• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

WB's Justice League 2017 movie pre-discussion thread

Samurai8472

Samurai8472

Admiral
Admiral
jl.jpg


http://uproxx.com/movies/justice-league-set-visit/

Willem Dafoe is playing Vulko, an elder statesman in Aquaman's kingdom

Some interesting points

Deborah Snyder confirmed Justice League will be more appropriate for younger children than BvS]
Click to expand...

Plot

Fueled by his restored faith in humanity and inspired by Superman’s selfless act, Bruce Wayne enlists the help of his newfound ally, Diana Prince, to face an even greater enemy. Together, Batman and Wonder Woman work quickly to find and recruit a team of metahumans to stand against this newly awakened threat. But despite the formation of this unprecedented league of heroes—Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Cyborg and The Flash—it may already be too late to save the planet from an assault of catastrophic proportions.
Click to expand...
 
Apparently, the villain for JL is going to be

http://screenrant.com/justice-league-movie-villain-steppenwolf-darkseid/

Steppenwolf, who we saw in that deleted scene. He's a CG character that somehow looks stupider then CG Darkseid, at least in my opinion.

Also, apparently the movie is no longer split into parts:
http://www.slashfilm.com/two-part-justice-league-now-one-movie/

Maybe that means they want to get Snyder's contractual obligations over with, then not have to either bring him back or have someone continue his story after Justice League.

As for the movie being more appropriate, maybe that means that Batman won't murder a bunch of people in JL, which would be great. I think Affleck could play a great non-murdering Batman if given a chance. It seems like DC is reigning in Snyder for this movie, which can only be a good thing.
 
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/set-visit-ben-affleck-on-batman-zack-snyder-on-justice-league-749-02

A few more things:


- Superman was on his way in Zack’s vision to having a reason to be Superman in his story. A reason to feel the way he felt about humanity. His moral compass. He had to go through something to be that. Zack jokingly laughs when he says “And I’m not saying that he’s in ‘Justice League’ by the way."

- He discusses the dynamic of Batman and Superman fighting eachother and how they had to dig down deep to find that reason as to why they would fight one another. In ‘Justice League’, they’re (Batman at least) now free of those shackles because it’s about uniting the team against a common enemy.

- Zack says that they’ve had “almost” all Justice League team members together at one time so far on-set. He refers to it at the “making the plan” scene.

- We asked about how ‘Justice League’ will end and that his current film is a “complete movie” on its own, meaning no real cliffhanger, although it obviously leads the door way open for multiple sequels.

- When asked about the current corporate pressure for the movie(s) to perform, he talks about the misconceptions out there and how he is a true dear fan of the comics and how Warner Bros. didn’t push them around on it. ‘Batman V Superman’ was created as a great starting vehicle and not something just to sell tickets. He says the studio has been amazing and they love making personal movies.

- Working on ‘Justice League’ is now giving Zack the opportunity to blow the doors off the scale of the movies including the bad guys, locations, etc.
Click to expand...
 
Here's io9's article on the same set visit -- a lot of the same info, but maybe some differences in detail and perspective.

I find the descriptions of the plot encouraging, but I still wish someone other than Snyder were directing.
 
Last edited:
I like the logo, and the basic premise of the movie.

I just skimmed through the articles, they seem to be aimed at people who had issues with BvS, personally, I don't need to be sold on JL, I liked both MoS and BvS and am very much looking forward to this.
 
I already posted this in the general DCEU thread, but now that this is here, I'll post IGN's report on the set visit here too.
I like what I'm hearing.
kirk55555 said:
Also, apparently the movie is no longer split into parts:
http://www.slashfilm.com/two-part-justice-league-now-one-movie/

Maybe that means they want to get Snyder's contractual obligations over with, then not have to either bring him back or have someone continue his story after Justice League.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good possibility to me. They do seem to be back tracking a lot here, first it was Part 1 and Part 2, then they were going to have different titles, and now there's only going to be one.
 
Ok, but it's at least no going to be "part 2" of the story being told in JL.
 
Yeah, I think everyone knows that there will be more than one JL movie. But, the second one just won't be a direct continuation of the first movie's story anymore.
 
JD said:
Ok, but it's at least no going to be "part 2" of the story being told in JL.
Click to expand...

I doubt the "Part 1" and "Part 2" were ever anything more than placeholder titles. It just meant that they decided to put two Justice League movies in the schedule, not that they'd already settled on a specific 2-part plot. Marvel did the same thing with Infinity War -- the two films were put into the preliminary schedule as "Part 1" and "Part 2," but now they're saying they'll have individual titles. So it's not revealing anything about the story, it's just placeholder text for the schedule.

Besides, in these serialized times, it's hard to draw a clear line between standalones and multi-parters anyway. Captain America: Civil War is as much The Winter Soldier, Part 2 as it is Age of Ultron, Part 2. Two stories can each be complete in themselves, yet still be parts of a larger sequence.
 
Sure, but each one still tells it's own individual story that is part of the bigger arc, rather than multipart stories ending on big cliffhangers. I think the confusion is that calling them Part 1 and Part 2 makes it sound like they are basically 2 halves of one 4-6 hour movie, rather than just two individual connected movies.
 
JD said:
I think the confusion is that calling them Part 1 and Part 2 makes it sound like they are basically 2 halves of one 4-6 hour movie, rather than just two individual connected movies.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, but I think the people in charge of putting these schedules together aren't thinking of it in the same terms that the audience is, so the audience reads something into the terminology that wasn't intended. It's best just to keep in mind that when they initially put these films in their schedule, they probably don't even know what the story will be yet. They don't need to know that at that point. What they need to know is what project is slated for release and what kind of contracts and budget allotments and shooting schedules and promotions and licensing deals and such they have to plan for. From a production/logistics point of view, it makes little difference whether two consecutive Justice League movies tell one 2-part story or two distinct stories. They still both need the same main actors and producers under contract, probably the same production team and many of the same sets and vehicles and costumes, etc. And it would make economic and logistical sense to combine a lot of the production aspects -- write them back-to-back, contract cast and crew for both together, do the design and art direction for both at once, maybe shoot them back-to-back, etc. So from a production standpoint, it makes sense to treat them as a single 2-part exercise regardless of their story content. The audience has the luxury to think exclusively in terms of the story, but the actual makers are coming at it from a very different direction.
 
kirk55555 said:
As for the movie being more appropriate, maybe that means that Batman won't murder a bunch of people in JL, which would be great..
Click to expand...

Agreed; the absence of Batman killing does not turn it into Batman: Brave and the Bold cartoon. It's just the logical continuation of his changing view of dealing with humanity as hinted in the conclusion of Dawn of Justice.
 
Also, it was implied in BvS that Batman was not always so careless with taking human lives, but that something over the years had made him bitter and cold. Even in his rescue of Martha Kent he was killing guys, but when he rescued her it was symbolic of him saving his own mother's life. Then after watching Superman sacrifice himself at the end, you can see that Bruce at the funeral is reflecting on what he has become. He realizes that he has witnessed a truly heroic symbol of a man and is inspired to remember what he himself can be.

Fine--the movie did a poor job of hitting this point home, but it is pretty obvious that was what Snyder intended.
 
Well, Batman really can't come back from that in the way Snyder might have wanted. He's a cold blooded murderer, and really Batman never would have killed anyone, much less gone on a murder spree. Heck, the fallout from jason Todd's death in the comics, over the years, had stuff about how Batman wasn't willing to kill, even after Jason's death. But, Snyder apparently doesn't believe that a hero can have an unbreakable code against killing, just like he thinks you need to murder someone to know its wrong. Its his weird worldview, and it doesn't fit Batman or Superman at all. Hopefully once JL is done he's just gone, which would make it easier to just forget about what he did and maybe let DC make a movie good enough to make people forget that Batman has a Punisher level kill count.
 
I was thinking about that early. With this turnaround to being more optimistic about humanity and now making wise cracks like "A bad guy with flying monkeys" I'd like to know how Batman will account for his actions

Looks like they answered my questions during the media blitz

http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/set-justice-league-21-things-need-know/



4. Is Batman still angry after Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice?
Not so relentlessly. "He was so solitary for so long, in the shadows, but he’s learning to trust people," says Deborah Snyder. On set, we watch a rainy rooftop scene in which, standing by the Bat Signal, Batman convenes with Commissioner Gordon (J.K. Simmons), Wonder Woman, The Flash and Cyborg; after the take, Ben Affleck strides over, cowl off, eyeliner around his eyes. "I know, I look like Alice Cooper," he says of his make-up, before outlining Batman’s new temperament. "He has a little bit more sardonic humour, a little more irony. He's a little bit more of a man on the mission this time. Last time he was so full of anger because of what happened at the Black Zero event, that rage coloured the whole character, it possessed him. He’s no longer extreme in that way. Now he's on a mission to get this group together, to constitute this League, and this wry ironic gallows humour comes out."
Click to expand...


Wouldn't surprise me if they sweep it under the rug

Synder- Batman killed a few people. He had a rough day!

I once posted somewhere that Synder is secretly Lex Luthor. This is all a big plan to smear Superman's reputation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top