Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Professor Irony
- Start date
Greboruri
Kiznaiver
I finally saw two movies considered to be the worst ever made, but are of the “so bad they’re good” variety. In that genre of films they usually boil down to two types; the one made by people who don’t give a crap and they’re there just to create a film fill a schedule, and those who are actually sincere and think they’re making some sort of masterpiece.
The Room (2003)
This is of course in the latter category. From what I understand, the cast and crew put in quite an effort to tone down Tommy Wiseau’s bizarre script and ideas in order to make a film that made some sense and was passable. But anytime Wiseau isn’t in a scene it’s an incredibly dull, plodding film. Of course the second he appears, it just improves the film 1000%. The film is chock-a-block full of bizarre dialogue full of non sequiturs and tons of weird dead end secondary plot lines. Wiseau is very much the modern era’s Ed Wood. I sort of wish this film didn’t get the attention it got and he kept making a ton of oddball films with his own money. I think this film is a once only watch for me. I’m not one of those people who’ll watch it over and over again.
Troll 2 (1990)
The other type of “so bad it’s good” film where the crew and cast just don’t give a crap. I didn’t realise this was a Joe D'Amato production (who also produced other classy fare such as “Porno Holocaust”) and pretty much an Italian production. The production itself seems to be a comedy of errors and poor planning (or no one really cared and did the bare minimum they were required to do); the script was written by someone who wasn’t all that fluent in English; most of the cast are amateurs, some who had no acting experience before including the guy who played a store owner who was on day release from a mental hospital. I was prepared for most of the scenes in the film as they have become internet memes over the years, but the scene with the popcorn got me. Such an incredibly bizarre film. You just keep continuing to watch because can’t believe it could get any worse, and it continually does. Again, this is a film I don’t need to watch ever again.
The Room (2003)
This is of course in the latter category. From what I understand, the cast and crew put in quite an effort to tone down Tommy Wiseau’s bizarre script and ideas in order to make a film that made some sense and was passable. But anytime Wiseau isn’t in a scene it’s an incredibly dull, plodding film. Of course the second he appears, it just improves the film 1000%. The film is chock-a-block full of bizarre dialogue full of non sequiturs and tons of weird dead end secondary plot lines. Wiseau is very much the modern era’s Ed Wood. I sort of wish this film didn’t get the attention it got and he kept making a ton of oddball films with his own money. I think this film is a once only watch for me. I’m not one of those people who’ll watch it over and over again.
Troll 2 (1990)
The other type of “so bad it’s good” film where the crew and cast just don’t give a crap. I didn’t realise this was a Joe D'Amato production (who also produced other classy fare such as “Porno Holocaust”) and pretty much an Italian production. The production itself seems to be a comedy of errors and poor planning (or no one really cared and did the bare minimum they were required to do); the script was written by someone who wasn’t all that fluent in English; most of the cast are amateurs, some who had no acting experience before including the guy who played a store owner who was on day release from a mental hospital. I was prepared for most of the scenes in the film as they have become internet memes over the years, but the scene with the popcorn got me. Such an incredibly bizarre film. You just keep continuing to watch because can’t believe it could get any worse, and it continually does. Again, this is a film I don’t need to watch ever again.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990)
Weirdly, I've actually never seen any Turtles movies before, but coming into this with general indifference towards the franchise, I was quite pleasantly surprised. The plot is standard blockbuster fare that occasionally struggles to decide who it's aiming at, but it's a lively, tongue-in-cheek romp whose practical special effects have aged remarkably well - the Turtles themselves are charmingly expressive and surprisingly agile in the fight scenes. Perhaps in part this may be down the notable presence of lauded martial arts movie producers Golden Harvest on the committee, but it seems like a real achievement that the stunt actors were able to fight so convincingly in what must have been exceptionally heavy costumes.
Weirdly, I've actually never seen any Turtles movies before, but coming into this with general indifference towards the franchise, I was quite pleasantly surprised. The plot is standard blockbuster fare that occasionally struggles to decide who it's aiming at, but it's a lively, tongue-in-cheek romp whose practical special effects have aged remarkably well - the Turtles themselves are charmingly expressive and surprisingly agile in the fight scenes. Perhaps in part this may be down the notable presence of lauded martial arts movie producers Golden Harvest on the committee, but it seems like a real achievement that the stunt actors were able to fight so convincingly in what must have been exceptionally heavy costumes.
Dai
Death Scythe
The Disaster Artist is well worth watching, if you haven't seen it yet. It's a sometimes hilarious, sometimes unsettling dramatisation of the making of The Room, based on the autobiography of one of the actors.
Also, I'll just leave this here:
Nicky Larson et le Parfum de Cupidon (2018)
An unexpected addition to the already diverse range of live-action City Hunter adaptations, this Francophone version appears to be something of a passion project for its director/star, comic actor Phillippe Lacheau, and proves to be one of the most remarkably faithful anime recreations I've yet seen. I was in mild disbelief at how uncannily accurate the square-jawed yet derp-faced Lacheau is as Ryo/Nicky, and he's ably matched by the equally convincing Elodie Fontan as Kaori/Laura, with the slightly naff 'love potion' plot serving as an unimportant jumping off point for their ever sillier exploits, battling a crime gang for a macguffin on its way to Monaco. As the film leans hard into the sex-comedy aspect of the original series, a few of the gags do feel a bit off-colour in 2020 (maybe it plays better with the French audience?), but in the main, I enjoyed this one far more than I expected to, and would certainly welcome an official release in English, should any distributor take the plunge.
An unexpected addition to the already diverse range of live-action City Hunter adaptations, this Francophone version appears to be something of a passion project for its director/star, comic actor Phillippe Lacheau, and proves to be one of the most remarkably faithful anime recreations I've yet seen. I was in mild disbelief at how uncannily accurate the square-jawed yet derp-faced Lacheau is as Ryo/Nicky, and he's ably matched by the equally convincing Elodie Fontan as Kaori/Laura, with the slightly naff 'love potion' plot serving as an unimportant jumping off point for their ever sillier exploits, battling a crime gang for a macguffin on its way to Monaco. As the film leans hard into the sex-comedy aspect of the original series, a few of the gags do feel a bit off-colour in 2020 (maybe it plays better with the French audience?), but in the main, I enjoyed this one far more than I expected to, and would certainly welcome an official release in English, should any distributor take the plunge.
Kite
Pokémon Master
Mortal Engines
Adaption of the book of the same name about a futuristic earth after a war wipes a lot of things out hundreds of years in the past. Good visual effects although I could tell where it diverts from the original text in terms of story biggest is that London doesn't explode itself up due too the WMD imploding.
Overall a good movie which i picked up a couple years ago on the cheap in Sainsburys.
Adaption of the book of the same name about a futuristic earth after a war wipes a lot of things out hundreds of years in the past. Good visual effects although I could tell where it diverts from the original text in terms of story biggest is that London doesn't explode itself up due too the WMD imploding.
Overall a good movie which i picked up a couple years ago on the cheap in Sainsburys.
Greboruri
Kiznaiver
A few more films I've seen over the last month or so;
Xtro (1982)
Always saw the video cover of this at the video store when I was much younger and it just creped the hell out of me. The Australian VHS cover was really horrifying and made the film out to be nothing but a gore fest I think. I'd heard about most of the weird/horrifying scenes of the film years prior to watching, so I wasn't all that shocked by it and was a little bit disappointed. Still, it's a very odd film. If you take away the alien parts of the story it could be a normal drama centred on a family. While the effects were mostly quite creepy, the scene dealing with Sam's abduction are pretty shoddy. Despite the notorious reputation the film has gained over the years, the core elements of the story are really interesting. The original ending is a lot more effective and creepy than the version used for the cinema releases.
Solar Crisis (1990)
A product of the Japanese bubble economy of the late 1980's, early 1990's with a Japanese steel company putting up a substantial amount toward the budget for some reason. Based upon a Japanese novel called "Crisis: Year 2050", but shot in the US with pretty much a 100% American cast and crew, it's just dull as dishwater. The sets are great, the model work is fantastic and it's got some pretty decent names in the cast like Charlton Heston, Jack Palance and Tim Matheson plus a $55 million budget. But it just doesn't work at all. One of the problems is that it's trying to tell two stories; one set on Earth and the other on a spacecraft heading to the sun to avoid a disaster. Both stories don't intersect well at all. The film direction is credited to Alan Smithee, so that's always a bad sign. The core plot is incredibly similar to Danny Boyle's 2007 film "Sunshine", but that film is obviously the better production.
The Hidden (1987)
Fantastic little known action/drama film that initially seems like another silly Hollywood car chase action film of the time and then you suddenly realise it's not. It's a bit silly in spots, but there is some great humour in the film as the director is not taking the premise of this film 100% seriously. Kyle MacLachlan is fantastic in this film.
Starship Troopers (1997)
I wasn't too sure what to expect with this one. I just wasn't interested in it when it first came to cinemas. I think Paul Verhoeven's film prior to this one was "Showgirls", so that's possibly the reason I initially passed on this. The film is a pitch black satire on the mechanics of war in the US post Cold War era. I know it's based on a book, but maybe things like the first Gulf War influenced the final film. The increasingly unsubtle fascist symbolism sort of did my head in by the end of the film. I also found really hard to care for any of the characters. Everyone seems to be OK with what they are doing and practically no one questions the ethics or morality of what is going on. They are also too perfect in many ways; all of them are absolutely gorgeous, never seem to get anything wrong, or soon make up for their errors. But the propaganda inserts where hilarious and over the top. I really enjoyed those. Maybe it's due to that period of Hollywood filmmaking, but everything about the film just seemed to look plasticly, too clean and artificial. In the end I sort of interpreted the film as a in universe propaganda tool for those fighting the "bugs".
Xtro (1982)
Always saw the video cover of this at the video store when I was much younger and it just creped the hell out of me. The Australian VHS cover was really horrifying and made the film out to be nothing but a gore fest I think. I'd heard about most of the weird/horrifying scenes of the film years prior to watching, so I wasn't all that shocked by it and was a little bit disappointed. Still, it's a very odd film. If you take away the alien parts of the story it could be a normal drama centred on a family. While the effects were mostly quite creepy, the scene dealing with Sam's abduction are pretty shoddy. Despite the notorious reputation the film has gained over the years, the core elements of the story are really interesting. The original ending is a lot more effective and creepy than the version used for the cinema releases.
Solar Crisis (1990)
A product of the Japanese bubble economy of the late 1980's, early 1990's with a Japanese steel company putting up a substantial amount toward the budget for some reason. Based upon a Japanese novel called "Crisis: Year 2050", but shot in the US with pretty much a 100% American cast and crew, it's just dull as dishwater. The sets are great, the model work is fantastic and it's got some pretty decent names in the cast like Charlton Heston, Jack Palance and Tim Matheson plus a $55 million budget. But it just doesn't work at all. One of the problems is that it's trying to tell two stories; one set on Earth and the other on a spacecraft heading to the sun to avoid a disaster. Both stories don't intersect well at all. The film direction is credited to Alan Smithee, so that's always a bad sign. The core plot is incredibly similar to Danny Boyle's 2007 film "Sunshine", but that film is obviously the better production.
The Hidden (1987)
Fantastic little known action/drama film that initially seems like another silly Hollywood car chase action film of the time and then you suddenly realise it's not. It's a bit silly in spots, but there is some great humour in the film as the director is not taking the premise of this film 100% seriously. Kyle MacLachlan is fantastic in this film.
Starship Troopers (1997)
I wasn't too sure what to expect with this one. I just wasn't interested in it when it first came to cinemas. I think Paul Verhoeven's film prior to this one was "Showgirls", so that's possibly the reason I initially passed on this. The film is a pitch black satire on the mechanics of war in the US post Cold War era. I know it's based on a book, but maybe things like the first Gulf War influenced the final film. The increasingly unsubtle fascist symbolism sort of did my head in by the end of the film. I also found really hard to care for any of the characters. Everyone seems to be OK with what they are doing and practically no one questions the ethics or morality of what is going on. They are also too perfect in many ways; all of them are absolutely gorgeous, never seem to get anything wrong, or soon make up for their errors. But the propaganda inserts where hilarious and over the top. I really enjoyed those. Maybe it's due to that period of Hollywood filmmaking, but everything about the film just seemed to look plasticly, too clean and artificial. In the end I sort of interpreted the film as a in universe propaganda tool for those fighting the "bugs".
Last edited:
Dai
Death Scythe
I saw the first two Xtro movies back when I was a teenager, and remember being baffled by how they had nothing in common. I saw Xtro 2 first, which is the most blatant Aliens rip-off ever made. The first one, from what little I remember of it, was both more grounded and more bizarre. I wasn't impressed by either though.
I love Starship Troopers. It was the first movie I saw three times at the cinema. It's best to think that there are two directors called Paul Verhoeven: one who makes biting SF satire, and another who makes exploitation trash. The fact that no one questioned what they were doing was absolutely the point. The film is about indoctrination and how the gears of the military just move new bodies into the same roles when their predecessors die, never pausing to question the cause. As the quadriplegic desk clerk said, "Fresh meat for the grinder." It's full of beautiful people because this is meant to be a vision of a fascist 'utopia', a society so far gone that they're blind to the madness, and oblivious to whatever horrors were committed to get there, the destruction of democracy glossed over as just another chapter in their history textbooks.
Greboruri
Kiznaiver
I think Verhoeven really amped that aspect up. It as you say it was like a hyperreal version of what fascists would consider a utopia. Verhoeven's early years were in the Hauge near the German headquarters in the Netherlands during World War II and he saw a lot of death and destruction as a very young child, so it's sort of unsurprising he treated the material this way. Maybe I expected few more scenes where people revolted against the status quo, but was surprised that there was little of that. These scene which got me what the part where Carl mindreads the captured bug. Everyone was completely brainwashed into believing what they were doing was right.
No, I did read that Verhoeven hated the book and couldn't get past the first couple of chapters. I assumed that a lot more liberties were taken. It sounds like screenwriter stayed as true to the book as possible.
I really like that one. Think I first heard about it as Kyle MacLachlan's character was likened to his character in Twin Peaks, but it's just a really solid little b-movie. I'm sure I also watched the sequel, although the fact that I can barely remember it is probably not a good sign.
Dai
Death Scythe
Zack Snyder's Justice League
I've always been fascinated by the long and winding road that movies take from idea to release. If I were ever given the opportunity to take a trip to alternate realities, I wouldn't be riding on a mega-zeppelin or visiting the Colossus of Rhodes, I'd head down to the nearest video retailer and buy Roger Corman's Alien, Steven Spielberg's Return of the Jedi, and Darren Aronofsky's Robocop. Zack Snyder's original cut of Justice League would have also been high on that list, but by some combination of circumstances (that I still can't quite believe actually happened), it's now a thing that exists.
We've seen alternate cuts of movies released before. So-called director's cuts or unrated cuts are often little more than a cheap marketing ploy to shift a few extra blu-rays by reinstating a few extra minutes of dialogue scenes. This is not that. It's also not the theatrical cut with an extra two hours of material. Instead, in almost every way possible, it's a new experience. The two versions of this film feel less like two different edits, and more like two completely different takes on the same basic story idea. Many scenes from the theatrical cut aren't here at all, and even familiar scenes play out completely differently in all but a couple of cases. Most surprisingly, this extends to the most expensive sequences, which now feature hundreds of new effects shots.
The audio-visual presentation is starkly different too. While the theatrical cut was cropped to 16:9, Snyder always intended for the film to be framed at 4:3. That's how it's presented here, and as far as I'm aware it's the first time a movie with a budget on this scope has ever been intended for Academy ratio. It works fine for the most part, though the frame can feel a bit constrained at times. The colour grading is also very different, rejecting Joss Whedon's saturated palette in favour of the darker, muted tones of Dawn of Justice. The music is all new, score by Tom Holkenborg (aka. Junkie XL) as Snyder originally intended. Even the audio mix feels different, prioritising the music instead of burying it under noise as the theatrical cut did.
So which version is better? That's a very difficult question to answer. I've seen the theatrical cut several times, so throughout the Snyder cut I found my mind padding out scenes with the (now absent) familiar dialogue, creating a composite experience. The tone is very different. The theatrical cut had a lot of Joss Whedon's signature humour, giving it the self-deprecating feel of a Marvel movie. The Snyder cut has none of that, and is instead a more somber and much more sincere take on the story. While the theatrical cut did a good job of introducing the new heroes and bringing them together, the Snyder cut gives much more fleshed out arcs to Aquaman, The Flash, and especially Cyborg, making this feel more like a composite origin story for all of them. This pays off with an almost completely different version of the climax that is far more emotionally resonant and satisfying.
Problems? Justice League was originally intended as a two-parter, but was condensed to one partway through production. The theatrical cut is a self-contained story derived from what would have been Part 1. When I heard that the Snyder cut was going to be four hours, I assumed that it would cover both parts, but surprisingly it's still just Part 1. Both versions start and end at roughly the same places, but the Snyder cut spends a fair bit of time setting up the villain who would have headlined Part 2, including another couple of extended visions of the apocalytic Bad End version of the future. Though interesting to see, these now fall into the same category as the vision from Dawn of Justice, teasing a sequel that will never happen.
Does it justify a four-hour runtime? Honestly, I'm not sure. I was planning to watch it over two evenings, but I was so engaged that I just watched the whole thing at once. It doesn't feel like a long four hours, if that makes sense, but this is coming from someone who likes the three-hour cut of Dawn of Justice, so your mileage may vary. While presented as a single movie, it does have six chapter title cards, so there are plenty of places you could pause it for a break.
As I mentioned before, I find it difficult to separate my experience of this new version from the one I'm more familiar with, even though they're two very different films. I'd give the theatrical cut 8/10, and for now I'll give the Snyder cut the same.
Currently, the only places you can watch it in the UK are Sky Cinema or Now TV Cinema, both premium upgrades from their respective services. I used the 7-day free trial of the latter to watch it.
I've always been fascinated by the long and winding road that movies take from idea to release. If I were ever given the opportunity to take a trip to alternate realities, I wouldn't be riding on a mega-zeppelin or visiting the Colossus of Rhodes, I'd head down to the nearest video retailer and buy Roger Corman's Alien, Steven Spielberg's Return of the Jedi, and Darren Aronofsky's Robocop. Zack Snyder's original cut of Justice League would have also been high on that list, but by some combination of circumstances (that I still can't quite believe actually happened), it's now a thing that exists.
We've seen alternate cuts of movies released before. So-called director's cuts or unrated cuts are often little more than a cheap marketing ploy to shift a few extra blu-rays by reinstating a few extra minutes of dialogue scenes. This is not that. It's also not the theatrical cut with an extra two hours of material. Instead, in almost every way possible, it's a new experience. The two versions of this film feel less like two different edits, and more like two completely different takes on the same basic story idea. Many scenes from the theatrical cut aren't here at all, and even familiar scenes play out completely differently in all but a couple of cases. Most surprisingly, this extends to the most expensive sequences, which now feature hundreds of new effects shots.
The audio-visual presentation is starkly different too. While the theatrical cut was cropped to 16:9, Snyder always intended for the film to be framed at 4:3. That's how it's presented here, and as far as I'm aware it's the first time a movie with a budget on this scope has ever been intended for Academy ratio. It works fine for the most part, though the frame can feel a bit constrained at times. The colour grading is also very different, rejecting Joss Whedon's saturated palette in favour of the darker, muted tones of Dawn of Justice. The music is all new, score by Tom Holkenborg (aka. Junkie XL) as Snyder originally intended. Even the audio mix feels different, prioritising the music instead of burying it under noise as the theatrical cut did.
So which version is better? That's a very difficult question to answer. I've seen the theatrical cut several times, so throughout the Snyder cut I found my mind padding out scenes with the (now absent) familiar dialogue, creating a composite experience. The tone is very different. The theatrical cut had a lot of Joss Whedon's signature humour, giving it the self-deprecating feel of a Marvel movie. The Snyder cut has none of that, and is instead a more somber and much more sincere take on the story. While the theatrical cut did a good job of introducing the new heroes and bringing them together, the Snyder cut gives much more fleshed out arcs to Aquaman, The Flash, and especially Cyborg, making this feel more like a composite origin story for all of them. This pays off with an almost completely different version of the climax that is far more emotionally resonant and satisfying.
Problems? Justice League was originally intended as a two-parter, but was condensed to one partway through production. The theatrical cut is a self-contained story derived from what would have been Part 1. When I heard that the Snyder cut was going to be four hours, I assumed that it would cover both parts, but surprisingly it's still just Part 1. Both versions start and end at roughly the same places, but the Snyder cut spends a fair bit of time setting up the villain who would have headlined Part 2, including another couple of extended visions of the apocalytic Bad End version of the future. Though interesting to see, these now fall into the same category as the vision from Dawn of Justice, teasing a sequel that will never happen.
Does it justify a four-hour runtime? Honestly, I'm not sure. I was planning to watch it over two evenings, but I was so engaged that I just watched the whole thing at once. It doesn't feel like a long four hours, if that makes sense, but this is coming from someone who likes the three-hour cut of Dawn of Justice, so your mileage may vary. While presented as a single movie, it does have six chapter title cards, so there are plenty of places you could pause it for a break.
As I mentioned before, I find it difficult to separate my experience of this new version from the one I'm more familiar with, even though they're two very different films. I'd give the theatrical cut 8/10, and for now I'll give the Snyder cut the same.
Currently, the only places you can watch it in the UK are Sky Cinema or Now TV Cinema, both premium upgrades from their respective services. I used the 7-day free trial of the latter to watch it.
jake scully
Kiznaiver
Honestly im just about to watch it!
jake scully
Kiznaiver
Yami
Thousand Master
I went into Zack Snyder's Justice League with rock bottom expectations and a great deal of cynicism. I respect the desire to see his original creative vision but the fact that the studio had essentially buckled to a fandom that has vocally toxic elements was a dangerous move, which recalled the creative bankruptcy of The Rise of Skywalker.
While I'm still wary that the release of this cut will just embolden fan entitlement, it is far, far, far superior to the theatrical cut put together by Joss Whedon. I haven't seen a director's cut so superior to its theatrical version since Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven.
It's not without its flaws - the performances of the main actors are on the same level as they'd give reading off an auto cue at an awards ceremony - but it's well paced and plotted and surprisingly manages to navigate both set up and pay off in its running time which is actually pretty well justified. I find it hard to believe that there wouldn't be more of a discussion regarding the ethics of resurrecting a (Super)man from the dead, but it is what it is. The antagonist is also dreadfully dull, essentially feeling like a copy of Thanos from The Avengers
It almost fooled me into thinking that Zack Snyder was a good director, but then I remembered all of his other films.
While I'm still wary that the release of this cut will just embolden fan entitlement, it is far, far, far superior to the theatrical cut put together by Joss Whedon. I haven't seen a director's cut so superior to its theatrical version since Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven.
It's not without its flaws - the performances of the main actors are on the same level as they'd give reading off an auto cue at an awards ceremony - but it's well paced and plotted and surprisingly manages to navigate both set up and pay off in its running time which is actually pretty well justified. I find it hard to believe that there wouldn't be more of a discussion regarding the ethics of resurrecting a (Super)man from the dead, but it is what it is. The antagonist is also dreadfully dull, essentially feeling like a copy of Thanos from The Avengers
It almost fooled me into thinking that Zack Snyder was a good director, but then I remembered all of his other films.
Samurai Cop (1991)
A huge latter-day hit with the meme makers, to the point that even people who‘ve never watched it will likely recognise a lot of scenes, this stunningly terrible story of two LA detectives tangling with the Yakuza, is still worth seeing in its entirety, if only to gawp at its sheer ineptitude.
Shot on a shoestring budget with little planning and few (if any) retakes, the film is barely coherent, unaware of how human beings interact with each other and frequently unable to grasp the basic spatial logic needed for camerawork, but still has a strange, creaky charm to it, with the scenery chewing Robert Z’Dar providing good value as the hammy villain and Mark Fraser arguably stealing the show with his amazing reaction faces.
I have no love for Snyder either, but hey, his version of Dawn of the Dead wasgood, alright pretty okay, generally.
A huge latter-day hit with the meme makers, to the point that even people who‘ve never watched it will likely recognise a lot of scenes, this stunningly terrible story of two LA detectives tangling with the Yakuza, is still worth seeing in its entirety, if only to gawp at its sheer ineptitude.
Shot on a shoestring budget with little planning and few (if any) retakes, the film is barely coherent, unaware of how human beings interact with each other and frequently unable to grasp the basic spatial logic needed for camerawork, but still has a strange, creaky charm to it, with the scenery chewing Robert Z’Dar providing good value as the hammy villain and Mark Fraser arguably stealing the show with his amazing reaction faces.
I have no love for Snyder either, but hey, his version of Dawn of the Dead was
Dai
Death Scythe
While the pursuit of this alternate cut certainly had one of the more vocal and pro-active fan movements, and showed that there was interest in seeing it, I'd be very surprised if they were the deciding factor in getting this greenlit. Justice League was a hugely troubled production given an impossible mandate to match the box office performance of The Avengers. The studio reworked it over and over, and ran the cast and crew ragged (there's a reason Ben Affleck gave up the chance to direct his own Batman movie after this). After all that, after retooling it to that point that it resembled a Marvel movie more than it did Snyder's previous films, and the rumoured $300M ploughed into it, Whedon's cut brought in the lowest box office return for a DCEU movie, less than Batman v Superman, less than even that PoS Suicide Squad.
I think the decision to go ahead with this new version came down to a combination of sunk-cost fallacy in the hope that a different version might be better received, rebuilding burnt bridges with the cast and crew, an extention of the more experimental direction that the studio is taking with DC films, and possibly (especially considering the heart-breaking circumstances under which the director originally stepped down from the production) a feeling in the studio that Snyder was owed this.