Justice League Spoilers from post 980 onward

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 03:02PM

senordingdong wrote: »

Hopefully the knightmare scene has reasonable context.
But this thread has helped to tame expectations.

The only context I can think that would make this work, would be a subplot where The Flash shot into the future to see how bad the threat of Darkseid was. That he bums about with Trenchcoat Batman for a spell, returns home with dire portents. THAT would work for me, it gives the scene some value to establish the stakes. It has purpose.

If it's just another pointless dream sequence via Bruce Wayne's imagination, then GTFO I say.

25-02-2021 03:28PM

Need a Username wrote: »

If someone considers watching a movie a “sacrifice” then I think maybe they just don’t like movies.

Four hours is two movies. Or an hour each evening.

It isn’t as big a deal as people are making out here.

Many people binge a TV series in a day or a few days even when only being a casual viewer. A four movie is just the thing.

The thing is, four hours is a time investment that a lot of films fans won't invest in something that's a mediocre film. They would probably be more willing if it's 2 hours. With such a long film, there really needs to be a demonstrable reason for the length of the film.

This is even more apparent in genre cinema imho. Eg I'd be apprehensive about watching a 3 hour comedy but in the case of something like Toni Erdmann, I'm happy to invest the time as it's a superb film and the length is justifiable.

I do actually hope it's a decent film cause I'm a comic book nerd. But everything that surrounds it atm seems more like hype than anything else. Particularly given the previous output of the director.

FunLover18 · 25-02-2021 03:39PM

Need a Username wrote: »

If someone considers watching a movie a “sacrifice” then I think maybe they just don’t like movies.

Four hours is two movies. Or an hour each evening.

It isn’t as big a deal as people are making out here.

Many people binge a TV series in a day or a few days even when only being a casual viewer. A four movie is just the thing.

I don't know if we got our wires crossed but you're talking as if everyone has the same level of interest in this film. I really amn't that interested in this movie so I am going to take the runtime into account when I consider whether I actually watch it as will a lot of people.

Like you said four hours is the equivalent of two movies I might actually be more interested in, or four episodes of a series I'm watching. Four hours is my and most people's evening, so yes, it's a factor.

It's a huge leap to suggest someone not willing to watch a four hour movie they're only mildly interested in maybe doesn't like movies at all.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 03:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The thing is, four hours is a time investment that a lot of films fans won't invest in something that's a mediocre film. They would probably be more willing if it's 2 hours. With such a long film, there really needs to be a demonstrable reason for the length of the film.

This is even more apparent in genre cinema imho. Eg I'd be apprehensive about watching a 3 hour comedy but in the case of something like Toni Erdmann, I'm happy to invest the time as it's a superb film and the length is justifiable.

I do actually hope it's a decent film cause I'm a comic book nerd. But everything that surrounds it atm seems more like hype than anything else. Particularly given the previous output of the director.

How can anyone know that they will think a movie is mediocre (or even brilliant or terrible) before they see it?

Did you know Toni Erdmann was good before watching it?

You are already viewing this movie negatively.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 04:03PM

Need a Username wrote: »

How can anyone know that they will think a movie is mediocre (or even brilliant or terrible) before they see it?

Did you know Toni Erdmann was good before watching it?

You are already viewing this movie negatively.

In fairness, while ordinarily, I'd agree about pre-judging any film, this is not an entirely unknown quantity either. The number of people who are going to see this without bias prior knowledge or pre-judgement will be fairly low IMO. I'll be viewing this with as open-minded as I can manage, but I also have a good idea of what I'm going to get too. This will be the ZackSynder'est thing ever ZackSynder'ed.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 04:04PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

I don't know if we got our wires crossed but you're talking as if everyone has the same level of interest in this film. I really amn't that interested in this movie so I am going to take the runtime into account when I consider whether I actually watch it as will a lot of people.

Like you said four hours is the equivalent of two movies I might actually be more interested in, or four episodes of a series I'm watching. Four hours is my and most people's evening, so yes, it's a factor.

It's a huge leap to suggest someone not willing to watch a four hour movie they're only mildly interested in maybe doesn't like movies at all.

You definitely getting wires crossed becasue that last remark is not remotely what I said. I said if someone considers the time spent watching a movie as a “sacrifice” (your words) then maybe they don’t like movies. That is very different to what you said above.

As to the length - if you’d be more interested in a four part mini series then you can just watch an hour each evening. I don’t understand why the film needs to cut in four parts. You just stop watching when you want to.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 04:14PM

pixelburp wrote: »

In fairness, while ordinarily, I'd agree about pre-judging any film, this is not an entirely unknown quantity either. The number of people who are going to see this without bias prior knowledge or pre-judgement will be fairly low IMO. I'll be viewing this with as open-minded as I can manage, but I also have a good idea of what I'm going to get too. This will be the ZackSynder'est thing ever ZackSynder'ed.

Other people are arguing that not many people are aware of this project at all.

Others are saying that amount of people is low.

I think people’s opinion of what other people think is biased by what they themselves think. I think so anyway.

The Synder Cut might be a known project to people love superhero movies, who follow movie news, etc. but how many people is that?

Most won’t know anything about it until a promotional campaign starts and how many will associate it with the previous release or even be aware of the previous release. And how many will care?

No one can tell how many have a mild interest or no interest.

25-02-2021 04:21PM

Need a Username wrote: »

How can anyone know that they will think a movie is mediocre (or even brilliant or terrible) before they see it?

Did you know Toni Erdmann was good before watching it?

You are already viewing this movie negatively.

Based on his films to date, yep I'm more inclined to believe that this is a film that has more to do with hype than anything else. If it was a different director with an established positive reputation I'd likely have some level of optimism for it. Eg Batman Versus Superman managed to bore me.

Erdmann was a critically acclaimed film, I might have hated it but it has a pretty great reputation behind it. Similar for something like Once Upon a Time In America. In this case, a film is primarily being hyped up and I'm not sure if there's much to justify the hype.

And fair play to him if he has managed to create a 4 hour film that does for the most part work. But I'm most definitely not watching it based solely on hype.

Need a Username wrote: »

You definitely getting wires crossed becasue that last remark is not remotely what I said. I said if someone considers the time spent watching a movie as a “sacrifice” (your words) then maybe they don’t like movies. That is very different to what you said above.

As to the length - if you’d be more interested in a four part mini series then you can just watch an hour each evening. I don’t understand why the film needs to cut in four parts. You just stop watching when you want to.

But so far, you're making it sound like a chore if you need to break it up to such a degree.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 04:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Based on his films to date, yep I'm more inclined to believe that this is a film that has more to do with hype than anything else. If it was a different director with an established positive reputation I'd likely have some level of optimism for it. Eg Batman Versus Superman managed to bore me.

Erdmann was a critically acclaimed film, I might have hated it but it has a pretty great reputation behind it. Similar for something like Once Upon a Time In America. In this case, a film is primarily being hyped up and I'm not sure if there's much to justify the hype.

And fair play to him if he has managed to create a 4 hour film that does for the most part work. But I'm most definitely not watching it based solely on hype.

Just because you don’t like a filmmakers previous movies doesn’t mean you won’t like his last.

And critical acclaim has nothing to do with what I asked. Prior to seeing it did you know Toni Erdmann was good and was worth 4 hours of your time?

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 04:37PM

Deleted User wrote: »

But so far, you're making it sound like a chore if you need to break it up to such a degree.

You seem to be confused here.

I’m not the person saying it needs to be broken up.

Another poster said people would be put off by the length and that he himself would be more willing to watch it in episode..

I was pointing out that it can be watch in any way that the viewer desires. If you are any an hour a night then do so.

I said I want to see it as a movie. I don’t need it broken up.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 04:38PM

Need a Username wrote: »

Other people are arguing that not many people are aware of this project at all.

Others are saying that amount of people is low.

I think people’s opinion of what other people think is biased by what they themselves think. I think so anyway.

The Synder Cut might be a known project to people love superhero movies, who follow movie news, etc. but how many people is that?

Most won’t know anything about it until a promotional campaign starts and how many will associate it with the previous release or even be aware of the previous release. And how many will care?

No one can tell how many have a mild interest or no interest.

For the purposes of sanity, my point of view in my previous point would be from within this thread. Fair to say everyone here chatting has some familiarity with the previous film, Synder's CV, and so on. To a certain degree we all know what we're going to get.

On a broader scale? Yeah who knows and I'd revert back to my very original speculation that the poverty of choice in the field of blockbusters may mean Justice League: Electric Re-do does very well for itself, by dint of starvation alone.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 04:47PM

pixelburp wrote: »

For the purposes of sanity, my point of view in my previous point would be from within this thread. Fair to say everyone here chatting has some familiarity with the previous film, Synder's CV, and so on. To a certain degree we all know what we're going to get.

On a broader scale? Yeah who knows and I'd revert back to my very original speculation that the poverty of choice in the field of blockbusters may mean Justice League: Electric Re-do does very well for itself, by dint of starvation alone.

Is this thread a good basis for the judging opinions of the masses though?

mikhail · 25-02-2021 04:55PM

Need a Username wrote: »

Is this thread a good basis for the judging opinions of the masses though?

4 of the last 6 posts are yours, so I'm thinking it's becoming mostly a good basis for judging the opinions of yourself.

johnny_ultimate · 25-02-2021 04:57PM

The internet as a whole is not a good basis for judging public sentiment around this film.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 05:20PM

mikhail wrote: »

4 of the last 6 posts are yours, so I'm thinking it's becoming mostly a good basis for judging the opinions of yourself.

Have you a problem with me for me for some reason?

FunLover18 · 25-02-2021 05:30PM

Need a Username wrote: »

You definitely getting wires crossed becasue that last remark is not remotely what I said. I said if someone considers the time spent watching a movie as a “sacrifice” (your words) then maybe they don’t like movies. That is very different to what you said above.

As to the length - if you’d be more interested in a four part mini series then you can just watch an hour each evening. I don’t understand why the film needs to cut in four parts. You just stop watching when you want to.

I was specifically talking about a movie I'm only mildly interested in but also you seem to be interpreting "sacrifice" in a very negative sense, I would argue any time spent on a film or a TV series is a sacrifice in some way given that we don't know whether it will be time well spent or not.

Of course you can just stop whenever you want but if you do you've still lost whatever time you've already spent on it. I really don't see an issue with taking runtime into consideration when deciding to watch a movie tbh. Of course if it's something you really want to see, it won't be an issue.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 05:47PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

I was specifically talking about a movie I'm only mildly interested in but also you seem to be interpreting "sacrifice" in a very negative sense, I would argue any time spent on a film or a TV series is a sacrifice in some way given that we don't know whether it will be time well spent or not.

Of course you can just stop whenever you want but if you do you've still lost whatever time you've already spent on it. I really don't see an issue with taking runtime into consideration when deciding to watch a movie tbh. Of course if it's something you really want to see, it won't be an issue.

I don’t any other way to interpret sacrifice here other than negatively.

You’ve now gone onto a different topic of time. Recovering time spent doing something that you found unsatisfactory.

That wasn’t the issue being discussed. It was whether people would be put off by the 4 hour length. My point was that you don’t have to watch it all the way through if you don’t have the time or desire to give four hours I one sitting. You are I the comfort of your own home and have complete control over how to watch it.

That you cannot get back the time spent watching any movie or show or part thereof is a different matter. And has nothing to do with the film being 4 hours long.

The same can be said of anything - a half hour sitcom, etc.

Worry about that is too negative for me.

And I don’t have an issue with taking runtime into account.

I was simply saying that no one has to watch it as a 4 hour movie.

FunLover18 · 25-02-2021 06:38PM

Need a Username wrote: »

That wasn’t the issue being discussed. It was whether people would be put off by the 4 hour length.

They would. /Discussion

mikhail · 25-02-2021 06:40PM

Need a Username wrote: »

Have you a problem with me for me for some reason?

Yeah. I have a problem with anyone spamming a thread. Learn to multi-quote.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 07:07PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

They would. /Discussion

Some people would. Others wouldn’t.

Others would split the movie into parts that suited them.

It is that simple.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 07:08PM

mikhail wrote: »

Yeah. I have a problem with anyone spamming a thread. Learn to multi-quote.

How am I spamming?

Show me the posts that are spam.

IncognitoMan · 25-02-2021 07:11PM

Wonder why they changed back from the 4 parts. From a business POV releasing it in parts makes more sense. You keep people subscribed for longer = more revenue

The film must not split un into 4 parts. No natural arc in each hour.

IncognitoMan · 25-02-2021 07:15PM

ThePott wrote: »

With most shows they get the first few episodes, in the case of WandaVision for example they got the first 3 episodes.

Which was brave considering those first 3 episodes :pac:

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 07:23PM

IncognitoMan wrote: »

Wonder why they changed back from the 4 parts. From a business POV releasing it in parts makes more sense. You keep people subscribed for longer = more revenue

The film must not split un into 4 parts. No natural arc in each hour.

I think the idea of a mini series was only speculation.

If as a film it should not be split then then episodes shouldn’t be an option.

For the viewer they can stop at any point they wish.

ThePott · 25-02-2021 07:46PM

IncognitoMan wrote: »

Which was brave considering those first 3 episodes :pac:

Ouch haha. I remember reviewers kept being like, it really steps up in the third episode :pac:.
The only reason I can think that they ditched the episode structure was that after announcing the WB slate coming to HBO Max they figured there was no need to make it episodes and figured it would mess with the final release or face some backlash like the Boys Season 2 did.

FunLover18 · 25-02-2021 07:54PM

Need a Username wrote: »

Some people would. Others wouldn’t.

Others would split the movie into parts that suited them.

It is that simple.

Jesus, I never said everyone would. Some people just don't have four hours to spare on a movie they're not that interested in.

senordingdong · 25-02-2021 07:57PM

IncognitoMan wrote: »

Wonder why they changed back from the 4 parts. From a business POV releasing it in parts makes more sense. You keep people subscribed for longer = more revenue

The film must not split un into 4 parts. No natural arc in each hour.

I wonder had it something to do with piracy? It struck me that it has the same release date worldwide.

Re:wandavision, I think we all know that tv shows take a few episodes to 'get going' and praising/slating on the pilot alone would be silly.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 08:02PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

Jesus, I never said everyone would. Some people just don't have four hours to spare on a movie they're not that interested in.

People who are interested are not going to watch it regardless of the length.

So what is the point of worrying about that?

Why is this making people upset?

25-02-2021 09:44PM

Need a Username wrote: »

People who are interested are not going to watch it regardless of the length.

So what is the point of worrying about that?

Why is this making people upset?

I don't think it's making anyone particularly upset. We're simply stating that people who might have given it a chance if it were 2/2.5 hours long are less likely to give it a chance with such a substantial runtime. That applies more than anything to more general audience rather than that of the hype machine. If it turned out to be exceptional or even decent to pretty good, then the runtime would probably be viewed as more okay. As pixel has said though, it may benefit from the lack of blockbusters to some degree as well.

Need a Username · 25-02-2021 09:56PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think it's making anyone particularly upset. We're simply stating that people who might have given it a chance if it were 2/2.5 hours long are less likely to give it a chance with such a substantial runtime. That applies more than anything to more general audience rather than that of the hype machine. If it turned out to be exceptional or even decent to pretty good, then the runtime would probably be viewed as more okay. As pixel has said though, it may benefit from the lack of blockbusters to some degree as well.

A couple of people here do seem upset.

And likewise I’m simply stating that since the movie can be watched at home then it doesn’t matter how long it is because people don’t have to watch it in one sitting.

I don’t know why that idea is so upsetting or causing some to be narky.

Justice League **Spoilers from post 980 onward**

Comments

Justice League Spoilers from post 980 onward