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

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:06 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

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

I mean... You can have a "conflict of interest" and still be right?  Like, can't the author not like ZS and still be correct that bot networks were employed to try to gin up support for a failed film?  

[theCapraAegagrus]

Continuing to read through the article, it's abundantly clear that it was written intentionally as a hit piece, disparaging Snyder at every turn. "Oh, no, he used his personal property on his personal property." The "insiders" and "sources" appear to all be those who have been on this campaign for years. It's honestly pretty disgusting to me that Rolling Stone would even publish this.

[Bosco685]

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)

Just for your awareness, this is not accurate. WarnerMedia (pre-Discovery acquisition) executives were the ones coming up with those details. Which is why even with the Rolling Stone article came out to note they wanted nothing to do with any of those details as that was the prior executive team.

You may not care for Snyder so this is getting by your review. But those are the facts. WB-D wants nothing to do with any of these previous articles and assumed decisions.

[theCapraAegagrus]

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

I mean... You can have a "conflict of interest" and still be right?  Like, can't the author not like ZS and still be correct that bot networks were employed to try to gin up support for a failed film?  

Well, the "bot" part is certainly true. It's the rest of the article that's written like someone with a huge grudge, bemoaning the fact that a movie was completed of which they claimed would never exist. That content isn't doing the facts of the article any favors. If they wanted to write this hit piece so bad, would have been best off having someone cover the facts and this person cover the conjecture.

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:16 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Well, the "bot" part is certainly true. It's the rest of the article that's written like someone with a huge grudge, bemoaning the fact that a movie was completed of which they claimed would never exist. That content isn't doing the facts of the article any favors. If they wanted to write this hit piece so bad, would have been best off having someone cover the facts and this person cover the conjecture.

When you have TMZ as the voice of reason concerning that Rolling Stone article, it conveys how silly this Snyder hate has become.

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:17 PM, Bosco685 said:

When you have TMZ as the voice of reason concerning that Rolling Stone article, it conveys how silly this Snyder hate has become.

 

Are we in Bizarro World!?

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:18 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Are we in Bizarro World!?

Something that has been pointed out with Rolling Stone's concern with the '13% rumored bots' is 25% of its followers are bots. An independent assessment was conducted that made this determination for RS.

So which metric is more significant: 13% or 25%?

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:15 PM, Bosco685 said:

Just for your awareness, this is not accurate. WarnerMedia (pre-Discovery acquisition) executives were the ones coming up with those details. Which is why even with the Rolling Stone article came out to note they wanted nothing to do with any of those details as that was the prior executive team.

You may not care for Snyder so this is getting by your review. But those are the facts. WB-D wants nothing to do with any of these previous articles and assumed decisions.

It wasn't in the original article I read, thanks for that. 

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:27 PM, jaybuck43 said:

It wasn't in the original article I read, thanks for that. 

You said WB-Discovery. They want nothing to do with the previous regime's activities. Thank you very much!

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:21 PM, Bosco685 said:

Something that has been pointed out with Rolling Stone's concern with the '13% rumored bots' is 25% of its followers are bots. An independent assessment was conducted that made this determination for RS.

So which metric is more significant: 13% or 25%?

I think there is a misunderstanding (by many people) about what the significance of "bot" networks is and how they're used.  Fake followers just bolsters the imagined reach of the individual (usually for advertising purposes).  So an advertiser on RS would think that when RS tweets out a story, it has an immediate reach of 6.4 million followers, but in reality only 4 million or so are "real".  Cool, but meaningless, because there is no correlation between reach and actual interaction.  A fake campaign however, is much worse (and has existed LONG before Twitter, they're called astroturfed campaigns).  Here's my question to you.  Do you think the volume of unique #releasethesnydercut tweets MATCH the consumption of the film?

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:39 PM, jaybuck43 said:

I think there is a misunderstanding (by many people) about what the significance of "bot" networks is and how they're used.  Fake followers just bolsters the imagined reach of the individual (usually for advertising purposes).  So an advertiser on RS would think that when RS tweets out a story, it has an immediate reach of 6.4 million followers, but in reality only 4 million or so are "real".  Cool, but meaningless, because there is no correlation between reach and actual interaction.  A fake campaign however, is much worse (and has existed LONG before Twitter, they're called astroturfed campaigns).  Here's my question to you.  Do you think the volume of unique #releasethesnydercut tweets MATCH the consumption of the film?

Here's a question for you: why does the failure of Zack Snyder and his interpretation matter so much to you? It seems very important.

There's a reason why the UK media market had the film at #1 for many weeks. And especially since the domestic market withheld the physical release leading to many domestic customers ordering from the UK.

[jaybuck43]

On 7/25/2022 at 12:44 PM, Bosco685 said:

Here's a question for you: why does the failure of Zack Snyder and his interpretation matter so much to you? It seems very important.

There's a reason why the UK media market had the film at #1 for many weeks. And especially since the domestic market withheld the physical release leading to many domestic customers ordering from the UK.

It doesn't?  I mean the beauty of film in general is I can like something others don't, or I can hate things others like.  Or I can like it.  It's personal opinion.  I liked 300.  I thought Watchmen, Man of Steel, and Justice League (original cut) were garbage.  Why?  Well the first two because they violated the concept of their sourcework, especially Watchmen which didn't know what it wanted to do...  Are you a faithful shot for shot remake of the comic or are you your own thing... but know what makes absolutely NO SENSE? Making Doctor Manhattan the villain.  Why?  BECAUSE HE'S SYNONYMOUS with the US.  So if he goes nuts and attacks everyone, the Russians are going to immediately think its a false flag attack and Nuke the US.  (That's why HBOs Watchman fixed everything and did itSO much better).  Same with Man of Steel.  Superman is LITERALLY the physical manifestation of hope (it's what the S MEANS!!!) and figuring out a way out of impossible scenarios.  So... what does he do the FIRST time he has a difficult situation?  O yea he snaps a dudes neck IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.  Yea that's going to inspire people... 

So yea, I don't think he makes good DC films.  But .  If WBD thinks the future of DC films would best be served by ZS, then by all means let him. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/25/2022 at 1:08 PM, jaybuck43 said:

I thought Watchmen, Man of Steel, and Justice League (original cut) were garbage.  Why?  Well the first two because they violated the concept of their sourcework, especially Watchmen which didn't know what it wanted to do...  Are you a faithful shot for shot remake of the comic or are you your own thing... but know what makes absolutely NO SENSE? Making Doctor Manhattan the villain.  Why?  BECAUSE HE'S SYNONYMOUS with the US.  So if he goes nuts and attacks everyone, the Russians are going to immediately think its a false flag attack and Nuke the US.  (That's why HBOs Watchman fixed everything and did itSO much better).  Same with Man of Steel.  Superman is LITERALLY the physical manifestation of hope (it's what the S MEANS!!!) and figuring out a way out of impossible scenarios.  So... what does he do the FIRST time he has a difficult situation?  O yea he snaps a dudes neck IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.  Yea that's going to inspire people...

If you're not joking, you really should be.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Dave Gibbons praises the Watchmen movie and I will take his review over any other person on the planet. It would be nice if Alan Moore would give it a fair shake, but he nearly belongs in a mental institution. (Manhattan had already publicly turned on America; Completely believable that he would seem alienated by a government that turned him into something even less human that he was becoming.)

Superman kills non-humans all of the time. He even killed Zod in SII and the comics. It's completely in-character for him to kill aliens to save the entire world.

I don't even know why I have to bother repeating all of this s**t.

Edited July 25, 2022 by theCapraAegagrus

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 1:08 PM, jaybuck43 said:

It doesn't?  I mean the beauty of film in general is I can like something others don't, or I can hate things others like.  Or I can like it.  It's personal opinion.  I liked 300.  I thought Watchmen, Man of Steel, and Justice League (original cut) were garbage.  Why?  Well the first two because they violated the concept of their sourcework, especially Watchmen which didn't know what it wanted to do...  Are you a faithful shot for shot remake of the comic or are you your own thing... but know what makes absolutely NO SENSE? Making Doctor Manhattan the villain.  Why?  BECAUSE HE'S SYNONYMOUS with the US.  So if he goes nuts and attacks everyone, the Russians are going to immediately think its a false flag attack and Nuke the US.  (That's why HBOs Watchman fixed everything and did itSO much better).  Same with Man of Steel.  Superman is LITERALLY the physical manifestation of hope (it's what the S MEANS!!!) and figuring out a way out of impossible scenarios.  So... what does he do the FIRST time he has a difficult situation?  O yea he snaps a dudes neck IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.  Yea that's going to inspire people... 

So yea, I don't think he makes good DC films.  But .  If WBD thinks the future of DC films would best be served by ZS, then by all means let him. 

Not trying to get so invested as you seem to have gotten on this topic - but for someone that doesn't care you sure do. That's a lot of words for "It doesn't".

[▫️]

The Snyder cut is old news now so its funny there are still haters out there drumming up anything they can fling. And its all good because I finally got to see and own this. I’m not a Snyder defender and didn’t care for Aquaman, BvS or the first release of JL but damn I love this one.

[▫️]

On 7/25/2022 at 8:08 PM, jaybuck43 said:

So... what does he do the FIRST time he has a difficult situation?  O yea he snaps a dudes neck IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.  Yea that's going to inspire people... 

Right, because Superman has never killed before in comics or movies. Like Batman has never killed anyone or used a gun. Bro, do you even nerd?

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/25/2022 at 1:55 PM, ▫️ said:

...its all good because I finally got to see and own this.

Yup. If someone searched long enough, they'd find my posts saying, "I can't die happy unless I see The Snyder Cut". I saw it. It's awesome. I don't care what anyone says, it's a very satisfactory experience.

It's sad to me that people are so toxic about the situation that they cannot let it go. Both sides.

[Bosco685]

On 7/25/2022 at 1:55 PM, ▫️ said:

The Snyder cut is old news now so its funny there are still haters out there drumming up anything they can fling. And its all good because I finally got to see and own this. I’m not a Snyder defender and didn’t care for Aquaman, BvS or the first release of JL but damn I love this one.

It is totally okay to not appreciate any (or all) of his movies. Nobody MUST appreciate them.

But these folks that swim in and out with all sorts of 'facts' how unsuccessful Snyder was/is and then want to declare fans as toxic is pretty funny. Go back to the Batman v Superman thread and how many people told me how wrong I was about enjoying this film. But not just that I was wrong. How blind I am to creativity. Fun times. Fun times indeed!

[▫️]

On 7/25/2022 at 9:49 PM, Bosco685 said:

It is totally okay to not appreciate any (or all) of his movies. Nobody MUST appreciate them.

But these folks that swim in and out with all sorts of 'facts' how unsuccessful Snyder was/is and then want to declare fans as toxic is pretty funny. Go back to the Batman v Superman thread and how many people told me how wrong I was about enjoying this film. But not just that I was wrong. How blind I am to creativity. Fun times. Fun times indeed!

Yes, we must all agree to like the same things!  I think we all know how childish it is to berate someone for enjoying a movie or show and I would just dismiss those people. And I don’t respect others opinions because they like what I like. If you find value in a movie I hate, we should celebrate those differences. Rib each other and move on, its not that serious.