(no subject)
Mar. 21st, 2021 10:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. New York Times does a really good analysis of the differences between the Snyder version of Justice League and Whedons
Apparently, I'm not the only film buff who got intrigued.
I was surprised John Scalzi didn't look into it - but I think he's avoiding the whole topic because of it's admitted toxicity in certain arenas of the pop culture fandom. I'm no where near those arenas, so not an issue.
Anyhow, excerpt:
For as much new material as has been added to the Snyder Cut, the biggest differences are in what’s been removed. Whole scenes conceived and directed by Whedon have been taken out, including almost all of the slapstick comic interludes, whose upbeat, madcap tone felt at odds with the seriousness of the rest of the picture.
Gone is the early sequence in which Batman strings up a crook on a rooftop to entice an alien out of hiding, as well as a later, painfully unfunny scene in which Aquaman, inadvertently sitting on Wonder Woman’s Lasso of Truth, begins to confess his secrets and share his feelings about his crew.
One of Whedon’s first jobs on the film, before Snyder left, was to add jokes that were spliced into Snyder’s first cut of the film. Quirky, irreverent sitcom riffing is ubiquitous in Marvel’s superhero blockbusters, but in the middle of “Justice League,” it felt incongruous.
Snyder has excised Whedon’s punch lines, so that the Flash no longer kids about brunch and Superman, back from the dead, no longer jokes about his coffin itching. In Whedon’s version, after Batman is beaten to the ground by Superman, he dryly quips, “Something’s definitely bleeding!” In the Snyder Cut, he just stays down, bruised and broken.
Warner Bros. felt the comedy would make “Justice League” more audience-friendly, Snyder said. But with those bits expunged, paradoxically, the Snyder Cut is more likable — and coherent.
There is an early scene in which Affleck’s Bruce Wayne visits Iceland, where Aquaman is hiding. Turning down his offer to team up, Aquaman tells Wayne, “The strong man is strongest alone.” In the Whedon version, Wayne fires back, “That’s not a saying — that’s the opposite of what the saying is!” In the Snyder Cut, Wayne has no retort. Whether you agree with the sentiment, it feels like an improvement that the movie at least accepts its own ethos. If nothing else, the Snyder Cut is no longer rife with such contradictions.
The difficulty with humor is everyone's sense of humor is different. I don't like a lot of situation comedy humor - because it's mean-spirited. Most of Whedon's jokes in Justice League are demeaning to women, or laughs at the expense of the characters. They aren't funny, just jarring. While Snyder's lines do have a sense of humor, while not laugh out loud funny, do resonate better.
2. AH (Ames) wants me to try the novel A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles. The book mother informed me she couldn't get into. I don't know if I can, the synopsis sounds less than enthralling.
A Gentleman in Moscow immerses us in another elegantly drawn era with the story of Count Alexander Rostov. When, in 1922, he is deemed an unrepentant aristocrat by a Bolshevik tribunal, the count is sentenced to house arrest in the Metropol, a grand hotel across the street from the Kremlin. Rostov, an indomitable man of erudition and wit, has never worked a day in his life, and must now live in an attic room while some of the most tumultuous decades in Russian history are unfolding outside the hotel’s doors. Unexpectedly, his reduced circumstances provide him a doorway into a much larger world of emotional discovery.
Apparently, I'm not the only film buff who got intrigued.
I was surprised John Scalzi didn't look into it - but I think he's avoiding the whole topic because of it's admitted toxicity in certain arenas of the pop culture fandom. I'm no where near those arenas, so not an issue.
Anyhow, excerpt:
For as much new material as has been added to the Snyder Cut, the biggest differences are in what’s been removed. Whole scenes conceived and directed by Whedon have been taken out, including almost all of the slapstick comic interludes, whose upbeat, madcap tone felt at odds with the seriousness of the rest of the picture.
Gone is the early sequence in which Batman strings up a crook on a rooftop to entice an alien out of hiding, as well as a later, painfully unfunny scene in which Aquaman, inadvertently sitting on Wonder Woman’s Lasso of Truth, begins to confess his secrets and share his feelings about his crew.
One of Whedon’s first jobs on the film, before Snyder left, was to add jokes that were spliced into Snyder’s first cut of the film. Quirky, irreverent sitcom riffing is ubiquitous in Marvel’s superhero blockbusters, but in the middle of “Justice League,” it felt incongruous.
Snyder has excised Whedon’s punch lines, so that the Flash no longer kids about brunch and Superman, back from the dead, no longer jokes about his coffin itching. In Whedon’s version, after Batman is beaten to the ground by Superman, he dryly quips, “Something’s definitely bleeding!” In the Snyder Cut, he just stays down, bruised and broken.
Warner Bros. felt the comedy would make “Justice League” more audience-friendly, Snyder said. But with those bits expunged, paradoxically, the Snyder Cut is more likable — and coherent.
There is an early scene in which Affleck’s Bruce Wayne visits Iceland, where Aquaman is hiding. Turning down his offer to team up, Aquaman tells Wayne, “The strong man is strongest alone.” In the Whedon version, Wayne fires back, “That’s not a saying — that’s the opposite of what the saying is!” In the Snyder Cut, Wayne has no retort. Whether you agree with the sentiment, it feels like an improvement that the movie at least accepts its own ethos. If nothing else, the Snyder Cut is no longer rife with such contradictions.
The difficulty with humor is everyone's sense of humor is different. I don't like a lot of situation comedy humor - because it's mean-spirited. Most of Whedon's jokes in Justice League are demeaning to women, or laughs at the expense of the characters. They aren't funny, just jarring. While Snyder's lines do have a sense of humor, while not laugh out loud funny, do resonate better.
2. AH (Ames) wants me to try the novel A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles. The book mother informed me she couldn't get into. I don't know if I can, the synopsis sounds less than enthralling.
A Gentleman in Moscow immerses us in another elegantly drawn era with the story of Count Alexander Rostov. When, in 1922, he is deemed an unrepentant aristocrat by a Bolshevik tribunal, the count is sentenced to house arrest in the Metropol, a grand hotel across the street from the Kremlin. Rostov, an indomitable man of erudition and wit, has never worked a day in his life, and must now live in an attic room while some of the most tumultuous decades in Russian history are unfolding outside the hotel’s doors. Unexpectedly, his reduced circumstances provide him a doorway into a much larger world of emotional discovery.
no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 03:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 03:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 12:39 pm (UTC)And just about the hardest time I have making any use of what critics say comes with whether or not something's funny
That's my problem too. I don't tend to like "insult" humor, or "embarrassment" humor for the most part. I have issues with most situation comedy writing - that ranges from cruel insult humor at someone's expense to crude sex jokes (usually at women's expense), to absurdist situational humor (works), sharp wit, embarrassment humor and slapstick. A lot of humor requires humiliation. That only works for me - if the character laughs at it as well, and it's set up well.
There's that old saying? Drama is easy, comedy is hard. It is hard, I think - because a joke is often an insult in some contexts, and the laugh depends on who is on the receiving end.
Whedon has a specific brand of humor - that works really well in some contexts and not others. It worked well on Buffy, Angel and Firefly and the Avengers. It also worked on Cabin in the Woods. It didn't work on Justice League at all, or for that matter on Dollhouse.
On Justice League - Whedon's brand of humor is outright offensive, and jarring. It cheapens the characters and action. And you can sense that the actors are cringing as they say the lines. I remember that was my difficulty with Whedon's film in 2018 - when I saw it. I was surprised at how bad the jokes and dialogue was - because I thought Whedon, prior to that, was really good at banter. But to do banter well, you have to understand the characters and the world. Whedon clearly didn't understand the characters or tone of Snyder's film. But WB also hired a male situation comedy writer to fix a dramatic film. The result was just painful.
no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 02:00 pm (UTC)Unless you think you'd like a story about someone mostly out of touch and totally out of place as the world changes, I'd avoid it.
no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 02:46 pm (UTC)I asked my mother about it - whose book club was reading it, and she said: "I couldn't get into it." Dead stop.
Maybe Dr. Zhivago would be more interesting? Although I don't think I could read that now either.
no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 04:02 pm (UTC)Maybe think about watching the movie (again?) before you think about reading the Dr Zhivago book.
no subject
Date: 2021-03-22 05:47 pm (UTC)Since I've never seen Dr. Zhivago - I probably should just watch it first time around.
I've been forewarned by a friend that unless you get "Russia" - it may not work for me. She saw the musical version and enjoyed it - but warned me that it is very "Russian", whatever that means. (My friend is third generation Russian-American).