Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Justice League Snyder Cut VS Original: 23 Biggest Changes

Zack Snyder's Justice League is finally on HBO Max. Here are the 23 biggest changes from the theatrical cut.

No matter where you stand on the great Justice League debate, one thing can be said for certain: the theatrical cut and the Snyder Cut are two very, very different movies. With double the run time, Zack Snyder's Justice League has both added new and extended scenes to the mix and subtracted some of the less harmonic moments of the original, making for a vastly different tone and viewing experience than the first time around.

Trying to recount every single difference would be an exercise in futility--the cuts really are that unique from one another--so in lieu of comparing apples to oranges, we've rounded up the biggest departures the Snyder Cut has to offer over its theatrical cousin. These include added scenes, new storylines, and totally removed or recontextualized moments that change the movie.

41 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for deactivated-625793e9d045a
deactivated-625793e9d045a

383

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

The Snyder cut was infinitely better than the original. Whedon's version was trash.

The Snyder cut actually molded and developed the characters and storyline. Sure, it was long, and you had to pause it halfway through and come back to the rest later on.

But, all and all the movie was better. MUCH BETTER than the original from 2017 release.

I have heard that WB execs dont plan on going with the Snyder universe going forward. They said "At least for now, Mr. Snyder is not part of the new DC Films blueprint, with studio executives describing his HBO Max project as a storytelling cul-de-sac — a street that leads nowhere."

In fact, they label all the snyder fans "toxic". Even though they admitted to a lot of the Whedon choices "WTF decisions" in his cut. They KNEW his movie was trash.

Like the robber on the roof where batman interrogated him, and the Russian family near an abandoned nuclear reactor? None of it made sense. Plus, using Steppenwolf the way that he did and the way he CLEARLY had an issue with Ray Fisher or his character ruined the entire story line.

The fact is....Snyder's version was better, but it didnt conform to the "woke" industry standards they are going for. In fact, the first version by Whedon was one of the most hated and confusing comic movies in history.

But, it is ok. Because ultimately. The consumer makes the decision with their wallet. And the people that these morons at the top are conforming to, are a very narrow margin. They arent the ones who invested in the comics throughout their childhood. Know the actual storyline and characters. These are roughly the 10% that make noise that honestly, nobody watching these cares about their opinions. If they dont like it, watch something else.

If these corporate goons dont figure it out. They will figure it out the hard way. Just ask Disney, they are having a good ol time right now with the Gina Carano fiasco. They are essentially set back 2 and half years on all Star Wars projects because of all of the cancel culture atmosphere and internal civil war going on in there.

3 • 
Avatar image for niceguy3978
niceguy3978

48

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This was probably twice as good as the original. Unfortunately, twice as good as "god awful", is still bad.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jergernice1
JergerNIce1

199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

liked the original. not perfect. snyder cut way way better.

4:3 sucks... 4:3 sucks 4:3 sucks....

i didnt buy a $2000 65" oled to burn in black and turn my tv to 48".

Dumb

Upvote • 
Avatar image for 6t4gp
6T4GP

345

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@jergernice1:

I stopped noticing the 4:3 on my 85". 😉

Upvote • 
Avatar image for n0matter
n0matter

742

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

When viewed alongside MCU movies (any of them), this movie is pure awful. Maybe it's the standards it's forced to live up to that make it so painful. The Nolan Batman was awesome--things really started to go downhill when Ben frickin' Affleck started being (the worst) Batman.

Anyway, the original version of this was pretty bad. The Snyder cut was just twice as much bad. Not sure why any actual comic book fan would think this was good. It doesn't resemble the comic in any way and the mountains of dialogue are just painful to listen to.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-625793e9d045a
deactivated-625793e9d045a

383

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

@n0matter: Sucks you didnt like it.

But, unfortunately you are wrong about it not following the comic book. Snyder is clearly a comic nut. Snyder did a pretty good job of following the comic.

Minus having Cyborg being sucked into Apokolyps. He did a much better job than Whedon did. It was a much better version. It followed the comics and character flesh outs MUCH closer than Whedons version.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for 6t4gp
6T4GP

345

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@n0matter:

So, you say Capitan Marvel was better?

2 • 
Avatar image for Fandango_Letho
Fandango_Letho

6204

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

@n0matter: I'm a comic book fan and I loved the Snyder Cut. I also think Affleck is a much better Batman than Bale. Sorry you didn't like it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for johnny0779
johnny0779

2257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

If Zack would have removed about a whole hour of filler and unnecessary chi chat, it would have been better.....but once again this flick still pretty bad and nonsensical even by comic based movie standards.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Newsboy
Newsboy

6534

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

The movie was better than the review of the movie on Gamespot.

Parts of it are dumb, parts of it drag but I can’t figure out how the Gamespot reviewer got so petulantly negative? Overall it’s great, parts of it are epic, memorable and cinematically excellent.

It’s a comic book movie for fans of comic books.

Go figure.

2 • 
Avatar image for ohnooze
Ohnooze

22

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Ohnooze

I would give it a solid 8.8765 and the original a 5.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-62b67c84be613
deactivated-62b67c84be613

96

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 5

@zmanbarzel: Thanks!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Theinfmustroll
Theinfmustroll

98

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Waaaaaayy better than a 3/10. Not perfect by any means, but a good viewing experience.

4 • 
Avatar image for knifebeater
knifebeater

236

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Finally finished this thing. Overall, it's better than the initial release but it's still 4 hours of content that is mostly average, and it's inexplicably in a 4:3 aspect ratio... in 2021.

...I guess I shouldn't say "inexplicably", Zack Snyder has given reasons for it, but I'm pretty sure he's the only film maker that they make sense too.

The video also doesn't mention that this version has removed the red hue that the original was tinted with in favor of a grey one, making the scenes considerably darker, both literally and figuratively as this version is also rated "R" and features scenes that are bloodier than the original.

4 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8
deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8

5977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

I didn't hate the original as much as most, but this version is soo much better.

2 • 
Avatar image for esqueejy
esqueejy

4982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Asleep in 1 hour 25 minutes. I'll try one more time to give it a fair shake, but WTF.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Baconstrip78
Baconstrip78

1893

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Baconstrip78

Just watched it yesterday.

It’s awful. Main bad guy looks way better now, but Snyder goes WAY overboard on the slowmotion. If the actions shots were at full speed it would probably be 2 hours long instead of 4.

It’s better than the original but still bad, and still WAY below even the worst Avengers movie (Ultron).

DCEU is just bad and it’s honestly the casting. Cyborg has no personality and is just sort of there. Fatfleck looks ridiculous and is extremely forgettable in this role as the team leader. I get the feeling like he wasn’t into the role. Diana is very hit and miss. In WW1, she’s endearing, but in a teammup movie she gets lost or pushed to the background. Other than Cavil, who just is Superman in the way that Chris Hemsworth is Thor, every other character feels “off”.

3 • 
Avatar image for FallenOneX
FallenOneX

2639

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I thought the first one was ok. Was happy that it came out, enjoyed the extended edition more. Years later, the Snyder cut is announced and I get excited again. Then, the word comes out that not only is he only shooting 20 more minutes of footage to make it a 4 hour film, he's not using any of the stuff Whedon shot. In the middle of all of this, Ray Fisher starts dropping bombs about the first film. Finally, on March 18 at 0215, I sit down with 5 tacos and start to watch the Snyder Cut.

Today... I now have the opinion that Fisher wasn't lying when he said Whedon was TICKED OFF over the reception to the second Avengers film. I enjoy a lot of his work, but he pretty much repeated the same mistakes then made more. That "save one" speech from Batman? That's pretty much the same type of speech Hawkeye gave Wanda. The whole "only Bruce want's to use the box to bring back Superman" plot? That's Tony Stark and Ultron.

Snyder seemed to be banking on the fact that he was going to have 2 more films to fix his. Pretty sure 15 minutes could have been cut if every character didn't have to have at least 2 slow motion scenes as an entire song plays along. Martian Manhunter was a sick joke and a waste. World in peril and you don't show up until AFTER the fight? Oh wait, before that you had to get Lois back to work by pretending to be someone she was eventually going to have to talk to and have a very awkward conversation.

With all of this rambling being written... I LOVED THE HELL OUT OF THIS MOVIE!!!! Yeah, it was 4 hours, but I didn't feel like it dragged on needlessly(keyword there, I did mention the slo-mo's). DARKSEID! Cyborg, Flash, and Themyscira got their due. Steppenwolf got an upgrade. The town singing as Aquaman left blew me away. DARKSEID!. The scene where they show Clark selecting a new suit. The first battle with DARKSEID featuring a Green Lantern. Desaad and... did I mention DARKSEID!!! Not a the best comic based film by a long shot, but so much better than what we got the first time IMHO. If you hated the first one, this probably won't change your mind, and that's ok. But at least give it a watch, even if you watch it like my sister in law and pretty much just fast forward until you see explosions.

8 • 
Avatar image for m4a5
m4a5

3289

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

Edited By m4a5

Watched it, was better than expected (had absolutely 0 interest in watching it until I looked into it more after release).

Also, if you watch it, speed it up a bit so it's not 4 hours lol

2 • 
Avatar image for ikcizokm
ikcizokm

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Superman choosing a black suit was a nod to the original Return of Superman comic arc. Following his death at the hands of Doomsday, Supes is eventually brought back to life in a Kryptonian birthing chamber. When he emerges, he is wearing a black and silver suit.

In the novelization, it's revealed that the black suit helps him absorb more solar energy. Fans started referring to it as "the Recovery Suit" and it made a few more appearances in comics and the animated series over the years.

Source: There's a blog post on the DC Comics web site, answering the question of why Superman is wearing a black suit in the Snyder Cut. :)

6 • 
Avatar image for Tekarukite
Tekarukite

783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@ikcizokm: those are good answers, if you refer to other materials, but it's a fair criticism that there is no explanation in the movie itself.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ikcizokm
ikcizokm

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Tekarukite: Yeah, but that's the whole point of an easter egg, isn't it? Not everything needs exposition -- that would make for a dull movie.

Fans familiar with the source material will understand the reference, and it will deepen their appreciation for the scene. Everyone else will either (a) be intrigued and probably look it up online, (b) assume that's how it's supposed to be, or (c) not give it a second thought.

Remember, too, that during the scene in question, several suits are shown in the gallery. There's a voiceover playing of Jor'El, explaining why humanity needs Superman. Jor'El wore a black suit. Even if you don't know the comics, it's not a stretch for casual viewers to assume Kal chose the black suit because he was thinking of his father during that scene.

2 • 
Avatar image for rodoxthedark
rodoxthedark

1348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By rodoxthedark

Did they delete the poor review? Watching this now (just getting a beer so thought I’d comment) this is so much better than the original cheese fest of the original, all the random bits are answered, yes it’s long and yes not too sure why it has to be square ratio but it’s just a really really good superhero film. So glad they dropped the drawn on glasses moment and other stupid bits, it feels like a sequel to the other films now

Edit. Finished it and it’s so much better than the original

6 • 
Avatar image for wahsobe
Wahsobe

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 5

I really didn't care for the poor perspective ratio but at least it was framed well enough on my 65" tv that I could let it fade from my mind as long as I didn't look away from the screen. There was a lot to like in this cut but I honestly preferred the more uplifting and playful moments sprinkled into the original cut. Some of the musical choices seems a tad over the top and unnecessarily depressing. It was like he had just watched Lord of the Rings and it unintentionally affected his musical taste and theatrical tone.

Personally I'm going to be keeping my eyes open for a quality fan edit that merges the two cuts, returning the feel of the original score and its more ranged tone while still following the general direction of Snyder's cut. Preferably with the little dream sequence either completely removed or shortened and moved to the beginning of the movie instead of appearing in an artistically disjointed way at the end.

2 • 
Avatar image for frostblind
Frostblind

99

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

I have never seen either until yesterday. Not much of a DC fan in all honesty but decided to give the movies a shot so I could give an actual review in the words of someone who never watched before with all the backlash this movie received. I decided to watch the Snyder Cut first. Being the first one I watched, I thought it was pretty decent for 4 hours. I took a little break and then watched the theatrical version. Honestly... the Snyder Cut was better than the theatrical version in my opinion.. definitely drawn out but better. I do believe some scenes from the theatrical version would have fit better in the Snyder Cut and vice versa. Looking back on both movies in comparison, I can see how many truly slow and almost boring scenes there are and if you were one of the people that happened to watch the theatrical version first, then I can see how boring the Snyder cut will play out for 4 hours .... lol. Now, with everything i just said... my 2 cents are to just watch the Snyder Cut if you have not seen either yet and don't even look at the theatrical version as it will be a much more fulfilling 4 hours of movie instead of comparing them both and I think it will turn out to be much more enjoyable with mainly the atmosphere the movie plays out in.

3 • 
Avatar image for restatbonfire
RestatBonfire

2576

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Haven't seen the original, but I thought the new one was okay. For 4 hours I was pretty intrigued still. Usually lose interset and fall asleep

Upvote • 
Avatar image for stat84
Stat84

91

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

4 fucking hours of this thing. sheesh.

2 • 
Avatar image for magnificent7
magnificent7

271

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@stat84: First 2 hours were meh. Second half was much better.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for aka_tosh
aka_Tosh

64

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 5

There's no denying it is a better movie now.

2 • 
Avatar image for cottonfly
CottonFly

95

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

It was a fantastic movie, but it was let down by the narrow view (4:3) - WHY??? and the lacklustre musical score.

2 • 
Avatar image for errol4tez
errol4tez

36

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cottonfly: synder explained this... with the widescreen format the superheros look normal size but on the full screen they look to be stretched a bit more (illusions) giving the superheroes a taller more comic book look style. I agree tho. would have enjoyed it more if it was IMAX ratio (No bars at all)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for wahsobe
Wahsobe

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 5

@errol4tez: The 4:3 cut was dumb and actually served no purpose. The guy really seems to only grasp a viewer like knowledge of the medium he's working with. Movies don't usually provide a tonne of height info because that's not how human sight works. The average person has greater horizontal vision than they do vertical on account of us having eyes on both sides of our heads. The whole point of moving to wider screens including TV's is to accommodate that fact.

Most things that are framed with verticality in mind still remain framed the same regardless of width except now you're losing a tonne peripheral information. The only blessing here is that as long as you have a decent size TV or are sitting relatively close, most of that peripheral information you lose if framed right shouldn't make you feel overly disadvantaged.

In short, dumb idea by a talented guy that he will likely eventually look back on with regret.

2 • 
Avatar image for zmanbarzel
ZmanBarzel

3166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@wahsobe: You're not losing any peripheral information, though. It was shot flat on 35mm, meaning the camera is capturing a 1.37 image on the negative. The widescreen version was created by matting out information from some combination of the top and bottom of the neg, so it actually offers less information than this "full-frame" 1.33 version.

2 • 
Avatar image for wahsobe
Wahsobe

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 5

@zmanbarzel: Technically that may be true when considering the raw footage but that's not typically the intention when framing shots during filming and that's not how our eyes perceive the final product.

The end result of Snyder's work is an image that lacks a greater sense of visual depth, especially in home unless you're looking to sit alone and unnecessarily close to the tv. Now if we were watching this in a true Imax theater, it would change everything. Since most won't see it this way, it's still a bad choice.

I can't help but feel he never sat in front of a standard size home TV to get a feel for his pet project. Maybe if he had, the majority of watchers wouldn't have had to deal with this old format. Then again he apparently did a black and white version as well so who TF knows what's going on in that head.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for zmanbarzel
ZmanBarzel

3166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@errol4tez: But it is IMAX ratio, or at least very close to it. IMAX -- real IMAX, the kind you get in specialty theaters usually attached to museums -- is 1.4. The Snyder Assembly Cut is 1.3.

Upvote •