Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBOmax in 2021!

[Castle]

As I recall, the point was that there was dissonance between the character and the themes (remember everyone coming out of the woodwork to point out that Superman doesn't kill and is a symbol of hope and all that jazz?). I mean, no one was arguing that Birds of Prey should've been a deadly serious drama instead of having a laugh a minute (to the point that the villain's defeat is a joke in and of itself).
.

Who gets to say there was a dissonance? this only happens if you ingore everything Snyder said and WB wanted to do.

As I recall, Days of Future Past had a lot more in common with Marvel Studios' work then not. (Once again, remember matching theme to character.)

No I refute this. Days of future past has more in common with man of steel and the dark knight. How can you even say it has anything in common with marvel studios? did you not see the stuff recently that has shocked everyone yesterday, DOFP has become the first movie Disney has chosen not to censor that Hugh Jackman had to chip in on twitter?

To be fair, everyone is compared to Reeves. He is to Superman what the '80s cartoon is to TMNT.

The more reason it was the best time for Superman to move away from Reeves.

Well, good for him, but that still doesn't address the actual problems in the writing and pacing, the very ones that all evidence about his JL cut show that he's doubling down on rather then learning from.

I admit that the pacing got a bit slopping towards the end because the fight felt non stop but please? it does not take away anything from this great film.

[Rev9]

Who gets to say there was a dissonance? this only happens if you ingore everything Snyder said and WB wanted to do.


No I refute this. Days of future past has more in common with man of steel and the dark knight. How can you even say it has anything in common with marvel studios? did you not see the stuff recently that has shocked everyone yesterday, DOFP has become the first movie Disney has chosen not to censor that Hugh Jackman had to chip in on twitter?


The more reason it was the best time for Superman to move away from Reeves.


I admit that the pacing got a bit slopping towards the end because the fight felt non stop but please? it does not take away anything from this great film.

I don't think the pacing had problems,because the extended cut flows quite well,they edited the hell out of the theatrical version but it still made sense to me.Plus we have to remember the final fight had to be different in MoS it was just Zod and Kal here you had to show, what is going on with Bruce while Superman is recovering from a nuke blast,then you show what is happening with WW, while Clark is blasted by Doomsday,everybody had something to do which makes the scene appear long but it was necessary.

[WebLurker]

Who gets to say there was a dissonance? this only happens if you ingore everything Snyder said and WB wanted to do.

But was what Snyder wanted to do a good fit for the character in question? That is the million dollar question.

No I refute this. Days of future past has more in common with man of steel and the dark knight. How can you even say it has anything in common with marvel studios?

High stakes sci-fi plot? Heavy character focus? Emphasis on the comic book-iness of things over realism? Not ashamed of comic relief? That's Marvel Studios' wheelhouse. (Maybe compare it a bit more to Winter Soldier? Granted, that movie is played more for its drama and is relatively more grounded, but the point remains.)

did you not see the stuff recently that has shocked everyone yesterday, DOFP has become the first movie Disney has chosen not to censor that Hugh Jackman had to chip in on twitter?

How's that relevant? Nudity and profanity are not mature in and of themselves (heck, they're often used for immature humor).

The more reason it was the best time for Superman to move away from Reeves.

See point one; should that be done?

I admit that the pacing got a bit slopping towards the end because the fight felt non stop but please? it does not take away anything from this great film.

The pacing of the ending is the least of the movie's problems and reason why some of us maintain that it lacks greatness. Consider Superman's lack of a story arc and how Batman's is undermined by his actions vs his words. How characters disappear partway through the narrative, the mess that is Lex Luthor, Jr., how the plot falls apart if you try to lay it out, and the lack of self control in inserting scenes that have nothing to do with the story and only exist to tease us about completely unrelated movies that where going to come out later.

[Rev9]

But was what Snyder wanted to do a good fit for the character in question? That is the million dollar question.



High stakes sci-fi plot? Heavy character focus? Emphasis on the comic book-iness of things over realism? Not ashamed of comic relief? That's Marvel Studios' wheelhouse. (Maybe compare it a bit more to Winter Soldier? Granted, that movie is played more for its drama and is relatively more grounded, but the point remains.)



How's that relevant? Nudity and profanity are not mature in and of themselves (heck, they're often used for immature humor).




See point one; should that be done?



The pacing of the ending is the least of the movie's problems and reason why some of us maintain that it lacks greatness. Consider Superman's lack of a story arc and how Batman's is undermined by his actions vs his words. How characters disappear partway through the narrative, the mess that is Lex Luthor, Jr., how the plot falls apart if you try to lay it out, and the lack of self control in inserting scenes that have nothing to do with the story and only exist to tease us about completely unrelated movies that where going to come out later.

Which character disappears partway through the narrative?
As far as I can tell on this very thread the plot is pretty well elucidated, whether in the ultimate or the theatrical the plot is pretty discernible. Even without the shooting in Nairomi ,Superman still became an object of discussion through an international incident,a state level intervention that caused death through reprisal, the beginning of the world questioning him and him questioning his place in the world.That is just Superman in Africa, not to mention the aftermath of MoS that impacted on Keith,Bruce and Lex

[SiegePerilous02]

The more reason it was the best time for Superman to move away from Reeves

See point one; should that be done?

Superman absolutely needs to move away from Reeves nostalgia. Snyder was absolutely not the way to do it.

Donner and Snyder shouldn't have to be our only two options. Hell, Snyder just rehashed Donner yet again but threw some grit onto it. The movies need to realize there is more to Superman's world than Clois, Ghost Dad, Lex and Zod or that he has other storylines besides getting killed by Doomsday.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Superman absolutely needs to move away from Reeves nostalgia. Snyder was absolutely not the way to do it.

Donner and Snyder shouldn't have to be our only two options. Hell, Snyder just rehashed Donner yet again but threw some grit onto it. The movies need to realize there is more to Superman's world than Clois, Ghost Dad, Lex and Zod or that he has other storylines besides getting killed by Doomsday.

Exactly! WB needs to stop moving Superman to two extremes.

[ComicJunkie21]

Superman is in a weird spot compared to other popular superheroes. Marvel has been able to cater their heroes to the newer generation and there's not a lot of pushback because outside of Spiderman and hulk there weren't any real expectations on the characters and how their overall portrayals should be. We have seen the ideal Superman in Reeves and because of his popularity with prior generations most of the audience outside of igen have a preconceived expectation of how Superman should look, act, sound, blow his nose, etc. Which makes his portrayal hard because on one end you have almost 3 living generations that know Superman well and may not be too open to modernizing him too far from what they know but on the other end he needs to be modernized for the newer generation to enjoy. This is a tough spot.

[SiegePerilous02]

Go back to the core of the character's beginnings: the embodiment of the working class standing up for the oppressed against the corrupt higher powers and authority, even extending to law enforcement and governments if need be. Someone who bullies the bullies right back, who is kind, compassionate and charismatic but doesn't take any BS. No naive farmboy, no reluctant hero trying to find himself: he wants the job and he has conviction, even when he doesn't know everything about his origins and reasons for being here. He doesn't need Jor-El telling him what to do. The core ideas that went into the character never stopped being relevant and are more easy to make modern than some of the later versions. The Reagan era Superman isn't relevant anymore. Superman is the type of character who can be controversial and needs to be pissing off the right kind of people.

And for God's sake, embrace the weirdness. He deals with craziest stuff out of all superheroes. He can out-crazy the Marvel universe by himself. Lets see Brainiac, the Legion of Superheroes, Bizarro World, bottle cities, a flying dog, MXY, etc. We have the special effects to pull it off at this point and audiences will roll with anything if it's executed well.

[Jokerz79]

Go back to the core of the character's beginnings: the embodiment of the working class standing up for the oppressed against the corrupt higher powers and authority, even extending to law enforcement and governments if need be. Someone who bullies the bullies right back, who is kind, compassionate and charismatic but doesn't take any BS. No naive farmboy, no reluctant hero trying to find himself: he wants the job and he has conviction, even when he doesn't know everything about his origins and reasons for being here. He doesn't need Jor-El telling him what to do. The core ideas that went into the character never stopped being relevant and are more easy to make modern than some of the later versions. The Reagan era Superman isn't relevant anymore. Superman is the type of character who can be controversial and needs to be pissing off the right kind of people.

And for God's sake, embrace the weirdness. He deals with craziest stuff out of all superheroes. He can out-crazy the Marvel universe by himself. Lets see Brainiac, the Legion of Superheroes, Bizarro World, bottle cities, a flying dog, MXY, etc. We have the special effects to pull it off at this point and audiences will roll with anything if it's executed well.

We've had the ability to do Metallo or 80's Metal Brainiac since Cameron's Terminator in 1984 and in the 36 years since and all we've gotten is Luthor, Zod, Nuclear Man, and Nuclear Man 2.0 (Snyder's Doomsday hey he had the same origin down to Lex's DNA he's Nuclear Man IMO not Doomsday.) on the silver screen in Superman films it's depressing.

[SiegePerilous02]

We've had the ability to do Metallo or 80's Metal Brainiac since Cameron's Terminator in 1984 and in the 36 years since and all we've gotten is Luthor, Zod, Nuclear Man, and Nuclear Man 2.0 (Snyder's Doomsday hey he had the same origin down to Lex's DNA he's Nuclear Man IMO not Doomsday.) on the silver screen in Superman films it's depressing.

It really is pathetic that we haven't even gotten Metallo yet, yeah.

Or even fucking Toyman and the Prankster.

[WebLurker]

Which character disappears partway through the narrative?

I was thinking of how the moderate government response, with Holly Hunter, was cut off in the bombing halfway through and never really came to anything.

As far as I can tell on this very thread the plot is pretty well elucidated, whether in the ultimate or the theatrical the plot is pretty discernible. Even without the shooting in Nairomi ,Superman still became an object of discussion through an international incident,a state level intervention that caused death through reprisal, the beginning of the world questioning him and him questioning his place in the world.That is just Superman in Africa, not to mention the aftermath of MoS that impacted on Keith,Bruce and Lex

Fair enough, but it's all of a mess and doesn't really have much relevance to the ending. I mean, yeah, Lex wants Superman and Batman to fight and then makes Doomsday because reasons, but Superman's own story and purpose don't factor into what he's doing or have much closure. I mean, we never see him come to an answer of what he owes the world or the government have the meaningful realization that they were wrong until he's dead and all that. I guess that's one problem I have with the movie; it raises the question, but never answers it.

[CliffHanger2]

I was thinking of how the moderate government response, with Holly Hunter, was cut off in the bombing halfway through and never really came to anything.




Fair enough, but it's all of a mess and doesn't really have much relevance to the ending. I mean, yeah, Lex wants Superman and Batman to fight and then makes Doomsday because reasons, but Superman's own story and purpose don't factor into what he's doing or have much closure. I mean, we never see him come to an answer of what he owes the world or the government have the meaningful realization that they were wrong until he's dead and all that. I guess that's one problem I have with the movie; it raises the question, but never answers it.

I think that question was meant to be answered in JL and it was. It'll probably be elaborated on more in the Snyder cut.

[Coal Tiger]

I think that question was meant to be answered in JL and it was. It'll probably be elaborated on more in the Snyder cut.

Depends on how much work Snyder does to his version. He had plans for like 3 movies, and I doubt he’ll get to do them.

[CliffHanger2]

Depends on how much work Snyder does to his version. He had plans for like 3 movies, and I doubt he’ll get to do them.

Yeah you never know, I mean I doubt he'll get 3 more movies.But if this runs like a season of eps he be able to add more than originally planned.

[Rev9]

I was thinking of how the moderate government response, with Holly Hunter, was cut off in the bombing halfway through and never really came to anything.




Fair enough, but it's all of a mess and doesn't really have much relevance to the ending. I mean, yeah, Lex wants Superman and Batman to fight and then makes Doomsday because reasons, but Superman's own story and purpose don't factor into what he's doing or have much closure. I mean, we never see him come to an answer of what he owes the world or the government have the meaningful realization that they were wrong until he's dead and all that. I guess that's one problem I have with the movie; it raises the question, but never answers it.

I think it's logic and plausibility that should guide you in wherever government responded.Kal goes to a hearing the place blows up,that act alone would make government tip towards Superman must be put on some leash at least(there is too much collateral not to consider this)and so Lex has free reign to come up with a deterrent and access the ship perhaps to seek answers for the government but hijacks the intent for his own means to his own end.

On the death of superman obviously by this time the wool has dropped from government's eyes because Lex proves he is after not Superman being kept in check but taken off the board.Plus Superman dies after saving the world twice by this point he himself didn't really need closure he got it ,he died so that Lois could live ,it looks simple but it is the way humans operate rarely do people fight for the world, in dire circumstances even as large as a war you die for your family and your comrades fighting the fight(they are the microcosm-the world) He got closure,for him knowledge that Lois and his mum were safe was enough.The world goes on no matter who dies ,what mattered was that in his country people came round to show respect and mourn for his sacrifice. The fact that people understood he sided with humanity was enough