Why the Snyder-cut will disappoint you.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by TommyT

Do you think Snyder will put the beard and mullet on Cavil? I have a feeling he will.

He didn't film it, so no, probably not. It wouldn't really be in service to anything significant so I kind of don't see the point in CGI-ing a fake beard and long hair.

Frankly, much as I generally love Snyder's deference to the comics, his slavish devotion to the Black Recovery Suit slightly irritates me by itself. Not that there's anything wrong with it, it's from the books so it should be in there. He and I agree on that, and he and I agree that it's a fun visual to play around with. If I made the movie, absolutely, Black Recovery Suit. It's canon, it needs to be there.

BUT, when one of the biggest points of "criticism" in these movies is that "The Blue Isn't Blue Enough", dressing Superman in black for even two minutes is just going to give people more to whine about and they've already whined plenty. Nobody cares about the context if they never read the comics, they just see him in black and think it's just "Being Edgy for Edgy's Sake", nevermind that it's canon. So even though I'M thrilled to see the Recovery Suit, at the end of the day it's just one more thing for people to bitch about so I kinda selfishly wish he didn't choose to die on that hill. But that just comes from a personal place of being tired of people nitpicking Every Single Thing to death without even understanding the context of these choices, nor caring to.

But yeah, anyways, no, he didn't film anything with long hair or a beard so I highly doubt it. In 1993 people thought your hair kept growing after you were dead; in 2020, we have Google, so we know better. Black Suit is canon, leave that in. The other stuff need not be adhered to quite so strictly.
------------

Awesome Teela art, now I gotta go masturbate.

[TommyT]

Do you think he'll bring in Injustice?

[The Deadman]

Originally Posted by TommyT

LOL, OF COURSE i'm pushing the dudes buttons. Self serious people are the best.

But it's true, none the less. You all will feel that horrible deep disappointment. There's no way not to, without, well, some kind of opiate.

Or you take this **** way too seriously.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Leo656

In 1993 people thought your hair kept growing after you were dead; in 2020, we have Google, so we know better.

So THAT'S why they did that.

[Leo656]

Yeah, they admitted way later on it was just "Bad Science".

Of course, there were other factors. Everyone except Bruce Wayne was dabbling with letting their hair grow out in the back, by 1993. Nightwing is probably the most iconic, to the point where a lot of people think he looks weird with short hair, now, since he was one of the first ones to rock the mullet and kept it longer than most. But it was a trend, and at some point they decided they wanted to give Superman a turn. You'll notice that on the cover of Superman #81, he's drawn wearing the black suit BUT he very clearly has short hair, which indicates that the long hair was a very "late-game" decision.

Then there's the after-the-fact retcons that some writers have tried to pull regarding the Death of Superman story, in that "Well, he wasn't really 'dead', just in hibernation", which more than anything, to me, seems like a way of trying to justify the hair. But Dan Jurgens himself has spoken on the matter several times, both in-story and in interviews, and his perspective has always been "Nope. He was absolutely dead, and he'd have stayed that way if it wasn't for super-advanced Kryptonian technology and a little bit of luck." And he's also copped to the fact that he and the other writers just messed up with the long hair because Bad Science. So I defer to Word of God on that.

I'unno. Not my favorite look, and I can't say I'm sad they got rid of it, but in the context of the day, it made sense. They also wrote Clark as being a bit more "laid back" in that time, wanting to use his second chance at life to loosen up a bit and try new things, so keeping his hair long wasn't entirely out of character in-context. He also frequently bonded with Jimmy over heavy metal music during that time, which was fun. That was a fun time for the character. He had a real joie de vie after coming back from the dead. Lots of fun stories.

I'm still amazed that they kept him looking like that for like, 3 or 4 years, though. Points for commitment, I guess.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by TommyT

The hype is always the best part. Look at what happened to Star Wars, both with the Prequels, and the Disneyverse.

You people, you are never, ever, ever, ever satisfied when over-hyped.

I find your stance on this odd. "You people" ? Who? There isn't a hive mind.

[TommyT]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I find your stance on this odd. "You people" ?? Who? There isn't a hive mind.

Tell that to the comicsgate pundits of youtube. They write as though the fight for the Snyder cut is akin to ratifying the constitution. The fever is absurd.

It's happening with He-man now, it's happening with Batman to a degree, it's palpable at conventions (pre lockdown). Hard line divisions across the board.

[Leo656]

NEWS FLASH! "Nerds are just the worst, and 'fans' ruin everything!"

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I find your stance on this odd. "You people" ? Who? There isn't a hive mind.

[TommyT]

Originally Posted by Leo656

NEWS FLASH! "Nerds are just the worst, and 'fans' ruin everything!"

You agree.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

https://www.solvoyo.com/wp-content/u.../03/Futile.jpg

It's definitely funny when people refer to the dissenting voices of the internet as "you" while trying to understand why said "person" keeps changing their mind. Can't imagine the frustration that would bring.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

The Snyder cut will be the greatest movie of all time and anyone who says otherwise will need to make a future appointment with a psychiatrist

[ProphetofGanja]

Originally Posted by Leo656

...so I kind of don't see the point in CGI-ing a fake beard and long hair.

CGI-ing a fake beard and mullet onto Henry Cavill after they spent all that money CGI-ing out his mustache would just be so ****ing funny to me

Originally Posted by Leo656

Everyone except Bruce Wayne was dabbling with letting their hair grow out in the back, by 1993. Nightwing is probably the most iconic, to the point where a lot of people think he looks weird with short hair, now, since he was one of the first ones to rock the mullet and kept it longer than most. But it was a trend, and at some point they decided they wanted to give Superman a turn. You'll notice that on the cover of Superman #81, he's drawn wearing the black suit BUT he very clearly has short hair, which indicates that the long hair was a very "late-game" decision.

...

I'unno. Not my favorite look, and I can't say I'm sad they got rid of it, but in the context of the day, it made sense. They also wrote Clark as being a bit more "laid back" in that time, wanting to use his second chance at life to loosen up a bit and try new things, so keeping his hair long wasn't entirely out of character in-context. He also frequently bonded with Jimmy over heavy metal music during that time, which was fun. That was a fun time for the character. He had a real joie de vie after coming back from the dead. Lots of fun stories.

I'm still amazed that they kept him looking like that for like, 3 or 4 years, though. Points for commitment, I guess.

Honestly tho, I think Cavill could've pull off the mullet look and not come off as ridiculous. I dunno, maybe I'm just biased cuz of how cool he was in The Witcher.

Also, TommyT, you're the worst

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Whatswiththeheadbands?

The Snyder cut will be the greatest movie of all time and anyone who says otherwise will need to make a future appointment with a psychiatrist

WELL, "Young Guns" exists so that's a bit of a high bar, but maaaaaaybe it'll take the Silver medal if we're incredibly lucky.

Originally Posted by ProphetofGanja

CGI-ing a fake beard and mullet onto Henry Cavill after they spent all that money CGI-ing out his mustache would just be so ****ing funny to me



Honestly tho, I think Cavill could've pull off the mullet look and not come off as ridiculous. I dunno, maybe I'm just biased cuz of how cool he was in The Witcher.

Also, TommyT, you're the worst

I think Cavill could probably make anything cool. He's such a swell fella. And charming!

[neatoman]

Fun thing, I found the blu-ray of the Whedon cut for next to nothing yesterday. I haven't bothered getting the movie because I've heard about how much it sucks. Guess now I'll have to watch it...

[Leo656]

People over-sell the Good and Bad in literally every single thing nowadays.

I wouldn't call the Whedon Cut "garbage" as many do, it's just a scab. There's dozens of worse super-hero movies and lots of better ones. Definitely a lot wrong with it but it's harmless in a vacuum. It's just not what it was supposed to be and thus created a lot of its own problems.

I think it's an acceptable way to pass two hours but I'unno if I'll ever watch it again after the "real" movie is available. My copy has some good Special Features and stuff, though. Those are worth revisiting for me even if the Whedon cut of the movie isn't. Big behind-the-scenes nerd.

[TommyT]

And you wonder why I chose this particular film to hold up as an example.

Shitson, just one big joke.

[Andrew NDB]

The Whedon cut is like a sliver above the worst of the MCU movies. Maybe. The reshoot material -- and it's like 80-90% of the film -- is easy to spot and not quality. Plus Affleck came back fat.

From the opening (reshoot scene) with Fat Batman and the Parademons, it was clear something was wrong.

[sdp]

If so much of the movie is Whedon's why didn't he get director credit? Did he really reshoot a lot or not ?

[Leo656]

It was a complicated union/contract thing.

Put simply directors generally can't share credit on a film. Partly for reasons of marketing consistency, as well as out of respect for the fact that the project, at least initially, was Zack's, he got to keep the director's credit, since he had gotten everything started, and had written and directed pretty much an entire movie's worth of material before they shifted gears. Whedon changed enough when he came in to completely overhaul the movie, BUT, he still oversaw less than half of the total footage that was shot between his stuff and Zack's stuff, even though he significantly changed the story and most of the final cut scenes were scenes that he shot. BUT. In terms of "directing" the movie, he did less than half of the total work (despite the final cut containing almost ONLY his work). So he got a story credit instead of a director credit.

That's about the simplest way to explain it. He shot less, but they used more of his stuff than Zacks stuff. But it was technically still "Zack's movie" on a technicality. So Zack gets director credit and Whedon gets story credit. Hope it makes sense. A lot of it has to do with loopholes and how contracts and titles work.