Justice League **Spoilers from post 980 onward**

HandsomeBob

Wedwood wrote: »

Think I'll leave this movie for bluray, if you're begging people to see it you're in trouble! The only people who really seem to want this movie are the comic book fans.

I think another problem casual audiences have with this franchise is the complete mishandling of Superman. Richard Donner's version framed how general audiences want Superman to look and act. Christopher Reeve effectively became Superman. Cavill's version may be closer to the modern comic versions, but general audiences don't want that version, they want Reeve's version.

Another issue, is the general look of the JL characters as a group. They don't look like a top notch group of superheroes, if anything they more resemble the naffness of the Kick-Ass group.

Bryan Singer gave the audience a Superman inspired by Reeves......they weren't interested. But I do agree this is perhaps not the Superman they want. Wouldn't be surprised if Shazam overtakes Superman in popularity with the audience tbh, as the former plays into what audiences seem to want these days.

In regards to how they looked, they honestly looked fine visually as you would expect from Snyder. The exception being Cyborg where the simply went down the wrong route conceptually.

Affleck looked poor out of costume at times though. Easy to spot the the reshoots because of this.

ps3lover

Justice League probably won’t Out gross IT (an R rated horror film), that has to be embarrassing for Warner Brothers. This is what happens when you try to force something and don’t bother listening to complaints.
Sure it’s easy to ignore complainers (sometimes you shouldn’t listen to them) but the massive drops BvS suffered after opening weekend should have told them something (it didn’t even hit a 2.0 multi). It’s all grand until the audience stops turning up and that’s clearly what’s happened.

Brief_Lives

Drumpot wrote: »

Brief_Lives wrote: »

Look, these films should be a, slam dunk for DC... Anyone pretending otherwise is fooling themselves..
some of the best characters ever created, infinite story lines available, and they utterly messed up..

Aside from Burton and Nolan.. The films have been rubbish..
recently the casting of Cavill, Gadot and Mamoa were inspired, but the films have been a dark mess... And cut to pieces from whatever the director originally envisioned...

People presume box office returns equates to gauging how good a movie is which is ridiculous. The more money a movie makes , the more filtered it is to appeal to mass audience. That doesn’t mean it’s not good but a poorly performing movie doesn’t mean it’s objectively bad either. I enjoy Burton, Nolan and Snyder’s Batman’s, you don’t have to pick between them and can annoy each one on its merits.

It’s ironic that people say they want things different yet when you look at Most major movies it’s very similar ones doing well in the pg-13 or lower ranks. This suggest strongly that the real truth is that People inherently enjoy something familiar , that’s why marvel and Star Wars movies do so well. I think it’s possible to enjoy DC and marvel for different reasons.

Justice league was a mess but I think it was partially because DC panicked and tried to marvel it up with the director of the avengers. It doesn’t feel fresh, coherent or that different from marvel. DC also , stupidly, tried to scale down runtime arbitrarily which doesn’t make sense. But this again was trying to squeeze into the marvel template of less equals more.

What I would say is to I would not bring my younger lads to See a 2.5 hour movie , but would be more inclined to bring them to one around the / hour mark and I think this is a major reason marvel stick to that target. Not for story telling or to enhance a movie but to keep it within younger children’s (and some adults) attention spans.

Marvel don’t really tell epic stories (Avengers 1 was closest to one) and I feel BVS felt more epic then anything marvel have done. I thought the theatrical release did the movie a disservice. I’m actually excited about watching it again soon in my new converted attic in the dark! I’ve no excitement about watching marvel movies. I really enjoy them but not as much on repeat viewing.

DC went wrong with justice league by trying to please everybody and in the end pleased nobody. It’s funny all the hate for Snyder because I think he makes wonderful worlds come alive on screen. Watchmen (extended) is one of my favorite movies and possibly the greatest superhero movie brought to the screen.

So you agree with me..
As an aside, I do like the extended version of BvS...
DC are close to explaining their complexity to the audience... I think we can all sense it, but they need to trust the directors more..

Watchmen is incredible.

kerplun k

At what point did they think it would be okay for

Aquaman and Flash to go grave digging and dig up the dead body of Superman, surely there’s a less laughable way of resurrecting the character, this bit was just as ridiculous as the CGI’d face

It kinda seems like they never had a concrete plan of executing his return, (or they did and it was radically changed). The way it was handled, plus the stuff with the CGI, leads me to believe that he wasn’t always going to be back for this film. I honestly believe that the film would have been better off if they left him out altogether.

Manach

C rating.
Normally I enjoy Super Hero films and found prior DC films fairly okay in this regard (expecting Wonder Woman which was excellent). In JL however this not gell in any meaningful way. From a cookie cutter villain to actors that did not seem want to be there (Affleck) and comic relief that fell utterly flat (Flash) JL seems more a step back than any evolution of the DC franchise.

JamboMac

This Barry Allen and the cyborg are terrible, need to recast the flash as somebody else and just get rid of the cyborg.

IncognitoMan

Some of the leaked deleted scenes. Most not finished visually.

https://streamable.com/6vg2m

q2xv9rjei4awgb

IncognitoMan wrote: »

Some of the leaked deleted scenes. Most not finished visually.

https://streamable.com/6vg2m

Thought the parademon was Firefly for a moment

HandsomeBob

Isabelle Helpful Variable wrote: »

Thought the parademon was Firefly for a moment

You could still be right....knowing how much Snyder was trying to pack in here and all.

Six for six? Eff that. They can refund my ticket six times, if they'd like.

Chris_Heilong

MOS and BvS extended cut are both great films, dark moody with interesting characters, Justice league is alright and certainly not terrible, an enjoyable mess with poor character development, WB cutting 45 minutes from the film really hurt the narrative. Asking Weadon to come on and remake the film into a comedy was a mistake also and it shows, It is really interesting hearing what the film was originally intended to be like and it is a shame that WB did not just let Zack finish his trilogy.

dublinman1990

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

MOS and BvS extended cut are both great films, dark moody with interesting characters, Justice league is alright and certainly not terrible, an enjoyable mess with poor character development, WB cutting 45 minutes from the film really hurt the narrative. Asking Weadon to come on and remake the film into a comedy was a mistake also and it shows, It is really interesting hearing what the film was originally intended to be like and it is a shame that WB did not just let Zack finish his trilogy.

Zack Snyder was not forced by WB to not finish JL. He opted to take time off due to the sudden death of his daughter to suicide.

His wife, Deborah, has been doing media promotional work for JL as she is executive producer. Zack on the other hand had to step aside as director because he views the death of his daughter to be a very personal loss for him to deal with in the public eye. I would not say that it is the fault of WB if he was not able to continue doing this movie in his own style. This was his own decision & I do respect him for making it even though it was an unexpected one to make at the time.

HandsomeBob

dublinman1990 wrote: »

Zack Snyder was not forced by WB to not finish JL. He opted to take time off due to the sudden death of his daughter to suicide.

His wife, Deborah, has been doing media promotional work for JL as she is executive producer. Zack on the other hand had to step aside as director because he views the death of his daughter to be a very personal loss for him to deal with in the public eye. I would not say that it is the fault of WB if he was not able to continue doing this movie in his own style. This was his own decision & I do respect him for making it even though it was an unexpected one to make at the time.

There is definitely more to it I think. Zack liked a post from his son on social media which described WB's "meddling and forced comedy" in the film.

When Whedon was brought in as well, the original claim was that he was just brought in to complete the film in post production as a favour to WB and a grieving Zack. Next thing we know Whedon is doing reshoots 3 months before release that arguably consisted of at least 25% of the final product and bringing in his own composer, further sending JL adrift from it's two predecessors.

I don't doubt that it was Zack's call to ultimately step back, but I believe this was after much harassment from WB behind the scenes over the film. The rumour going around is that WB saw Snyder's rough cut and lost their heads completely.

HandsomeBob

HandsomeBob wrote: »

There is definitely more to it I think. Zack liked a post from his son on social media which described WB's "meddling and forced comedy" in the film.

When Whedon was brought in as well, the original claim was that he was just brought in to complete the film in post production as a favour to WB and a grieving Zack. Next thing we know Whedon is doing reshoots 3 months before release that arguably consisted of at least 25% of the final product and bringing in his own composer, further sending JL adrift from it's two predecessors.

I don't doubt that it was Zack's call to ultimately step back, but I believe this was after much harassment from WB behind the scenes over the film. The rumour going around is that WB saw Snyder's rough cut and lost their heads completely.

I mean... do you really think anyone would continue working with a project after your daughter kills themselves? I really doubt there's any conspiracy theories. The movie wasn't complete, so they had to bring in someone else, because the studio had to meet a deadline.

Snyder likely wasn't involved in the editing that went on behind the background while he was gone, hence the liking of social media.

Mr Freeze

Deleted User wrote: »

I mean... do you really think anyone would continue working with a project after your daughter kills themselves?

I think he did continue working on it for a few months after the death, then stood down.

To me, it looks like he was removed or forced out. Pretty horrible thing to do to someone after such a loss.

This is worth a read:
https://www.youdontreadcomics.com/blog/2017/7/23/was-zack-snyder-secretly-fired-from-justice-league

It makes little sense if Snyder was only stepping down for personal, family related reasons for Whedon to drastically alter the look of the film. And if Warner Bros wasn’t unhappy with the direction Snyder had taken up to now, they wouldn’t want Whedon to create something that looked vastly different than what Snyder would have made. The departure is fairly obvious between Snyder’s DC films and this trailer, so it can only be surmised that such a change was desired by WB.

When taking into account the timing of all this, it seems even more likely that Snyder was taken off the film. Snyder stepped down May 22nd, two months or so after his daughter’s death, but only a week before the release of Wonder Woman, a film that is not only definitively more successful than any of the earlier Snyder-driven films, but also distinctly brighter and warmer in the visuals

Mr Freeze

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I think he did continue working on it for a few months after the death, then stood down.

To me, it looks like he was removed or forced out. Pretty horrible thing to do to someone after such a loss.

This is worth a read:
https://www.youdontreadcomics.com/blog/2017/7/23/was-zack-snyder-secretly-fired-from-justice-league

Oh really? I know it was reported in the news that he stepped down because of his daughter, but wasn't sure of the timing. You'd have to wonder whether the death of his daughter was having a huge affect on the production of the movie.

It's a sh1tty move, absolutely, but they were expecting JL to be their cashcow, the thing to start raking in that Marvel-style money.

It's a pity, because it feels like they're going to struggle to get the directors they need now. I doubt Whedon would come back to do another movie, because he stopped doing the Marvels because of creative differences - so I can't imagine him going back to another meddling studio, like DC/WB are proving to be.

Mr Freeze

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh really? I know it was reported in the news that he stepped down because of his daughter.

I hate saying it, but WB might have used that as an excuse rather than creating more controversy by having it in the news that they fired him.

Mr Freeze

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I hate saying it, but WB might have used that as an excuse rather than creating more controversy by having it in the news that they fired him.

Has it ever been reported that directors were fired? Most of the time it's "stepping down due to creative differences", with the director sounding like it was their choice. Like with Edgar Wright and Ant-man.

Mr Freeze

Deleted User wrote: »

Has it ever been reported that directors were fired? Most of the time it's "stepping down due to creative differences", with the director sounding like it was their choice. Like with Edgar Wright and Ant-man.

The 2 guys from the Han Solo film were fired. Thats the most recent one I can think of.

Penn

I think it's unlikely Snyder would have gone along with WB using his daughter's suicide as a reason for him stepping down if it wasn't actually the case.

Maybe WB wanted more changes and brought on Whedon to help, and then Snyder decided it just wasn't worth it staying on as they were changing too much of what he wanted and after his daughter's death just decided it wasn't worth the stress. But I think to suggest WB used his daughter's suicide as a way to remove him and that Snyder went along with it if it wasn't actually the case, it doesn't seem like something he'd do.

I know he continued working on the film after his daughter's suicide, but from his own statement it was being back at work that made him realise he was needed more at home to be with his family, and I don't see anything wrong with that, especially considering how much work would have been involved in post-production and the likely stresses as part of that (especially if he was battling with the studio).

Mr Freeze

Penn wrote: »

I know he continued working on the film after his daughter's suicide, but from his own statement it was being back at work that made him realise he was needed more at home to be with his family, and I don't see anything wrong with that, especially considering how much work would have been involved in post-production and the likely stresses as part of that (especially if he was battling with the studio).

That is probably the truth, but I can't help thinking that WB forced him out as they wanted something more MCU and it wasn't happening.

Mr Freeze

Mr Freeze wrote: »

That is probably the truth, but I can't help thinking that WB forced him out as they wanted something more MCU and it wasn't happening.

They were very likely going to let him go anyway, but saw his daughter's suicide as the boon to get it to happen.

And that's a sentence I can't believe I wrote. I feel icky now.

Penn

Mr Freeze wrote: »

That is probably the truth, but I can't help thinking that WB forced him out as they wanted something more MCU and it wasn't happening.

I think the word was Whedon was already brought on board in an unofficial capacity before his daughter's suicide to help script the reshoots (probably more in line with what WB wanted), so I think they'd already made their move to make it more lighter like the MCU even before his daughter's suicide.

I don't think they could let him go completely (as the negative publicity might scare people off the film and there wasn't enough time to bring on a new director) and still wanted him to stay on and implement changes as agreed, but his daughter's death just likely gave himself an out and he took it.

Again, I think people are reading too much into it. Unless we hear from Snyder himself on the situation I'd be hesitant to throw accusations at WB for forcing him out.

It's definitely a film of two directors though, and suffers in part because of it. But I think many of the Whedon touches/dialogue added to the film helped in many ways too.

I'm amazed Whedon said yes. They must have given him an absolute sh*t tonne of money to do it, because I thought he would have sworn off productions like that after Avengers 2, which supposedly suffered from studio meddling.

ps3lover

I’m surprised they didn’t remove him after BvS.

Penn

ps3lover wrote: »

I’m surprised they didn’t remove him after BvS.

They certainly took steps to limit him, considering Justice League was supposed to be a Part 1 & 2 and then bringing in the likes of Geoff Johns to help oversee the rest of the DCEU.

MilesMorales1

I listened to the directors commentary for age of ultron recently and Whedon sounded miserable about it as he was talking.

FunLover18

MilesMorales1 wrote:

I listened to the directors commentary for age of ultron recently and Whedon sounded miserable about it as he was talking.

Well that film suffered from heavy studio influence, obviously all Marvel films do given the overall arc but AoU is one where it is more obvious and is known who have been a sore point. The whole Thor in a pool thing was all down to the studio. I hope theyve learnt their listen for Infinity War

MilesMorales1

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I listened to the directors commentary for age of ultron recently and Whedon sounded miserable about it as he was talking.

Yea, it seemed that the reason the movie was such a mess was down to the studio more or less seizing control. Which is odd, consider that Whedon's Avengers is still ranked #5 of the top box office movies of all time.

It does seem like Marvel learned from their mistake though, with the likes of Thor Ragnarok and Waititi's fingerprints being absolutely everywhere. I'm sure there was some meddling, but you can still see that his voice is there (literally, too).

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Yea, it seemed that the reason the movie was such a mess was down to the studio more or less seizing control. Which is odd, consider that Whedon's Avengers is still ranked #5 of the top box office movies of all time.

It does seem like Marvel learned from their mistake though, with the likes of Thor Ragnarok and Waititi's fingerprints being absolutely everywhere. I'm sure there was some meddling, but you can still see that his voice is there (literally, too).

I think the whole of Phase 2 suffered with how the studio tended to interfere, maybe with the exception of GOTG.

I do utterly love Age of Ultron though, despite its flaws and the changes he was forced to make (the rest of the Banner/Nat scene in the house should have been in the movie, it's brilliant and makes a lot more sense).

Maybe they were harder on Whedon since it was an Avengers film though as opposed to a solo film.