The clip makes Supes look totally OP and/or the rest of the JL look weak. That is a shame since Wonder Woman, Batman, Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman are powerful heroes in their own right too.
WB's Justice League 2017 movie pre-discussion thread
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
The clip makes Supes look totally OP and/or the rest of the JL look weak. That is a shame since Wonder Woman, Batman, Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman are powerful heroes in their own right too.
It was Snyder's position that Supes would never form the JL, because he's a one man army. Plus he's invulnerable to just about everything. So every punch he takes is one, someone else doesn't have to. The JL needs Supes, but Supes doesn't need the JL. This is a sentiment repeated in various animated shows and rebooted incarnations of the JL in the comics. Even in the Silver Age, Supes was a part time Leaguer. Him and Batman both. However, since the late 80s (starting with the JLI) and mid 90s (Morisson's JLA) Batman has become the de facto leader of the League.
I thought the clip was brilliant and funny. For a long time in the comics, shows and movies, Supes' importance has been downplayed in League stories. He doesn't get stories where he is the focus or take leadership roles anymore. He's just on the team because people expect him to be there and to show up for the fights.
Since, you know, Batman is > Everything and everyone with prep.
WW is a female Superman and ambassador for the Amazons, and ambassador of Peace for the UN, and the goddess of War, and the spirit of truth, and whatever else writers seem fit to add to Diana's resume.
The Flashes have the "write your own ticket" Speed Force.
GL is limited only by his imagination.
-Plus with Geoff Johns being President and Chief Creative Officer for the DC comics, you know Hal and Barry never run out of chances to look amazing.
Aquaman is the king of Atlantis, who also got the Johns revamp touch.
Cyborg was elevated from TT, and he fits in wherever the writers can squeeze him.
Since, you know, Batman is > Everything and everyone with prep.
WW is a female Superman and ambassador for the Amazons, and ambassador of Peace for the UN, and the goddess of War, and the spirit of truth, and whatever else writers seem fit to add to Diana's resume.
The Flashes have the "write your own ticket" Speed Force.
GL is limited only by his imagination.
-Plus with Geoff Johns being President and Chief Creative Officer for the DC comics, you know Hal and Barry never run out of chances to look amazing.
Aquaman is the king of Atlantis, who also got the Johns revamp touch.
Cyborg was elevated from TT, and he fits in wherever the writers can squeeze him.
From what I'm hearing and will soon discover for myself. Superman fans won't be disappointed by his showing in JL.
Last edited:
I don't much care for what passes for film "criticism" these days. Granted I don't really read it anymore apart from snippets that people post in topics such as this one, so the overall picture might be slightly better, but from what I see it's mostly hack writers who know very little of film and who only deal in hyperbolic praise or condemnation.
Back when Siskel and Ebert did their thing, yes they were confrontational, they disagreed, but they were respectful of each others opinions and they knew how to articulate negative opinions without hate or malice. Today's critics hypered up the confrontational aspect to the maximum and removed any respect from the equation, either to the filmmakers or people who happen to disagree with them.
Instead of being a calming, rational element to online debates they just add fuel to fandoms who are already confrontational enough (for altogether stupid reasons to begin with). Aggregate sites make it even worse, by distilling hundreds of voices to a number and a single sentence.
Justice League is fine, by the way, it is an entertaining movie filled with great character moments, and I'm totally looking forward to the "entertainment" of the next few years of people telling me how WRONG! I am to like it because of a number...
Back when Siskel and Ebert did their thing, yes they were confrontational, they disagreed, but they were respectful of each others opinions and they knew how to articulate negative opinions without hate or malice. Today's critics hypered up the confrontational aspect to the maximum and removed any respect from the equation, either to the filmmakers or people who happen to disagree with them.
Instead of being a calming, rational element to online debates they just add fuel to fandoms who are already confrontational enough (for altogether stupid reasons to begin with). Aggregate sites make it even worse, by distilling hundreds of voices to a number and a single sentence.
Justice League is fine, by the way, it is an entertaining movie filled with great character moments, and I'm totally looking forward to the "entertainment" of the next few years of people telling me how WRONG! I am to like it because of a number...
Some of us speculated this could happen on this very thread IIRC.
Agreed. If people need Rotten Tomatoes (and similar sources) in order to form their movie going tastes, then there's much to be said about the loss of their ability to think for themselves.
This reminds me of 1983, where a so-called "important" film critic called Return of the Jedi "...an overused battery". Yes, one of the best films of the Star Wars franchise (and held its own compared to the previous installments at the time), is "an overused battery". I could go on, the point is clear: so-called authorities on tastes in film are often nose-ringed by agenda, so the wise movie goer should make their own choices about JL as a film, part of a series, or whatever.
That you disagree with the popular opinion that Jedi is the worst of the original trilogy?
You could have used a much better example than the movie with Ewoks, Ford phoning it in and Death Star (again).
Super off topic so lets keep this short, but I watched the OT as a kid - and I liked ROTJ the best. I think it's the most appealing to young teens.
Gyllenhaal was supposedly a runner-up for the lead in Batman Begins (Goyer wanted him, Nolan plumped for Bale, the story goes). He sas also rumoured to have been lined up to replace Tobey Maguire for Spider-man 2 when Tobey either had back problems or was being an ass (depending on who you believe).
And of course he replaced Vinnie Chase in James Cameron's Aquaman 2.
They could do a lot worse, assuming that this is true. I don't know if this is intended to be a brand new take on Batman, a prequel to BvS or indeed if they're going to pretend that Ben's Batman now looks like Jake, but he could probably convince in all 3 scenarios.
Interesting timing, if this is really happening. It won't change people's desire to see Justice League, I don’t think, but it is interesting nonetheless.
In '83, ROTJ rocketed to become the second most successful original trilogy film after Star Wars, which means the critics were (typically) wrong about the more than successful sequel. More than box-office, the Luke arc was the most compelling of the OT (and as it turned out, the entire SW franchise), and was a fantastic, dramatic end to the series.
I look at reviews just to get an idea what to expect. If it's something I'm lukewarm on and it gets horrid reviews I will skip a movie. If it's something I really want to see, like JL, reviews won't change my mind, although they might lower my expectations some.
The article says the movie(s) might not be part of the DCEU, so if it/they aren't does that mean we could still get Batfleck in DCEU movies, with Gyllenhaal in a standalone trilogy?
Joss Whedon did "Age of Ultron". Really?
You know, I'm beginning to wonder if this is going to be another DCEU film that is being bashed by the critics and I'll end up enjoying.
I'm also beginning to really suspect if the vast majority of film critics are either in the pockets of Disney or that it is the end thing to hate a DCEU film (unless it has a political agenda like "Wonder Woman"). Well, I guess I'll find out this weekend.
I think you need to deal with the possibility that this movie is going to suck and that not everyone is a Disney shill or an unapologetic hater.
The movie could "suck" on some "moviemaking is an exact science" way, but I can still enjoy it like I did BVS. We'll see.
The whole everyone is in Disney's pocket conspiracy is lunacy though.
Gyllenhaal is Reeves' choice for the role ONLY IF AFFLECK BOWS OUT.