Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBO Max (3/18/21) 4 4

[Bosco685]

Quote

Now that Zack Snyder’s Justice League has finally been released, viewers are understanding exactly what Snyder meant when he called Cyborg’s (Ray Fisher) storyline “the heart” of his movie. Of course, an integral component of Cyborg’s arc involves Joe Morton’s Dr. Silas Stone, who was first introduced in 2016’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. After a devastating car accident took the life of his wife, Dr. Elinore Stone (Karen Bryson), Morton’s character channeled the incalculable power of an alien technology to prevent his son Victor from suffering the same fate. In doing so, he created an advanced human cyborg with a laundry list of superpowers, as well as the ability to manipulate technology at will.

 

In a movie that’s filled with second chances, it’s quite fitting that Snyder would receive one himself by way of his most ardent fans, who’ve raised over $500,000 for suicide prevention along the way. After Snyder and his supporters overcame incredible odds to get “The Snyder Cut” released, Morton believes the audience should have greater influence on what they want to see.

 

“The fact that it engendered so much interest that people really pushed on social media to see it, I think that’s how a lot of it should actually work,” Morton tells The Hollywood Reporter. “If the audience says, ‘We really, really, really have heard about this, we really want to see it,’ so much so that the studio says, ‘Alright, I guess we have to put it together and put it out there,’ then I think that’s a great thing. It’s kind of like voting.”

 

When 2017’s version of Justice League reduced the roles of Cyborg and Dr. Stone to a significant degree, Morton was still able to look at the bright side of the matter. Namely, that Dr. Stone survived the theatrical cut, where as he died in Snyder's version.

 

“Well, what I actually felt about it was, ‘Oh, I guess I get a sequel because I don’t die,’" Morton shares. “That’s really what my response was. I loved Zack’s version of it; I thought it was terrific. But this means that there’s life for the character after [2017’s Justice League], and I’m still hoping that’s true.”

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 hour ago, Bosco685 said:

Didn't notice until the other night in watching for a third time that we do see a second Green Lantern.

  Reveal hidden contents

Kilowag 

 

I would honestly be surprised if anyone could point out something that I missed in this movie. I'm not sure if I even blinked during my first watch.

[▫️]

9 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

I would honestly be surprised if anyone could point out something that I missed in this movie. I'm not sure if I even blinked during my first watch.

Did you notice Bizarro? That was a blink and miss scene.

[theCapraAegagrus]

2 minutes ago, Oddball said:

Did you notice Bizarro? That was a blink and miss scene.

[▫️]

2 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

 

[Bosco685]

This message of #RestoreTheSnyderVerse is coming up more and more on social media. 

[Zonker]

Quote

This message of #RestoreTheSnyderVerse is coming up more and more on social media.

The Redditors are coming...

 

[Bosco685]

3 minutes ago, Zonker said:

The Redditors are coming...

 

It worked the first time driving the WB execs nuts that AT&T and Warnermedia listened and reacted. 

[the blob]

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Didn't notice until the other night in watching for a third time that we do see a second Green Lantern.

  Hide contents

Kilowag 

 

but isn't that some sort of vision of the future, not the stuff from 5000 years ago?

[the blob]

1 hour ago, Oddball said:

Did you notice Bizarro? That was a blink and miss scene.

oh krap, that is how they defeat krazy superman in the future!

 

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, the blob said:

but isn't that some sort of vision of the future, not the stuff from 5000 years ago?

It is during when Ray Fisher connects with the Kryptonian ship and sees visions of things to come as the ship is warning him about changing events.

[the blob]

44 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

This message of #RestoreTheSnyderVerse is coming up more and more on social media. 

I am not sure what a "marvel movie" is, just that all of them have worked, and even the most boring one out of all, thor dark world, made money. DC has had winners, they just need to see what worked in those. coherent stories help. I think they are still ticked off that Batman/Superman did not break a billion, but really, almost $900 million still turned a nice profit. They had three billion dollar movies in Aquaman, Joker, and WW, they should not be so shellshocked.

ANYWAY..... HBO Max has gotten $30 or $45 out of my for a streaming service I might not have signed up for if not for these 2 movie releases. I have watched plenty of other stuff on it, sure, but I might not have signed up, so maybe they shouldn't give up on movies just yet.

[theCapraAegagrus]

10 minutes ago, the blob said:

I am not sure what a "marvel movie" is, just that all of them have worked, and even the most boring one out of all, thor dark world, made money. DC has had winners, they just need to see what worked in those. coherent stories help. I think they are still ticked off that Batman/Superman did not break a billion, but really, almost $900 million still turned a nice profit. They had three billion dollar movies in Aquaman, Joker, and WW, they should not be so shellshocked.

ANYWAY..... HBO Max has gotten $30 or $45 out of my for a streaming service I might not have signed up for if not for these 2 movie releases. I have watched plenty of other stuff on it, sure, but I might not have signed up, so maybe they shouldn't give up on movies just yet.

A "Marvel movie" is what they hired Joss Whedon to turn Justice League into. No gravity with excessive quips. Popcorn flicks with no epic scope. There are exceptions to that (Infinity War), but, that's their blueprint. It generally works.

Not all movies need to appeal to the largest "general audience", though.

Edited March 23, 2021 by Angel of Death

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, the blob said:

I am not sure what a "marvel movie" is, just that all of them have worked, and even the most boring one out of all, thor dark world, made money. DC has had winners, they just need to see what worked in those. coherent stories help. I think they are still ticked off that Batman/Superman did not break a billion, but really, almost $900 million still turned a nice profit. They had three billion dollar movies in Aquaman, Joker, and WW, they should not be so shellshocked.

ANYWAY..... HBO Max has gotten $30 or $45 out of my for a streaming service I might not have signed up for if not for these 2 movie releases. I have watched plenty of other stuff on it, sure, but I might not have signed up, so maybe they shouldn't give up on movies just yet.

Although it is incredible what the MCU has achieved, that's actually not accurate. The Incredible Hulk only achieved 1.8X budget (huge loss) and Captain America: The First Avengers only did 2.6x budget (a smidge over break-even). And as massive a hit as Iron Man (2008) was, Iron Man II did a big nosedive compared to its predecessor (4.2X vs 3.1X). So yes, many made huge profit. But the reality in Phase One was Iron Man and Avengers (2012) were the massive wins.

But I agree with you. DC needs to take stock of what works for its properties. And also recognize not everything needs to be linked to a shared universe. Which is why when CW's The Flash integrated the Multiverse short scene, that opened the door for so many varying paths through differing roadmaps. NOT 'everything must be connected in one massive franchise'. That's where the MCU has found success.

 

[the blob]

Just now, Bosco685 said:

Although it is incredible what the MCU has achieved, that's actually not accurate. The Incredible Hulk only achieved 1.8X budget (huge loss) and Captain America: The First Avengers only did 2.6x budget (a smidge over break-even). And as massive a hit as Iron Man (2008) was, Iron Man II did a big nosedive compared to its predecessor (4.2X vs 3.1X). So yes, many made huge profit. But the reality in Phase One was Iron Man and Avengers (2012) were the massive wins.

But I agree with you. DC needs to take stock of what works for its properties. And also recognize not everything needs to be linked to a shared universe. Which is why when CW's The Flash integrated the Multiverse short scene, that opened the door for so many varying paths through differing roadmaps. NOT 'everything must be connected in one massive franchise'. That's where the MCU has found success.

 

hmm, in my head i though HUlk 2 was before Iron Man 1 and Iron Man 1 was where they got their sh**t together, but I guess not, it came out a month earlier... which was also dumb, why release 2 movies so close? Not that I think Hulk 2 would have been a winner with more time between the two. but yeah, marvel was not doing well with movies until IM 1. I had forgotten Cap 1 did not do that well, which I don't fully understand, other than the foreign market might not be so excited about "captain america" in the title, at least for the first movie. it missed the mark in europe where I suspect they didn't have much interest in watching a guy dressed as a flag save them (UK, France, etc.) or defeat them (Germany, Italy, etc.). Joker did 10X the box office in Germany as the first Cap movie. with that said, all the movies you are referencing are ancient history in hollywood.

[fantastic_four]

23 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

The Incredible Hulk only achieved 1.8X budget (huge loss)

Are we sure of that?  I've never seen anyone who was able to tell that once broadcast licensing, merchandise licensing, streaming income, on demand income, and disc sales were factored in.

[fantastic_four]

6 minutes ago, the blob said:

I had forgotten Cap 1 did not do that well, which I don't fully understand, other than the foreign market might not be so excited about "captain america" in the title

Cap, Thor, Iron Man, and the Avengers were B-list characters before the MCU films, and a case can be made for them being closer to C-list.  That's why Marvel didn't sell their film rights during bankruptcy--nobody wanted them.  I was surprised they were making films based upon them at all before Iron Man came out and blew everyone away.

I wasn't looking forward to Iron Man at all and was shocked as to how good it was.  Kevin Smith said the same, even as a fan of these characters he was also surprised they released these films based upon the lukewarm popularity of the characters at the time.  Hulk is the only Avenger who was a proven commodity which presumably is why Universal owned the distribution rights for him.

One thing I'm still unsure of is why Fox owned the rights to Daredevil but had passed on the Avengers.  Frank Miller's run certainly boosted his popularity so maybe that's why, but I never had the sense that Daredevil was more popular than most Avengers even at his height.

[Bosco685]

12 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Are we sure of that?  I've never seen anyone who was able to tell that once broadcast licensing, merchandise licensing, streaming income, on demand income, and disc sales were factored in.

Revenue. Not profit. None of us can nail down the profit in the end. But why do you think Feige didn't work out a follow-on film with Universal since they own first refusal film rights?

Both Hulk movies were a bust.

[fantastic_four]

1 minute ago, Bosco685 said:

17 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Are we sure of that?  I've never seen anyone who was able to tell that once broadcast licensing, merchandise licensing, streaming income, on demand income, and disc sales were factored in.

Revenue. Not profit. None of us can nail down the profit in the end.

We don't even know total revenue because the studios never reveal the totals they rake in past the box office.

[Bosco685]

7 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Cap, Thor, Iron Man, and the Avengers were B-list characters before the MCU films, and a case can be made for them being closer to C-list. 

Spoiler

 

That's why Marvel didn't sell their film rights during bankruptcy--nobody wanted them.  I was surprised they were making films based upon them at all before Iron Man came out and blew everyone away.

I wasn't looking forward to Iron Man at all and was shocked as to how good it was.  Kevin Smith said the same, even as a fan of these characters he was also surprised they released these films based upon the lukewarm popularity of the characters at the time.  Hulk is the only Avenger who was a proven commodity which presumably is why Universal owned the distribution rights for him.

One thing I'm still unsure of is why Fox owned the rights to Daredevil but had passed on the Avengers.  Frank Miller's run certainly boosted his popularity so maybe that's why, but I never had the sense that Daredevil was more popular than most Avengers even at his height.

 

 

These characters were never C-list and even B-list (kind of known - maybe) ignores all the Marvel Comics collateral and marketing used to expand their names/teams. And this includes all the cartoons and animated films used to push these brand names wherever they could be distributed. Just now due to the massive success of the MCU they are A+ list (EVERYONE knows who they are - not just comic book fans).