Justice league box office: What went wrong

[Madam-Shogun-Assassin]

I never saw Grace so pissed before lol

[choptop]

Hell nah, **** that movie. I mean WTF was that ****?? lol

For me it was the only good marvel movie of 2017 SMHC was to YA and GOG2 was just to much was it the comdey that you didn't like in Thor? For me that was the biggest problem not just in Thor but all 3 movies it just didn't work.

[tkitna]

So much hear say, so whatever lol. On another note I REALLY love Spider-man homecoming and i thought it was the only good marvel film that came out this year. Having said that i'm not sure about how i feel about that writing team heading Flashpoint.

SMHC is the one Marvel movie I didn't like this year (loved Keatons Vulture, but just burnt out on Spiderman). I thought Logan, GotG 2, and Thor 3 were all good. Funny how tastes differ.

[Madam-Shogun-Assassin]

For me it was the only good marvel movie of 2017 SMHC was to YA and GOG2 was just to much was it the comdey that you didn't like in Thor? For me that was the biggest problem not just in Thor but all 3 movies it just didn't work.

Yes, but for me it worked for Spider-Man. The rest was just too cringe for me. Logan was great but it wasn't a MCU film so i didn't bring it up.

[RikWriter]

Hell nah, **** that movie. I mean WTF was that ****?? lol

It was Marvel Studios letting an innovative director do his thing, successfully.

[XPac]

I never saw Grace so pissed before lol

I know... she's completely freaking out over these guys. I agree with the criticism about doing a Flashpoint movie as it seems WAAY too soon to reboot anything. But the choice of directors seems understandable enough. DC picked guys that just did a successful comic book movie. Like Spider-Man Homecoming or not, it was both a commercial and critical success. They got the job done with that movie, so the Vacation guys probably should get the benefit of the doubt for that at least.

[Emperor-of-Dragons]

I know... she's completely freaking out over these guys. I agree with the criticism about doing a Flashpoint movie as it seems WAAY too soon to reboot anything. But the choice of directors seems understandable enough. DC picked guys that just did a successful comic book movie. Like Spider-Man Homecoming or not, it was both a commercial and critical success. They got the job done with that movie, so the Vacation guys probably should get the benefit of the doubt for that at least.

I'm gonna wait and see what their upcoming film is gonna do.

[Da Boat]

I never saw Grace so pissed before lol

She is dumb. Dark tone doesn't work for all characters. Superman is not Batman, period.

[Ishmael]

I agree with Grace's comments about Flashpoint being the subject of the film -- this just seems to be a potentially big mistake. They haven't established the DCEU well enough to pull this off, for the very reasons she mentions.

But I think she's wrong about the appeal of the success of Batman: the Dark Knight. It wasn't because it was "dark" -- it was because it was grounded (little cgi), well filmed, and had a great script. Nolan brought a realism to Batman that was sorely missing from the Burton/Schumaker movies -- and it was his playing it straight that succeed. I think a lot of folks have confused that with his movies being somehow tonally darker than they actually are. I also think that's why Batman v Superman misfires in certain ways, because cynical, hyper-violent Batman is NOT what Nolan's movies were about (although that's how they been characterized).

Nolan nails the Joker in DK because he gets that the Joker is a serial killer in the guise of the clown -- not because he's "edgy" or hipster tatted crazy or whatever he was supposed to be in Suicide Squad. He's sinister and conniving, not crazy and unpredictable. The core of the characters are often misrepresented in the DCEU movies -- and that's why these films don't succeed. I don't think that was the case with Nolan's movies, and why DC keeps missing the mark whenever anyone says their movies are darker (implying they need to be darker) than Marvel's.

No. They just need to quit relying on cgi that makes their movies look like refugees from a video game ad, and stop portraying their characters in a light that makes it look like their characters have lost faith in the heroic ideal. When they don't do that -- like in Wonder Woman and parts of the Justice League -- they nail it. Whey they do that (such as Batman in BvS) they screw it up.

It's not hard to figure out. The DC characters are the embodiment of the heroic ideals of the 20th/21st century. Portray them that way. Give them stories that respect that and allow them to display it. And quit having 20-25 minute long fight scenes for conclusions that look like a wayward video game.

And for heaven's sake, do like Grace suggests and steer clear of Flashpoint.

[AJBopp]

Nolan nails the Joker in DK because he gets that the Joker is a serial killer in the guise of the clown --

Also, Ledger nails the Joker because, in addition to the above, he's genuinely funny and also horrifying at the same time.

[DrNewGod]

Nolan nails the Joker in DK because he gets that the Joker is a serial killer in the guise of the clown -- not because he's "edgy" or hipster tatted crazy or whatever he was supposed to be in Suicide Squad. He's sinister and conniving, not crazy and unpredictable. The core of the characters are often misrepresented in the DCEU movies...

In all fairness, Joker's had more than two interpretations over the years in comics, however, DK employed the one that works best (IMO), which is O'Neil and Adams' return of the character based on Finger and Kane/Robinson's original.

[Emperor-of-Dragons]

I agree with Grace's comments about Flashpoint being the subject of the film -- this just seems to be a potentially big mistake. They haven't established the DCEU well enough to pull this off, for the very reasons she mentions.

But I think she's wrong about the appeal of the success of Batman: the Dark Knight. It wasn't because it was "dark" -- it was because it was grounded (little cgi), well filmed, and had a great script. Nolan brought a realism to Batman that was sorely missing from the Burton/Schumaker movies -- and it was his playing it straight that succeed. I think a lot of folks have confused that with his movies being somehow tonally darker than they actually are. I also think that's why Batman v Superman misfires in certain ways, because cynical, hyper-violent Batman is NOT what Nolan's movies were about (although that's how they been characterized).

Nolan nails the Joker in DK because he gets that the Joker is a serial killer in the guise of the clown -- not because he's "edgy" or hipster tatted crazy or whatever he was supposed to be in Suicide Squad. He's sinister and conniving, not crazy and unpredictable. The core of the characters are often misrepresented in the DCEU movies -- and that's why these films don't succeed. I don't think that was the case with Nolan's movies, and why DC keeps missing the mark whenever anyone says their movies are darker (implying they need to be darker) than Marvel's.

No. They just need to quit relying on cgi that makes their movies look like refugees from a video game ad, and stop portraying their characters in a light that makes it look like their characters have lost faith in the heroic ideal. When they don't do that -- like in Wonder Woman and parts of the Justice League -- they nail it. Whey they do that (such as Batman in BvS) they screw it up.

It's not hard to figure out. The DC characters are the embodiment of the heroic ideals of the 20th/21st century. Portray them that way. Give them stories that respect that and allow them to display it. And quit having 20-25 minute long fight scenes for conclusions that look like a wayward video game.

And for heaven's sake, do like Grace suggests and steer clear of Flashpoint.

I would argue, DC has always had a dark tone, even the Superman stories (though Superman himself wasn't dark), so has Marvel since the 70's. Like i heard someone else say, what the MCU is doing is basically a theme park version of Marvel comics.

[robreedwrites]

I would argue, DC has always had a dark tone, even the Superman stories (though Superman himself wasn't dark), so has Marvel since the 70's. Like i heard someone else say, what the MCU is doing is basically a theme park version of Marvel comics.

That's an oversimplification, imo. Dark is relative. For example, I wouldn't call Hickman's Fantastic Four run dark, even though it has darker moments. The majority of Al Ewing's work, Hudlin run on Black Panther, Whedon's Astonishing X-Men, Ultimate Spider-Man, etc. I wouldn't really classify those as dark, persay, which (in terms of describing tone/mood) I would define as being gloomy, tragic, and/or humorless as a whole rather than talking about individual moments/issues.

[Emperor-of-Dragons]

That's an oversimplification, imo. Dark is relative. For example, I wouldn't call Hickman's Fantastic Four run dark, even though it has darker moments. The majority of Al Ewing's work, Hudlin run on Black Panther, Whedon's Astonishing X-Men, Ultimate Spider-Man, etc. I wouldn't really classify those as dark, persay, which (in terms of describing tone/mood) I would define as being gloomy, tragic, and/or humorless as a whole rather than talking about individual moments/issues.

I was using dark as a umbrella term for the mood, and style of those comics. And yes dark is relative, cause i remember people saying Man Of Steele was dark. Which it really wasn't.

[GhostPirate]

I was using dark as a umbrella term for the mood, and style of those comics. And yes dark is relative, cause i remember people saying Man Of Steele was dark. Which it really wasn't.

It really is... did you not watch the movie? Or is it because it's a "Superman" movie that leads to the erroneous preconception that it can't be dark.

You have Pa Kent instilling a fear and distrust of government, authority, and humanity in Clark from an early age, which leads to "Superman" being a reluctant hero who questions whether he should save lives if it means exposing himself and, ironically, results in his watching Pa Kent die meaninglessly. The also ironic mistrust of government and authority leading to his stealing a spaceship that only he could activate, his irresponsible experimentation with the same ship being what leads Zod to earth in the first place. The focus on genocide as a primary solution, first from Zod, then from "Superman". The overwhelming amount of death and destruction of the 3rd act, climaxing with the brutal (but necessary) death of Zod?

Or is it because the ending involves some misplaced, awkward attempts at "humor" that somehow makes the rest of the movie not qualify as dark?