Read on Twitter
In the rush to comment on the revisionist superhero director's cut phenomenon, it's important to distinguish between directors getting to finish the movie the way they wanted to (DC) and fans dictating the direction of a franchise by yelling (Star Wars). Very different things.
There's also a huge difference between a movie being taken away from a director because they were fucking it up or were impossible to deal with and a director having to be replaced due to personal tragedy. In the latter case, a do-over doesn't seem like a cosmic wrong to me.
My feelings about various DC and Marvel films are on record and easy to find. Suffice to say I've loved some, liked some, hated some. Ultimately it comes back to whether the thing feels personally expressive or like a cog in an assembly line. Better to have it be personal.
I get a sense from reading Justice League do-over coverage that nobody wants anything from it except whatever Snyder feels like cooking up. That's as it should be. That's real fandom. Support the artist. Don't yell at them to make what YOU want, like it's a diner order.
This is all, of course, separate from the behavior of DC fans over the past few years with regard to anyone who dares say anything negative about a film or director they adore. That's straight-up bullshit and it does sometimes become abusive.
What I'm saying here is that it's an altogether good thing that a film that got released in a fractured, rescue mission way is being redone in a manner closer to what was originally envisioned. I can think of a lot of other movies that I'd love to see revisited in this way.
Muting this now because any time I discuss DC films on here it's like I've opened a crate full of badgers and I don't have the emotional bandwidth for that tonight. Hopefully you all can see what I'm getting at. Goodnight.
