Yeah... I'm just gonna do what I usually do and judge the movies after I've seen them.
An utterly crazy and novel idea, I know...
WB's Justice League 2017 movie pre-discussion thread
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Yeah... I'm just gonna do what I usually do and judge the movies after I've seen them.
An utterly crazy and novel idea, I know...
Even after BvS, I just can't see Thor standing a chance against Justice League. We're talking about the least financially successful member of the original Avengers line up, against the fucking JL, I just don't see it happening. Even people who hated BvS are probably still going to go see JL just for novelty of seeing all of these characters together on the big screen for the first time. And even if they hate it, they'll probably go see it a second time, just to make sure they know all the little details they want to complain about.
If being disappointed by the first movie stopped people from going to see future movies in the series, The Phantom Menace would have been the last Star Wars movie, and we wouldn't be on our 5th Transformers movie.
If being disappointed by the first movie stopped people from going to see future movies in the series, The Phantom Menace would have been the last Star Wars movie, and we wouldn't be on our 5th Transformers movie.
On the box office front, we should also remember that unlike last year, when BvS beat the similarly-themed Civil War to theaters by over a month, this November, Justice League will be opening a mere two weeks after Thor: Ragnarok.
Now, given its director, wild cast, and apparently mold-breaking story structure (Thor and Hulk on a cosmic road trip, with gladiator fights, Loki, Dr. Strange and Jeff Goldblum?!), Ragnarok is likely to be praised by audiences and critics for its humor, orginality, personality, and generally being tons of fun. And then, when the ink on most Ragnarok tickets has barely dried, Snyder will be giving us... this.
If you don't think the most likely conventional wisdom among movie critics and fans alike will be that Marvel and Taika Waititi put Justice League to shame, then, uh, we'll probably have to agree to disagree. Which do you think is going to appeal to Thanksgiving family crowds? (Especially with a Pixar entry opening less than a week later!) Hell, when all's said and done, Ragnarok out-grossing Justice League would not surprise me one bit.
Don't get too sentimental about your WB stocks, folks.
I can completely see this happening. Ragnorak/Planet Hulk with Loki and Dr. Strange might have a similar drawing power to Civil War, especially if Guardians and Spider-Man are big hits. Justice League, could easily finish in second place behind a Pixar movie.
Thor and Loki's The Dark World made 74% of BvS' take on their own. Now Ragnarok is adding Hulk, while "fucking" Justice League is subtracting Superman in favor of a half-metal unknown, a merman, and that guy you can see anytime on the CW for free. (And again, Ragnarok isn't facing up against a Pixar movie less than week after it opens.) I call for one that a very real fighting chance for Ragnarok winning out.
All of that hinges on whether people like the out of this world, gladiator, 80s pop style Thor movie. The Thor movies have so far been modest successes for Marvel, and the addition of Loki (the real star of Thor's movies), Dr Strange, Hulk and others seems like an everything and the kitchen sink for this Thor finale. I saw the images from the EW a few weeks ago and a lot of it looked really goofy. Granted I suspect it's intentional.On the box office front, we should also remember that unlike last year, when BvS beat the similarly-themed Civil War to theaters by over a month, this November, Justice League will be opening a mere two weeks after Thor: Ragnarok.
Now, given its director, wild cast, and apparently mold-breaking story structure (Thor and Hulk on a cosmic road trip, with gladiator fights, Loki, Dr. Strange and Jeff Goldblum?!), Ragnarok is likely to be praised by audiences and critics for its humor, orginality, personality, and generally being tons of fun. And then, when the ink on most Ragnarok tickets has barely dried, Snyder will be giving us... this.
If you don't think the most likely conventional wisdom among movie critics and fans alike will be that Marvel and Taika Waititi put Justice League to shame, then, uh, we'll probably have to agree to disagree. Which do you think is going to appeal to Thanksgiving family crowds? (Especially with a Pixar entry opening less than a week later!) Hell, when all's said and done, Ragnarok out-grossing Justice League would not surprise me one bit.
Don't get too sentimental about your WB stocks, folks.
As for the Thanksgiving/Holiday crowds, well, last year Rogue One (one of if not the darkest Star Wars movies) made a billion dollars at the BO. This with it's cast of characters whose names nobody could remember, a terrible lead actress and a climax that involves all the main and supporting characters dying. Now, I don't know how much we can attribute's RO's success to the juggernaut of Star Wars, but the audience really loves space operas of this nature. Entertainment and rewatch value is what makes or breaks films at the BO.
I still contend that what BvS lacked and what Civil War had, was more moments of awesome. Both films were 2 hours and 30 minutes long, but BvS fist action scene (the batmobile chase) didn't happen until the hour and 30 minute mark. While Civil War was an action ride from start to finish, with just about every Avenger we've seen so far, Black Panther and a new Amazing Spider-Man all having awesome moments.
Win the crowd.
I just want the damn sun to come out already, is that too much to ask? The DCEU is giving me SAD.
Seriously. I live in Washington state. I spend enough time in the rain as it is.
I understand all that, but I still think the novelty of this being the first ever Justice League movie, will still be enough to be beat Thor. I'm not ripping Thor here or saying I think it's going to be bad, I just can't see a character whose already gotten two solo movies, which are both in the bottom five for the MCU domestic box office takes, could be real competition for the Justice League. I could maybe see it being close if the word of mouth for JL is bad, but if it actually is as good as the trailers, then Thor doesn't stand a chance.
I'm huge fan of the first two Thor movies, and the character definitely has a lot of name recognition, but he's really not on the level of the Justice League.
Like I said before, even if a previous movie got a bad reaction, that doesn't seem to stop being continuing to go see the movies in a big series. Just look at Transformers, all of those movies have gotten a pretty bad reaction, but they're still bring in huge $$$. If they can do that, I just don't see how a Justice League movie could fail.
Really? So apparently you have watched both films already and not only know that Thor: Ragnarok is a better movie than Justice League but that it also has a "mold-breaking story structure" and that it will "be praised by audiences and critics for its humor, orginality [sic], personality, and generally being tons of fun"! All that for a film that is still seven months away and hasn't even released a single spot or teaser?!?! You're real proof that time travel exists!
Last edited:
If you don't understand what the words "likely to be" mean, as well as the general concept of making predictions based on past performance, I don't think participating in silly BBS discussions of upcoming comic book movies is a prudent use of your time.
I think of 1997 as part of the "modern era" of filmmaking. So even though it was a TV Pilot, it's hard to believe the difference in the execution in 20 years.
I don't think anyone would have accepted the "Giffen" incarnation in a big movie, though they'll probably be open to expanding the ranks for Justice League 2. Green Lantern is a MUST.
RAMA
These two photos demonstrate what I feel is the biggest problem with the DCU. Look at the promo shot above and the trailer clip below. Where did the color go? Stan Lee learned back in the early days of the Fantastic Four that super-heroes need a little color.
You predicted a film's story structure (and it's critical appraise) "based on past performance"? Without even a trailer? That's a great talent! And what past performance is that exactly? Because Thor: The Dark World didn't exactly set the critics, the audiences or the box office ablaze. It was a lot worse than (the mauled) Batman v Superman.
Exactly my point. They might be MCU movies, but overall reaction to both Thor movies seemed to be meh, and I can't see non-fans being that pumped for a third one.
I found Io9's trailer analysis, which I tend to like because they have nice stills and gifs that give us a chance to get a better look at the bits and pieces of the trailer.
I found Io9's trailer analysis, which I tend to like because they have nice stills and gifs that give us a chance to get a better look at the bits and pieces of the trailer.
That's an odd statement. Superhero comics were always brightly colored, going back to the late '30s; the printing process of the day didn't really allow for dark colors other than black.
I think he was referring to the FF not starting out in costumes.
Yeah, but Lee only did the writing, not the art. And even Jack Kirby didn't control the coloring decisions. For early FF, that was Stan Goldberg's job.
By the way, I just noticed something odd about the movie's Flash costume. Traditionally, the Flash has wings on the sides of his cowl, based on the wings of Mercury's helmet. The TV Flash has his logo on the sides of his cowl, though Kid Flash has stylized wings. But the movie Flash's cowl adornments look more like... boomerangs. Which makes me wonder if Digger Harkness is going to go after him for trademark infringement.
Thank you, but it's actually simple observation and deduction. In Norse mythology, Ragnarök foretells the death of the Asgardian gods and the universe as they know it, followed by a rebirth of a new one. Mix that with a cosmic road trip and elements of the Planet Hulk storyline, and it's the most reasonable thing in the world to expect an innovative and unique story, by comic book movie standards. Whereas Justice League appears to be about an alien invasion of Earth, i.e., the same basic trope as that behind The Avengers and last fall's CW "Invasion!" event, to name just two examples. The actual upcoming movies may not reflect the commonality of their core premises, but again, this is Prediction Techniques 101.
You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. The Dark World has a Metacritic score of 54 and an RT score of 66%. Batman v Superman has a Metacritic score of 44 and an RT score of 27%. Before that, Thor beat Man of Steel 57/55 on Metacritc and 77%/55% on RT. Or maybe you wanna talk directors? Ragnarok helmer Taika Waiti has a career Metacritic score of 72 to Zack Snyder's 48, and on both Metacritic and RT, all three of his most recently directed movies scored higher than any of Snyder's.
In these sixteen different objective data points, Thor/Waititi beat DCEU/Snyder in my Probable Quality Winner game every single time, so yeah, I'd say it has the more promise based on past performance. If you have objective, numerical data supporting a different prediction, fire away.
Last edited:
Eh? This "half metal unknown" had a stronger media presence going into his first movie outing than Thor at the same stage. To most, Thor is a character most still associate with myths, instead of the comic version. On the other side, for two generations, not only was Cyborg a popular part of one the 80s most successful comics, but beyond the comic audience, he had his animation debut in the same decade, eventually being a fixture to modern day audiences in the Teen Titans series which had as much of an adult fanbase as the younger viewers it originally targeted. Hardly unknown.
...and no one is thinking of the character in that way. Moreover, in only a few seconds of footage, he's already shattered any old idea of who & what Aquaman is as a character--in other words, this is not the Super Friends.
You seem to be under the impression that audiences simply see and accept all superhero productions in a blur--as if the largely inferior TV series are seen in the same way as the DC films. They are not by any stretch of the imagination, so next to no one is going to think they're getting the same character (or quality) from the TV Flash.
Thor has always been the low man on the totem pole of comic adaptations, and the fact Marvel is attempting to top-load the last film with other characters has less to do with a story demand and more to do with trying to pump some air into a series that has not been an increasingly appealing effort, like the Captain America films (pretty mush the one and only jewel in the MCU crown).
…a mess, an unfocused, convoluted and confused hodgepodge that's even worse than Thor: The Dark World. Especially since we're dealing with a layman director here. Against Justice League that has a script written by an Academy Award winning screenwriter. Like you said, "this is Prediction Techniques 101".
How about the fact that Alan Taylor has directed two films with a 25% Rotten Tomatoes score? Or the fact that Taika Waititi's movies have a combined box office of 12 million dollars. That's correct, 12 MILLION. Versus Zach Snyder whose films have a combined box office total of 2.5 Billion dollars. Again that's correct, 2.5 BILLION.
I'm really excited for both Thor: Ragnarok AND Justice League, but it's ridiculous to definitively claim that one is going to perform better than the other when they're not due for release for 8 months.