Justice League

[seminoles1]

21 minutes ago, O'Doyle Rules said:

So DC sold all of their film rights to WB? 

Warner Brothers owns everything DC, not just the movie rights.

[Calvert28]

37 minutes ago, O'Doyle Rules said:

So DC sold all of their film rights to WB? 

Their souls too.

[43M]

Im not making excuses for WB, because they really botched this with their impatience, but its not like they havent proven capable of delivering quality stuff.   The Nolan Batman's were terrific and they have tons of animated stuff through the years that is top notch.    I just think the studio needs to find the right people that love the characters and know what they are doing to push the DCEU forward, and then the suits need to stay the hell out of the way and stop trying to control everything because thats what ruins movies.   I was just watching a documentary about what happened with Spiderman 3 and Sam Raimi wanted to have Sandman as the main villain and wrap up the Harry Osborne story arc, but the studio forced him to use Venom, even though he didnt understand or particularly like the character, and didnt want to use a character like that in his movie.   

Patty Jenkins did well with Wonder Woman.   Keep her.

Matt Reeves with Batman should be great as long as they keep his Batman part of the DCEU.   If they try to do two separate Batman's, they deserve to fail.

Get someone like Matthew Vaughn for Flashpoint and retcon certain things, particular actors who dont fit what the characters are supposed to be.    Get a better actor for Lex....get a better version of the Joker, and if needed, do whats needed to replace Batfleck if/when he leaves.

They shouldve never made Suicide Squad this soon into the DCEU.     They shouldve stayed focused on developing the main Justice League members before thinking about anything else.  Instead, they started planning freaking movies for every damn character in the DC archives.      Didnt even have Wonder Woman, Batman or the Flash (or hell, even Superman for that matter) firmly established and they were already planning movies for Nightwing, Black Adam and Lobo?     How stupid can you be?   Seems like they were so focused on a) catching up to Marvel, and b) not doing things the same way as Marvel that they completely disregarded what it takes to make this successful.  

At this point, I dont care if they copy Marvel step for step as long as they turn it around.   I love the DC characters to much to see them done so poorly.   Dont get me wrong, I think the heroes are being done fairly well, but the villains have been an afterthought and/or done poorly.      

Until WB gets people running things that actually care about doing the characters justice (no pun intended), its going to keep failing, because at this point, it just seems like their mindset is "Throw the characters on screen, throw in some pretty special effects and people will throw money at it" and until they figure out that thats not the case, its not going to get better....and this is coming from someone who has kinda liked all the movies in the DCEU thus far except Suicide Squad (which, as I said, shouldve never been made in the first place).   

 

[Deadpulse]

I know the DCCU gets flak for rushing and doing things differently than Marvel's proven method, but I think people forget how lucky Marvel got. Maybe luck doesnt give them enough credit but they made a movie about a B maybe even C list hero in Iron Man and casted the absolute PERFECT actor coming off a very down few years both career and life wise. Suddenly Iron Man was the Aest of the A list and Robert Downey Jr. was a player in hollywood again. This was in no means a slam dunk to launch what it did. They took a risk on RDJ and they took a risk on the property. It would be like DC launching the DCCU from a Cyborg movie with an actor who hasn't been relevant in years. 

[THE DUKE]

One thing I think these comic book movies need to stop doing so consistently is focusing the story on  saving the world.  Marvel falls into this trap some too, but DC has it bad.

Man of Steel - Must save the world from the alien who wants to terraform earth.  Ok, first movie in and an OP hero like Superman, makes sense
Batman v Superman - Must save the world from Superman...errrr......Doomsday, that Supers is A-OK, but now he's dead
Suicide Squad - Must save the world from the witch girls hurricane machine thingy with 1990's CGI sidekick
Wonder Woman - Sure the world is at war, but the biggest theme is believing in humanity and the good in people and inspiring them, what do you know, the DCEU's best rated movie by far
Justice League - Must save the world from the CGI villain and Jesus resurrect Superman

Think about the best Marvel movies, and it usually boils down to a broader theme than "We have to save the world!".  Sometimes it includes that, but not always

Winter Solider - Security vs Privacy and trusting so much in the government
Iron Man - The perils of weaponizing technology and how should it be limited
Spider-Man - How we are defined by the choices we make and how that effects those around us
Civil War - The secrets and lies we hide can hurt far more than physical pain

Marvel has at least tended to weave some other themes into their "Gotta save the world!" movies though.  At their core, both Guardians of the Galaxy movies are about choosing who you want to be and building the family you want with those who matter to you.  Ragnarok was about actually ending the world (not Earth, but their world) to save the people, that's a novel twist on the normal theme.   Doctor Strange was about saving the world, but done through sacrifice, humility, and growth instead of just overpowering the baddy.  Age of Ultron expanded upon the theme from Iron Man in limited weaponized tech, but suffered from poor execution more than a flawed premise.  Not to mention, the team up movies are kind of expected to be the "Gotta save the world!" movies.

The first Avengers movie was ostensibly a "Gotta save the world!" movie, but they at least built up to it so you knew all the players outside of the chiutari, and had a compelling established villain in Loki. 

What DC really needs to do is hit some broader themes.  And they have to do better than "Oh look, now the BAD guys are gonna save the world!"  Such a mistake to make that movie with non established DCEU villains.
 

[StLunatic88]

35 minutes ago, THE DUKE said:

Think about the best Marvel movies, and it usually boils down to a broader theme than "We have to save the world!".  Sometimes it includes that, but not always

Winter Solider - Security vs Privacy and trusting so much in the government
Iron Man - The perils of weaponizing technology and how should it be limited
Spider-Man - How we are defined by the choices we make and how that effects those around us
Civil War - The secrets and lies we hide can hurt far more than physical pain

I know you called it out later, but lets not pretend that plenty of MCU films havent fallen into the "hole in the sky/end of the world" scenarios. The ones you mentioned are also considered by most to be in the best of the MCU films, and your point is exactly why. Those arent "Superhero Movies" they are Spy thriller (Winter Soldier), John Hughes (Homecoming), Space Opera (Guardians), Heist (Ant-Man) films that happen to have Comic Book characters in them. Thats why they are the best, but unfortunately we get plenty of junk thrown out that just falls under "Superhero" without an actual spine of a film genre to hold it up.

But Avengers, Cap 1, Dr Strange, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, and AoU all fall into the typical idea of a Superhero movie. And I think this really shows through most with Avengers: Age of Ultron. because when you compare it to the first Avengers, its basically the same plot (especially in the 3rd act) as they have to battle a faceless army and save the world. But in the first Avengers, it was so new, we were so pumped that we were getting something we've never seen before, and we got some amazing group shots, so it feels so darn good. But when we run back the same thing in the next installment, with only alittle bit of team character development (and a botched Villain) it does not feel nearly the same.

Now, there is no Defending DC here, they do not even have that first Avengers film to compare the rest of their Universe to, and we could go on for pages here on all the screw ups they had. Im just saying that as great as the top of the MCU is, the rest of is often feels very disappointing in comparison (and often gets the benefit of being part of the MCU when reviewed)

[StLunatic88]

1 hour ago, Deadpulse said:

but I think people forget how lucky Marvel got.

Exactly, all credit to them for getting it done, capitalizing on the opportunity, and building a decade long Universe. Its amazing, and we have never seen something like this before. 

But just like I pointed out with the very clever meme about how if the MCU started by Iron Man/Civil War/Guardians, it wouldnt be quite apples to apples comparison. DC has their Big Guns, 3 of them to be exact, so in theory, they should not have to build up their universe in the same way before they go to the ultimate team up.

And actually, their plan/timeline was very similar to what Marvel did for its lead up to the Avengers. They are both almost exactly 4 year time lines (April'08->May'12 compared to Nov'13->Nov'17). And if you treat the Incredible Hulk the same way the MCU did for its first 7 years (dont really count it) They are both looking at 5 films in that span with a pretty decent gap between the first and 2nd films. Three intro films (IM/Thor/Cap and Superman/Batman/WW) with an odd one also thrown in there that tried to expand the universe too fast (IM2/Suicide Squad). It just comes down to the leadership in each studio. Marvel got who has proven to be the best of the best in Kevin Feige (while also forcing out Perlmutter), while DCWB has had nothing but a mess on their hands.

With a few very small tweeks in the planning out of these DC films, they could have been in lock step with the MCU at this point. MoS could have stayed exactly the same (maybe just go a shade lighter on the suit, let him smile more, and actually save a few things through the destruction of Metropolis). He can even still kill Zod. Wonder Woman doesnt even need to be touched, but a better vision could have let the ending of the film be a slight bit better, and made it an absolutely incredible movie start to finish. And you could have even still done BvS to intro Batman. But pull out the Doomsday, the Lex and the MARTHA! and you've already got a much better movie. Make it more Batman needing to test Superman, find out where he stands, and realize in THAT movie that Superman is more human than he has ever been... You could have withstood the mess that Suicide Squad was and still had an amazing Justice League on the horizon.

Its just unfortunate how easy the path to a great DCU that there was, we can all see it, but unfortunately they couldnt.

[43M]

15 hours ago, THE DUKE said:

One thing I think these comic book movies need to stop doing so consistently is focusing the story on  saving the world.  Marvel falls into this trap some too, but DC has it bad.

Man of Steel - Must save the world from the alien who wants to terraform earth.  Ok, first movie in and an OP hero like Superman, makes sense
Batman v Superman - Must save the world from Superman...errrr......Doomsday, that Supers is A-OK, but now he's dead
Suicide Squad - Must save the world from the witch girls hurricane machine thingy with 1990's CGI sidekick
Wonder Woman - Sure the world is at war, but the biggest theme is believing in humanity and the good in people and inspiring them, what do you know, the DCEU's best rated movie by far
Justice League - Must save the world from the CGI villain and Jesus resurrect Superman

Agreed for the most part.

Didnt have an issue with Man of Steel doing it.    I actually think Man of Steel couldve been much better with just a few changes and better dialogue.    In general, I didnt have an issue with MoS's overall plot....just some of the execution.

Batman vs Superman IMO shouldve completely scrapped Doomsday and introducing anyone from the Justice League except maybe in the end credits.    I think the story shouldve centered around Lex Luthor (NOT Jesse Eisenberg's Lex, but a different version) being obsessed with Superman and actually trying to BEFRIEND him, but when Superman refuses, Lex pulls some strings and is able to convince Batman to help capture (NOT KILL), Superman.   Batman succeeds, but eventually realizes that Lex manipulated him and he breaks into Lex's facility to save Superman.   They could throw in a villain like Metallo, which wouldve worked perfectly and not been a threat to the world...just Superman and maybe Batman

Wonder Woman was fine story wise.

My idea for Suicide Squad before the movie came out was that the presidents family was kidnapped by a superpowered terrorist cell, and Waller hires the same people.    As I said, I dont think Suicide shouldve even been made until they developed the main characters of the DCEU....but they couldve easily made a movie that wasnt about saving the world.

Justice League however, will pretty much always have to have high stakes....same as the Avengers.   However, wish they had used Brainiac for the first movie instead.

[Calvert28]

If they do a new Batman without Affleck. I hope they go a darker direction then what we have seen before. Even Nolan's Batman's as great at they were went dark with the villains but Batman had some crystal clear boundries that he avoided. Personally I want to see a Batman that sturggles with it in a big way, where he is almost dealing with split personalities and really shows his darker side when it comes to getting to criminals and what he's willing to do to stop other Superheroes. I wanna see a behind the scenes type Batman. The one who borders on insanity after losing Damien or D!ck, the one who is willing to protect the world at all cost only to see him just barely be able to make it back to his humane side.

[43M]

34 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

If they do a new Batman without Affleck. I hope they go a darker direction then what we have seen before. Even Nolan's Batman's as great at they were went dark with the villains but Batman had some crystal clear boundries that he avoided. Personally I want to see a Batman that sturggles with it in a big way, where he is almost dealing with split personalities and really shows his darker side when it comes to getting to criminals and what he's willing to do to stop other Superheroes. I wanna see a behind the scenes type Batman. The one who borders on insanity after losing Damien or D!ck, the one who is willing to protect the world at all cost only to see him just barely be able to make it back to his humane side.

Thats basically what we got with Affleck in BvS....and while I think most people like Affleck, many didnt seem to like that he went over the edge.

Batman always has those boundaries.  Its a defining part of his character.    I dont mind the idea of him seeing him struggle with it at times, but not to the extremes you seem to want to see it.

I doubt they go overly dark after all the complaints they got about BvS and Man of Steel.    I know Batman is the one character you can have a darker tone with, but he should still be connected with the DCEU, and as such, I dont think they should or will go too dark with it.  

[O'Doyle Rules]

I no issues with WB getting to Justice League so quicky and making solo films after. It's just the product so far.

[seminoles1]

12 minutes ago, O'Doyle Rules said:

I no issues with WB getting to Justice League so quicky and making solo films after. It's just the product so far.

Agreed.  The "Justice League" cartoon series proved that.

[43M]

6 hours ago, O'Doyle Rules said:

I no issues with WB getting to Justice League so quicky and making solo films after. It's just the product so far.

I agree to a point, but I think the way Marvel did it has really highlighted the flaws in the way DC decided to go about it.    Marvel introduced their characters slowly and developed them within the same universe and then it all culminated in The Avengers and they just blew  up and got better from there.     DC clearly just rushed everything and no one felt really established going into Justice League.   Sure, fans of these characters from comics, cartoons and other sources know them well, but what about casual fans?    And beyond that, even the characters that we all know werent exactly how we know them, which is okay to a point, but if youre going to make Batman a killer, you damn well better establish how he got to that point.   Even though many love Affleck in the role, I think many have rejected the current Batman because he was just thrown into BvS as a killer.   

Starting off with Man of Steel wasnt too bad, even the final product we got, which I thought was okay, was flawed.   Problem is, Superman hasnt been viewed well in the public eye for quite a long time.    To start off with Superman, they needed a way to make him more likable and really capture audiences....and they failed.     Even though I liked Superman in Man of Steel, the movie was a bit pretentious, it never became "fun" (the action was entertaining enough, but the movie itself wasnt really fun), and Superman was never established (among audiences) as a character they should be invested in.    They attempted to give him human problems and make him more down to earth and relatable, which is perfectly fine, but wasnt executed well because I dont think the people involved understood the character enough.

Point is, the tone was all wrong from the beginning, and alot of people want to blame Zach Synder.    I definitely dont think Snyder helped matters with his messy storytelling, but the tone was all wrong for Superman from the get go and they never seemed to move on from that.    I blame the studio MUCH more than Zach Snyder, because they had such a hard on for Christopher Nolan that they brought him and his team over for Man of Steel and it just didnt work.    I also think the failure of Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern scared them away from making a "lighter" version of Superman.

In general, outside of the Dark Knight trilogy, I think studio involvement over at WB has been their biggest downfall in regards to the product.    Like I said, they need to find the right people that love these characters and stories and then just let them do their thing.    If they dont want to do that, they may as well quit now.   They are sitting on a cash cow but have no idea how to milk it.   

 

[O'Doyle Rules]

BvS still grossed over 700 mill worldwide and SS over 800 while getting slammed by critics. If both were considered good movies, JL wouldv'e performed better. 

[43M]

38 minutes ago, O'Doyle Rules said:

BvS still grossed over 700 mill worldwide and SS over 800 while getting slammed by critics. If both were considered good movies, JL wouldv'e performed better. 

I agree....at least with BvS. 

My point is, a big reason BvS wasnt good is because it felt rushed....like they tried to pack way too much into it.    Had they taken a step back and spent more time developing the characters through more than 2 movies before JL, the movies likely wouldve been better and they wouldnt have had to force so much development into one movie.

Im not going to argue it much.   We both agree there have been major missteps on the part of WB.     

PS....no one should be listening to "professional critics" to make up their minds of whether or not they see a movie.