Spoilers Justice League - Grading and Discussion

[Anwar]

That's why they made Suicide Squad, and the next two solos are about Aquaman, the fish guy, and Captain Marvel, who is so popular he doesn't even show up in comics.

They used Joker for advertising and had Batman cameo.

As for Aquaman and Shazam, it shows they're FINALLY starting to learn their lesson...40 years in.

Marvel does not have 3 characters as popular as Supderman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. At least not ones they had rights to when the MCU was launched.

That's why they decided "Hey, why don't we make good movies and make our B and C listers into A Listers?"

 

[crookeddy]

That's why they decided "Hey, why don't we make good movies and make our B and C listers into A Listers?"

Right, and DC had no need to do that. Different circumstances.

 

[Anwar]

Right, and DC had no need to do that. Different circumstances.

Starting off with an attitude of "Why don't we push the envelope and make movies about more than our A-Listers?" would've shown they were willing to try something new. Instead it fell to Marvel Studios to pave the way for them.

As for the complaining about Thor Ragnarok not being stone-serious with absolutely no levity, the original cut WAS that. But the audiences complained it was boring so the edited in the humor scenes that had been cut originally.

 

[crookeddy]

Starting off with an attitude of "Why don't we push the envelope and make movies about more than our A-Listers?" would've shown they were willing to try something new. Instead it fell to Marvel Studios to pave the way for them.

As for the complaining about Thor Ragnarok not being stone-serious with absolutely no levity, the original cut WAS that. But the audiences complained it was boring so the edited in the humor scenes that had been cut originally.

Source?

 

[Noname Given]

The third Thor film - isn't Thor Marvel's weakest franchise? - got better reviews and will probably have a better box office when all is said and done. Unbelievable.

^^^
No, in the MCU, the Hulk has been the most underperforming 'big' character (and the fact the Hulk was in Ragnarok shows we'll never get another Hulk standalone film because Marvel/Disney realize this.)

 

[Turtletrekker]

We never got a second Hulk movie because Universal still owns distribution rights.

 

[Noname Given]

With that attitude we would still be enjoying campy superhero movies, since superheroes cannot be treated with respect.

What was so 'different' about BvS - it was mostly a lousy adaptation of Frank Millers "Dark Knight" series of the 1980ies - right down to the way Superman got nuked.

 

[crookeddy]

What was so 'different' about BvS - it was mostly a lousy adaptation of Frank Millers "Dark Knight" series of the 1980ies - right down to the way Superman got nuked.

What was different? It wasn't like Marvel. It was an attempt to actually put superheroes into our world (though it wasn't nearly dark enough to achieve THAT goal). It was also very heavy thematically. Plot was secondary to the overall themes. Also didn't do a good job at that, but I just have to applaud the attempt. The easy way to do superhero movies is to make them into campy comedies.

 

[Tosk]

The easy way to do superhero movies is to make them into campy comedies.

You say that as though to imply that what Marvel has accomplished was easy. If it was, everybody would be succeeding at it, which is clearly not the case.

Making a movie "fun" is not easier. You still have to make a good film, you have to deliver something that the audience appreciates. And there are very few superhero "campy comedies" (Fun and camp comedy are not the same thing) that are actually good films.

 

[Sgt. Sacrament]

^^^
No, in the MCU, the Hulk has been the most underperforming 'big' character (and the fact the Hulk was in Ragnarok shows we'll never get another Hulk standalone film because Marvel/Disney realize this.)

I'll give you that, but due to their performance they (the Hulk film with Eric Bana and the other one with Edward Norton) aren't really considered part of the 'formal' MCU that I think started with Iron Man? As far as the '100%' official MCU films, Thor is the 'weakest' methinks. But I don't follow the details that closely.

 

[Turtletrekker]

@Sgt. Sacrament

The Ed Norton Hulk movie is very much part of the MCU continuity. Banner made a direct reference to the Hulk's battle in Harlem in the first Avengers, and Civil War we saw the return of General Thaddeus Ross, played by returning actor William Hurt from The Incredible Hulk. Also, The Incredible Hulk had a cameo from Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. Can't get much more MCU than that.

 

[Noname Given]

I'll give you that, but due to their performance they (the Hulk film with Eric Bana and the other one with Edward Norton) aren't really considered part of the 'formal' MCU that I think started with Iron Man? As far as the '100%' official MCU films, Thor is the 'weakest' methinks. But I don't follow the details that closely.

Iron Man was the first (cameo by Sanuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury) in 2008
The Incredible Hulk was the second MCU film (Cameo by Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark) also in 2008

Ang Lee's 'Hulk' was the non-MCU film from 2003.

 

[Sgt. Sacrament]

I am completely not shocked that most of the people complaining here haven't seen the movie...

If you read my post, what I'm shocked about is the only thing that really matters for the future of this thing - the box office. I'm shocked that it didn't even hit $100M in the US its opening weekend.

 

[Sgt. Sacrament]

@Sgt. Sacrament

The Ed Norton Hulk movie is very much part of the MCU continuity. Banner made a direct reference to the Hulk's battle in Harlem in the first Avengers, and Civil War we saw the return of General Thaddeus Ross, played by returning actor William Hurt from The Incredible Hulk. Also, The Incredible Hulk had a cameo from Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. Can't get much more MCU than that.

Thanks for the clarification - I never got around to seeing the Norton one. I did see the Eric Bana one, which had some okay things (I liked that it was trying to be a visual comic book), but overall just didn't work. Mark Ruffalo (sp?) is a great improvement over Bana (and probably a brooding Norton too, I'd guess), FWIW.

 

[crookeddy]

You say that as though to imply that what Marvel has accomplished was easy. If it was, everybody would be succeeding at it, which is clearly not the case.

Making a movie "fun" is not easier. You still have to make a good film, you have to deliver something that the audience appreciates. And there are very few superhero "campy comedies" (Fun and camp comedy are not the same thing) that are actually good films.

What Marvel has accomplished was not easy, because they didn't go the full on camp route until Guardians of the Galaxy. Which was fine because it was a one-off. Except it wasn't.

 

[Anwar]

Source?

https://screenrant.com/thor-ragnarok-early-cuts-jokes/

What Marvel has accomplished was not easy, because they didn't go the full on camp route until Guardians of the Galaxy. Which was fine because it was a one-off. Except it wasn't.

So far it's just been GOTG 1 and 2 and some of Ragnarok. Out of all the MCU movies you're that threatened by 3 of them?

 

[crookeddy]

So far it's just been GOTG 1 and 2 and some of Ragnarok. Out of all the MCU movies you're that threatened by 3 of them?

And a whole lot of Homecoming leading to 3 Marvel movies in a row.

 

[crookeddy]

$101,350,550 for Justice League now. Sharpest dropoff Sunday to Monday of the top 5 movies percentage wise.

 

[Turtletrekker]

And a whole lot of Homecoming leading to 3 Marvel movies in a row.

You're actually bitching about humor and a Spider-Man movie?

 

[crookeddy]

You're actually bitching about humor and a Spider-Man movie?

I loved homecoming. Point stands.