PDA

View Full Version : Justice League Movie.



GypsyLayla
11-17-2017, 10:15 AM
I am so irritated at the critics review score of this movie on Rotten Tomatoes. Justice League was FUN!!! Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash and Aquaman ROCKED. Even if you HATE Bafleck (and I'm in the lukewarm camp) the movie was SO MUCH BETTER than Batman versus Superman (which devolved into a incoherent mess every time Lex--worst casting ever-- took the stage). Was it as good as Wonder Woman? No.

But the actors had good chemistry, the plot was as strong as Avengers 1 (Aliens want to take over the earth), and there was a nice amount of NOT SHALLOW humor.

I don't know WHAT the critics are thinking.

What did you think?

robeiae
11-17-2017, 06:18 PM
I think saying a movie was so much better than Batman v Superman--which is what I'm hearing a lot of people say--is not necessarily a compliment, because that movie was so awful.

But I haven't seen Justice League yet; I do plan to, though. I think my biggest concern, from reading various reviews, is Aquaman. It seems like he was just tossed into the movie and plays the roll of "tough guy with gnarly hair."

As to Affleck, honestly that's pretty much the only aspect of BvS that I kinda enjoyed. I really like him in the role. It's not his fault that the screenwriting and direction and plot were all lousy. So I'm hoping he'll fare better in JL.

Jcomp
11-17-2017, 06:51 PM
I think saying a movie was so much better than Batman v Superman--which is what I'm hearing a lot of people say--is not necessarily a compliment, because that movie was so awful.



As I'm inordinately fond of reminding people, better than bad isn't necessarily good.

Also, regarding the original comment, the Rotten Tomatoes score is just a percentage of critics who gave it an overall positive review. It doesn't mean that the negative reviews are all absolutely lambasting it (or, for that matter, that the positive reviews are high praise). In short, it just means only 37% of critics have given the movie an overall positive review, not that the movie is a 37/100 on a quality scale. The actual average rating is 5.2 / 10, which is middling, but hardly atrocious or worthy of major aggravation. That Kingsman sequel had a 51% "tomato-meter" score, but a comparable 5.3 / 10 average rating, for example.

nighttimer
11-17-2017, 06:57 PM
I am so irritated at the critics review score of this movie on Rotten Tomatoes. Justice League was FUN!!! Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash and Aquaman ROCKED. Even if you HATE Bafleck (and I'm in the lukewarm camp) the movie was SO MUCH BETTER than Batman versus Superman (which devolved into a incoherent mess every time Lex--worst casting ever-- took the stage). Was it as good as Wonder Woman? No.

But the actors had good chemistry, the plot was as strong as Avengers 1 (Aliens want to take over the earth), and there was a nice amount of NOT SHALLOW humor.

I don't know WHAT the critics are thinking.

What did you think?

I think I have no interest in Justice League and I think a lot of critics feel its a over-correction by DC/Warner to "lighten up" after the leaden Batman v. Superman. I think the fact the film was started by one director (Zack Snyder) and finished/reshot by another (Joss Whedon) is going to lead to some inconsistencies in plot, camerawork, script, tone and Henry Cavill's CGI-erased mustache.

I think whenever the suits tell the talent the film MUST clock in no more than 2 hours, you're going to get a choppy and uneven final product. I think DC/Warner desperately wanted to use the good will created by Wonder Woman to spill over on Justice League. Apparently, the critics don't believe it did.

I think Ben Affleck wants out of the Batsuit in the worst way and eventually he's getting out. I think being better than BvS or Suicide Squad is a pretty low bar to clear and if Justice League does that I'll still wait to check it out on DVD or HBO.

Most of all, I think if you enjoy a movie who cares what the critics think or what Rotten Tomatoes thinks. Like it, dislike it or "meh" about it, what you like is what you like. Somebody likes The Room more than 2001: A Space Odyessy or Casablanca.

That's their right and nobody gets to say they're wrong.

JohnLReed
11-18-2017, 12:57 AM
It's very interesting to me how different the audience experience was in comparison to the critic experience.

As of right now on Rotten Tomatoes:

Critics: 40%
Audience: 86%

I thought it was a good movie. Fun, and more humorous than I would have believed. A lot closer to the audience score than the critics.

Alessandra Kelley
11-18-2017, 11:11 PM
NOT impressed with the treatment of Wonder Woman and the Amazons. o_o

Kjbartolotta
11-18-2017, 11:27 PM
NOT impressed with the treatment of Wonder Woman and the Amazons. o_o

Really? Because Zack Snyder was so accurate with the Spartans, I'd think he'd have just notebooks of historical details to draw upon.

katiemac
11-19-2017, 12:05 AM
NOT impressed with the treatment of Wonder Woman and the Amazons. o_o

Did you see the movie? Just curious, because I saw the film and then I saw the side-by-side costume photo circulating social media, and I honestly didn't notice any midriffs in the movie. I'm curious what people noticed who may been more keyed in to the differences.

Twick
11-20-2017, 11:12 PM
I saw it last night and concluded that the early reports "fun, but flawed" are correct. The flaws possibly resulting from Zach Snyder getting whiplash from trying to change directions from BvS. (Seriously, I hope the DVD has a director's commentary where Snyder and Whedon explain what parts of the movie are theirs, because this really does NOT feel like a Zach Snyder movie.)

The good: Batman is grim, but no longer a psychopath who tortures his victims. Gadot continues blending otherworldly charm combined with steely resolve - you really get the feel that she's Superman's equal. Is there going to be a Flash movie? If so, I'm there, because Ezra Miller is adorkable, but able to pull some emotional strings when needed. Cyborg was not a showy part but had enough charisma to make him one of my favorites - I'd go to a Cyborg movie too. Best of all, the movie isn't entirely shot at night, in a rainstorm.

The bad: The villain is standard "maniac gonna take over the world." There's still some murky religious symbolism that doesn't seem to lead anywhere. Seriously, what is Snyder trying to say about God and Man? Does he have a point, or is he just under the impression that religious references make your film "deep"? Jason Mamoa LOOKS great at Aquaman, but isn't given a lot to do, and his American accent seems oddly mundane. As in BvS, a lot of emotional backstory of the characters is either given as straight exposition ("Bruce, you shouldn't feel guilty about Superman's death") or skipped entirely (Aquaman has some emotional baggage about his mom. I have no idea what it is.) And plotwise, when Superman shows up, we know the game is over for the villain, so the conclusion is a bit of a letdown.

The ???: Why was the Russian family in the story? Why did they leave the glowy thing in the parking lot?

My take: This is probably my 2nd favorite DCEU film so far. The actors have more to do than brooding broodily, the plot isn't insanely convoluted and the humour is, I think, at the right level - not a kneeslapper every 30 seconds, but the sort of humour people in difficult circumstances make as a way of dealing with tension. Total score 7/10, would see again.

katiemac
11-21-2017, 02:03 AM
(Seriously, I hope the DVD has a director's commentary where Snyder and Whedon explain what parts of the movie are theirs, because this really does NOT feel like a Zach Snyder movie.)

There is online a list that was, supposedly, leaked by the VFX team who worked on it. That's all you are likely to get in the near future, since Zack is by all reports completely done and it would be poor form for Whedon to discuss, especially since he does not have a director's credit.

The Russian family, if you couldn't already tell, was all Whedon reshoots.

Twick
11-21-2017, 09:21 PM
Did you see the movie? Just curious, because I saw the film and then I saw the side-by-side costume photo circulating social media, and I honestly didn't notice any midriffs in the movie. I'm curious what people noticed who may been more keyed in to the differences.

I didn't notice any midriffs, but the Amazon action scene was pretty intense. And I tend to be pretty oblivious of things like costuming and butt-shots. I have to be shown them and then go "d'uh!"

Laer Carroll
11-22-2017, 01:34 AM
The comments solidified my decision: wait till I can rent it for $2 from RedBox. The only character the previews made me want to see was Wonder Woman, and all the teriff action shots can't make up for disinterest in the characters involved in them.

nighttimer
11-23-2017, 04:57 AM
Justice League "won" the opening week with $96 million. And that's about all it's gonna win. (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-box-office-loss/)


It’s something that few could have predicted, but Warner Bros. could potentially lose as much as $100 million on Justice (https://screenrant.com/tag/justice-league/) League (https://screenrant.com/tag/justice-league/). DC Films’ first crack at an ensemble superhero movie did not pan out the same way everyone thought it would. The movie has prompted mixed reactions from critics, in addition to earning a B+ Cinemascore (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-cinemascore/) and an underwhelming Rotten Tomato Score (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-rotten-tomatoes-score/) rating. While the film could have done far worse both critically and commercially, that doesn’t mean it’s anywhere near a success either.


The blockbuster nabbed $96 million in its opening weekend domestically (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-opening-weekend-box-office-domestic/), far from the $110-120 million (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-box-office-predictions/) that it was tracking for but a couple of weeks earlier. Justice League‘s U.S. debut was the lowest for a DC Film release yet, which is all the more ironic given that it was supposed to be Warner Bros.’ superhero crown jewel. Internationally, the film did better, earning $281.5 million (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-international-box-office/), but even that may not be enough to ensure that the expensive blockbuster is a commercial success. Case in point, it’s now being reported that Justice League might not even turn a profit and worse, it could lose its studio a significant amount of money.

Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/11/20/warner-bros-faces-a-possible-50m-to-100m-loss-on-justice-league/#419070ea5d8b) has broken down the numbers in an effort to gauge what the movie’s total gross will be. Justice League‘s overall budget ballooned to reportedly $300 million due to reshoots (https://screenrant.com/justice-league-movie-reshoot-changes-explained-snyder-whedon/), with an additional $150 million for its marketing. That’s a total of $450 million spent on the movie, in addition to the global home entertainment costs ($60 million), talent guild residuals ($20 million), interest expense ($20 million), and finally talent costs to cover the cast, crew, and producers ($50 million). Final cost? Around $600 million.


To complete the equation, Forbes has made an educated guess based on the current box office trajectory of the movie, with the domestic haul possibly ending up at $235 million (2.45 multiplied by the film’s opening weekend haul, with 2.45 being the median multiplier for the last 4 films from the franchise). Internationally, Justice League could pocket as much as $400 million, assuming it performs along the lines of Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (https://screenrant.com/tag/batman-v-superman/). That would give the film $635 million in earnings worldwide, roughly $545 million of which would end up in WB’s bank account. Should that be the case, that would result in at least a $55 million loss – before taking into account factors like overhead costs and the amount of time it takes for the film to earn revenue from other channels than the box office, which could drive the total to $100 million.


This, in turn, puts DC Films’ larger franchise plans in a tough spot. While James Wan’s Aquaman (https://screenrant.com/tag/aquaman/) has already finished filming and both David F. Sandberg’s Shazam! (https://screenrant.com/tag/shazam/) and Patty Jenkins’ Wonder Woman 2 (https://screenrant.com/tag/wonder-woman-2/) are expected to keep moving forward as planned, there are currently several other DC movies in development – including, Nightwing (https://screenrant.com/tag/nightwing/), Suicide Squad 2 (https://screenrant.com/tag/suicide-squad-2/), and Batgirl (https://screenrant.com/tag/batgirl/) – that are now in danger of falling by the wayside, once WB and DC decide how best to move forward from here. Of course, given that it has just been a couple of days since Justice League was released in theaters around the world, it’s best to not jump to too many conclusions either way just yet.

Roxxsmom
11-23-2017, 05:03 AM
NOT impressed with the treatment of Wonder Woman and the Amazons. o_o

The review I heard yesterday said, now that we have a male director again, we're back to square one with male gaze "booty shots."

Given the recent success of WW, and some other movies (like the most recent Mad Max movie) where women are treated like human beings, why do people male directors still think it's a good idea to objectify them?

Laer Carroll
11-23-2017, 11:20 PM
Given the recent success of WW, and some other movies (like the most recent Mad Max movie) where women are treated like human beings, why do people male directors still think it's a good idea to objectify them?
I imagine you're being rhetorical. From all your posts I know you're way more smart enough to know the answer: it will take dozens more movies "where women are treated like human beings" to even BEGIN to effect change.

Max Vaehling
11-24-2017, 03:32 AM
After enjoying both Wonder Woman and the trailers for this one, I watched it the other day and was... not exactly disappointed but underwhelmed. There were some good jokes and some of the actors had good chemistry (Gadot and Affleck, mostly), but there was a lot of empty pathos, especially around the Superman storyline. It's something I've seen a lot in Zack Snyder movies: He's going through all the motions of a good action flick but it just doesn't connect. Or it didn't for me.

Twick
11-24-2017, 08:54 PM
After enjoying both Wonder Woman and the trailers for this one, I watched it the other day and was... not exactly disappointed but underwhelmed. There were some good jokes and some of the actors had good chemistry (Gadot and Affleck, mostly), but there was a lot of empty pathos, especially around the Superman storyline. It's something I've seen a lot in Zack Snyder movies: He's going through all the motions of a good action flick but it just doesn't connect. Or it didn't for me.

The bolded parts hit the nail on the head about what I've felt about BvS and (to a lesser extent but still here) Justice League.

I've read commentaries on BvS talking about how Batman has been corrupted by his grief over Robin's murder. But I didn't SEE it. As far as I could tell from the acting or presentation, Batman wasn't particularly grieved or maddened. Same thing with the infamous "Martha" scene - one commentator gave a brilliant summary of how this would make Batman see himself for the first time as on the same side as the man who killed *his* mother, and Superman as that devastated child he had been. But again, I have to put that as an overlay over the scene, because it certainly didn't leap out at me.

Perhaps Snyder overestimates how subtle he can be and still get his message across. (I may not be the most perceptive person in the audience, but I don't think I'm the only obtuse one.) Or maybe he's just bad at emotional moments. I think I know now why Whedon introduced the Russian family scenes. They are wildly out of place, but without them there is no human cost to Steppenwolf's actions in a deserted power station. At least we felt a bit of the confusion, the terror, of this family faced with things beyond their understanding that are trying to kill them.

nighttimer
11-27-2017, 10:03 PM
I've read commentaries on BvS talking about how Batman has been corrupted by his grief over Robin's murder. But I didn't SEE it. As far as I could tell from the acting or presentation, Batman wasn't particularly grieved or maddened. Same thing with the infamous "Martha" scene - one commentator gave a brilliant summary of how this would make Batman see himself for the first time as on the same side as the man who killed *his* mother, and Superman as that devastated child he had been. But again, I have to put that as an overlay over the scene, because it certainly didn't leap out at me.

Would that one commentator be Bob "Moviebob" Chipman and that brilliant summary part of his two-part deconstruction of Batman v. Superman?

Inquiring minds....;)

Myrealana
11-27-2017, 10:21 PM
I liked it, but it felt flat to me.

The villain was obvious, the solution was too easy, the characters were shallow.

It was fine. It wasn't horrible. I liked Flash.

I just wanted something with a little more heart.

Twick
12-01-2017, 01:35 AM
Would that one commentator be Bob "Moviebob" Chipman and that brilliant summary part of his two-part deconstruction of Batman v. Superman?

Inquiring minds....;)

Yes, that was what got me thinking about the fact that I don't get a real "smack in the face emotional punch" in Snyder movies, even when what's happening on screen *should* give me one.

Cernex
12-09-2017, 02:45 PM
I saw it when it was in the theaters some time back (friends figuratively dragged me to see it) and it was, in three leters, "meh."

Did I hate it? No. Was it better than Batman vs. Superman? Yes. Was it fun to guess what scenes were from Snyder and what wre Whedon reshoots? Heck yeah (that CGI upper lip). Could you tell that Zack was going for more dark and brooding (and boring) and Whedon pretty much had to salvage the whole thing as much as possible with whatever they could afford (I'm also pretty sure they went with body doubles when possible. I'm still not sure the Aquaman holding Flash during the "I see you" scene is the same actor) using scraps left by Snyder? Yes.

However, the problem is that the villain was boring and the special effects were quite bad. I didn't hate the constant quipping as much as some people did (although it is very noticeable they were desperate to make the movie lighter and fluffier). Which leads to cahracter inconsistencies (aquaman and cyborg in particular are all over the place. Superman too... but only when compared to the previous Snyder films). They tried their technical best (not counting WW) and it went from horrid to "pasable", which is an improvement, I guess.

Didn't regret it, didn't make me angry, but not interested in seenig it again anytime soon, though.

Twick
12-15-2017, 09:01 PM
It's infinitely ironic that Whedon was brought in to finish it, because the story's practically a copy of The Avengers in the setup. The villain wants to take over the world using boxy glowy things. He wears a horned helmet. He has alien henchmen flitting about, and is really the cat's paw for a larger galactic villain. The Team Must Learn To Work Together in order to take him down.

It's a shame that no one thought to copy the Avengers wholesale by making Steppenwolf actually charismatic or giving him a personality beyond "powermad alien warlord." Perhaps all their Personal Trait Pills had been given to Jesse Eisenburg, who suffered a serious overdose on them?