WB's Justice League 2017 movie pre-discussion thread
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Well over half of the MCU movies are under two hours long. (Sometimes not counting credits.)
That's not how this works.
What if the movie is.... good??? impossible?
As someone who has not enjoyed almost any of the DCEU so far, if Justice League does turn out to be good, I'll be simply overjoyed. (This idea that most people who diss the DCEU are haters is idiotic. Many of us want it to be great.) I wanna watch a DCEU movie and be super pumped when it's over, let out a big "Yes!" and wan tto watch it again immediately. And if that movie is a Superman movie? My smile will be endless. I'm sick of living in a world where there is only one truly great Superman movie.
Hmmm. In my world, there are two. Ain’t the multiverse grand?
Exactly. The reason we're so frustrated with the movies to date (other than Wonder Woman, which was awesome) is that we want good DC movies. I would've dreaded how Justice League would turn out if Snyder had stayed on until the end, but with Whedon doing the revisions and editing, I'm hopeful that it'll end up at least being okay, because I really want there to be two good DCEU movies in a row so that this series can finally find its footing.
Meh. I live in a world where there are three great Superman movies and five truly great Batman films. I wish I could say the same about the MCU. To each his own (world and universe) I guess.
I agree with your sentiment.
The DC movies have established a strong, unified tone with Zach Snyder leading the charge. On the other hand, the MCU is only a few of strong films surrounded by light, comedy-drenched films not much better than the Transformers films or Power Rangers episodes.
"Focus determines your reality".
If you go into a movie expecting it to be bad, chances are you're going to come out of it thinking it was bad.
Conversely, if you go into a movie thinking it's going to be good, chances are you're going to come out of it thinking it was good.
There are of course exceptions to this, but it's far better to be optimistic than pessimistic.
Also, while we're drawing lines in the sand, "in my world" there have been 2 good Superman movies, 6 good Batman movies, one good Wonder Woman movie, and one good Suicide Squad movie.
If you go into a movie expecting it to be bad, chances are you're going to come out of it thinking it was bad.
Conversely, if you go into a movie thinking it's going to be good, chances are you're going to come out of it thinking it was good.
There are of course exceptions to this, but it's far better to be optimistic than pessimistic.
Also, while we're drawing lines in the sand, "in my world" there have been 2 good Superman movies, 6 good Batman movies, one good Wonder Woman movie, and one good Suicide Squad movie.
It does work sometimes. But, it does get old. Did Spider-Man need to be more then two hours? Or Thor 2? Or Iron Man 3? I like the last two of those movies, but the answer is no. It should be on a case by case basis, right nbow it feels like they want everything to be 2+ hours just because that's what they've been doing.
Actually, it is. Many movies have had major changes by other people coming in, and there is nothing to say JL won't have that happen. In fact, the reports all basically say that DC is tired of Snyder's grimdark crap and both Johns and Whedon came around specifically to un-Snyder it. in tone, at least. It will probably have the same shitty visual style (if I never seethat crappy slow mo action ever again I'll be the happiest man on Earth). But, storywise and tonally, Snyder's style is by all accounts on the way out.
That doesn't mean they're trying to be Marvel, but they seem ("They" meaning everyone but Snyder) to have learned a lesson from Wonder Woman's huge success and BvS's under performance (and it did under perform, even if it made a lot of money). DC went total grimdark, moodly garbage. That bit them on the ass. If JL succeeds, it will be because the reports were right and the movie has had a big tonal shift away from Snyder's "vision", and succeeds despite him.
I wish I lived in the alternate reality that has more then one great (Mask of the Phantasm) and one good (Batman 1989) Batman films, and more then two (Superman and the Donner cut of Superman II) great Superman films. But, if not having more then that means I have the current MCU, which only has one bad movie (Spider-Man Homecoming), I guess I'll take this reality. Much more quality to go along with the quantity, and more variety.
So, while the actual reviews aren’t out yet, the social media embargo has been lifted. I had a quick look at the #JusticeLeague hashtag on twitter and am pleased to say that the reviews are positive. Flawed but fun appears to be the majority view.
Again, that's not how it works.
Go to the Director's Guild of America website, find their Rulebook, and read Sections 7-504 through 7-509.
No studio or producer can legally exert the kind of control over the "final cut" of a film in the manner that many people believe that they can, as per DGA rules, unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances, and the credited director of a film cannot have their vision forcibly overwritten without arbitration.
Does a film break somehow when it crosses the 120 minute mark?
Do they need to be over two hours? No, of course not. Do they need to be under two hours? No. They are what they are. If the running time is a sticking point with you, just don't go see the long ones.
You just ignored my point. More than half the MCU films fit your weird criteria of being under two hours. Including Thor 2, which you just specifically mentioned.
Do they need to be over two hours? No, of course not. Do they need to be under two hours? No. They are what they are. If the running time is a sticking point with you, just don't go see the long ones.
It might be hard for you to understand, but not all people have unlimited amounts of time and/or money, so they have to be selective about what forms of entertainment they use those things on.
The more I analyze it, the more I dislike Superman II.
So you dislike variety, then. The MCU isn't afraid to have a greater overall arc while still giving different tones to its movies while the DCEU suffers from characters being forced into tones that don't match the inherent nature of the characters.
Anyways, the reviews tend to all agree that we're getting good characters but a thin plot and thin villain. Admittedly, this is common for the team up movies so I'm waiting on official reviews.
A handful of really good movies surrounded by 'dreck' isn't variety, it's mediocrity.
I liked the MCU in the beginning, but as it's expanded, it's become formulaic, lazy, and oversaturated.
I liked the MCU in the beginning, but as it's expanded, it's become formulaic, lazy, and oversaturated.
Yeah, the critical consensus seems to be that the story is weak and lacking narrative coherence, but the characters and their interaction save it. Which is pretty much exactly what I would expect from a film that Zack Snyder oversaw during the writing and filming and that Joss Whedon was then brought in to revise and complete.