Zack Snyder's Justice League

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Depends. I think a lot in the world don't pick up on the "woke" stuff in these movies. It's only politicized in certain areas of the world.
 
Isnt she in a nut house? How does that equate to mail oppressors? Cause some of the orderlies were men? Sorry there is no deep message there, its just hot chicks in underwear kicking ***, his female equivalent of 300. Which is why some people hated it and he got labeled a misogynist

It was a fake mental health institute designed as a *** house for rich paying men to come in and abuse the power they had over women who were institutionalized unfairly. They were being used sexually whether they liked it or not. The empowerment comes from the fact that given the circumstances they were in, they still have power that can't be taken away from them by these men and they can use this power to their advantage.

So instead of them being used for their *** they used their *** to better their situation, the dances translated into fantasy settings were metaphors for them taking back their power in abusive situations, and literally in the plot to escape the facility.

You can argue how successful it was or not, but it's very naive to think it was just a hot chicks in underwear kicking *** film.
 
It was a fake mental health institute designed as a *** house for rich paying men to come in and abuse the power they had over women who were institutionalized unfairly. They were being used sexually whether they liked it or not. The empowerment comes from the fact that given the circumstances they were in, they still have power that can't be taken away from them by these men and they can use this power to their advantage.

So instead of them being used for their *** they used their *** to better their situation, the dances translated into fantasy settings were metaphors for them taking back their power in abusive situations, and literally in the plot to escape the facility.

You can argue how successful it was or not, but it's very naive to think it was just a hot chicks in underwear kicking *** film.

I probably shouldnt have commented on sucker punch because ive only seen it once and all I remember is zack getting a bunch of **** for his depiction of women. I only cited sucker punch for that reason, i was trying to illustrate zack isnt a woke director his movies dont force that ****,- sp might be a female empowerment film but its not as on the nose or in your face as the new mcu- blasting she?s just a girl as captain marvel beats up a bunch of evil male nobodies.

And yes zack promotes diversity but it feels natural and organic unlike disneys. I have no business discussing sucker punch on this level because as i mentioned before i hated it- so ya i just remember the hot chicks in underwear kicking *** sorry if offended anyone with my assessment of the flick- all that deeper meaning stuff flew over my head (like many others) when i watched it years ago in the theater.
 
I think one thing is clear with Snyder though - even though he means to say one thing, it is usually taken in another way. I don't use the word cheeky much, but I think it fits him in a sadistic way. The type of violence he uses, it kind of loses touch of his story.
 
It was a fake mental health institute designed as a *** house for rich paying men to come in and abuse the power they had over women who were institutionalized unfairly. They were being used sexually whether they liked it or not. The empowerment comes from the fact that given the circumstances they were in, they still have power that can't be taken away from them by these men and they can use this power to their advantage.

So instead of them being used for their *** they used their *** to better their situation, the dances translated into fantasy settings were metaphors for them taking back their power in abusive situations, and literally in the plot to escape the facility.

You can argue how successful it was or not, but it's very naive to think it was just a hot chicks in underwear kicking *** film.

So, that's what Sucker Punch was about?? :dunno

Locked away, a young woman named Babydoll (Emily Browning) retreats to a fantasy world where she is free to go wherever her mind takes her. Determined to fight for real freedom, she finds four women -- Rocket, Blondie, Amber and Sweet Pea -- to join together to escape the terrible fate that awaits them. With a virtual arsenal at their disposal, the allies battle everything from samurais to serpents, while trying to decide what price they will pay for survival.

It was so bad, I couldn't even watch it. I was looking forward to watching it too. I DVR'd it off HBO. I scanned through nearly the whole movie. In about 15 minutes. Even the CGI was terrible. For me it was like watching a video game cutscene with live action people inserted in. Everything was terrible. If I was somehow made to watch it again it would be like a form of torture. :lol

I'm sure the movie only got made due to the success of 300 & Watchmen (both of which are some of my fav's).

Sorry to those that like it. But there's not too many movies I would consider worse. Regardless of the hidden deep meaning of the movie. For me it's just trash.
 
I think one thing is clear with Snyder though - even though he means to say one thing, it is usually taken in another way. I don't use the word cheeky much, but I think it fits him in a sadistic way. The type of violence he uses, it kind of loses touch of his story.

Snyder's an interesting problem. He has vision, which I respect, but I don't respect his overall execution of that vision; his reach exceeds his grasp, a sort of Quixotic series of grand failures.

If the goal of art is to communicate a specific set of ideas and one is required to explain it because people consistently walk away with something else, there reaches a point where one must admit failure and adjust the conveyance of said ideas. Maybe that's asking too much of lowbrow entertainment like strong men in capes.
 
It was so bad, I couldn't even watch it.[...]

It came across as a film so blatantly vacuous and exploitative, I thought it was making fun of itself the whole time. I enjoyed it for being so bad.

But given the fate of "Baby Doll" at the end, for Snyder to claim 'female empowerment' is laughable.
 
Yea it was still a very bad movie but I understand what he was trying to do. But again story telling is his weak point and sucker punch is a great example of how he?s good with visuals but sucks at story
 
But given the fate of "Baby Doll" at the end, for Snyder to claim 'female empowerment' is laughable.

Exactly.

But again story telling is his weak point and sucker punch is a great example of how he?s good with visuals but sucks at story

Correct.


That 16 min video of him revisiting his career was so devoid of substance, or genuine point, it just shows how he works on a visceral level that he can barely articulate -- other than he likes everyone to be fit -- and he has no real care or interest in genuine story other than what moves images.
 
Exactly.



Correct.


That 16 min video of him revisiting his career was so devoid of substance, or genuine point, it just shows how he works on a visceral level that he can barely articulate -- other than he likes everyone to be fit -- and he has no real care or interest in genuine story other than what moves images.

Did you miss my Sam Jackson present I made for you go back a few pages :gah:

Because I GOTS TO KNOW lol
 
Well didn't she sacrifice herself for the other person to escape? The empowerment comes from fighting back. Either don't fight back and be abused forever or fightback with autonomy and potentially face repercussions. But I suppose the repercussions of the lobotomy is that if some men can't control a woman then they'll take everything away from them, ie murdering to assert complete control.

I don't really understand what's exploitative about it to be honest. If you mean the costumes they wear it's a bit of a stretch considering modern feminists giving power to *** workers and being able to wear whatever they want if that empowers them. Not to mention the film is clearly commenting on genre film as Snyder said in the Vanity Fair video.

Again, I think it's a fair case to argue how well he's achieved these points, I think it's incredibly naive to just brush the film off as exploitative and vacuous.
 
[...] I don't really understand what's exploitative about it to be honest. If you mean the costumes they wear it's a bit of a stretch considering modern feminists giving power to *** workers and being able to wear whatever they want if that empowers them. Not to mention the film is clearly commenting on genre film as Snyder said in the Vanity Fair video.

Again, I think it's a fair case to argue how well he's achieved these points, I think it's incredibly naive to just brush the film off as exploitative and vacuous.

Feminism is not a monolith anymore than 'women' are. The outfits aren't a problem per se. The entire film is typical Snyder, i.e. lacking in substance no matter what it pretends to, hence my use of the term 'vacuous'. And if you can't land the message what are you left with? Action ****.

I'll even view the film again, now, years later ... to see if I change my mind.

And if Snyder's big feminist moment is martyrdom does that say something about the best women can expect? It's another case of failed communication.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top