists of the story is openly gay and the only person who has an issue with that is the aforementioned antagonist. (I'd also like to point out that the first two protagonists in his first ever film you meet are a woman and a black man, and that trend is continued throughout his movies)
There's a really good video by Gwendolyn Jae Stone breaking down Snyder's viewpoints based on his filmography, and it's really interesting and enlightening.
th-cam.com/video/4ciwO9zUYIE/w-d-xo.html
Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox now lmao
@@BajaShouta I literally just watched that video! It's very good, nuanced and clearly well-researched. Super hyped for the sequel.
@@YggdrasilAudio It's so good!! I'd also recommend this one: th-cam.com/video/dMrWK4RxyiU/w-d-xo.html
and this one:
th-cam.com/video/6e4ZF2HZLRs/w-d-xo.html
I feel the exact same way and agree with the person below you. I took issue with this video on a smaller aspect, with unity being the theme and the “contradictory villain”.
I think it’s a gross misrepresentation to leave out the fact that Snyder had an Asian daughter and before the premiere of the movie on HBO Max, had to denounce a group by the name of Geeks + Gamers at a charity live stream for suicide prevention. This group is racist and sexist online and promotes that type of behavior (e.g joking about killing Asian people bc of covid). In that livestream Snyder said Justice League was about different types of people coming together and because of the comments that G+G have made, he felt the need to clarify he is not affiliated with them.
Through this lens it’s not a contradiction for the main heroes to be unity and the villain to also be “unity”. The Justice League values unity AND diversity. While the JL may have their differences that have led to some bumps in the road, the group is still able to succeed, and does so because of their unique perspectives and skill sets. The villains of this movie (parademons aka the faceless horde) have valued unity so much that it cost them diversity and that is the reason why they failed. The Justice league each contribute something unique to their victory while the parademons each contribute the same thing that still leads to their demise
Now that you mention it, it is really weird to have the threat in a superhero team-up movie be "Unity."
Edit: I admit, this wasn’t a very deep or thoughtful comment on my part. I’m probably not going to read any more replies.
Why was the "Borg" so threatening in Star Trek?
He glossed over the fact that unity is also recognized as a virtue of the heroes. The people of ancient Earth “fought united”. Batman motivates the team by reminding them they’ll be unbeatable if they stay united. The unity of the Boxes isn’t meant to represent an actual unity, but merely a mockery of it. Everything related to Darkseid is about that, since his main goal is to unite everyone... by making everyone a literal part of himself.
@@rickblaine9670 You make a really good point. When I think about it, it does make sense to have the heroes work together to defeat a “false” unity. Though I still have a hard time processing the way the theme of losing your individuality and agency is explored in Snyder’s films. I mean, I think that a very human fear. I can empathize with that. What I don’t really get is why that fear is directed at gay people, communists, and Muslims.
@@rickblaine9670 The problem is that Snyder only believe is a particular type of "unity" that is also false. It isn't unity what he believes, he believes in individualism. Take what JustWrite stated about Cyborg, with that type of technology he probably would do WAY more good working on economics and helping the capitalistic system become more fair. But Snyder, being a Rand-ian-Head, don't believe in caring about people outside his social bubble. The worse still example is Father Kent's quote on how probably it would've been better if Clark hadn't saved a bus full of kids, or the more idiotic scene where he faces a freaking tornado to safe a dog instead of having his All-Powerful adopted son do it for him. Snyder framed it as if Father Kent were sacrificing himself, but to me it just looks like a dumbass decision. You are in a crisis and you decide the best thing to do is to face a tornado? Really? That screams individualism all through it. Superman is the symbol of hope, a hero that would try to save everyone, and Snyder ruined him.
@@acehealer4212 I think, and I agree with other commenters, that there's the unity that benefits yourself, directly, and the unity that benefits others but not yourself, as much.
It's almost like splitting hairs, but I agree about the ideas of "true" unity vs. a "false" one.
Isn’t Avengers just about stopping a bad guy from collecting magic rocks?
Well, yes but the execution is way different.
@@chinmaysharma9424 And the characters were set up properly before hand!
@@Fork1 When you have 20 years, doesn't that kind of make sense? WB just wanted to catch up and Snyder did his best to do that in 4 hours and then WB said "nah, cut it by 2" It's almost as if WB wanted JL to fail.
@@dylanjones268 But nobody wanted them to catch up, everybody wanted them to take their time and make good movies. WB wanted to succeed by shooting themselves in the foot and crawl over the finishline!
@@Fork1 Properly? just because they had a stand alone movie? ok
This feels like a reach. I HATE Ayn Rand and any ideas like hers but this is a reach. Dude, did we watch the same movie?
My biggest fear is that with the Snyder Cut being successful, Zack Snyder will never again make a movie that doesn’t NEED a Snyder Cut.
I do like his movies, but give me a movie again that doesn’t take up half my day.
Most people will easily and very happily binge a season of a tv show. What's the difference here? Is it just that you feel like you're 'forced' to watch it in one sitting? Genuine question.
@@ElMoShApPiNeSs TV shows are split into episodes, which gives the audience good places to take breaks. Movies are single continuous work, and they are not designed to be paused.
@@ElMoShApPiNeSs If Snyder wants to make a miniseries, why not make a miniseries? Is the format just not grandiose enough?
@@bored_person To add onto what you said, it's not only the breaking point but a good TV show sections its episodes (or parts, whatever you want to call them) in ways where each episode has a contained meaning, it has its own plot. A properly written TV show (even ones where entire seasons have their big arc) isn't just one long movie cut up into parts.
If you were to take the Snyder Cut and break it into 5-6 parts, then what is the one part trying to say? What is the message? What is the story that, among the big plot of the whole series, THAT episode specifically trying to say. You can look at shows like Breaking Bad, each episode contained its own themes, meanings, and stories. And each of the episodes has its own three-act structure that is contained within the full season 3 act structure (If you want to think of the season like a movie).
That's why I think that the Snyder cut isn't the same as a mini-series... it's a long movie because that's how it was written. Taking a long movie and breaking it down into sections doesn't make it a TV show, or a miniseries... it makes it a movie broken down into sections.
@@DarrenNoFun Its broken into chapters that do have there own themes and stories.
16:30 the bull and bear scene is just Neil Breene with a budget
JIM!
That's funny. But also ironic since it's our beloved critic here, not the director, who said Cyborg can "literally end poverty".
In what way, may i ask?
It's obviously a Fallout New Vegas reference, duh
@@shibble yeah it just made me think of New Vegas, and how I'd rather be enjoying that story.
I've always wondered what a Zack Snyder adaptation of I Am Legend would look like. Do you think he'd fail to comprehend the point of that too? Like... Zack Snyder IS the main character of that book.
Coming up next:
Justice League: The Snyder & Bay cut.
Filming Michael Bay blowing up characters Zach Snyder thinks are amazing.
Edit: In slow motion.
In slow motion and with the camera moving, the characters moving and the background moving.
The Snyder Cut is an advanced maneuver no novice swordsman should ever attempt.
“While you were out lazing about, I was studying THE BLADE!”
-Zack Snyder
-Me
Best way to describe this average movie everyone pretending its a masterpiece
@@devilsadvocate4081 just because you found it average doesn’t mean that everyone else has to think the same. Art is subjective
@@fastforwardvideos2752 It's honestly a great movie. Very memorable. But objectively, it is far from being perfect, or being considered a "masterpiece".
It's really difficult to think of any comic book movie that's a "masterpiece". Maybe Logan?
@@qy72hund Joker is another example I could think of. But as far as large scale blockbuster superhero movies go, I would argue that Snyder cut is one of the best in the genre
“It was fine” is a lot like when your friend tells you she went on a date and the guy had some wild red flags but still says “he’s nice though!” 👀
"So, I dated this guy who came up with how the lack of objective standards is ruining art since the 20th century, the western values are endangered or something like it, but he was nice, though"
For all the flaws of the Snyder cut, I don't see any wild red flags. Just write is grasping at straws with this anti-unity narrative.
@@AstralMarmot " To me the red flags are his relentless promotion of a philosophy based on selfishness and ego glorification"
LMAO, "Relentless promotion".
Tell me, when Did Zack Snyder say that Randian objectivism had the right idea about how to live life and treat others? You are aware that he voted for Joe Biden? that he heavily promoted mental right issues for teens?
No, what happened is that Snyder said he was a fan of the Fountainhead, and suddenly every pseudo-intellectual poser tried to find hidden meaning in his works that are not there.
Superman, who twice over finds ways to sacrifice himself for humanity (with some glaring Jesus paralells), is the embodiment of Randian Heroism? Cyborg, whose entire character revolved around innate Humanism, is the embodiment of Randian heroism?
" It normalizes a lack of empathy and posits unity itself as an evil to be actively fought"
No, it does not. #Usunited was a tagline used to heavily promote the Snyder Cut. Batman literally points to Unity being why they will suceed, but who cares about actually watching the movie?
Cyborg, who hacks his homeless friends grades and the risk of being expelled, or/and kicked out of the team,And then after being turned into 80% machine he helps a poor woman. In your eyes, is that normalizing lack of empathy?
You need to grow up. Snyder has no sinister motives here, he is a dude that likes to make a particular style of film. As is Sorkinson. Being Assimilated into a faceless crowd with no free will of your own is a legitimately terrifying prospect. The actual movie does not say that Unity in itself is bad, that idea exists only in your head.
@@AstralMarmot " I'm sorry you're not interested in a conversation vs. making personal attacks."
But making blatantly overblown assumptions and attacking the moral character of Snyder is okay, apparently.
I've expressed nothing here as a personal attack. If you take it as such, then that's a shame.
" That's called discussion, and lots of people do it"
With how condescending you are here, should you really be upset about personal attacks?
The most annoying noise in Zack Snyder's Justice League was the "Ancient Lamentation" that played every time Wonder Woman was on screen.
I fast forwarded those scenes. I just couldnt bear it
That's JunkieXL's work...
Small pointer after being 5 minutes in the video: Zack Snyder's reshoots ONLY included the two epilogue scenes at the end (The Knightmare scene and the MM scene), all the rest was already shot back when he was originally working on it. The money he got to finish the movie for the most part went into fixing the visual effects.
There's no way he sees this
That's bull. There are so many scenes that are framed differently based on the new aspect ratio he decided to use.
"Very online fans of Snyder's" SENT me, dude. The most accurate.
this is not accurate. this video is a joke
April fools day!
Why? 😏💅🏼 You pressed that we got our way? lmao
Lmao what? The only place Snyder haters are found is online. His fans can be found anywhere if you start talking about his movies, and others simply say it's not there style of preference. Haters, though, are no where to be found but online.
@@qy72hund the problem is that the words fan and haters are used too easily. 300 and watchman are good movies and if I praise that, I'm only a fanboy. Justice league and man of steel are bad movies and if I evidence their problems I'm a hater. There can be also the situation where you enjoy a movie that is objectively bad or being bored by a really good movie.
The problem is when you start defending a bad movie or thrashing a good one without relying on movie facts, world and mechanics.
Unity could be referring the the philosophical idea that one day man and machine will unite. It goes with the faceless horde trope. I don't think it was specifically communism in that one spot.
Also cyborg redoing the world's finance system unilaterally might not actually be a cool and good thing. Half of this stuff is getting the heroes not to enforce their will on the world, ultimately culminating in the superman injustice character arc.
Cyborg meddling with economy would probably do a lot of damage. I understood the scene as a "making a better world for one person at a time is a good way to start", and a way to reconnect Victor with other people. But everyone can interpret it their own way, I guess.
Gotta recommend the Jobwillins fanedit of Man of Steel and BvS into Man of Tomorrow. He does a really good job of paring out the Randian bullshit and centering the emotional arc of the sacrifice we make for family. It actually makes the Martha moment land with the proper gravitas.
Where can I find these?
EDIT: Never mind I found it.
@@SRETRODUDE The full thing? I can only find trailers.
A Randian who almost exclusively makes adaptations is just the chef's kiss
Ive disliked Snyders style for years but was always unable to pin down what exactly pushed me away. This was very much eye opening
Same for me, Rand preached how being selfish is good for everyone, but this is in direct contradiction what superheroes do from day one
Bruce literally emphasizes working as a team before the last battle. Remember "us united"
@@danield.8233 Not only that, but Bruce states he is acting on faith rather than reason throughout the film showing his growth from being a xenophobic asshole in BvS. Ayn Rand believed people should only act with reason. These anti-Snyder takes are so dumb lmao
@@BabyYodie She preached a lot of contradictory things
@@BabyYodie because this is a justice league movies, and someone have to start unite the team. The problem is that I always point Batman as the last person to create the JL. Batman in the comic and cartoon, always fear the JL because they have too much power, so he never accept as a real member and always create fail-safe incase the JL went evil.
I see a lot of people give this movie credit for expanding the character motivations and stories but I imagine if it also had to be cut down to 2 hours for cinema release, it would have also been a jumbled mess.
If time did not slow down, it could probably be a 2 hour movie.
More seriously, the content of this movie should have been over more than just this one movie
@@scottsbarbarossalogic3665 I believe someone did work out that there is about 25 min of slomo
I've said this before. I guess that's the reason why WB don't really like him as a director. All of his superhero movies are way too long (and probably also too expensive for a CGI fest movie)
@@abitsourrrrsorry4885 WB are cheapskates. The audience deserves a good movie regardless of how long it is.
I mean we have already seen Zack Snyder's first Justice League movie, it's called Batman v Superman. And while I haven't seen it apparently the extended cut adds some needed context. Funny how giving him free reign to make a 4 hour movie kind of makes it passable entertainment. No doubt having to abide by at least a 2-3 hour limit world have made him leave a lot on the cutting room floor.
"my philosophy is about individual identity and I want everyone of my characters to think the same."
Ayn Rand in a nutshell folks. Lockstep under the veil of individualism.
Like all ancaps, Ayn Rand believes that people have the right to repress other people.
@@potatoprodutions7871 Ayn Rand is neither an ancap nor does she believe in repressing other people. Where do you get this from?
@@henrikknightingale I shouldn't have boiled objectivism down to "ancaps," but all I intended by that was someone whose ideal world is one where capitalists are less restricted by laws than they currently are. Both ancaps and Randian objectivists believe society is pushed forward by the rich and powerful, who should therefore be free to do as they please. Hence, I was quick to group them together. I still personally see Randians as one subgroup of anarcho-capitalism but respect someone who doesn't agree on that point's opinion, and I recognize the possibility I'm oversimplifying the issue.
As for your second point, you are far too wrong for your opinion to warrant any respect in any dialogue that places any kind of value on verifiable facts. Her entire worldview is one of a hierarchy where those people who were born great (and totally didn't become that way thanks to their circumstances that anyone could've become great with) have the right to undemocratically rule over the less preferable workers, who contribute nothing without the guiding hand of the capitalist. Her Fountainhead protagonist is a blatant stand-in for her ideal philosopher-hero who, after running away from society to live in a commune, pettily return for no other reason to demand the love and respect of the filthy, scary poor who dare suggest they should democratically own the workplace now that he left it, choosing to destroy his factories rather than let the world move on without him, because to Ayn Rand and her followers, something far worse than repressing workers or destroying their means of income is to upset the hierarchy.
@@potatoprodutions7871 First of all; I have spent three years reading every single book (fiction and non-fiction) of Ayn Rand. So if you’re accusing me of being non-factual, then please, cite where you have your facts from as opposed to mine.
When it comes to the content of your answer, I would just say that Rand doesn’t think the rich and powerful should be able to do all that they please because they are rich and powerful. Her political view is that men should be free to live their lives as they wish granted that they do not initiate force on others. You can live your life as you please as long as you don’t disturbe the lives of others.
Anarchists on the other hand, believe that there should be no institution to forbid force in the lives of men. That is the opposite of the objectivist view of capitalism
@@henrikknightingale One note before I begin: I accidentally mentioned the wrong book in my last comment. I meant Atlas Shrugged but wrote the Fountainhead. Also, normally I wouldn't apologize for such a long comment but this really is a sizable chunk for a YT comments section. Sorry about that but like I previously corrected myself on, I shouldn't be simplifying any of this. It's nothing you can't knock out in a minute or so though.
I agree that the beliefs of anarchists and capitalists are inherently at odds and cannot be combined. However, anarcho-capitalism is a piece of terminology created by capitalists borrowing from the anarchists' vocabulary and shouldn't be dismissed as just some nonsense. It specifically refers to a society where there is either no state or a state that has no business whatsoever impeding the efforts of capitalist projects. One important thing to note is the difference marked between the government and state to either brand of anarchist, who would still want a government, but not the borders, monopoly on violence, or other aspects of a state. I struggle to see how you could read Ayn Rand and come to the conclusion that she doesn't believe in anything resembling anarcho-capitalism. Rand constantly depicts welfare and social programs as negative and the impoverished as disgusting and lazy, and her entire fiction is dedicated to glorifying capitalist philosopher-heroes. Fortunately for me though, I don't have to prove to you that she does. Her followers already believe that. Courtesy of the Atlas Society's website, "Objectivists advocate laissez-faire capitalism." (www.atlassociety.org/post/what-is-objectivism, David Kelley, founder of the Atlas Society).
What Rand ignores is that this form of capitalism, and perhaps any form of capitalism, is a force that prevents others from living as they see fit. Her characters are the perfect example of that contradiction. People who become rich and powerful don't hit the finish line when they do that, they continue growing richer and more powerful, and they continue eating up resources that their workers lose access to. Meanwhile, Rand's characters in Atlas Shrugged have no reason to leave Galt's Gulch except that outside of the Gulch they have power. Since in the absence of the capitalist, people would just keep working and surviving, Rand must create a problem. The rich must leave Galt's Gulch to prove how much they're needed, like abusive parents tormenting their now-grown children. In order to hold onto the power their riches allow them, the rich will not hesitate to screw over the common working-class man. In truth, the capitalist class only exists because a government recognizes it and gives a handful of people power over the rest, with the workers having no democratic power in that process. The capitalist class is an outside force imposed on people, and laissez-faire policy, which dismisses social programs like Rand does, makes it more challenging for those who aren't capitalists to "live their lives as they see fit."
Finally someone shares the same grey zone feeling about this movie like me. It’s fine, could still do with a bit of trimming and that Knightmare epilogue could have been a short film instead of being tacked onto the end of it. Would have made it a little easier to finish at least. By that point, I was getting serious bored as the story had ended already.
I think it's an issue of expectations. A lot of people thought "dear god, a four hour Zack Snyder movie!" and expected a nightmare. When your expectation is that low you just need to be good to surpass expectations.
Your title is just exactly how I feel about it
Stfu
@@littledudefromacrossthestr5755 lol
Gagu
@@littledudefromacrossthestr5755 Ayo mang you got any more of that, salt?
@@piccoloatburgerking naaaahhh
Coldcrashfilms also has a great video about Ayn Rand called "Why the hell do I own a copy of the fountainhead"
We must know the tactics of our opponents to defeat them.
@@Ocker3 She is not your opponent - neither are her fans. In truth, you only have one opponent.
@@benjaminvoiles1678 Objectivism is an inherently and deliberately super-selfish. It's a toxic ideology that needs to be driven from the world.
I recommend reading more into Snyder on Rand. He says he hates her politics but likes her one book called the fountainhead for its story about art and architecture . Specifically how it’s about a dude giving the corporate fat cats the finger.
And I mean common, with your explanation about Cyborg it's you who install into it something that isn't there. No Cyborg can't "erradicate poverty" and if you think so you have a very naive view of economics. The reason why his father tells him not to do it is exactly the one that applies to you. Economy is very complicated and naive - even if good spirited - things like what Cyborg could do would do much more harm then good. Cyborg could for example just add +1000000 dollars to everyones account in effort to eradicate poverty - which would at best do nothing, at worst cause massive turmoil which enivatbly harms mots the poorest of people. His father tells him to be responsible and not think he's so smart he can just solve all the worlds problems like this - because he can't...
Potentially he could do that, but if he has the computing power to make those changes then he has the computing power to predict the results and make far better changes instead.
@Erik Kemeey @Erik Kemeey no it's not, it's extremely naive to think that a limited human being would know more about doing better choices than a machine, but let me tell you this right of the bat: no man can know more than a machine, it's literally impossible, no man can make a equation faster than a computer can, no man can beat a machine built to play chess (a couple years ago a machine in just 4 hours teaching itself how to play beat the chess world champion), so the bottom line is, what you think can't be solved because of your limited human brain, a machine would be able to solve in ways you can't even dream
@Erik Kemeey except his father don't know how an alien godlike technology that was infused alongside his own tech work
The worst part for me, was when you highlighted the way that Jonathan Kent raised superman. I think conceptually it’s a really cool idea to have Jonathan be afraid, and try to instill these Randian values in Clark, and the internal struggle that can cause. I say it was the worst part, because I was forced to acknowledge, again, that these movies are almost really cool, but, like you said, these are movies about awesome characters who go through no character growth.
Character growth is kind of an illusion in comics themselves though
Almost all comics exist in a permanent 2nd act, where an origin is known but never revisited, and they can never end because there's always another issue coming.
Thats why I'd say the most successful Hollywood adaptations are almost always origin stories
They, by nature, have a character growth that again, by nature, must remain absent from almost everything else.
@@rockyseverino9230 I think the third act could also be interesting i.e. Logan and the classic Western of the old dog pulling one last stand before riding into the sunset and retiring.
Snyder said these movies are looking at these godlike beings from a real world perspective. Jonathan knew his son was an alien. He was only worried about protecting Clark from being abducted by the goverment and turned into a lab rat. These movies take a more realistic approach and some people cant handle and want everything to be fantasyland full of jokes.
@@patrickbryan4702 That fear and anxiety could have worked if we were dealing with Spiderman or one of the X-Men and not Superman, a character that's so cartoonishly invincible that the government would be incapable of doing anything against him even as teenager. Furthermore, those kids saw Clark save them from that crash and some of them are shown to have even told their parents about it and yet in this realistic universe where we're supposed to be concerned about the alleged threat of the government investigating Clark... nothing happens. The film mentions the threat of his discovery and doesn't do anything about it.
Lastly, don't pretend that these superhero films with magic, aliens and absurd physics are anywhere close to realistic. These are the same movies that pretend that somehow Metropolis was rebuilt in only a few years despite the Superman and Zod trashing most of downtown and that the governments of the world would be ignorant or just sit back and do nothing while Steppenwolf tries to destroy the planet. Also, both versions of Justice League are filled with cringy jokes.
Liking these movies is more than fine but you have to admit that they are absurd.
Nothing against a filmmaker's take a well known character. We have a lot evil Superman over the years(Amazon given us two), but Snyder's take on him just casting out potential drama about him. The conflict the want and the need is something what defines Clark. A person who want to be an everyman, however has a responsibility for protecting not just his hometown or his country but all of the planet. Snyder's Randian take just incoherent with the concept of the main incarnations of the character, because it suggesting that "everymen" have no right to criticize the "Superman", and that any concern is based on fear and jealousy.
"The Snyder-verse is almost just an alternate Universe where Pa Kent read Atlas Shrugged" OMFG I am rolling on the floor ROTFL
Not only is it funny, but maybe it really is that simple.
@Erik Kemeey not really, the point of pa Kent is to tell us this Superman was raised by someone who approves of watching children die and not saving them, I'd say that's pretty Rand lmfao
@Erik Kemeey of course I watched the movie lmfao, and you know what, diegesis will always have a thematic point, so pa Kent being unsure absolutely does not depreciate the fact that he suggested for Clark to just stand and watch a dozen kids die. Also lmfao protect Clark from what? Nukes can't kill him, pa Kent can't know about kryptonite, I suppose he's protecting him from evil ideologies? Like, oh I don't know, something that justifies a person watching a bunch of kids die just so their own interest is not affected?
@Erik Kemeey that is clearly not the message being conveyed. So clearly that whether Superman should stop saving people is a major plot point in the sequel - bvs.
Did you watch the movies?
@Erik Kemeey clearly me, since you seem to have minimum skill of analysis?
Pa Kent knew the world will hate him? It is a thematic choice on the director's part that the world in the movie hates Superman. This is also Snyder's message, that humans are fearful snivelling ingrates who will blindly hate. It is also Snyder's choice that Superman had to die to save Doomsday, or that Doomsday exists at all. It's like saying Jesus is great for saving humanity from sins when Jesus and sins only exist within the biblical framework. And no, Superman didn't save the world, he saved Lois, who was his world. Saving the rest of the world was just a sweet by product. Maybe actually watch the movies?
The bar Josstice League is so low that everyone and their mother start praising Snyder
Except mothers named martha
@@qwerty11111122 *WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME???!!!*
Been waiting for someone to do this analysis! Sorta ironic that in trying to his make fav characters fight back against the faceless hordes he makes them all John Galt just with different masks
So you’re saying this film *just is leagues* better than the original cut, but it’s all *flash* with no *wonder.* Damn I sure could go for a glass of *aqua, man*
Wth did I just read? My brain cells aren't computing to these words
I don’t wanna like this comment but I will anyway
Your comment was very *Martian Manhunter*
...Did I do it right?
@@boogaloojenkins2646 mysterious as the darkseid of the moon
You BATted this out of the park!
I’m glad the portal sound was addressed. Anyway, great video again!
I think the “unity” stuff is kind of silly. He also has Batman talk about the importance of the JL being “United.” He clearly isn’t saying unity is bad.
It's an old trope, "we must obtain all the pieces that will unify and create the ultimate POWAA!". But its 2021 and generic plots with simple good vs evil morality in service to something that's actually fun is considered anti-communist propaganda by, you guessed it, communists.
Bruh the literal villians of the story are trying to enact this plan of unity
@@jacobposkey1962 As they sometimes do. The mother boxes and the unity is just another form of Mcguffin that pervade comic storylines. This storyline in particular was created around 2011 I think by Geoff Johns who is definitely not right wing. The infinity gauntlet isnt powerful by itself, but when all the stones come together it's the ultimate weapon. Kind of like, the triforce, the megazord, or captain planet, it's just another "with our powers combined" ultimate weapon, not some critique on fragile leftists. And noone that likes this movie thinks it is.
@Erik Kemeey Knew it was coming, I always find it hilarious when low effort thinkers begin self idenitfying with the cannon fodder in these movies. Its like Tolkien created shoe that would fit a brain dead idiot and 70 years later a leftist shows up and cuts all his toes off to fit into it.
I'm not sure how you can say that this film is against unity. The main characters themselves even talk about them being and needing to be united. Like Wonder Woman saying 'we need to fight together' (or something along those lines) during the tunnel scene or Batman saying 'he hasn't fought us *united*' in the scene leading up to the climax battle.
But say and show are two different things
If you asked me to write the JLA I would do the following:
Batman: A detective who speaks mostly in threats, but is good with kids.
Superman: A boyscout dork who is used to being overlooked when he is not using his powers. If you were ever a 6 foot tall artist in highschool and everyone is trying to push you on the football or basketball team because you are tall, you know this feeling. "You think you know me, but you don't. That is why the glasses disguise works"
Wonder Woman: Imagine if King Leonidus tried to be a buddhist. "PEACE BE WITH YOU, FELLOW WARRIOR!! NON VIOLENT CONFLICT RESOLUTION IS MY SECOND FAVORITE SKILL!"
Green Lantern: John Stewart as the straight man saying "I guess I am working with aliens again. Welcome to my 9-5 job".
The Flash: The name dropping teenager that wants to be with his heroes "Hey, have you met Jay Garrick? Barry Allen? Bart Allen, no wait, he is from the future, so you can't have met him unless you time traveled. Have you time traveled? I know this great bistro in manhattan in 3125 CE".
Aquaman: The guy who has seen everything and brags about it. "You protect Gotham? I protect 75% of the earth's surface. I deal with drug dealers, human traffickers, pirates, casino boats, every kind of disaster, kaiju, greek gods, wizards, military labs (both on islands, seaside, riverside, and under water), and JUST GUESS where most alien monsters crash land? I give you a hint: Not Kansas. Try fighting John carpenter's The Thing when you can't use a flame thrower and then tell me how mean the clown in purple is when he robs banks, you 1% rodent".
Martian Manhunter: Like a lonely Data from Star Trek. " Thanks for letting me be hear. You want to use my moon base? I have cookies. Sorry. But there was no one I can trust on earth for 70 years and it is nice to have company I don't have to mind read"
It would be fun to compare Ridley Scott and Zack Snyder's styles as directors. They both have exaggerated styles and use similar techniques to very different results. Scott's characters are always failing to meet their maker. Snyder's characters seem to have a god complex. What can you do if you're already god except smite hoards?
Ngl it really bothers me that in the first live-action justice league film ever Superman doesn’t interact with any of the league members other than Batman. Even though it’s not some essential thing, the dc fan in me just can’t forgive that.
Unity is good. just not for the bad guys. Thats the theme. The justice league needs to UNITE. Earth needs to unite.
theres a line from Steppy where he says that Earth is divided, which is why the bad guys feel they can take the planet easily. Superman is the hope that UNITES the league together and then later the Earth
“The Snyder Cut is definitely... a Snyder Cut.”
Ah, yes, the floor is definitely floor.
slippery when wet
You're joking but once a dude at work told me, without a hint of irony, that there is no such thing as a "ceiling" because it is either just the floor of the flat above yours or the roof
@@Huskyy14 We can just say that “Ceiling” is a synonym for roof.
@@Huskyy14 Not sure if you're being serious or not.
@@mainstreetsaint36 Sadly yes. In hindsight I'm not sure what point I was trying to make (other than my coworkers are dumb). I guess I'm just saying that I like when people state the obvious as a semi-joke because of weird-ass takes like "there are no ceilings" or the new contestant above, "ceiling is a synonym for roof".
If Snyder never had anything to do with a script or the story or the characters, he'd be a good director.
Also, give him a slow-mo budget so he stops overusing it, and tell him he's no longer allowed to drain the colour from everything.
@@talideon perfect
Just put someone else in charge of color grading haha
He's not the writter.
I'm fascinated and baffled by this video at the same time. I'm not nearly as well read as you are when it comes to Ayn Rand's philosophy, so I'm not going to cross that minefield, but it does seem to me that you're reading into Snyder's work way more than you ought to.
For one, hoards of faceless enemies are not exclusive to Snyder. We've literally seen this in The Avengers, Age of Ultron, Infinity War and Endgame, so why is it being scrutinised to the nth degree here?
Second of all, you seem to have cut Snyder's DC films down to size in order to fit your narrative. Yes, Martha does tell Clarke that he doesn't owe the world a thing, but what does he then go and do? He gives his life to save humanity. I'm not sure why you've taken scenes from the middle of the film as microcosms for Snyder's entire philosophy. You're not allowing the arc of the story to crystallise.
Characters don't change? Bruce going from the jaded, cynical vigilante in BVS to the hero with restored faith in JL is a direct rebuttal of that point. You may think that the change is unearned or abrupt, but that very notion is left out of your video.
I highly doubt you'll read this comment (let alone respond to it), but I just thought I'd raise a few issues I had with the video.
Not an issue with his video, issue with his channel.
He seems to come up with a general thesis about what he wants the video to be about first, then twists the entire film to fit his narrative. He did the very same with his AOT video which was heavily disliked before being removed. Objective of video first, prove point after. That's literally the first thing you're told NOT to do when reviewing literature/film. Unfortunately, this film is too controversial to rival AOT in the amount of backlash it got but seriously, don't bother with Just Write anymore. He's got fundamental flaws with how he constructs his arguments that aren't going to be solved overnight.
@@pagatryx5451 I don't under your criticism
He interprets things in a certain way; because of his background, philosophical inclinations, books read etc - and for being a subject or an individual. We also can't know and see, and notice, everything, every time about a piece of media.
Objectivity is never going to be reached anyway, and perhaps shouldn't even be aspired to?
To say Just Write has an agenda or a view he wants to share with his videos, isn't any sort of disregard - it's exactly what they are, and perhaps should be? -- is it because you find him too ideological?
I usually think he's pretty good and well rounded in his argumentation and writing - i dont understand why he got so much backlash from his AOT video, where he multiple times stated that he ventured into difficult terrain.
Im curious as to what you think about the above- if you ever find the time or interest in answering :)
@@Chickenlovercamp Long rant kinda explaining my issues a bit more: What I'm suggesting isn't that he interpret's things in a different way, it's that he's too quick to interpret such things and then sticks stubbornly to his first interpretation, bending the writing to support his view, even if it's quite clearly not what he's saying it is, no matter what your background may be.
Rather than watching a show, then pondering on it afterwards, by the first few episodes/minutes he seems to already have his interpretation of what it's doing. He then attempts to make everything that comes after support that view, even if you have to do some mental gymnastics to do so. You can't do this. The 'message' of the story is only clear when it has all been told. In fact, I'd argue that every good story is a mystery, with the authors intent being only clearly revealed at the end. Often, not even then.
This was prevalent in the AOT video in particular, to the point I simply refuse to believe he had actually watched the show. He would use out of context scenes to support what he's saying, even if the context or scenes directly before or after were contradictory to what he was trying to say they were. Either he never saw such scenes or he was actively choosing to avoid talking about any of the scenes that refute his point...
This is in essence what made the video so controversial. He was saying stuff like "Look at this bad ass action scene. It's promoting violence and the military!" Whilst the scene directly before portrayed the slaughter or thousands of civilians, and the scene directly after had the soldier crying "What have you done?". He argues that it's 'muddy' but it's clearly not. I actually think they should have dialed back how clearly against violence the series was at that point. It was TOO clear for my liking.
I would say AOT's political message is quite clearly the opposite of what Just Write was trying to say it was. It STARTED by promoting violence, but that's not seen as a positive thing by the close of the series. People don't mind different interpretations as long as they aren't completely disproven by the source material. Like arguing that Fast and Furious is about abandoning your family.
@@pagatryx5451 I think you touch on the muddy nature of interpretations very well.
on the one hand, we could say that what counts is the author/writer/directors meaning, reason, justification or message - that the message of the piece of media, is the message of the author, so if he/she says a movie is about 'this thing', then that's what it is - and 'this is the message, then that's what it is.
on the other hand, we could say that the moment a piece of media is released, it no longer belongs to the author - it can be interpreted in any which way it can be, and made to mean a whole bunch of stuff - maybe even opposite one another. but the creator doesn't anymore have say in what his/her creation will mean, or how it will be used or interpreted.
What Just Write does well i think, is point to a film or book's subtext, for example: why are we seeing so many military montages, basically glorifying or softening life in the military with scenes of smiling faces, comeradeship and cool gear/machines in our superhero movies - are they trying to tell us something perhaps?
And i think that's what he tried to point out in AOT video and their (perhaps problematic) use of allegories; That no matter what the show is trying to tell us, it's use of certain imagery, symbols and gestures, lends it self TOO EASILY to be interpreted in a certain way - that its to easy to interpret it flirting with fascistic ideas, which he finds very problematic.
on another note, there are several books about how to review movies and books without reading them, which i myself think is a little too cynical. its also just say that there are interpretive communities where a book or movies series, where the ending isn't even merited; it's content and message is already ingested.
I do greatly appreciate you answering though :)
Isn't it possible, then, that the same points he makes here can be reapplied to the majority of action-blockbusters? Rand had a lot of influence in Hollywood.
Well, considering how Snyder is an Ayn Rand's fan (me, for the little i know about her, am NOT), it's weird that Cyborg, the aforementioned "heart of the movie" does pull his own strings to make social justice to a single working striggling mother which is kind of...A THING.
Thanks for putting into words what my feelings can't say :D
I'm just happy that Joss Whedon is getting his comeuppance tbh.
Honestly, from what I've heard, Snyder's original film was much worse than the theatrical cut, and Whedon did the best with what he had. Apparently, it was only with a few years hindsight that Synder was able to make an ok movie.
Only for his behind the scenes abuse and not because of this movie
@@jdcrosier2682 That's not how it is. This is basically the original movie, with the exception of the Joker and Martian Manhunter scenes. Snyder has not even scene the Whedon version.
@@Vesohag There's some definite signs he changed stuff. Aquaman's "My man!" was in the trailers before Whedon got involved, but it's missing here. Seems like he could tell it wasn't well received and removed it.
@@Vesohag yeah sure. He needed 70 million dollars worth of reshoots to create the movie "how it was 4 years ago".
I really don't get why the "His father is always telling him he maybe shouldn't help others" take is so pervasive.
To me, it's clear from context and text that Jonathan is saying that MAYBE Clark shouldn't risk exposing himself YET, EVEN if it means letting others come to harm.
Given how heavily qualified that conversation is, "helping others is good, actually" is obviously already a given.
And if you found that messaging subtle (which, it wasn't), it's literally stated in the text later.
Clark Kent:
My father believed that if the world found out who I really was, they'd reject me... out of fear.
[flashbacks show Clark telling Lois how Jonathan died in a tornado; Clark having to stand and watch because Jonathan told him not to use his powers to come to his aid]
Clark Kent:
I let my father die because I trusted him. Because he was convinced that I had to wait. That the world was not ready. What do you think?
[Lois (who's literal job is to keep the public informed) then agrees to keep his secret, implying she agrees)
People live with moral absolutism these days, when faced with difficult to answer questions that are left ambiguous for a reason, take it as an absolute of whatever theyre against, as if they wont or cant think about difficult moral questions at all. He said "maybe" that means "yes because he didnt say no". this guy is supposed to be a writer but tok it as an absolute no when pa kent said "maybe"? that makes no sense at all. People are really jamming these puzzle pieces into anywhere they would like them to go, instead of leaving it up to interpretation.
@@GrungeyMr the conversation between Clark and Pa Kent is about saving a bus full of children. Pa Kent is frustrated that he saved them and he’s telling a child that maybe he should’ve let them die. It’s a pretty black and white scenario. There’s not a lot of grey area in saving a bus of children and risking people noticing or just letting them die for selfish reasons.
@@Uglyweezer which is funny because in BvS Pa Kent gives the opposite advice, that doing something selfish (saving your own farm from a flood) can lead to the misfortune of others (the lang farm got flooded instead).
...those two scenes prove his point, you know.
The whole movie is about him wandering around from place to place anytime after he does something that might give him away, because of that mentality instilled into him. Don't save the kids because they might discover you, Lois please keep my secret despite all the heroism stories you heard about me because I don't want people to know it was me.
And there's no Black Panther "YOU WERE WRONG!" moment where he pushes back against his dad and grows past that mindset, at least not from his own learning experience. His hand is forced by Zod, and the movie *thinks* that the military is a good enough substitute for coming out to the general public when it really isn't.
He definitely coulda cut 30 min out but I loved it. The action scene with Steppenwolf and Amazons is nuts
What kinda name is that?
@@foonyahaha Apokolips is his home planet
Dude he could have cut over an hour out of that movie, and even Snyder knows that. He didn't because this is his one blank check from the studio, they're never gonna let him go as wild as he did here again. Especially when they know the end result is just okay, if it were a box office release it would have flopped for the cost alone, not even counting for the deals they'd have to cut with theaters to put out a 4 hour movie.
The amount of times you used the word ideology in this analysis made me wish for a Žižek Cut.
is this an analysis ??
People, who use one word too often are just people who posessed by it. This video says more about Just Write than Zack Snyder.
this video is reaching so hard with the Randian Libertanian angle, which clearly Snyder doesn't even hold. Can't believe he spent half the video ranting about that. What a joke.
For sure preferred the longer snyder cut over the original released.
Contrary to popular belief, you can polish a turd. Unfortunately, it's still a turd...
@@talideon polish, is that what you call it? Smh
@@talideon contrary to popular belief, its normal to encounter those of different opinions and not try to criticize them
@@luckyboi5878 How else would we have heard his very witty (and original) comment?
@@luckyboi5878 I do believe what you've witnessed is me _expressing_ an opinion, not criticising anyone. If you enjoyed it, good for you. However, if you think I was criticising TriumphOverDeath, you're very much mistaken. You appear to think that when somebody expresses an opinion different from your own, they're criticising. Do I think it was better? Yes. Do I think it was good? Not really. Fundamentally, it needed somebody other than Snyder himself to edit it.
Why did you delete your Attack on Titan criticism video?
Since he was proven wrong
Today I learned that Zack Snyder directed the movie adaptation of Guardians of Ga’hoole. I don’t know what to make of this
It's his best film by a long shot.
Very weird, but the whole of Silicon Valley have idolized Ayn Rand a lot. I wonder why? Using people as pawns in a game (see Facebook's psychology experiments for example)? That couldn't be true, could it? ;-)
People in the comment section who think that Snyder just want to make fun superhero action really doesn't fucking understand his work. And I mean at all.
I mean... does anybody like you or them really understand what Snyder’s making?
@@jadennavarrofilms2377 im not going to pretend i know him fully but to say there is no objectivism philosophy in snyder movie is fucking stupid
@kafu Kemeh I know what this video trying to say. I simply don't agree.
I dont think snyder is some fascist or whatever however a lot of his movie have contradictory message regardless of his intent.
Take that video argument about 300 about how 300 is supposed to satires the west views on anybody who isn't them as barbarianism. The problem with that statement is, at what point the narrative show us that point of views is wrong?
At no point in the movie the Spartan was shown to be wrong for portraying this and for intend purpose we the viewer have to assume the worse.
@kafu Kemeh Yes I agree the problem is at no point we see the other side of the story nor the story show us that this take is exaggerated we shouldn't be taking it seriously.
There is a relationship between author and audience. I am not asking artist to spoon feed the audience but here we are left nothing to show at. How many people understsnd spartan culture and historical context?
I have not even touch Rorshach who suffered all kind of tragedy.
@kafu Kemeh It is the way they are film that what matter.
Spartan action often portrayed as epic and heroic. Their face are described larger than life. Their death is often portrayed as tragic and epic.
Compare to Persian where they are all faceless men who dies faceless. And to emphasized. Leonidas dies not before giving one final fuck you and dies with Christian pose.
Every single face of spartan soldier are immortalized and memorized while no focus on Persian beside man bad guy.
18:45 um...someone's projecting. ... and it's not snyder.
Good catch. Such a shame when pushing an ideology becomes more cost-efficient than fair criticism or writing advice. No one who watches these sorts of videos learns anything, they either feel challenged or vindicated.
Knowing Better's video on Ayn Randy is pretty awesome too.
I'll check out those 2 you linked, thanks.
You literally snipped Martha’s talk with Clark to fit your narrative. She compares the dichotomy of helping and not helping, a great take on a Superman that can’t be everywhere at once and so he falls short constantly. She is just trying to say “don’t feel guilty.”
One day we'll have a real Superman again.
Read Superman Smashes the Klan. It's pretty great Supes story, with him facing a believable inner conflict that doesn't revolve around Randian nonsense.
I can't wait for that day.
as someone who's barely familiar with the "DC CW-verse," I think the Superman and Lois show portrays a pretty great Supes imo. but the show's focus on family drama prob isn't for everyone lol
This is the most real Superman we ever had. This Superman actually has to grow , learn how to control his powers and become Superman.
Superman: Man of Tomorrow is amazing!
Briefly, (enjoyed the vid, agree with much of your breakdown), but I think the theme of Cyborg not interfering with people is a theme I disagree as being part of objectivism. I found it as more of the "this is too much power for any one person to have" kind of a theme. I found themes like this reminiscent of Donner's Superman where Jor-El tells him he is "forbidden to interfere with human history." Its a lot of power. Removes much of the agency of those you start to control or change like toys (as Silas Stone says) and removes the humanity of Cyborg (or Superman), and they could develop a powerful god complex or evil intentions, spite etc. Just something I wanted to touch on.
I will give the Snyder cut some good points though in that it is my favorite of Snyder's works. I never liked 300 in any capacity and was more fond of the comic version of Watchmen than the movie.
Incidentally though I can't help but see that, but I kinda gave an excuse for the Snyder cut on the Parademons because the movie doesn't just not show us that, but it is worth pointing out the animated movie titled "Justice League: War" also did the thing where people captured by Darkseid's minions were directly transformed into Parademons under his control.
Though... yeah, while I really did like the scene where Cyborg helps that one woman, I also did give Cyborg's father the benefit of the doubt in that scene, I was under the impression that he was implying that Cyborg would have to resist the temptation, not to help others... but instead not to just *help himself* which.... well, this would be Cyborg having the possibility of making himself as wealthy as Bruce Wayne and Lex Luthor combined if he so wanted but choosing not to.
I finished this movie and went, "Yup, this is a much better version of the movie. 5.5/10."
I thought it was a 9/10. Highly enjoyed it
I thought it was a 2/10. worst than whedon
@@coolvibesradio3267 I can respect that. I liked that there was more mindless super hero fanservice. We're never getting actual character or plot from this franchise, so the most we can look forward to is cool stuff.
@@Sabasanosiss I had really hope that the snyder version would have been better. Snyder has done great stuff. but this is his worst. Now I believe that between warner and the material he had Joss whedon has done a better job in less time and more pressure.
@@coolvibesradio3267 Snyder doesn't understand super heroes and is a man child. I don't know why anyone expected anything more or why he keeps getting chances.
6:35 I love that someone finally brought up *Dawn of the Dead*
13:50 but those are brought up as bad
9:45 I thought he was supposed to be portrayed as a nutjob
9:45
We interpret it as such because so we believe, but the film makes no effort to present it that way
@@gedeonnunes5626 It seems pretty clear from the overblown performance of Ken Foree
@@matman000000 Some people genuinely manage the feat to misinterpret the most obvious stuff
Yeah, he’s supposed to be portrayed as a religious nutjob. Specially considering that the only character that speech resonates with is a homophobic, individualist, agressive guy who, at that point, is the film’s antagonist.
The movie’s real answer to the zombies is “We don’t know”
While you're at it, remember who wrote the Snyder's DotD script? That's right. Gunn. Zombie toddler is the kind of edgelord stuff people would show in early career.
Finished it in one go with my brother and we both loved it so much
16:54 not sure if you know this or not but you can't eradicate poverty by printing more money. see Weimar republic
Thank you for pointing out that sound effect! I laughed literally every time it happened.
why though? in JL:Unlimited it sounded very much the same. i still find funny how the beeming in Star Trek sounded, yet i accepted it as fact. no need to challenge the concept. who the heck actually knows what a boom tube sounds like? it sounded like thunder, when it appeared and disappeared it created a violent reaction on its surroundings. i found it pretty good to this description.
These were nearly exactly my thoughts about the movie... I'm just am not nearly well read enough to have put those thoughts into a cohesive essay like you have.
Implicitly pretentious will help you iron out more of your thoughts too, maybe Hitop as well
My favorite scene was Cyborg hacking the bank to give the woman money.
So basically your Commi senses got hurt
How did I not know Snyder was a Rand fan. Oh my goodness im turning into that cat that freaks out when the flower is put on his head it all makes sense now
he only likes one story and hates her politics, so what?
@@GuruPrashanth7970 and her politics is pretty much spelt out throughout her entire work as an author. And as you said, he liked one of her books and it helped direct his projects later on.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 not really. He said he sees it as a story of sex and architecture. And that's it. No toxic ideals or inspiration from her is present in any of his films. His DC ones especially. The above analysis, and all such is just clear misinterpretation. I could direct you to things that go indepth if you're upto it.
I came away with the same, “It’s fine,” but for completely different reasons.
Just Write: It's fine.
Efap: How many times must we teach you this lesson old man?!?!?!?
Dicks ranting about a video in a 10 hour stream. Not exactly the greatest plan.
I find Martha’s reassurance that Clark doesn’t owe the world much more acceptable than Jonathan’s ‘maybe’.
Jonathan is implying that Clark shouldn’t help out when trouble comes near his way. That he should actively withhold help. Martha is saying that helping people is a choice & Clark shouldn’t feel like it’s an obligation & be burdened by it.
Clark was noticeably stressed when talking to his mom & of course at that moment she would prioritize her sons mental well being over other people. It’s better to have no Superman than a Superman who’s stressed out & inching closer to his breaking point.
No. Jonathan is saying that he shouldn't rush into things. It's very realistic actually.
The funniest part of the Snyder cut is the "This movie is in 4:3 aspect for Snyder's vision"
Annd for a movie missing its sides it is also the only full-frame (aka uncropped) one with more content per frame than any 16:9 4k bluray out there atm 🤪
I love the extra 6 inches of headspace that was totally meant to be there even though all of this was allegedly shot before the cut existed meaning it had to have been shot for 16:9 for theatrical release
@@hobbes6392 annnd no. The camera is actually 4:3, the cropping is done in post AFTER shooting.
Take the same frame from both cuts, and you'll see *EXACTLY* what's missing in the 16:9 scene.
Ps: basically you're complaining about your own tv 🤣 this was explicitly made for the biggest imax screens (which are 4:3 full-frame) and wall projections (how I roll), so pretty please zoom/crop the damn thing yourself if you wanna see less in 16:9 maybe? 😘
@@interlace84 You misunderstand; I do not care about the actual aspect ratio; it would have been just as funny for me if it had been 16:9 or 1:1. The explicit call out of it, framed with 'Because of the ARTISTE'S VISION' is a hilarious preamble for a 4 hour long movie
@@interlace84 Dipstick the logical fallacy is that Snyder and you all allege and claim that he never shot anything else for this cut. That it was all on the cutting room floor. If that statement is true
SNYDER’S FILMING WOULD’VE BEEN UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE MAJORITY OF HIS VIEWING AUDIENCE WOULD SEE THE MOVIE IN A NORMAL THEATER AND NOT IMAX AND THAT THE MAJORITY OF HIS VISION WOULD BE SEEN IN 16:9
Meaning. That while perhaps the version he prefers is imax, he would’ve known that most people would not see it that way. Meaning it was never shot with the intention of only imax, no specific compositions or establishment shots, or specific movements to utilize the unique framing. It’s just him jerking off to be different
Thank you so much for bringing forth the ideological level thought process that went behind this movie. Tbh, I also could not find an overarching ideological theme that would make sense to me.
You can if you make up your mind first and look for justification afterwards. For example, if you take what Pa Kent said as being the voice of the director, but completely ignore what Jor-El said, you can just ignore the internal conflict and decide the character only has one note.
Isn't UNITY a simple universal theme enough for you to understand. Not that "unity" of mother boxes. That's evil.
Your point about BvS is spot on! The fact that all the main characters are pretty much the same in movie literally titled “Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice” The “vs” part of the title certainly is an after thought!
The lack any real attempt at actually having a clash in ideologies in the movie forces the majority of it’s run time to be dedicated towards sequel baiting, and Batman trying to pick a dick messuring contest with Superman. All leading up to Lex Luther to play “who’s you’re favorite Martha” with our heros. Meanwhile he’s also got Lord of the Rings cave troll awaiting to emerge from his hottub.
This is quite a contrast to another little know superheo movie at the time called Captain America: Civil War that had it’s characters actually challenge eachother on an ideal-logical level and that Marvel already had this shit figured out for the rest of the MCU.
It’s not that such a story couldn’t have been done, it’s that out favorite heros in Superman and Batman where given to the objectivist in Hollywood who where uninterested in challenging their audince or themselves! In that sense THIS movie that was made was truly the best they could have offered 0.o
The first thing I thought of when someone asked me what I thought of it was "Self-indulgent".