Justice League Spoilers from post 980 onward

The White Wolf · 01-07-2020 6:55pm

Ray Fisher (@ray8fisher) Tweeted:
Joss Wheadon’s on-set treatment of the cast and crew of Justice League was gross, abusive, unprofessional, and completely unacceptable.

He was enabled, in many ways, by Geoff Johns and Jon Berg.

Accountability>Entertainment https://twitter.com/ray8fisher/status/1278362556214755329?s=20

Fisher with the least the lose so good on him. Will be interesting to see what others will say. Given Whedon has a show coming on HBO Max as well this is one giant sh1t sized sandwich.

Give me the documentary already. :pac:

CastorTroy · 01-07-2020 7:16pm

Did I miss something about joss that people seem happy that someone is speaking out like this?
I assumed with the number of actors that work with him repeatedly that he must be good to work with.

Or has his own hype turned him into an a$$hole?

Potential-Monke · 01-07-2020 8:11pm

So let's complain about it nearly 3 years later! Is his career that empty? In fairness, they messed up Cyborgs look, should have gone with a costume instead of all CGI, looked terrible, Robocop from the 80s looked better imo, and even the suit from the Robocop reboot looked better. They dropped the ball on him, but to come out and start complaining like this 3 years after the fact.

And considering his only role since has been on True Detective, I'm sure he's just butt hurt and wants some media coverage. Could be reading into that a bit much, but I can't see why he waited this long to out and say it. Looks desperate for attention imo.

CramCycle · 01-07-2020 8:13pm

Legal cover?

pixelburp · 01-07-2020 8:33pm

I'm too lazy to Google but I think Whedon had previous accusations of abuse thrown at him, but this reads more like "director was an asshóle" than any kind of sexual abuse; which, I mean it's horrible, but hardly a new thing. Ask Shelly Duvall / Uma Thurman if Stanley Kubrick / Quentin Tarantino was a warm fuzzy fellow to work with. That's not to say that kind of behaviour should be tolerated and makes me uncomfortable to think so many aueteurs are/were Bad Bosses. As collaborative a process as film production can be, the "mercurial" director is accepted

On the other hand, that set must have been a bit stressful anyway, given the complete switcheroo of script and director - albeit for the most tragic of circumstances. Maybe Fisher and Whedon butted heads and clashed, again wouldn't be the first time. We'll see I guess what kind of response this tweet gets.

Eduard Khil · 02-07-2020 6:10pm

Whedon sounds strictly business on set and in development he seems to like engaging in the press tour and comic con scenes Actors don't really like hands on approach directors

mikhail · 02-07-2020 7:00pm

CramCycle wrote: »

Legal cover?

A lot of the responses on reddit amounted to "I guess the NDA must have just expired".

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm too lazy to Google but I think Whedon had previous accusations of abuse thrown at him

Perhaps there's something else I'm unaware of, but I remember his ex-wife said he'd had an affair with an actress who worked with him. Maybe more than one, I forget the detail, but at least no one was named. Whedon's response made no effort to deny it, so I assume it was true.

He seems to have had a good relationship with a lot of people he's worked with - actors, writers, costume designers, loads of them follow him around from project to project. Whether that's because they like him or just that he's been steady work, who knows? In any case, sleeping with one or more of his actresses left him open to casting couch accusations, and hurt his credibility with the feminist end of his fanbase.

Has anything detailed come out? All I saw yesterday was the tweet above. I'll reserve judgement in the absence of detail.

The White Wolf · 04-07-2020 12:10am

mikhail wrote: »

A lot of the responses on reddit amounted to "I guess the NDA must have just expired".

Perhaps there's something else I'm unaware of, but I remember his ex-wife said he'd had an affair with an actress who worked with him. Maybe more than one, I forget the detail, but at least no one was named. Whedon's response made no effort to deny it, so I assume it was true.

He seems to have had a good relationship with a lot of people he's worked with - actors, writers, costume designers, loads of them follow him around from project to project. Whether that's because they like him or just that he's been steady work, who knows? In any case, sleeping with one or more of his actresses left him open to casting couch accusations, and hurt his credibility with the feminist end of his fanbase.

Has anything detailed come out? All I saw yesterday was the tweet above. I'll reserve judgement in the absence of detail.

There is some stuff trickling out, some known (Gal Gadot refused to film the scene where Flash fell on her, face to tit, and they used a stunt double instead) and not known previously - Kevin Smith said in his latest Fatman Beyond podcast that he was aware of claims that Whedon was unprofessional on set, openly deriding Snyder and his cut.

All the same, Fisher is still tweeting and not getting any back up from his fellow cast and crew members. I'd like to think his persistence is born out of being aware some report is coming on the shoot.

dublinman1990 · 20-07-2020 8:51pm

Beyond The Trailer's Grace Randolph had interviewed Zack Snyder today on Youtube.

You should give this a watch. It should be quite good.

The White Wolf · 21-07-2020 1:09pm

Fair play to Snyder for giving that interview and happy for Grace given how much abuse she's taken.

She was obviously very excited as she kept talking over Snyder but all things considered it was an enjoyable 20 minutes.

Drumpot · 22-07-2020 1:08pm

dublinman1990 wrote: »

Beyond The Trailer's Grace Randolph had interviewed Zack Snyder today on Youtube.

You should give this a watch. It should be quite good.

Zach is my kind of Marmite.

I’m delighted Warner are doing this, I think it’s great and really look forward to his take on the movie. Hope it’s dark AF and he’s allowed to run wild.

CramCycle · 22-07-2020 1:49pm

The White Wolf wrote: »

Fair play to Snyder for giving that interview and happy for Grace given how much abuse she's taken.

She was obviously very excited as she kept talking over Snyder but all things considered it was an enjoyable 20 minutes.

I thought it was a poor interview to be honest, a bit hard to watch she was too jumpy and gittery and nothing really came out. I don't know who she is or anything about abuse, it was just a bit like those american interviews where nothing is said and nothing of interest is gleamed from it, just fill the time.

pixelburp · 22-07-2020 2:04pm

I don't hold anything against Synder in terms of creative output: he's clearly a talented man who can make some beautiful images. Just on that alone he's a better artist than 99% of (say) the MCU's stable of directors. It's just more often than not the scripts he oversees are garbage, or else his instincts choose to emphasise the "wrong" approach to a subject.

Drumpot · 22-07-2020 2:49pm

pixelburp wrote: »

I don't hold anything against Synder in terms of creative output: he's clearly a talented man who can make some beautiful images. Just on that alone he's a better artist than 99% of (say) the MCU's stable of directors. It's just more often than not the scripts he oversees are garbage, or else his instincts choose to emphasise the "wrong" approach to a subject.

I find I connect emotionally with the tone of his movies. They are quite beautifully made, but I dont appear to have the issues alot seem to have with the stories or certain human elements of his characters.

I do notice this in movie discussions, quite often your level of enjoyment will determine things you will let go and things you will highlight as a problem. Franchises like Aliens and SWs are prime examples where older movies are forgiven for similar mistakes of newer ones. Nostalgia and the massive time between movies makes it harder to be objectively fair on newer movies.

But in terms of Snyder movies, I cant quite understand myself why I really enjoy them. And quite often with Snyder movies I dont love them on first viewing but grow to really like them. Watchmen, is to me, still one of the finest superhero movies made ever. Might be OTT to call it a masterpiece, but the directors cut enhances an already superb movie. And I initially hated it when I saw it first as it marketed as an x rated X-Men, which it most definitely is not.

I think MOS and BvS are uniquely enjoyable, not least for how different they are from Marvel recipe. That on its own is not enough to qualify them as good movies, but I think it was very bold to try an alternative approach and think both work really well as complimentary alternatives to marvel. WW and AM and Shazaam are effectively marvel movies with DC characters. I am really excited to see what Snyders version of JL will be like, I am not excited about anything Marvel have in the pipeline as I know we will get a safe 6/7 out of 10 cookie cutter enjoyable movie, I dont know what JL is gonna be like .

Again, this doesnt make Snyders movies good, but I do wonder if the backlash and strong stance some have with Snyder boil down to either snobbery against visually rich movies with less substance (marvel movies are tidier/cleaner, but not necessarily full of substance or better stories) or just fans who might pretend to want different but really want more marvel type movies (that WW and AM provided).

Another thing I notice is a distinct lack of capacity for many to understand human behavior (people can change with age/pain). My "batman, Luke, superman etc Wouldn't do that". There is no harden fastened rule that should be used against a character being reinvented. Reboots can only make so many changes, so to have one character always doing the same things will make the reboot redundant.

I appreciate none of this changes what others think of these movies, I suppose I am only highlighting my reasons for enjoying his movies. I equally enjoy marvel movies, but they seem to get a much easier ride when it comes to critically assessing them as movies. Copy and paste, copy and paste movies , mostly focusing on the next movie or Avengers beast with the safest ingredients used and the odd spice (GOTG) added. I am saying that as somebody who enjoys them, but I do think their blandness gets ignored.

Agent Coulson · 22-07-2020 6:28pm

Looking forward to seeing his Netflix Zombie flick though.

Tony EH · 22-07-2020 7:10pm

If it's anything like his piss poor remake of 'Dawn of the Dead', he can keep it.

Snyder, to me, is like JJ Abrams. He's of that same school. All flash and no substance, with everything flying at the viewer at a thousand miles an hour so they don't stop to think about how poor the story telling is.

In saying that, I'd rate him above Abrams. At least here's some relative entertainment to be had from some of his movies, even if they are still utter trash at the end of the day. Abrams name on anything just makes the hairs on the back of neck stand up for all the wrong reasons. He's a plague on cinema.

pixelburp · 26-07-2020 7:36pm

A brief clip of this, which we kinda saw in one of the very original trailers, appeared via a chat with Synder:

https://www.twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1287146672703897605

astrofool · 27-07-2020 4:07pm

Tony EH wrote: »

If it's anything like his piss poor remake of 'Dawn of the Dead', he can keep it.

The well loved Dawn of the Dead remake? I mean, you do realise that lots of people really liked that movie (I'm kind of meh on it), and there's a lot to like in it critically as well. You've got to think to yourself that sometimes your opinions are purely your own, and thus carry no weight a lot of the time.

Fysh · 27-07-2020 5:26pm

astrofool wrote: »

The well loved Dawn of the Dead remake? I mean, you do realise that lots of people really liked that movie (I'm kind of meh on it), and there's a lot to like in it critically as well. You've got to think to yourself that sometimes your opinions are purely your own, and thus carry no weight a lot of the time.

Also worth noting it was written by James Gunn, which to me explains why the writing had an actual sense of identity to it. That's, for me, what lets down the films where Snyder writes himself - he's not IMO a good screenwriter and seems to overly privilege kewl moments over narrative structure or character development.

pixelburp · 27-07-2020 6:03pm

100% he's a terrible writer and his closer collaborators equally so. Very much of the era of set piece writing, where the old concept of "character through action" takes a step back for splashy set pieces and Big Dramatic Moments in lieu of any kind of earned development. I'm actually not sure Synder understands nuance TBH and don't necessarily mean it as an insult either. He understands cinema as superficial opera which absolutely has a place, but it's almost never matched by a script worth a damn.

The White Wolf · 27-07-2020 6:35pm

Drumpot wrote: »

Another thing I notice is a distinct lack of capacity for many to understand human behavior (people can change with age/pain). My "batman, Luke, superman etc Wouldn't do that". There is no harden fastened rule that should be used against a character being reinvented. Reboots can only make so many changes, so to have one character always doing the same things will make the reboot redundant.

I think Snyder's problem is that he made too many changes for the audience to be able to endure. Both his Superman and Batman are the other, alien to the people that they defend.

Bale's Batman and Bruce were both so likeable and endearing to the audience, that the shock of Affleck's Batman being literally xenophobic and a murderer was too much to process. Especially given there were 4 years between them.

His Superman is equally polarising as well.

I say all this as a fan of the things he does well, and tbh as a comic book fan you have to appreciate some of the visuals he's given us and will give us, but I don't think people's aversion to reboots is the issue here. Elseworld stories in live action have always been appreciated in the DC fandom as well.

The reality is that unfortunately Snyder just overlooks certain mechanics in storytelling that are really needed if you want to appeal to your average, non committed, cinema goer. Just to add I understand that Batffleck being a xenophobe is a part of his overall arc, but it would inevitably rub people up the wrong way in our current society.

Tony EH · 28-07-2020 5:26am

astrofool wrote: »

The well loved Dawn of the Dead remake? I mean, you do realise that lots of people really liked that movie (I'm kind of meh on it), and there's a lot to like in it critically as well. You've got to think to yourself that sometimes your opinions are purely your own, and thus carry no weight a lot of the time.

I don't care if some people liked it. There are people that like all sorts of crap.

Why should that change my reaction to it.

It's just another name rape film that ends up being grossly inferior to the original (which has its own issues to due to a low budget). In the end, all they did was take a well known, and loved title, and fuck it up.

It remains typical of movies over the last 20 years or so. A zero invention rip off, masquerading as a new product, full of noise and flash.

It had some moments, but over all it was muck.

pixelburp · 28-07-2020 10:30am

The original Dawn of the Dead is a film that hasn't aged too good. It's definitely a film requiring understanding of its 1970s context cos I remember watching this with a casual filmgoer and he was in fits laughing at the movie. I could sort of see why from his POV: choppily edited [*], its action and budget pretty low rent with that (in)famous soundtrack, even the zombies themselves often looked awful (with a few overacting extras); I could see how someone might find the original film a bit goofy if they hadn't much prior knowledge of Romero's legacy

Synders Dawn was a good movie and TBH there's no reason why both these versions can't exist in the same headspace. The remake at least didn't try to copy the original beat for beat, while James Gunns script was solid, character focused stuff. TBH it had better characters than the original.

[*] "Apparently" Romero was fond of just shooting a metric tonne of footage then arranging it into something whole, which is why Dawn has a weirdly scattershot feel to it (to me anyway)

Homelander · 28-07-2020 10:37am

Snyders Dawn of the Dead is an excellent film in my opinion, while I do think 300 and Watchmen are good films, and everything thereafter was fairly forgettable at best, Dawn was by far his best work.

It's perfectly fine to not like it, but I think it's a bit much to claim it's crap and that anyone that thinks otherwise is an idiot who can't see past noise and flash.

I'm also fairly sure it was critically quite well received.

pixelburp · 28-07-2020 10:43am

It would never happen but I'd like to see Synder get a hold of some MCU properties, the scripts still in the hands of (say) the Russos. His obvious eye for cinematic visuals would breath some life into the flat aesthetic of the Marvel films, their strength always more in their long form character storytelling. The flat directorial approach seems to be a deliberate choice though so Synders auteur sensibilities would quickly chaffe.

Tony EH · 28-07-2020 11:13am

pixelburp wrote: »

The original Dawn of the Dead is a film that hasn't aged too good. It's definitely a film requiring understanding of its 1970s context cos I remember watching this with a casual filmgoer and he was in fits laughing at the movie. I could sort of see why from his POV: choppily edited
[*], its action and budget pretty low rent with that (in)famous soundtrack, even the zombies themselves often looked awful (with a few overacting extras); I could see how someone might find the original film a bit goofy if they hadn't much prior knowledge of Romero's legacy

As I said, the original has it's issues, but they are mainly due to budget, it was made for less than 2 million and that was scrabbled together haphazardly and it had to be shot at night in a shopping mall on tight hours. Romero also couldn't get access to other locations after the initial shoot too, leading to some scenes being "choppily edited".

You probably do have to watch 'Dawn of the Dead' with its time and the money involved chucked in as a factor.

But, even with its own problems, it's still miles ahead of Snyder's rubbish.

A lot of fans, especially American, rate it as the greatest zombie movie ever. But, I've never seen it as such. That accolade belongs to 'Day of the Dead', which is untouchable for me.

pixelburp wrote: »

Synders Dawn was a good movie and TBH there's no reason why both these versions can't exist in the same headspace. The remake at least didn't try to copy the original beat for beat, while James Gunns script was solid, character focused stuff. TBH it had better characters than the original.
[*] "Apparently" Romero was fond of just shooting a metric tonne of footage then arranging it into something whole, which is why Dawn has a weirdly scattershot feel to it (to me anyway)

Well, sure, there's no reason why it can't exist. Poor rip off's have been a staple of Hollywood since its beginning. And no, they didn't do a Gus Van Sant on it, either.

But that still doesn't make it a good film.

johnny_ultimate · 28-07-2020 11:49am

Dawn of the Dead is the best Zack Snyder film, and not coincidentally the least Zack Snyder film he's made.

Still flabbergasted he made a generally faithful adaptation of Watchmen and still somehow ended up with a bad, shallow film.

Tony EH · 28-07-2020 11:57am

^
That's easy, when you're more concerned with visuals than story.

As I said earlier, the likes of Snyder and Abrams are in the same boat. They can knock up a visually interesting piece of multiplex mulch. But it'll be as shallow as a puddle of rain water and won't stand up to too much examination.

pixelburp · 28-07-2020 12:41pm

Sooo. Fair to say then Tony you won't be watching the Synder cut so, if even out if curiousity over an original vision?

Tony EH · 28-07-2020 12:59pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Sooo. Fair to say then Tony you won't be watching the Synder cut so, if even out if curiousity over an original vision?

I might give it a watch some time, some where. But I won't be going out of my way to do it and I'm in no hurry.

To be honest, I can't see it being THAT much different to the theatrical cut. These things rarely are, when 90% of a film remains the same.

I really don't know what people are expecting from it.

Justice League **Spoilers from post 980 onward**

Comments

Justice League Spoilers from post 980 onward