Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBO Max (3/18/21) 4 4

[jaybuck43]

On 7/19/2022 at 4:57 AM, Bosco685 said:

So the day before the Snyder Cut digital copy goes live Rolling Stone Magazine drops an article proclaiming a large portion of his fanbase are bots??

Exclusive: Fake Accounts Fueled the ‘Snyder Cut’ Online Army

No way the media and reporting sites have it in for Zack Snyder. It's a conspiracy, man.

Yet the author has been trashing him for years because she is a huge Joss Whedon fan.

Talk about abusing your influence power to build a narrative.

Darksiders has spoken!

 

Well, except the article didn't say that.  They said that experts put it at 13% fake engagement, but that the engagement was targeted in such a way to amplify it, and that it's possible that Snyder himself hired/directed some of it.  Here's my question, what incentive does WarnerMedia have to tank the film?  They lost millions on the first film (I believe the official count was around $70 million).  THEN they give Snyder another $100 million ($75 million in reshoots and VFX, plus another $25+ million in advertising) to rerelease the film.  Shouldn't WarnerMedia want the film to succeed so that they recoup some of that $170 or so million they're out?  What is the grand cabal reason they want to sabotage Snyder?  

[D84]

On 7/19/2022 at 9:10 AM, jaybuck43 said:

Well, except the article didn't say that.  They said that experts put it at 13% fake engagement, but that the engagement was targeted in such a way to amplify it, and that it's possible that Snyder himself hired/directed some of it.  Here's my question, what incentive does WarnerMedia have to tank the film?  They lost millions on the first film (I believe the official count was around $70 million).  THEN they give Snyder another $100 million ($75 million in reshoots and VFX, plus another $25+ million in advertising) to rerelease the film.  Shouldn't WarnerMedia want the film to succeed so that they recoup some of that $170 or so million they're out?  What is the grand cabal reason they want to sabotage Snyder?  

Because Hollywood execs are as petty as Homelander.

[jaybuck43]

On 7/19/2022 at 10:50 AM, D84 said:

Because Hollywood execs are as petty as Homelander.

But it's owned by a completely new company (Discovery WarnerMedia) who has significantly changed over executives.   Original Cut- Time Warner.  Snyder Cut HBO Max release - AT&T WarnerMedia.  Snyder Cut Digital release - Discovery WarnerMedia.  So... different executives each time.  

[D84]

On 7/19/2022 at 10:02 AM, jaybuck43 said:

But it's owned by a completely new company (Discovery WarnerMedia) who has significantly changed over executives.   Original Cut- Time Warner.  Snyder Cut HBO Max release - AT&T WarnerMedia.  Snyder Cut Digital release - Discovery WarnerMedia.  So... different executives each time.  

With the same Hollywood mentality: Petty, back-stabbing narcissists.

[Bosco685]

On 7/19/2022 at 11:02 AM, jaybuck43 said:

But it's owned by a completely new company (Discovery WarnerMedia) who has significantly changed over executives.   Original Cut- Time Warner.  Snyder Cut HBO Max release - AT&T WarnerMedia.  Snyder Cut Digital release - Discovery WarnerMedia.  So... different executives each time.  

You forget something. Executives that are now dismissed - including Joss Whedon - ended up tarnishing their own brand leading to their dismissal. And articles were funded afterwards to help make them look more the victim such as the Joss Whedon article on how misunderstood he is.

But with this Rolling Stone piece, the reference the reporter is from the old regime - not the new Discovery team that now authorized the digital copy release. So this is all about exec brand damage so when they apply for other roles this helps make them look more effective.

Even the details about reaching out to included parties for a response and receiving no response is untrue.

 

[Bosco685]

Remember the previous year word got out Tobey Emmerich tried to offer his executive services to Netflix.

They made it clear "No Thanks".

[Bosco685]

Whedon was rumored to have paid Vulture to do an article about his being cancelled. He even blamed the Justice League cast.

But even with that, he went on tangents like how sexy his mother was leading to people mocking the article.

The Undoing of Joss Whedon

Edited July 19, 2022 by Bosco685

[▫️]

Got my copy on iTunes and Gray is included!  Also interesting to see how they listed the Justice League Trilogy bundle. If only.

[▫️]

I have to say, I’m not adverse to watching bootlegs and have my go-to sites but I first got HBOMAX to watch this and will continue supporting the monumental effort that went into bringing us this version. I’m also going to gift a copy to my sister and another to a friend. 

[Bosco685]

For anyone that purchased on VUDU or Itunes and the film is not porting across the linked platforms, you need to call Movies Anywhere and they can fix this.

They believe it has to do with iTunes coming with the Justice Is Gray version as an additional feature on iTunes. And with Google Play, they still haven't figured out yet how to fix the porting problem.

GO WB-Discovery! 

[Bosco685]

Rolling Stone researchers are now lying about reaching out to subjects of the article for clarifications.

 

[Bosco685]

Warner Bros.-Discovery wants no part in that Rolling Stone article and points to the old leadership as the source.

 

[Bosco685]

 

[Bosco685]

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/19/2022 at 10:10 AM, jaybuck43 said:

...they give Snyder another $100 million ($75 million in reshoots and VFX, plus another $25+ million in advertising) to rerelease the film.

Where the Hel are you getting these numbers? Even the rumored $70 million number has never been confirmed. The studio said, "$30 million", and then someone in charge - during an interview - said that, "it's more than just that" (meaning time to complete the VFX, soundtrack, etc).

Edited July 25, 2022 by theCapraAegagrus

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 10:33 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Where the Hel are you getting these numbers? Even the rumored $70 million number has never been confirmed. The studio said, "$30 million", and then someone in charge - during an interview - said that, "it's more than just that" (meaning time to complete the VFX, soundtrack, etc).

The director was also given the $13 million he’d been demanding in production costs. That brought the studio’s total expenditure on the film to $73 million, before marketing costs put it over the $100 million mark.--Rolling Stone.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/25/2022 at 11:02 AM, jaybuck43 said:

The director was also given the $13 million he’d been demanding in production costs. That brought the studio’s total expenditure on the film to $73 million, before marketing costs put it over the $100 million mark.--Rolling Stone.

And who is their source? Because that $70 million rumor has still never been corroborated. People literally just took it and ran with it for the headline.

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 11:07 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

And who is their source? Because that $70 million rumor has still never been corroborated. People literally just took it and ran with it for the headline.

Not stated, but 1) The Snyder Defenders claim that this article is an attempt by the executives to help them get new jobs, so one can assume that those numbers came from executives within Warner/ATT who are doing as is claimed. 2)The report is provided to RS by Discovery/Warner and ostensibly they gave a detailed reporting of costs.  But regardless, the article does not state a $70 million rumor, but rather breaks down costs on various payments (and requests for payments)

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:00 PM, jaybuck43 said:

Not stated, but 1) The Snyder Defenders claim that this article is an attempt by the executives to help them get new jobs, so one can assume that those numbers came from executives within Warner/ATT who are doing as is claimed. 2)The report is provided to RS by Discovery/Warner and ostensibly they gave a detailed reporting of costs.  But regardless, the article does not state a $70 million rumor, but rather breaks down costs on various payments (and requests for payments)

Whatever "1" is, is entirely irrelevant to me. It breaks down "information" in the same exact way that the $70 million rumors began. If it doesn't come from the source of funding, I'm calling BS.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Quote

That means a fandom amplified by fake accounts helped shake down a major studio — at an ultimate cost to Warner Bros. of more than $100 million — to re-release a movie that had already bombed years earlier.

If someone can't read between the lines of this precisely-worded sentence, then...