Scans_Daily

Thank you for the review. I've been reading the reviews here and there. They are mixed - which is to be expected. Snyder isn't for everyone. Snyder kind of reminds me of a geek/poor man's take on Terence Malick - to be honest - into visuals more than plot or story or dialogue. (Not that it isn't there - and from your review above - it may be more there than I thought from other reviews.)

I've not seen it yet - that's my current plan for the weekend. Although I may space it out a bit.

Having seen all of Snyder's films (with a few exceptions) and all of Whedon's - I honestly don't think those two director's styles work well together at all. That was my difficulty with the Whedon version of Justice League - it was jarring. Whedon isn't really a director so much as a screen-writer and television writer. And I honestly think he works better as a television writer - smaller scale, and more conversation. He can't do big action scenes well - at all. All you have to do is watch the Avengers/Avengers AoU and compare that to Thor:Ragnarock, when the Russo's started to take over. The Russo's have a good grasp of cinematic action sequences. Whedon sucks at action sequences - he's at his best when he's doing smaller character moments or a big emotional character moment - such as that scene he wrote between Bruce and Diana that you mentioned. That's his strength.
And that stuff often works better in television than film - because it requires more build-up to get there. An example of Whedon's brilliance is The Body episode on Buffy and possibly HUSH.

Snyder in marked contrast is excellent a large action sequences and creating visual paintings on the screen. He's not great at dialogue (not necessarily horrible). But he is a painter, his background is in fine arts and painting, he thinks visually. And wants to use film to play out a graphic novel. Alot of what the Russos did in MCU was in a way grabbed from Snyder - who started the whole slow motion action paintings, where you freeze frame on a character. I think Snyder did it in 300, and it was also done by Ang Lee in his take on the Incredible Hulk (which does have interesting visuals.)

What Snyder and Whedon unfortunately have in common - is neither are very good at plotting, or continuity. That's been a problem I've had with Whedon throughout his works - he is a horrible plotter. Snyder, from your review, and my memory, isn't much better.

Which kind of begs the question - why on earth did Johns and Berg hire Whedon of all people to cut and complete a Snyder film?

I know they wanted something lighter - but it was kind of too late at that point. I mean they hired Snyder because he was similar in style to Christopher Nolan. If they didn't like the direction Snyder was going after Batman vs. Superman, why not scrap it there?

I really don't understand what WB was thinking. Nor do I understand why they hired Whedon - considering they hated his Wonder Woman script. And Whedon isn't a DC guy - he's Marvel. Whedon doesn't get the characters, he's not written for them previously...it made no sense. While with the Avengers - Whedon was a huge Marvel fan. He even wrote for the comics, and worked on scripts for some of the films prior to The Avengers. It would be like having Snyder direct Avengers Age of Ultron.