JUSTICE LEAGUE: PART ONE (11/17/17) 5 5

[bane]

10 hours ago, VintageComics said:

I called JL a stinker without seeing it but I still went to see it.  I went with Lou last night to see it and we dished out $100+ at a VIP theater with dinner. I expect value for my money when I choose to watch a movie.

 

How the other half live eh? 

[VintageComics]

4 minutes ago, bane said:

10 hours ago, VintageComics said:

I called JL a stinker without seeing it but I still went to see it.  I went with Lou last night to see it and we dished out $100+ at a VIP theater with dinner. I expect value for my money when I choose to watch a movie.

 

How the other half live eh? 

Hey, that was considered an expensive date.

[Bosco685]

The assumption WB/DC should just do it like the MCU and plug in their characters in matching order to the MCU characters because it is a proven approach on the surface would make sense. It would give us the DC characters we love in a comfortable and familiar setting, building out close to the same pace. And we would easily say to ourselves, "I know pretty much what's happening next, and at what point they become a team and have to take on the Big Bad." And the money would come flowing in, as critics and movie-goers congratulated them on faithfully following their demands. A perfect picture of success!

Or maybe not. I think what we are seeing take place is WB/DC are trying to find its own way to be unique, and stumbling because it is overly influenced by too many sources. Those demanding they just 'follow the MCU blueprint' are so loud, along with critics making it clear no matter what Snyder is involved in there will be no gift critique or even at times a fair review, the studio is overwhelmed with roadmap correction demands that may or may not be reasonable. And let's not kid ourselves some of these critics are holding some form of grudge or dislike for Snyder. Some outright rejoice in it.

That's a real, unaltered post from the Senior Writer of Vanity Fair. When I first heard of this, I thought it was someone's attempt to tell a tall tale. Then I found her account, and there was the post.

The dislike for altering some of the history of Superman in 'Man of Steel' leading into the outright hate for the dark and crowded 'Batman v Superman' leaves little room for any positive in these films. And there are plenty of positives in these films. To include WB/DC is trying to make its path unique and new compared to the easier path. If they wanted to just make a jump for the cash, wouldn't it have just caved in and started drafting the MCU DC Infinity War Cosmic Odyssey? Call it done!

What I think we are seeing first-hand with Justice League is a studio second-guessing its abilities and direction, and trying to appease the loudest voices (not the average voices). So whatever Snyder had planned was altered to bring the funny, bright traditional world demanded even by involving the director that helped Marvel establish this more clearly and successfully with 'The Avengers'. Yet it was done so late in the process, we received an incomplete, slightly garbled production with CGI work that can be slightly distracting. Better the WB/DC executives had come to the conclusion it was either better to limit the changes, or to admit a finished product required more time and ate the humble pie by altering the release date and dealing with the backlash on that.

Yet for all the negatives that can be called out with 'Justice League', there is a large portion of the audience that appreciated this movie so much, they have taken to social media to spread the word. It's not just CGC forum members saying this. All the videos, twitter and articles calling this out is not easily ignored. Unless someone wants to because it is counter to their message.

WB/DC should craft a clear plan that may have some form of deviation with releases. Sure, there will be the Connected DC Universe films. There is a large enough market desiring this, it makes plenty of sense. But then there are the Standalone DC films that should not be forced into Easter eggs and connection scenes. It is all about that individual movie driving towards a solidly told story with well-positioned characters and plot points. This is the same studio that gave us 'Superman: The Movie', 'Batman (1989)' and even the small universe Nolan Batman films. It has a proven track record, if it only trusted in itself.

And I think this is what Geoff Johns is trying to accomplish. But with all the loud voices saying to do it like the MCU, WB/DC can't keep it together. And now the film that should have kept the momentum going opens up not as powerful as it should have because the studio allowed itself to make late changes to appease what it assumed to be the average movie-goer's demands.

For any of the negatives with 'Justice League', is it truly the studio's fault, the market's fault, or a combination of the two? I lean towards it being a joint result. WB/DC should have gone the 'Wonder Woman' route in that instead of allowing all the social media demands of doing it like Joss Whedon had planned or make it like 'Captain America: The First Avenger', it went down its own path and was a huge success. And yet even when the early trailers came out, folks called out they were copying the MCU because a woman with a shield was like a man with a shield, so this must be Captain America. What studio wants to be noted as doing an exact copy of its competitor, and selling out for the money only?

[Bosco685]

A short article that I have to agree calls out some of the accomplishments of Justice League that helped establish new characters, along with taking Superman down a better path.

4 Things Justice League Does Right, And One Thing It Did Wrong

Quote

Cyborg's powers, and his overall look

And yet, Cyborg walked away as one of the most interesting members of the JL, because his powers are out of his control, and connected to the Mother Box tech that Steppenwolf seeks to acquire. Cyborg didn't choose to become this monster -- it was the decision of the "monster" he calls father, the head of S.T.A.R. Labs.

 

Flash's speed force

How do you present "excessive speed" in a new fashion, after we have seen Quicksilver (in Avengers: Age of Ultron), another Quicksilver (in two X-Men movies), and a Flash who has occupied his own TV show on the CW for multiple seasons?

Justice League has its own fun creating Flash's speed force, wrapping our hero (Ezra Miller) in a blue-lightning cocoon that trails behind him as he zigs and zags through the action.

 

Superman... finally!

If nothing else, Justice League finally retcons Superman so he can start being Superman!

 

The introduction of this team into the world

Diana Prince is now a recognized savior on our planet. Batman's out of the shadows. The Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg are ready to fight. And Bruce is turning his Wayne Manor into a Hall of Justice! The building of the team might be a little clunky, but by the credits, a Justice League has been established -- likely to fans' delight.

What the writer felt was done wrong was an end credit scene. I disagree. But to respect being complete, here it goes.

Spoiler

Great! When is that going to happen? In Aquaman, the next DC movie, due to arrive in 2018? Likely not. Will they be in Shazam or Wonder Woman 2? Unlikely, as those films will have different villains that connect deeply to the heroes. Could this be a set up for Matt Reeves' Batman movie? Maybe, but that film has no release date.

At the earliest, the scene sets up a movie that might arrive in 2020 at the earliest... but probably teases a movie that will never happen. Why do this? No clue.

 

[Bosco685]

I really do like what they did with Cyborg and Flash. And you could clearly seeing the characters were starting to lean on one another as the junior members of the newly formed team. I so want to see Ray Fisher and Ezra Miller do a film together.

[Bosco685]

An interesting review piece from a Forbes.com contributor that strongly disliked 'Batman v Superman'.

'Justice League' Is No 'Avengers' But Better Than You've Heard

Quote

But I do think it’s better than the critics are saying. A 39% Rotten Tomatoes score seems overly harsh to me, given what I saw onscreen this weekend, which was an enjoyable, if unremarkable film, that avoided many of the pitfalls of its predecessors, even if it never reaches the highs of Wonder Woman, the DCEU’s paragon, or any recent Marvel movie.

 

The shift toward making the DCEU a bit more lighthearted, a bit more funny, is clear here. And it works! At times, Justice League is a genuinely hilarious film, thanks namely to Ezra Miller’s Flash, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman and a few scenes that Joss Whedon clearly wrote. But even Bruce, Clark and Diana get some good lines in too.

 

What the film does have is a few great moments instead. Wonder Woman had those, like Diana charging across No Man’s Land. Here, we have the entire JLA taking on a newly resurrected, confused Superman in the film’s best fight scene, complete with headbutting contest vs. Wonder Woman, or the film’s best moment when The Flash looks on in horror as he realizes Clark can actually match his super speed.

 

There’s nothing in Justice League to point at and say “this is horrendous” like Leto’s Joker or Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor (mercifully relegated to a post-credits scene). There’s no core alteration of heroes, like making Batman some kind of murderous psychopath who brands criminals to get them killed in jail.

 

Simply put, these characters are who they’re supposed to be. Batman is the reluctant team leader with a master plan. Wonder Woman is the muscle, and the heart, of the group. The Flash and Cyborg are new heroes wrestling with their powers. Aquaman is uh, well I don’t really know exactly. He’s dramatically different than every other version I’ve seen of him, but given Momoa’s endearing performance, I would say it’s a change for the better.

Pretty nice shift from someone that was not a fan of the previous direction and productions.

[Bosco685]

I've wondered how these negative responses to the films weighs on the actors. You can clearly tell with Affleck he didn't get the easy win assumed.

Jason Momoa has no time for the 'Justice League' haters

Quote

Momoa clearly approached the role with all the joie de vivre he brings to his day-to-day existence — which, judging by his social media, is often spent throwing axes, drinking Guinness and hanging out with his beautiful friends — so he's pretty "bummed" that the internet (and box office receipts) started raining on his parade by pointing out that the movie is ... not great.

 

"I try to stay the f—k away from what people say. Some of my friends said, ‘Justice League isn’t doing well’ and it kind of bummed me out. But I didn’t want to look it up," Momoa admitted, defending the film in an interview with Entertainment Weekly. "I don’t want to look up the bad and the negativity. I don’t think that’s useful; it doesn’t help.”

 

Unsurprisingly, Momoa is a fan of the superhero team-up — and he's already seen it twice. “I loved it the second time even more," he said, insisting that when he visited the Wizard World Austin fan convention this past weekend, he received "great praise." 

 

"Now obviously, that’s a positive place, and I’m not only interested in the positive. But if people love what we did with Aquaman, it’s all [director Zack Snyder] — it’s his brainchild. He came in with, ‘I’m going to make Aquaman a badass and I’m going to change stuff, and change the myths about this guy.’ And I busted my .”

 

[Gatsby77]

29 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Yet for all the negatives that can be called out with 'Justice League', there is a large portion of the audience that appreciated this movie so much, they have taken to social media to spread the word. It's not just CGC forum members saying this. All the videos, twitter and articles calling this out is not easily ignored. Unless someone wants to because it is counter to their message.

You can trumpet this until you're blue in the face, but

a) not all the social media has been positive -- by a long shot.

b) Even if it were true (hint: it's not) t's easy to claim "large portion of the audience" when the the audience is so much smaller than for prior films.

The fact is, the audience still didn't show up for this.

Opening Weekends:

Man of Steel: $116.6 million

BvS: $166 million (+42%)

Suicide Squad: $133.7 million (-19..5%)

Wonder Woman: $103 million (-23%)

Justice League: $93.8 million (-9%)

 

That's a trend line that's hard to ignore.

[Jaylam]

13 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I've wondered how these negative responses to the films weighs on the actors. You can clearly tell with Affleck he didn't get the easy win assumed.

Jason Momoa has no time for the 'Justice League' haters

 

Jason Momoa my friend, you have nothing to worry about. In this movie, you defined and owned Aquaman in your own way and it worked. I am most certainly looking forward to the solo movie.

DC hit a home run and broke new ground by doing something Marvel hadn't so far in Wonder Woman (female heroine lead), and I hope they can do the same with Aquaman (under water hero).

 

[Gatsby77]

9 minutes ago, Jaylam said:

Jason Momoa my friend, you have nothing to worry about. In this movie, you defined and owned Aquaman in your own way and it worked. I am most certainly looking forward to the solo movie.

DC hit a home run and broke new ground by doing something Marvel hadn't so far in Wonder Woman (female heroine lead), and I hope they can do the same with Aquaman (under water hero).

 

Agreed.

He can put the stench of Conan the Barbarian behind him.

[Get Marwood & I]

Just picked up my ticket and going in. Back in a few hours with the verdict! 

[bane]

My two cents for what its worth (not having seen the film yet).

 

I loved MoS, think its the best Superman film made and it gets better with every viewing.

I liked BvS extended in parts, it gets a pass from me because Batman & Wonder Woman (brief appearance) was so good in it and that warehouse scene was immense.

I hated Suicide Squad, a movie with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I missed Wonder Woman but I own it on 4K but have not yet watched it.

 

After the somewhat bloated Avengers 2.5, I mean Civil War and the utterly forgettable Doctor Strange I was tiring of Marvel and preferred my heroes along the lines of Deadpool & Logan. I skipped Guardians 2 but then watched it on a plane to Vancouver in August and absolutely loved it! I enjoyed GotG2 more than GotG.

 

So I skipped Spider-Man Homecoming, RDJ is wearing thin for me and I didn't really like Spider-Man's inclusion in Civil War, I thought Tom Holland was a good Peter Parker but annoyed me in the Spidey suit. I am going to watch this on rental this week so we'll see what happens.

 

I skipped Thor Ragnarok, at this point I was suffering a bit of superhero fatigue.

 

Now Justice League, the trailers didn't really impress me much and all of the talk about reshoots, Whedon coming in etc, changing the tone, doing this... it did put me off and it was going to be another movie I would skip. I don't think a hoot about RT or what critics think, I will see a movie based on what I see in the trailers, the premise of the movie and what my friends think. Well majority of my friends are telling me go watch Justice League, its better then BvS and is thoroughly enjoyable... a lot of non-comic book friends are telling me its awesome.

 

So I'm going to go and see it regardless of its RT score or the so called learned critics, I think this movie may do better with word of mouth, I'm going to see it this weekend and generally excited when I wasn't before.

Edited November 21, 2017 by bane
Forgot WW

[Bosco685]

40 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

You can trumpet this until you're blue in the face, but

a) not all the social media has been positive -- by a long shot.

b) Even if it were true (hint: it's not) t's easy to claim "large portion of the audience" when the the audience is so much smaller than for prior films.

The fact is, the audience still didn't show up for this.

Opening Weekends:

Man of Steel: $116.6 million

BvS: $166 million (+42%)

Suicide Squad: $133.7 million (-19..5%)

Wonder Woman: $103 million (-23%)

Justice League: $93.8 million (-9%)

 

That's a trend line that's hard to ignore.

Wait a minute. I was just posting my opinion of the situation.

1 hour ago, Bosco685 said:

The assumption WB/DC should just do it like the MCU and plug in their characters in matching order to the MCU characters because it is a proven approach on the surface would make sense. It would give us the DC characters we love in a comfortable and familiar setting, building out close to the same pace. And we would easily say to ourselves, "I know pretty much what's happening next, and at what point they become a team and have to take on the Big Bad." And the money would come flowing in, as critics and movie-goers congratulated them on faithfully following their demands. A perfect picture of success!

Or maybe not. I think what we are seeing take place is WB/DC are trying to find its own way to be unique, and stumbling because it is overly influenced by too many sources. Those demanding they just 'follow the MCU blueprint' are so loud, along with critics making it clear no matter what Snyder is involved in there will be no gift critique or even at times a fair review, the studio is overwhelmed with roadmap correction demands that may or may not be reasonable. And let's not kid ourselves some of these critics are holding some form of grudge or dislike for Snyder. Some outright rejoice in it.

That's a real, unaltered post from the Senior Writer of Vanity Fair. When I first heard of this, I thought it was someone's attempt to tell a tall tale. Then I found her account, and there was the post.

The dislike for altering some of the history of Superman in 'Man of Steel' leading into the outright hate for the dark and crowded 'Batman v Superman' leaves little room for any positive in these films. And there are plenty of positives in these films. To include WB/DC is trying to make its path unique and new compared to the easier path. If they wanted to just make a jump for the cash, wouldn't it have just caved in and started drafting the MCU DC Infinity War Cosmic Odyssey? Call it done!

What I think we are seeing first-hand with Justice League is a studio second-guessing its abilities and direction, and trying to appease the loudest voices (not the average voices). So whatever Snyder had planned was altered to bring the funny, bright traditional world demanded even by involving the director that helped Marvel establish this more clearly and successfully with 'The Avengers'. Yet it was done so late in the process, we received an incomplete, slightly garbled production with CGI work that can be slightly distracting. Better the WB/DC executives had come to the conclusion it was either better to limit the changes, or to admit a finished product required more time and ate the humble pie by altering the release date and dealing with the backlash on that.

Yet for all the negatives that can be called out with 'Justice League', there is a large portion of the audience that appreciated this movie so much, they have taken to social media to spread the word. It's not just CGC forum members saying this. All the videos, twitter and articles calling this out is not easily ignored. Unless someone wants to because it is counter to their message.

WB/DC should craft a clear plan that may have some form of deviation with releases. Sure, there will be the Connected DC Universe films. There is a large enough market desiring this, it makes plenty of sense. But then there are the Standalone DC films that should not be forced into Easter eggs and connection scenes. It is all about that individual movie driving towards a solidly told story with well-positioned characters and plot points. This is the same studio that gave us 'Superman: The Movie', 'Batman (1989)' and even the small universe Nolan Batman films. It has a proven track record, if it only trusted in itself.

And I think this is what Geoff Johns is trying to accomplish. But with all the loud voices saying to do it like the MCU, WB/DC can't keep it together. And now the film that should have kept the momentum going opens up not as powerful as it should have because the studio allowed itself to make late changes to appease what it assumed to be the average movie-goer's demands.

For any of the negatives with 'Justice League', is it truly the studio's fault, the market's fault, or a combination of the two? I lean towards it being a joint result. WB/DC should have gone the 'Wonder Woman' route in that instead of allowing all the social media demands of doing it like Joss Whedon had planned or make it like 'Captain America: The First Avenger', it went down its own path and was a huge success. And yet even when the early trailers came out, folks called out they were copying the MCU because a woman with a shield was like a man with a shield, so this must be Captain America. What studio wants to be noted as doing an exact copy of its competitor, and selling out for the money only?

You mean if I don't agree with your repeated dismal view of the situation, I'm in the wrong? I thought that's what I do.

Think what you like. But the studio second-guessing itself caused some of what we are seeing now due to all the loud negative influencers. Add to this something family-oriented and unique like Wonder that was forecasted to do $17M ended up doing $27.6M. Now, if we look at the original Justice League forecast ($110M) and figure out the difference in result ($16M), there could be some of that family-oriented money WB left on the table for Lionsgate to scoop up due to the critic responses and negative reviews. It's not as funny as you assume.

[Bosco685]

12 minutes ago, bane said:

I skipped Thor Ragnarok, at this point I was suffering a bit of superhero fatigue.

 

Now Justice League, the trailers didn't really impress me much and all of the talk about reshoots, Whedon coming in etc, changing the tone, doing this... it did put me off and it was going to be another movie I would skip. I don't think a hoot about RT or what critics think, I will see a movie based on what I see in the trailers, the premise of the movie and what my friends think. Well majority of my friends are telling me go watch Justice League, its better then BvS and is thoroughly enjoyable... a lot of non-comic book friends are telling me its awesome.

 

So I'm going to go and see it regardless of its RT score or the so called learned critics, I think this movie may do better with word of mouth, I'm going to see it this weekend and generally excited when I wasn't before.

Take the time to go see Thor: Ragnarok, as the comedy mixed with the action really made it feel a little better than even Guardians of the Galaxy. And I really appreciate that latter movie.

Interesting to hear what non-comic book movie-goers are saying, which seems to be a general trend. Now if that word-of-mouth can keep the momentum going, hopefully we will see some pickup in box office pace. And yes, Justice League is worth seeing. Even with its obvious faults caused by studio late changes. But it will be interesting to get your reaction based on your response to Batman v Superman.

[CBT]

2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

The assumption WB/DC should just do it like the MCU and plug in their characters in matching order to the MCU characters because it is a proven approach on the surface would make sense. It would give us the DC characters we love in a comfortable and familiar setting, building out close to the same pace. And we would easily say to ourselves, "I know pretty much what's happening next, and at what point they become a team and have to take on the Big Bad." And the money would come flowing in, as critics and movie-goers congratulated them on faithfully following their demands. A perfect picture of success!

Or maybe not. I think what we are seeing take place is WB/DC are trying to find its own way to be unique, and stumbling because it is overly influenced by too many sources. Those demanding they just 'follow the MCU blueprint' are so loud, along with critics making it clear no matter what Snyder is involved in there will be no gift critique or even at times a fair review, the studio is overwhelmed with roadmap correction demands that may or may not be reasonable. And let's not kid ourselves some of these critics are holding some form of grudge or dislike for Snyder. Some outright rejoice in it.

That's a real, unaltered post from the Senior Writer of Vanity Fair. When I first heard of this, I thought it was someone's attempt to tell a tall tale. Then I found her account, and there was the post.

The dislike for altering some of the history of Superman in 'Man of Steel' leading into the outright hate for the dark and crowded 'Batman v Superman' leaves little room for any positive in these films. And there are plenty of positives in these films. To include WB/DC is trying to make its path unique and new compared to the easier path. If they wanted to just make a jump for the cash, wouldn't it have just caved in and started drafting the MCU DC Infinity War Cosmic Odyssey? Call it done!

What I think we are seeing first-hand with Justice League is a studio second-guessing its abilities and direction, and trying to appease the loudest voices (not the average voices). So whatever Snyder had planned was altered to bring the funny, bright traditional world demanded even by involving the director that helped Marvel establish this more clearly and successfully with 'The Avengers'. Yet it was done so late in the process, we received an incomplete, slightly garbled production with CGI work that can be slightly distracting. Better the WB/DC executives had come to the conclusion it was either better to limit the changes, or to admit a finished product required more time and ate the humble pie by altering the release date and dealing with the backlash on that.

Yet for all the negatives that can be called out with 'Justice League', there is a large portion of the audience that appreciated this movie so much, they have taken to social media to spread the word. It's not just CGC forum members saying this. All the videos, twitter and articles calling this out is not easily ignored. Unless someone wants to because it is counter to their message.

WB/DC should craft a clear plan that may have some form of deviation with releases. Sure, there will be the Connected DC Universe films. There is a large enough market desiring this, it makes plenty of sense. But then there are the Standalone DC films that should not be forced into Easter eggs and connection scenes. It is all about that individual movie driving towards a solidly told story with well-positioned characters and plot points. This is the same studio that gave us 'Superman: The Movie', 'Batman (1989)' and even the small universe Nolan Batman films. It has a proven track record, if it only trusted in itself.

And I think this is what Geoff Johns is trying to accomplish. But with all the loud voices saying to do it like the MCU, WB/DC can't keep it together. And now the film that should have kept the momentum going opens up not as powerful as it should have because the studio allowed itself to make late changes to appease what it assumed to be the average movie-goer's demands.

For any of the negatives with 'Justice League', is it truly the studio's fault, the market's fault, or a combination of the two? I lean towards it being a joint result. WB/DC should have gone the 'Wonder Woman' route in that instead of allowing all the social media demands of doing it like Joss Whedon had planned or make it like 'Captain America: The First Avenger', it went down its own path and was a huge success. And yet even when the early trailers came out, folks called out they were copying the MCU because a woman with a shield was like a man with a shield, so this must be Captain America. What studio wants to be noted as doing an exact copy of its competitor, and selling out for the money only?

 

I honestly believe the executives at the top of WB/DC basically think/thought this"

1.) Our Heroes (Superman & Batman) are better and more famous than the ones Marvel is making big bucks with.

2.) Superhero movies are a fad, we need to get our team-up movie out there ASAP because we dont want to miss the boat.

 

The problem is, despite what so many think, Marvel isnt really producing "superhero" movies, they are producing movies, with super heroes in them.  Their goal is to ultimately be putting out movies in every genre, that happen to have comic characters in them.

Winter Solider - Spy Drama

Guardians - Space Opera

Ant-man - Heist Movie

Dr. Strange - Fantasy

Thor: Ragnarok - Road Trip/Buddy movie

If you include things like the Fox movies, you have New Mutants coming out as a Horror Flick, Deadpool is basically Action Comedy, etc etc etc

 

DC's biggest problem in my opinion is trying to rush things.  They need to focus on making GOOD movies first and foremost, and letting everything else develop.  It doesnt have to be the "Marvel formula", but they need to make REALLY good movies, that happen to have comic book characters in them.  Wonder Woman is probably the only one so far that meets that standard, and its universally respected, (even there they almost went off the rails pushing lefty feminist garbage, you dont need patriarchy bashing jokes and quips, when your female hero is a complete badass, just let her show it with actions).

I think with Flash and Aquaman DC has the chance to make two really good movies.  Both fit my pattern, of lead actors who arent yet Mega Stars.  Casting and Writing are what made the Marvel movies so good.  From this point forward DC needs to focus on young upcoming actors, and top tier writing.  Every movie cant be just a Transformers-like action flick.  It doesnt matter if its "dark and serious" or "light and full of one liners".  Just make it GOOD, with emotional buy in for the audience and real stakes and a relate-able villain.

Personally, I still think they need to use Flash's movie to do some reality bending ret-con of Batman to make him a young actor.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by CBT

[fantastic_four]

18 minutes ago, CBT said:

DC's biggest problem in my opinion is trying to rush things.  They need to focus on making GOOD movies first and foremost, and letting everything else develop.  It doesnt have to be the "Marvel formula", but they need to make REALLY good movies, that happen to have comic book characters in them.  Wonder Woman is probably the only one so far that meets that standard, and its universally respected, (even there they almost went off the rails pushing lefty feminist garbage, you dont need patriarchy bashing jokes ans quips, when your female hero is a complete badass, just let her show it with actions).

Their biggest problem is trusting directors to create quality superhero movies, but most great directors have no idea how to create a great superhero film.  Marvel used to pick good directors and hope for the best, too, back when Avi Arad was in charge because he had no idea himself how to create good films with comic book characters.  Some of the Avi Arad movies were good, some weren't, but it all came down to the director's vision.  Arad used Kevin Feige as his sidekick comic book expert, but he didn't always take Feige's advice and just picked good directors, not good directors willing to change their usual approach to fit comic characters, hence they had unpredictable trainwrecks like Elektra, Daredevil, Hulk, etc.  Ang Lee's Hulk is a perfect example--Ang Lee is a FANTASTIC director, he just wasn't sure how to create a great comic book film despite the fact that he really, really wanted to, and Avi Arad didn't know how to, either.  But Feige does because he knows Marvel's characters really, really well, so he only picks directors he knows are capable of adapting what they do to the superhero genre.

DC's success comes when they pick a director with a vision that ends up mapping well to superheroes.  Patty Jenkins did great with that, and so did Christopher Nolan, so we got great DC films from those two.  But none of the Warner Brothers execs have proven they're any better than Avi Arad was at pre-2008 Marvel movies.  They need Geoff Johns to pick great directors willing to adjust what they do for the genre like Feige does, but since Geoff Johns keeps getting actively involved in production or writing (he co-wrote Aquaman), I'm not sure he'll ever be that guy.  Which isn't surprising because creative types very frequently don't enjoy pure management jobs like Feige has, they'd rather be drawing, or creating characters and dialogue, or something closer to the end product than just picking the right guys to do well at the creative stuff.  And I'm not sure that he and Jon Berg together can ever be that guy.  Until they have their Feige equivalent guy or group of guys at the top, some of these movies will be great, and others will suck.

Edited November 21, 2017 by fantastic_four

[CBT]

1 minute ago, fantastic_four said:

Their biggest problem is trusting directors to create quality films.  Marvel did that, too, back when Avi Arad was in charge because he had no idea himself how to create good films with comic book characters.  Some of the Avi Arad movies were good, some weren't, but it all came down to the director's vision.  Arad used Kevin Feige as his sidekick comic book expert, but he didn't always take Feige's advice and just picked good directors, not good directors willing to change their usual approach to fit comic characters, hence they had unpredictable trainwrecks like Elektra, Daredevil, Hulk, etc.  Ang Lee's Hulk is a perfect example--Ang Lee is a FANTASTIC director, he just wasn't sure how to create a great comic book film despite the fact that he really, really wanted to, and Avi Arad didn't know how to, either.  But Feige does because he knows Marvel's characters really, really well, so he only picks directors he knows are capable of adapting what they do to the superhero genre.

DC's success comes when they pick a director with a vision that ends up mapping well to superheroes.  Patty Jenkins did great with that, and so did Christopher Nolan, so we got great DC films from those two.  They need Geoff Johns to pick great directors willing to adjust what they do for the genre like Feige does, but since he keeps getting actively involved in production or writing, I'm not sure he'll ever be that guy.  Or that he and Jon Berg together can ever be that guy.  Until they have their Feige, some of these movies will be great, and others will suck.

directors are important, I agree

Casting is the most important

Writing is second

Directing third.

 

The day it was announced the RDJ was cast as Tony Stark, I remember spazzing at my girlfriend (now wife), about how "it was the best choice ever, he basically is Tony Stark, this movie will be great I cant wait for it to come out".  If RDJ wasnt cast as Tony Stark, there wouldnt be any Marvel Studios by now, Disney wouldnt have bought them, etc.

Marvel was willing to re-cast Hulk as Ruffalo.

They cast Chris Evans, despite having been Johnny Storm.

They cast Hemmsworth and Hiddleston and they become huge stars.

They cast Chris Pratt as an action hero, despite everyone only knowing him as a chubby goofball.

and so on.

Marvel's casting and writing (sticking to the comicbooks) allows good Directors to make good films.  Now at this point every actor,writer,director wants to be involved, and they can pick whom they like.  But they still focus on casting.

Spider-man and Black Panther are great examples of how they are still doing it. Casting is King with Writing and Directing obviously vital as well.

 

It's no accident that the DC stuff that does best or is received the best, are the things that involve new, young, upcoming actors (Gal Gadot, etc).  DC can right the ship, but they need to do it on the back of Aquaman and Flash, and get Ben Affleck outta there.

[fantastic_four]

8 minutes ago, CBT said:

Casting is the most important

Writing is second

Directing third.

So untrue.  Stick Robert Downey, Jr. into a Zack Snyder film and it's not going to change the fact that it's a Zack Snyder film.  It'll be a little bit better, but it'll still have a bunch of problems.

Mark Ruffalo does well as Hulk because Hulk is dead-simple to play.  He screwed up on Bill Maher's show back in 2012 and openly admitted that he hates superhero movies.  I'm somewhat surprised Feige didn't fire him, but he already had a contract at that point, so I'm not sure it was an option.  Probably doesn't matter anyway since it doesn't take much to play a CGI character.

Edited November 21, 2017 by fantastic_four

[Westy Steve]

15 hours ago, Jaylam said:

Personally I can't believe all the nit picking going on about this movie. I think everyone is setting their expectations to an unrealistic level. I tried to be objective and accept it for what it is and really enjoyed it. Holy cow, after all these years we finally got a Justice League movie and some of Jack Kirby's fourth world thrown in too!

The casting of the actors to the characters seems to be spot on. I most certainly enjoyed Ezra Miller's rendition of the Flash (and the costume) much more than the TV version. Jason Momoa really rocks it as Aquaman and Amber Heard's brief Mera appearance blew me away. Ray Fisher really stepped up to the Cyborg part and was much better than I expected.

There seemed to be an excellent dynamic written in between the characters, even the ones who'd never met each other. Think of how Superman and Cyborg worked together to separate the mother boxes, not bad for two guys that didn't know each other and were just dead before this.

So overall, I think they've laid a good foundation to continue and this movie was not as bad as it's being played up to be. I enjoyed it and felt it had a little bit in common with the recent Thor movie: it had that "...because that's what heroes do!" vibe going on.

I hope WB doesn't let this sink their ship and presses on.

Agree.  My God, people  here are hammering this film.  I'm not a big DC fan personally, but I liked the movie.  Didn't know anything about Superman's mustache and didn't notice anything either.   I thought Flash provided good comic relief even if it was a little much at times.  Loved some of the framed shots of Wonder Woman...a sexy strong character.  But the biggest pleasant surprise was Superman.  I've never liked Superman because he was always so perfect.  But their portrayal was cool.  First, genuinely scary, then a hero worth cheering for.  I think that's the first time I was moved/interested/happy to see a Superman appearance since I was about 8 years old.

We can dissect this movie to death, but to me, it was entertaining.  I've seen movies that were more entertaining in the genre, but it got my money and I'm not unhappy I paid to see it.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Westy Steve

[Bosco685]

36 minutes ago, CBT said:

DC's biggest problem in my opinion is trying to rush things.  They need to focus on making GOOD movies first and foremost, and letting everything else develop.  It doesnt have to be the "Marvel formula", but they need to make REALLY good movies, that happen to have comic book characters in them.  Wonder Woman is probably the only one so far that meets that standard, and its universally respected, (even there they almost went off the rails pushing lefty feminist garbage, you dont need patriarchy bashing jokes and quips, when your female hero is a complete badass, just let her show it with actions).

I think with Flash and Aquaman DC has the chance to make two really good movies.  Both fit my pattern, of lead actors who arent yet Mega Stars.  Casting and Writing are what made the Marvel movies so good.  From this point forward DC needs to focus on young upcoming actors, and top tier writing.  Every movie cant be just a Transformers-like action flick.  It doesnt matter if its "dark and serious" or "light and full of one liners".  Just make it GOOD, with emotional buy in for the audience and real stakes and a relate-able villain.

Personally, I still think they need to use Flash's movie to do some reality bending ret-con of Batman to make him a young actor.

No matter what the opinion is on overall roadmap approach, I totally agree the target needs to be a solid, entertaining movies. Worry less about how it plugs in teasers for later use in some movie that may be years down the road. Have folks walk away feeling satisfied and wanting more. Amen to that!

24 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Their biggest problem is trusting directors to create quality superhero movies, but most great directors have no idea how to create a great superhero film.  Marvel used to pick good directors and hope for the best, too, back when Avi Arad was in charge because he had no idea himself how to create good films with comic book characters.  Some of the Avi Arad movies were good, some weren't, but it all came down to the director's vision.  Arad used Kevin Feige as his sidekick comic book expert, but he didn't always take Feige's advice and just picked good directors, not good directors willing to change their usual approach to fit comic characters, hence they had unpredictable trainwrecks like Elektra, Daredevil, Hulk, etc.  Ang Lee's Hulk is a perfect example--Ang Lee is a FANTASTIC director, he just wasn't sure how to create a great comic book film despite the fact that he really, really wanted to, and Avi Arad didn't know how to, either.  But Feige does because he knows Marvel's characters really, really well, so he only picks directors he knows are capable of adapting what they do to the superhero genre.

DC's success comes when they pick a director with a vision that ends up mapping well to superheroes.  Patty Jenkins did great with that, and so did Christopher Nolan, so we got great DC films from those two.  But none of the Warner Brothers execs have proven they're any better than Avi Arad was at pre-2008 Marvel movies.  They need Geoff Johns to pick great directors willing to adjust what they do for the genre like Feige does, but since Geoff Johns keeps getting actively involved in production or writing (he co-wrote Aquaman), I'm not sure he'll ever be that guy.  Which isn't surprising because creative types very frequently don't enjoy pure management jobs like Feige has, they'd rather be drawing, or creating characters and dialogue, or something closer to the end product than just picking the right guys to do well at the creative stuff.  And I'm not sure that he and Jon Berg together can ever be that guy.  Until they have their Feige equivalent guy or group of guys at the top, some of these movies will be great, and others will suck.

One thing that has concerned me with WB is that belief 'directors should have total control of their productions' when it comes to a common studio value. That's why for so many years they put out movies that ended up being wasted opportunities like Catwoman, Steel, those follow-on Batman movies post-Burton. Even Green Lantern (an easy space adventure win). WB having the fear it may seem like they are over-controlling of its property. Yet then in Suicide Squad they jump the gun, and take too much control.

From reading multiple Feige interviews, including his presentation at the Richard Donner recognition, it sounds like part of the Marvel secret sauce is a director indoctrination program. When he talked about one movie everyone is required to watch is 'Superman: The Movie', it sounded like they drive home the point what works and why with story content, character development and audience expectations. It's a smart move when trying to remain consistent and linked throughout all these films.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Bosco685