Man of Steel / Justice League / DC films

X-SOLDIER

Harbinger O Great Justice
AKA
X
Man, I feel optimistic about the movie watching that trailer. Like... even if it doesn't hit all the beats, it looks like it's gonna be a genuinely good time. (Also, good job at setting me up with the Man of Steel theme, since I loved that film).





X :neo:
 

lithiumkatana17

Pro Adventurer
AKA
Lith
I can't fucking wait for this movie. I'm more excited for this than Ragnarok tbh.

Also, I'm glad that at least one hero acknowledges the sentiment of asking people they don't know to put their lives on the line. It's nice to actually hear it spoken aloud.
 

X-SOLDIER

Harbinger O Great Justice
AKA
X
So, I have to say that I missed Zach Snyder's filters and Junkie XL's soundtrack a LOT in this movie. With the whole death of Superman lingering over the film, and the tensions of potential global destruction – Joss Whedon's somehow managed to make the film less dark AND less emotionally impactful than any of the previous installments, which is exactly the opposite of what it needed.

It's alright, but it definitely feels like it's a complete tonal disconnect from every other film that lead up to it, which means that the moments of everything coming together doesn't feel like anything. No leitmotifs for the characters doing badass things – especially glaring with Wonder Woman's theme being absent. Just... Yeah. Clearly feels like a book was started by one author, and then re-edited and finished by someone who was more concerned about making their stamp on it than connecting the vision that was laid out.





X :neo:
 
Back. Got lucky that there was no TLJ trailer, but a hilariously stupid ad for JL themed razors instead.

Adequate. Not much to love or hate. I was concerned that the snark might take over, and in fairness it didn't, but there was still a line or two out of place here and there. None of these characters are naturally snarky (or are snarky in specific ways), so it jarred just a tiny bit occasionally.

They just had too much to do in too little time. Where BVS (which I grew to love) packed in small bits of history and hinted at the rest, this one tried to pack in all the history start to finish, and the script had to be too blunt to cram it all in.

Example: Dialogue wise, here's the same joke/twist as it was in BVS.

"They said it was all taken care of. Anonymous donor'

v.

"I bought the bank" Same point, but much more bluntly, and losing impact in the process.

There are loads of fantastic ideas in here, but they need more room to play out properly. Like much of the DCU so far, it...juuuuust misses brilliance by a hair.

Standout moments: The Flash staying behind on the rooftop.

WW's 'room for more' line, which made me double take because I took a second to realise that she was talking about the Justice League and not the 'start a family' sense. Don't know if that was intentional or not, but it was funny once I caught up.

Everyone has a good arc, but they needed more time to play out. It's not something I can blame anyone for, maybe they were just punch drunk from BVS' reception and certain other issues.

I'm disappointed with myself that I'm whining so much. It wasn't a bad film, it's mostly my own expectations tripping me up. Maybe I'll recant this later, considering how much I ended up enjoying BVS in retrospect, but I don't see quite the same depth here so far.
 
*** SPOILER FREE INSIGHT ***

That was better than I was expecting, and I can only attribute that to Whedon. You could instantly see the lines that he added and the scenes which were reshot, as they crafted more depth between the characters and helped raise it from the dreary doom and gloom motif that this film could have been completely mired in.

It was a slow and boring start, but began to slowly pick up speed and finally get interesting. I have to agree with Clement that for a film with such a small team, they surprisingly needed more time to flesh everyone's arcs out. It was obvious that it needed the Marvel approach of having individual films setting up some of these characters. Cyborg wasn't handled very well, I personally felt, Aquaman got ... something ... but Barry at least was on point. He pretty much was the standout for the film for me, and his reactions - let alone dialogue - were just priceless.

So yeah, much better than I was expecting going in.
 
I don't really feel this was a problem per se. I almost feel like writing an article on this if I knew where to send it.

Marvel and DC'S Business Model were different because they were in different situations, not because one model is better or worse.

Marvel in 2008 had sold off their A listers, they couldn't use the X Men or Spiderman, so they had to build up from their lower tier characters. Because they weren't quite so widely known, they had to build them up in isolation. Black Widow and Hawkeye are also debuted in higher profile character's movies, as is Spiderman when they get him back, so it's not like debuting characters in other movies so they get exposure is so alien to Marvel's way of thinking.

Hulk had brand recognition from his TV show and earlier movie, Thor is a name people recognise even if they don't know Marvel Thor, Cap was just 'the guy that punched Hitler in the face on that one cover'. They were mostly unknown to the wider public, so it had to be established who and what they were up to before the Avengers movie.

Superman and Batman are far more widely known. Superman needed an intro to establish his differences from Christopher Reeve, but if there's one character that needs no introduction, it's the goddamned Batman. All the audience already knows who he is, and even the brief precredits Origin in BVS got flack for retreading old ground.

Because they already have high profile superheroes in Bats and Supes, there's scope for using that profile to give exposure to other characters. Wondy is not so high profile, and comes with some baggage, so rather than begin with a solo movie that might not draw in people that don't already know about her. And BVS sold Wondy brilliantly, her costume was gladiatorial rather than a swimsuit, that little grin showing off her attitude to battle, and so on. Wondy's subsequent success owes a lot to her previous exposure in BVS.

Meanwhile, they also tease a few lower level characters, which somehow gets flack for being appropriately written into the story instead of being a post credit sequence. Aquaman is shown off in all his glory in his limited screentime, showing his powerful warrior nature to counter those jokes about him being just a guy that can talk to fish. Boom, people that wouldn't have gone to an Aquaman solo movie are now interested in him.

Flash and Cyborg also get established briefly, enough to get an idea of who they are without saying too much.

By the time Justice League rolls around, the Trinity are all showcased at length, leaving room for the other three to be developed in this movie to build anticipation for subsequent solo films. Unfotunately, JL's production is extremely troubled and it doesn't quite deliver, but that's more due to a run of extreme bad luck than a flaw in the business model.

They're different situations, not a question of good or bad policies.

If there's one thing you can't blame Snyder for, it's a too short runtime. He always ends up with long director's cuts, and given the amount of missing scenes from the trailers, I think it's fair to assume Whedon is more the problem than the solution here.

Also, I'm pretty sure he's responsible for the various shots centred on Gal Gadot's ass.

'I bought the bank' is still bothering me, for a new reason now. Bruce is rich and takes care of his friends, but he's not stupid. He's not going to spend billions buying a bank when he can achieve the same result by just buying the loan or the farm itself for far less. It's a small family farm in Kansas (probably nearly paid off) it's not going to be harder to get hold of than an entire bank's balance sheet.

Edit: Sigh...This is one of those movies where I'm going to have to keep away from the fandoms for a while isn't it?
 
Seems like most commentators are playing 'spot the reshoot'. Any moustache fanciers like to comment? I wasn't really paying attention.

Been humming bars of 'Everybody Knows' and that random background KPop song over the last week. Their costume budget must be crazy.
 
AKA
Jesse McCree. I feel like a New Man
They managed to come through inspite of all the reshoots and the tragedy, I appreciate what they made but hopefully in the future, they could take it slow and build their cinematic world. I am eager to see Superman vs. Brainiac or have a solo bout with Darkseid before another crossover takes place. Ironically, this film made me enjoy Superman's presence even more than in MoS or BvS.
 

Ryushikaze

Deus Admiral Parsimonious, PHD, DDS, MD, JD, OBE
AKA
Tim, Ryu
I don't really feel this was a problem per se. I almost feel like writing an article on this if I knew where to send it.

Marvel and DC'S Business Model were different because they were in different situations, not because one model is better or worse.

Marvel in 2008 had sold off their A listers, they couldn't use the X Men or Spiderman, so they had to build up from their lower tier characters. Because they weren't quite so widely known, they had to build them up in isolation. Black Widow and Hawkeye are also debuted in higher profile character's movies, as is Spiderman when they get him back, so it's not like debuting characters in other movies so they get exposure is so alien to Marvel's way of thinking.

Hulk had brand recognition from his TV show and earlier movie, Thor is a name people recognise even if they don't know Marvel Thor, Cap was just 'the guy that punched Hitler in the face on that one cover'. They were mostly unknown to the wider public, so it had to be established who and what they were up to before the Avengers movie.

Superman and Batman are far more widely known. Superman needed an intro to establish his differences from Christopher Reeve, but if there's one character that needs no introduction, it's the goddamned Batman. All the audience already knows who he is, and even the brief precredits Origin in BVS got flack for retreading old ground.

Because they already have high profile superheroes in Bats and Supes, there's scope for using that profile to give exposure to other characters. Wondy is not so high profile, and comes with some baggage, so rather than begin with a solo movie that might not draw in people that don't already know about her. And BVS sold Wondy brilliantly, her costume was gladiatorial rather than a swimsuit, that little grin showing off her attitude to battle, and so on. Wondy's subsequent success owes a lot to her previous exposure in BVS.

Meanwhile, they also tease a few lower level characters, which somehow gets flack for being appropriately written into the story instead of being a post credit sequence. Aquaman is shown off in all his glory in his limited screentime, showing his powerful warrior nature to counter those jokes about him being just a guy that can talk to fish. Boom, people that wouldn't have gone to an Aquaman solo movie are now interested in him.

Flash and Cyborg also get established briefly, enough to get an idea of who they are without saying too much.

By the time Justice League rolls around, the Trinity are all showcased at length, leaving room for the other three to be developed in this movie to build anticipation for subsequent solo films. Unfotunately, JL's production is extremely troubled and it doesn't quite deliver, but that's more due to a run of extreme bad luck than a flaw in the business model.

They're different situations, not a question of good or bad policies.

If there's one thing you can't blame Snyder for, it's a too short runtime. He always ends up with long director's cuts, and given the amount of missing scenes from the trailers, I think it's fair to assume Whedon is more the problem than the solution here.

Also, I'm pretty sure he's responsible for the various shots centred on Gal Gadot's ass.

'I bought the bank' is still bothering me, for a new reason now. Bruce is rich and takes care of his friends, but he's not stupid. He's not going to spend billions buying a bank when he can achieve the same result by just buying the loan or the farm itself for far less. It's a small family farm in Kansas (probably nearly paid off) it's not going to be harder to get hold of than an entire bank's balance sheet.

Edit: Sigh...This is one of those movies where I'm going to have to keep away from the fandoms for a while isn't it?
I disagree with this assessment on two points.

Firstly, Cap, Iron Man, and Thor were not lesser known. They weren't SpiderMan or X-men in the 90s well known, but they absolutely had very broad recognition, enough so that Iron Man also had a 90s cartoon, even. So yeah, Marvel didn't have the movie rights to their heaviest hitters- a move they had to make when they made it- and had to go to their A- list guys. I mean, in terms of movies, Guardians of the Galaxy is absolutely from D-list material cultural awareness wise.

But no, it's not that people are being introduce in other people's movies as part of the plot, it's the Clunky Way they're being introduced. BvS has some serious pacing issues, and the Bruce watches videos scenes just slows the film down further. I agree with you, Snyder has a lot of material, but he often has too MUCH material. Like, BvS didn't need the extended dream sequences teasing Justice Lord Superman, or Flashpoint. It felt like hitting a checklist without any passion, same as jumping from BvS to Justice League so quickly.

I liked Wonder Woman's solo film. I would have liked at LEAST an Aquaman solo film too, maybe a Flash one (Especially since he needs to distinguish himself from the TV Flash, which is what he's going to be compared to because that's already there)

TL: DR, Warner Brothers feels like it's rushing to play catchup and that's why it's stumbling so badly.
 
In deference to Claymore I should specify that this isn't a Marvel v DC thing. I enjoy both properties, and the silly turf war stuff is making the fandoms more poisonous than they need to be, it's the most needlessly vitriolic conversation since the Star Wars prequels. There's no reason they can't both succeed.





Cap et al were not nobodies, but they didn't have anywhere near the same brand recognition as Batman/Superman. Which means less immediate success, but also you don't have the same level of 'That's not my Superman/Batman' from the fanbase.

So the Batman and Superman introductions get a lot more immediate interest, but also a lot more flack for getting their characters 'wrong'.

If your specific complaint is that there wasn't enough time spent on the newcomers, it is relevant that much of the work that actually was done on their stories was cut out, that's evident just from watching the trailers (I didn't, in advance of watching the film, looking back, wow, who thought
replacing 'I'll take that as a yes' with 'dying feels itchy' was a good idea
). It's not some fundamental rule of storytelling that they have to do the solo movies first.

Justice League was not a problem because it was rushed into, it had problems because of a ridiculously troubled production where the first director had to step aside, the replacement director was immediately hit by three separate scandals, the stupid moustache controversy, and Ben Affleck got into some kind of trouble too I think?

It also doesn't seem like Joss had much respect for his predecessor's vision, while normally the Steppenwolf tweet thing wouldn't be worth comment, in these circumstances it looks like a direct jab at his predecessor. As soon as he started work, he seems to have fired the composer. So you get clashing directing styles and possibly actual malice.

Also, Danny Elfman using his own 1989 theme while mostly ignoring this franchises established themes is looking kind of like a deliberate snub to me. Granted, he was working in a hurry.

JL had far more problems than a lack of solo movies, and saying 'this is because they didn't build the universe first' is overlooking a host of other things that went wrong to the point that we're lucky we got a movie at all.

RE: BVS, if that's how you saw it, fair enough. I do think a lot of the problems were subverted expectations rather than being objectively bad, though. The vision gives weight to Bruce's paranoia, it's not solely there as a reference. The videos spur Wonderwoman to join the fight.

TL,DR: I blame the cut scenes, not the lack of solo movies.

Edit: Found this guy on Youtube, feels like he has one of the very few fair and evenhanded perspectives on this whole thing
 
Last edited:

Ryushikaze

Deus Admiral Parsimonious, PHD, DDS, MD, JD, OBE
AKA
Tim, Ryu
In deference to Claymore I should specify that this isn't a Marvel v DC thing. I enjoy both properties, and the silly turf war stuff is making the fandoms more poisonous than they need to be, it's the most needlessly vitriolic conversation since the Star Wars prequels. There's no reason they can't both succeed.
Oh, absolutely, I don't want the DCEU to fail. I just wish they were taking more care with their film universe.

Cap et al were not nobodies, but they didn't have anywhere near the same brand recognition as Batman/Superman. Which means less immediate success, but also you don't have the same level of 'That's not my Superman/Batman' from the fanbase.

So the Batman and Superman introductions get a lot more immediate interest, but also a lot more flack for getting their characters 'wrong'.
The thing is, it's not about that Bats and Supes are different in BvS from other portrayals, they're actually both mimicking some popular comic portrayals of the two, but clumsily.

If your specific complaint is that there wasn't enough time spent on the newcomers, it is relevant that much of the work that actually was done on their stories was cut out, that's evident just from watching the trailers (I didn't, in advance of watching the film, looking back, wow, who thought
replacing 'I'll take that as a yes' with 'dying feels itchy' was a good idea
). It's not some fundamental rule of storytelling that they have to do the solo movies first.
It's not the time spent, it's the lack of care taken in establishing them. I say rushed not because there weren't solo films, but because I do think the DCEU is being run with a "Eh, good enough." mentality, and the lack of focus on the characters is evidence of that. Like Jimmy "BLAM" Olsen in BvS.

Justice League was not a problem because it was rushed into, it had problems because of a ridiculously troubled production where the first director had to step aside, the replacement director was immediately hit by three separate scandals, the stupid moustache controversy, and Ben Affleck got into some kind of trouble too I think?

It also doesn't seem like Joss had much respect for his predecessor's vision, while normally the Steppenwolf tweet thing wouldn't be worth comment, in these circumstances it looks like a direct jab at his predecessor. As soon as he started work, he seems to have fired the composer. So you get clashing directing styles and possibly actual malice.

Also, Danny Elfman using his own 1989 theme while mostly ignoring this franchises established themes is looking kind of like a deliberate snub to me. Granted, he was working in a hurry.

JL had far more problems than a lack of solo movies, and saying 'this is because they didn't build the universe first' is overlooking a host of other things that went wrong to the point that we're lucky we got a movie at all.
Lack of Solo Movies is a symptom, not the disease. The disease is that Warner Brothers wants to strike while Disney's Iron is Hot but isn't take the time or effort to make their offering as good as it can be. They're rushing to market.


RE: BVS, if that's how you saw it, fair enough. I do think a lot of the problems were subverted expectations rather than being objectively bad, though. The vision gives weight to Bruce's paranoia, it's not solely there as a reference. The videos spur Wonderwoman to join the fight.
I'm not saying the visions need to be excised. I'm saying each one was lingered on too long and that it should have been pared down to improve the pacing of the film.

TL,DR: I blame the cut scenes, not the lack of solo movies.
I think we largely agree past each other on the issue, really.
 
No question WB is making mistakes, but I don't feel 'running to catch up' is one per se. Filmwise, there's nothing wrong with the schedule, they're just trying to do the 'sell with extended cameo first, then do the solo movie' route. Which is not wrong, it's just not following the Marvel template, which people are comfortable with because it's established awhile now.

It's actually worked out pretty well re selling the new characters, people raved about WW in BVS, and now we know who Flash/Aquaman/Cyborg are and they're broadly all liked by the audience, and most people do want to see more of them as far as I can tell. None of them have much of a hatedom. Aquaman seems honestly pretty popular, which is a huge success as he used to be something of a joke. (unfairly, but whatever).

The two biggest failings (for me, anyway) are SS and JL, both of which fell victim to being course corrected too late and ending up as failed compromises. JL's run of bad luck didn't help with that.

I don't think general audiences were comparing Bats and Supes to comics incarnations, but to their previous movies (not entirely accurately at that, overlooking things like depowered Zod thrown off a cliff). There's a lot of TDKR in BVS, the same way there's a lot of Gotham Central in Dark Knight, but they're not strict adaptations. Not as familiar with Superman, not clear what his influences are. Shorthand was used with Batman because they were relying on previous knowledge.

I'm not claiming BVS is perfect, but I do think it deserves more credit than it got. Maybe it dragged in places, but 'this is a bit too long' is on the whole a better complaint than 'what's happening, exactly?' so getting cut down didn't do it any favours.

The mandated 2 hour runtime was a bad decision, (IMO) it compressed everything too much and cost scenes their nuance:

"Hello Mera, want to talk about my parentage which both of us obviously know about?"
There was care taken, but it was cut for time.

JL was a product of its ridiculous bad luck. There were poor choices, but I don't think the film being too early was one of them.

I think we largely agree past each other on the issue, really.
Probably true.

Now, after all that whining, I should mention that the
"Save One"
conversation was brilliant, it was such a good way to display both characters skills and faith in each other. Brilliantly done.

Btw, Joss Whedon is taking credit for the 'Everybody Knows' sequence, which is the one scene I was pretty sure was Snyder. Am I overthinking by finding it kind of unprofessional to be taking jabs at the guy that lost his daughter, or am I misinterpreting there? I could be.

Note to thread: Feel free to tell me to shut up if I'm taking over the thread to your detriment.
 

The Twilight Mexican

Ex-SeeD-ingly good
AKA
TresDias
It's an interesting discussion. No need to stop.

All I can contribute is this: the fact there's even a debate to be had about whether Marvel or DC's cinematic universe has done this or that as well as the other is a great problem to have -- hard to imagine 10 years ago, maybe impossible to imagine 15 years ago.
 
All I can contribute is this: the fact there's even a debate to be had about whether Marvel or DC's cinematic universe has done this or that as well as the other is a great problem to have -- hard to imagine 10 years ago, maybe impossible to imagine 15 years ago.
True, it's been a great couple of years. Ideally, though we could stop crossing the streams so much. They're honestly hard to compare accurately. What's the benchmark? Marvel Phase 1s? Their current competitor, which have far more buildup to work with? Some imaginary spot in between? It's hard.
 

Ryushikaze

Deus Admiral Parsimonious, PHD, DDS, MD, JD, OBE
AKA
Tim, Ryu
All I can contribute is this: the fact there's even a debate to be had about whether Marvel or DC's cinematic universe has done this or that as well as the other is a great problem to have -- hard to imagine 10 years ago, maybe impossible to imagine 15 years ago.
True, it's been a great couple of years. Ideally, though we could stop crossing the streams so much. They're honestly hard to compare accurately. What's the benchmark? Marvel Phase 1s? Their current competitor, which have far more buildup to work with? Some imaginary spot in between? It's hard.
DC's benchmark is their own previous works. They need to live up to the previous live action movies and the DCAU.

And of course Batman 66, the highest of all possible benchmarks.
 
Top Bottom