JUSTICE LEAGUE: PART ONE (11/17/17) 5 5

[Gatsby77]

5 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

So untrue.  Stick Robert Downey, Jr. into a Zack Snyder film and it's not going to change the fact that it's a Zack Snyder film.  It'll be a little bit better, but it'll still have a bunch of problems.

Mark Ruffalo does well as Hulk because Hulk is dead-simple to play.  He screwed up on Bill Maher's show back in 2012 and openly admitted that he hates superhero movies.  I'm somewhat surprised Feige didn't fire him, but he already had a contract at that point, so I'm not sure it was an option.  Probably doesn't matter anyway since it doesn't take much to play a CGI character.

Exactly.

Writing trumps everything.

George Clooney = great actor; still the worst Batman ever.

But stick him in the Nolan films - he would have been fine.

Make good movies, and the people will come.

Make mess movies and well...

[fantastic_four]

10 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Writing trumps everything.

Directing trumps everything.  A great screenplay with a bad director means a bad movie, but a bad screenplay with a great director can get edited on the fly.  Or the director can have the screenplay scrapped and rewritten...Spielberg has done that several times.

The Oscars present best film last because it's the big prestige category, but next to last is best director because they fully realize the director is the biggest individual contributor to the success of a film.

Edited November 21, 2017 by fantastic_four

[F For Fake]

6 hours ago, Kevin76 said:

I think Joss Whedon had to salvage what was already a mess into something actually watchable, If this was 100% Snyder, it would have been really terrible. The action was awesome and that's what I wanted to see. People complaining about the CGI, How may I ask are you supposed to make a movie like this without CGI?  

People need to stop comparing every DC movie to the Nolan Batman films, those were the exception.

 

I think we're complaining about the CGI because they spent something like $300m on this flick, and Steppenwolf still looks like he was made out of PlayDoh. 

And at the end of the day, maybe that's what burns me the most. To throw such obscene amounts of money at a project like this, and have it still turn out so mediocre-to-awful (depending on your take), from a production standpoint. Not sure if it's because DC is rushing these things through production too quickly, or if it's just the parties involved, but if you're going to spend that much money, you should be able to see it on the screen. 

[bane]

44 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Exactly.

Writing trumps everything.

George Clooney = great actor; still the worst Batman ever.

But stick him in the Nolan films - he would have been fine.

Make good movies, and the people will come.

Make mess movies and well...

Nolan or not, Clooney's head would still bobble about and it would look silly with a Cowl over it.

[bane]

37 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Directing trumps everything.  A great screenplay with a bad director means a bad movie, but a bad screenplay with a great director can get edited on the fly.  Or the director can have the screenplay scrapped and rewritten...Spielberg has done that several times.

The Oscars present best film last because it's the big prestige category, but next to last is best director because they fully realize the director is the biggest individual contributor to the success of a film.

Bad Screenplay, Great Director = Alien Covenant, top 10 of worst film candidates for 2017.

Spielberg... well its a pity he couldn't work any magic into the utterly terrible War of the Worlds, so was that a bad screenplay ??

[fantastic_four]

6 minutes ago, bane said:

Bad Screenplay, Great Director = Alien Covenant, top 10 of worst film candidates for 2017.

Spielberg... well its a pity he couldn't work any magic into the utterly terrible War of the Worlds, so was that a bad screenplay ??

Ridley Scott is an OK director.  The best directors are also capable of being a screenwriter, but Ridley Scott isn't a writer at all and has never written a single screenplay.  Spielberg is similar in that he's also not a writer, but he's better than Scott at fixing problem on the fly.

There would be no point in discussing the relative quality of War of the Worlds because you don't trust anyone's opinion on films except your own and people you know.  All I can say is that I enjoyed that film and so did most critics, but as you've repeatedly stated that means nothing to you.

Edited November 21, 2017 by fantastic_four

[bane]

1 minute ago, fantastic_four said:

Ridley Scott is an OK director.  The best directors are also capable of being a screenwriter, but Ridley Scott isn't a writer at all and has never written a single screenplay.  Spielberg is similar in that he's also not a writer, but he's better than Scott at fixing problem on the fly.

There would be no point in discussing the relative quality of War of the Worlds because you don't trust anyone's opinion on films except your own and people you know.  All I can say is that I enjoyed that film and so did most critics, but as you've repeatedly stated that means nothing to you.

I don't understand your point.

I watch a movie, I don't like it but because you or critics or the Oscars tell me its a great movie I must change my opinion of it?

[fantastic_four]

4 minutes ago, bane said:

I watch a movie, I don't like it but because you or critics or the Oscars tell me its a great movie I must change my opinion of it?

If they have good reasons for their opinion, then yes.  If they don't, then no.  If you shut them out either way then that's either willful ignorance to save time or arrogance that you're always right, I don't know which.  Either way it makes discussion useless.

[skypinkblu]

OK, raise your hand if you hated the movie but haven't seen it yet.

I'm getting confused;)

@VintageComics Roy, we got to pick our seats for $9.50, they were these really neat electric couches...move and take the kids;) Also, maybe READ the thread before explaining how they took out Supes mustache

I wonder how many people that would have really bothered if you didn't know it was removed, and how much it cost before you did or (in some cases didn't ) see the movie?

 

[bane]

3 minutes ago, skypinkblu said:

OK, raise your hand if you hated the movie but haven't seen it yet.

I'm getting confused;)

@VintageComics Roy, we got to pick our seats for $9.50, they were these really neat electric couches...move and take the kids;) Also, maybe READ the thread before explaining how they took out Supes mustache

I wonder how many people that would have really bothered if you didn't know it was removed, and how much it cost before you did or (in some cases didn't ) see the movie?

 

I'm in the camp of wasn't bothered about seeing it but have now changed my mind and will try and catch it this weekend.

[RedRaven]

So much angst. The only concrete measure of success for this movie will be the financials. That will determine the scope and direction of DCEU. My guess is that WB will draw back  based on what appears to be disappointing results. I'm bad at guessing though.

[Artboy99]

Saw this last night with 3 other friends ( all members of this board! )

It was entertaining, and overall I enjoyed it. I am at a 6.5/10

My nitpicking:

Spoiler

Batman:

1. He used his guns far to much in my opinion and I would love to see the detective and the exceptional fighter more than the space ship like vehicles.

2. To have Bruce be the one that comes up with "lets resurrect Superman using this weird magic box" was horrible writing. He has no idea what the box is capable of and in my opinion would want nothing to do with the resurrection of a dead person. It should have been Cyborg that reveals the power the box has especially since he was created by that power. Even better: have Superman not be dead. Perhaps have a scene where they are standing by the grave of Clark together as a team and then Cyborg reveals that Clark is not dead because his sensors pick up some faint life readings. Clark isn't dead but in a state of suspended animation and the power of the box ( if we have to use that item ) can "wake him". The ground shaking at the end of BvS suggested that Superman wasn't dead to me. Use that approach. That whole resurrection scene was terrible and made as much sense as how Luthor created Doomsday in BvS which I thought was awful.

3. If you are the individual that orchestrates the recruiting of other powerful people to be a team for justice then you are the leader. Batman is the leader of this group and he would never drop that mantle on anyone - he would own it! I don't understand the purpose of the whole discussion with Diana, Batman would simply utilize her for what she is good at - combat and her desire to do what is right and good in this world. And let's see that leadership in some simple dialogue: "Diana/ Aquaman, I need you to distract Steppenwolf. Flash, get these civillians out of here. Cyborg, you and I need to separate these 3 boxes."

Steppenwolf

was an ok villain, but he needed to be fleshed out. I want to know more about why he is here to destroy the Earth - I need more than "it is what I do."

Otherwise he is a very flat one dimensional character. If the main adversary is a one dimensional character - well, then you have a flat movie.

Parademons

I dislike it when move makers feel they have to include creatures for the team to fight that is just filler. They mean nothing other than to have some easily disposed of threat for the heroes so you can have lots of scenes with fights and explosions. The Parademons were just like the "grapehead" things in Suicide Squad, or the robots in Age of Ultron. Who cares?

 

[Bosco685]

11 minutes ago, RedRaven said:

So much angst. The only concrete measure of success for this movie will be the financials. That will determine the scope and direction of DCEU. My guess is that WB will draw back  based on what appears to be disappointing results. I'm bad at guessing though.

And yet if the box office doesn't pick up in Week 2 and 3 (and beyond), you could be slightly right.

They won't pull back on Aquaman (it's finished filming). They will continue with Shazam (ramping this up), and Wonder Woman 2 will move forward. It may end up the rest of the slate gets shuffled slightly. Though the producer and Ezra Miller said Flashpoint is moving forward.

[RedRaven]

By drawback I specifically meant in relation to the extended universe and the idea that you have to have a tentpole team to support it. If WB simply ends up making smaller scope character driven vehicles instead, well I don't think that would be a bad thing at all.

[Gatsby77]

Interesting analysis from a Forbes guy on how Warner Bros.' upcoming legal battle with the DOJ over the AT&T merger will likely make the film studio that much more risk-averse, likely killing the prospects for near-term Cyborg, Green Lantern, and solo Superman movies, as well as Flashpoint:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2017/11/20/justice-league-box-office-failure-doj-lawsuit-are-major-trouble-for-dceu/#2e5a3e9e4b91

For those who missed this morning's news, DOJ is suing to block the full merger of AT&T with Time Warner to essentially blackmail Time Warner into selling CNN to Fox.

Either way, the legal battle will hammer Warner's stock.

[Straw-Man]

me and a grandson at 4.  tho' i sometimes see my handle in a post lumping me in with the anti-d.c.'ers, don't presume a neg review--love w.w., like mos. 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Straw-Man

[Get Marwood & I]

4 hours ago, Marwood & I said:

Just picked up my ticket and going in. Back in a few hours with the verdict! 

OK, I'm back!

First up, I just wanted to take this opportunity to give credit to @Bosco685 for running these film threads. They make up an increasing percentage of the board traffic lately and, Bosco, I like the way you run them - fairly, professionally and with a good spirit. Well done 

Now to the film, or movie if you're from the US of A. 

Usual drill for me, a solitary visit and up until 3 minutes to go I was the only one in there:

 

The only other chap that arrived incidentally fell asleep with 10 minutes to go. I know this because he snored louder than the film roared. I thought it funny.

Anyway, what on Earth is all the fuss about this film? I go to 'superhero' films to be entertained and this film did just that. I thought it was excellent. Of course it had flaws, and of course parts of it could have been better, but overall I was impressed by how well the makers managed to cram all the elements in and still keep it enjoyable and moving along at pace. I think we're far too critical nowadays and I suspect the 16 year old me would have pooped in his pants with glee to see these characters so well realised on screen, were we to go back in time.

I'm a Marvel boy, have been for 40 years, and I've never read a JL comic. So maybe I wasn't as hung up on historical and character accuracy as I was with Homecoming. But Homecoming was just a bad film with only Michael Keaton coming away with any credit. This was a good film, with heart, with some truly stand out superhero scenes. I can be an emotional wally at times, and a few of those scenes almost brought me to tears as they so accurately portrayed what up until recently we could only dream of a film portraying (I remember the shiver that went down my spine when Spidey saved MJ the first time in the first Spidey film - I nearly cried then as it was so amazing (no pun intended) to see this finally realised on screen).

DC films seem to be more epic to me, and have more gravitas and emotional impact. It should be the other way round, but I prefer them to the Marvel films. The DC actors inhabit their roles completely, especially Superman and Wonder Woman who just rock. Were Henry Cavill and Gal Gadot actually manufactured to play these roles? They are definitive. And I like Ben Afflecks jaded, worn out Batman. The Flash was funny. I usually find that role in a film annoying, as it's usually overdone. Here it wasn't.

If I want a film to make me think, I'll go see Blade Runner. If I want to be entertained for 2 hours, I'll go see Justice League. If you like comics, and superhero's, why in the name of J Jonah Jameson would you not like this film?

I hope it makes a trillion. Not that that matters of course 

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Marwood & I
Board no like me pictcha

[ComicConnoisseur]

2 hours ago, Westy Steve said:

Agree.  My God, people  here are hammering this film.  I'm not a big DC fan personally, but I liked the movie.  Didn't know anything about Superman's mustache and didn't notice anything either.   I thought Flash provided good comic relief even if it was a little much at times.  Loved some of the framed shots of Wonder Woman...a sexy strong character.  But the biggest pleasant surprise was Superman.  I've never liked Superman because he was always so perfect.  But their portrayal was cool.  First, genuinely scary, then a hero worth cheering for.  I think that's the first time I was moved/interested/happy to see a Superman appearance since I was about 8 years old.

We can dissect this movie to death, but to me, it was entertaining.  I've seen movies that were more entertaining in the genre, but it got my money and I'm not unhappy I paid to see it.

Superman was the boss in this film strengthening my argument that they should have made a Man of Steel 2 before BvS and focused on the Cavill Superman as the lynchpin to bringing the DC Universe together than Batfleck. 

[Rodey]

Saw the movie the other night. It was...entertaining. But one thing still bothered me:

 

Spoiler

Superman/Clark Kent were dead. Flash and Cyborg dug up Clark's body. At the end of the movie, nobody in Smallville is shocked to see Clark walking around?

 

[Bosco685]

Henry Cavill thank you message.