Justice League official "Zack Snyder" cut on HBO Max

Again, not healthy. It might still be inside the boundaries of mental health if you did this once or twice over the course of a month, but the fact you've been doing this for the better part of a decade suggests a deep trauma which you really should not have over something as trivial as comic book movies. Lashing out in "payback" clearly does not help you to move on. Go seek help.

 

Okay, you didn't read it before so once again:

"Reactionary is the outdated method pioneered by the DC movies wherein the villain was the real star of the movie, which thankfully is now seen as the outdated method it is."

Payback for years of DC and Nolanites acting like they were the only legit game in town.

I just pointed out the flaws in those things, rather than pretend they're infallible.

 

Harry Lennix discusses JL & the Whedon/Fisher story (he wasn’t onset for any of that, but he has worked with Whedon on Dollhouse & seems a little more well-disposed to him than many other actors): https://variety.com/2021/film/news/...ce-league-joss-whedon-zack-snyder-1234910668/

 

That's not pointing out flaws; that's vindictive.

 

With MCU movies, you know exactly what you're getting every single time. Quips, big action scenes, goofy moments, happy family friendly adventures. They're fun, but they also are what they are.

DC's output has been more varied. Joker, for example. Or Synder's stuff. Or the MCUish Aquaman. Or the forthcoming The Batman. Each very seperate from the other, with diffetent tones and interpreting the mythos differently. Some have massive explosions and quips, others none.

 

So like every James Bond movie, or Star Wars, or Star Trek, or other long running series.

And as a direct result, there's way s*** with the shinola.

Cause they're not in a unified Universe, some are just Prima Donna directors merely using names of characters to gain a built-in audience so they can do an insulting "In Name Only" story because they knew they'd never succeed without hijacking.

It's a matter of consistently good quality vs Head-Up-Its-Rear Pretentiousness that occasionally produces something good but often than not implodes on itself.

 

No such thing as in name only. Comics are varied story telling formats.

Safe, predictable, entirely disposable. They are just fine but ultimately unsatisfying over and over again.

Give me the variety. Give me the risk. Otherwise Tim Burton's Batman should be thrown out as "in name only" bull because it isn't faithful to the comics and Adam West is the more faithful adaptation.

 

So if someone did a Hulk adaptation where Bruce Banner slipped and hit his head on a console during an experiment and this gave him brain damage that manifested as Dissociative Identity Disorder and he didn't have powers or change when his other personality took over and this was intended to be a Hulk story....you'd be fine with that?

So like Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr Who, LOTR, James Bond...every long runner?

 

Yes. There is no one way to tell a comic book story about a comic book character.

If Adam West and Tim Burton can both have Batman then I can have DID Hulk. The only difference is the elitist expectation that there is only one right way to tell the story of a character. Which, I had for the longest time as I thought Tim Burton's Batman was an abomination.

LOTR is not a long runner. The Hobbit was completely unsatisfying. Star Trek has had variety in its presentation so doesn't fit. SW is closer. James Bond don't give a . Entirely boring and predictable.

Again, the MCU is fine for what it is but don't expect me to take it as the only way to do comic book films. Because that hasn't been true for a while.

 

If you are a fan of the MCU, then congratulations. You are part of the fandom of the largest, most successful entertainment franchise in the world right now. And it’s showing no signs of ending or even changing any time soon. So you are just going to keep getting what you enjoy for many years to come.
If that’s not enough for you and instead you need to belittle other people who aren’t fans of it to feel any kind of validation as a person, then that’s just sad and you should take a long look at your life to figure out what you’re missing.

 

I agree except Captain America the Winter soldier was surprising with how SHIELD ended.

 

International release details have been released
https://www.gamesradar.com/justice-...megBWIwc6Wap6v1wk_MDz1MO65bxWpAQof8SpbsHMqqNg

 

Yes, and it's a detriment. I'd rather Trek in particular was less homogenous both in the 90's and today.

Subjective.

Oh, grow up. The way you personally imagine a character isn't the only valid interpretation.

Subjective. I've enjoyed the DC movies very much.

 

One of the film's tracks has been released:

 

Genuinely it still amazes how possessive of interpretation of characters. I mean, I use to think that way and would argue in the schoolyard about who was better "Black Batman" (Burton) vs. "Blue Batman" (Adam West). But then school was out and we were still friends.

 

Hilarious.

This is the one big thing I will give DC over Marvel, they are definitely giving their creative teams a lot more freedom to do their own thing. Although if the Disney+ shows are anything to go by, it looks Marvel might be giving us a bit more variety.

I have to disagree here, I think there is a fair amount of variety in the Trek movies, and the Bond movies have changed a lot over the decades. No is going to confuse a Connery, Moore, Brosnan, or Craig Bond movie.

Gotta disagree here, with Aquaman, the two Wonder Womans, and Birds of Prey (one of my all time favorite movies, Margot Robbie's Harley is amazing) the good has definitely been outweighing the bad.

Gotta disagree here, again I love the MCU, but there something to be said for being willing to take some chances and do something different.

 

Indeed, yes. Expecting uniformity leads to stagnation.

 

I love the MCU and how it all ties together, but, equally, while I haven’t always been a great fan of the DCEU, I think the way it’s allowing for different takes on the same characters has lots of potential. The Phoenix Joker was a decent one-shot and I’m hoping Leto gets a chance to make a better impression in the Snyder Cut. And 3 different Batmen (on the big screen alone!) coming up in the next year or two; I really don’t see a downside to this.

Someone mentioned the Bond movies earlier - now that the gap between 007 movies is getting longer and longer, I would love to see Eon take a leaf from DC’s book. A big budget film every couple of years, then maybe let the BBC or Netflix do period movies with smaller budgets or scope, let Brosnan, Dalton or even Lazenby play older versions of their incarnations. Yes, I know it won’t happen, but let me dream.

 

With so many franchises expanding out into shared universes with multiple series and movies, I'm kind of surprised we haven't gotten any kind of Bond spin-offs.

 

They considered spinoffs for Michelle Yeoh’s character from Tomorrow Never Dies and for Halle Berry’s from Die Another Day, but neither got off the ground.

Personally, I’ve no great interest in seeing the adventures of 006 or 008, unless they make them very different characters from Bond.