Justice League The Justice League General & Speculation Discussion Thread - - - - - - - - - - Part 48

[MbJ]

No. Literally nobody.

 

[Erzengel]

Indeed. An unfortunate side effect of the success of the MCU has been Hollywood's sudden obsession with a shared continuity, often to the detriment of the individual movies (see the cluster**** that was the Mummy reboot). Batman Begins did not have to worry about how it might possibly relate to the events of Justice League 2: The Search for Curly's Gold, and was much stronger for it. Just take it one step at a time with each movie.

I sorta disagree. I don't think it's necessarily an obsession with a shared continuity. Studios have ALWAYS been obsessed with sequels/franchises/spin offs. A series like Harry Potter or James Bond are gold and they can milk multiple movies. The MCU with it's shared continuity is just another example of a sequel, franchise, spin off. It's not necessarily "new".

In terms of the X-Men, they have been so ill concerned with continuity, however in DOFP, all the X-Men around after TLS were the ones in the Future. And the biggest issues were the "Sentinel" project being around since the 70s and Wolverine getting his admantium claws back in the future.

 

[misslane38]

No. Literally nobody.

Well, I'm a somebody, and I care. I also know a lot of Superman fans who are very much attached to the idea that he retains his iconic role as the first public superhero, since it's been his modus operandi for nearly a century. And we all know how much you, MbJ, care about respecting the source material, right?

Plus, it's a continuity change that moving forward affects all DCEU films. The world knowing about gods and superheroes since the 1980s is a big damn deal. Even the fact that Darkseid began to move on Earth was a consequence of Superman opening up the world to a metahuman event.

 

[MbJ]

Sorry. I did a scientific survey of the Earth's population and still came to the same conclusion: nobody would care.

I sorta disagree. I don't think it's necessarily an obsession with a shared continuity. Studios have ALWAYS been obsessed with sequels/franchises/spin offs. A series like Harry Potter or James Bond are gold and they can milk multiple movies. The MCU with it's shared continuity is just another example of a sequel, franchise, spin off. It's not necessarily "new".

Oh, it's by no means a new development (the horrid Die Another Day movie from the Bond franchise was basically a pilot for a spin-off starring Halle Berry's character). But I do think it has increased since then, particularly the shared universe aspect. Even some of the MCU films themselves suffer from it, like Age of Ultron having that pointless sideplot that Whedon didn't even want in the movie, but was placed there to tease Thor: Ragnarok and Infinity War.

Mind you, having future films in mind isn't always a bad thing. Wonder Woman after all did end up the most praised aspect of BVS and her own film was a massive hit. But too often, I do think an obsession with continuity and spin-offs can be a needless constraint.

 

[Tra-El]

Well, that's on Joss. No way Snyder would've done that with this cut.

Yeah, it just goes to show the element of what works best with these characters and that means giving a character(s) to their own directors and let them taper off and tell their story. Marvel can afford to let other directors take a crack at the tone in their films since Feige sets the rules. Thor in Ragnorak felt totally different than Thor in IW. DC doesn't have that luxery yet. Joss went ahead and did that redundant scene with Flash and Wondy without even consulting with Patty at any time. Unless you have a solid and bulletproof direction, which WB didn't have with their JL franchise, then you must allow their respective directors of their character standalones take over.

 

[misslane38]

Sorry. I did a scientific survey of the Earth's population and still came to the same conclusion: nobody would care.

Oh My God.

 

[_Superman_]

Yeah, it just goes to show the element of what works best with these characters and that means giving a character(s) to their own directors and let them taper off and tell their story. Marvel can afford to let other directors take a crack at the tone in their films since Feige sets the rules. Thor in Ragnorak felt totally different than Thor in IW. DC doesn't have that luxery yet. Joss went ahead and did that redundant scene with Flash and Wondy without even consulting with Patty at any time. Unless you have a solid and bulletproof direction, which WB didn't have with their JL franchise, then you must allow their respective directors of their character standalones take over.

Not only that Snyder's JL synced up more because he kept all the respective directors of the solo movies involved with what was going on. Which allowed them to have some input.

 

[Jekecy]

I sorta disagree. I don't think it's necessarily an obsession with a shared continuity. Studios have ALWAYS been obsessed with sequels/franchises/spin offs. A series like Harry Potter or James Bond are gold and they can milk multiple movies. The MCU with it's shared continuity is just another example of a sequel, franchise, spin off. It's not necessarily "new".

In terms of the X-Men, they have been so ill concerned with continuity, however in DOFP, all the X-Men around after TLS were the ones in the Future. And the biggest issues were the "Sentinel" project being around since the 70s and Wolverine getting his admantium claws back in the future.

Shared universes are basically just re-branded spin-offs, the only difference now there’s an effort to have everything exist concurrently.

MCU had that formula down-pat, but nearly everyone else has suffered from chasing that initiative. With regards to DC it’s a double-edged sword. I firmly believe had the MCU not existed, we would have better Superman and Batman films out the gate, and both those series’ would be flourishing as the directors would be left to their creative whims.

On the other hand I also believe their other heroes would have been left on the bench like they were for decades. Avengers assured a fire was lit under the studio, and pressured to make successes out of B/C/D-listers.

I don’t mind cinematic universes, but unless you can execute with precision Marvel had, it’s always felt muddled and half-baked. I still feel the ideal plan is to have separate creative teams for each IP, and have a specific crew to work out the logistics of the ensemble pics (e.g. Justice League) without interfering the solo properties.

 

[2kt09]

In terms of the X-Men, they have been so ill concerned with continuity, however in DOFP, all the X-Men around after TLS were the ones in the Future. And the biggest issues were the "Sentinel" project being around since the 70s and Wolverine getting his admantium claws back in the future.

I'm not sure what was established time-wise in TLS, but they were training against sentinels in the danger room.
It's because of DOFP that they can go any where & when they want to since there's now officially such a multiverse of timelines.

 

[kguillou]

Indeed. An unfortunate side effect of the success of the MCU has been Hollywood's sudden obsession with a shared continuity, often to the detriment of the individual movies (see the cluster**** that was the Mummy reboot). Batman Begins did not have to worry about how it might possibly relate to the events of Justice League 2: The Search for Curly's Gold, and was much stronger for it. Just take it one step at a time with each movie.

I agree. The worse side effect I feel has come from it is that as a result of this ongoing sharred universe, its no longer about the film, its always about the NEXT film. Whats next? When The Dark Knight came out, people talked for years about THAT movie. Its impact, the themes, what it meant. We've sort of lost that mentality with everything wanting to be part of an ongoing franchise because every movie ends on "to be continued next issue..." And also as a result,the individual films feel less satisfying.

When Aquaman comes out, I want it to be its own stand alone epic. A movie that tells its own story and ends with a "The End." And then obviously if successful it can pick up on threads for the sequel. I'd like DC films going forward to get back to crafting stand alone epics that just tell their own story and dont care about an ongoing series of films

 

[Erzengel]

Oh, it's by no means a new development (the horrid Die Another Day movie from the Bond franchise was basically a pilot for a spin-off starring Halle Berry's character). But I do think it has increased since then, particularly the shared universe aspect. Even some of the MCU films themselves suffer from it, like Age of Ultron having that pointless sideplot that Whedon didn't even want in the movie, but was placed there to tease Thor: Ragnarok and Infinity War.

Mind you, having future films in mind isn't always a bad thing. Wonder Woman after all did end up the most praised aspect of BVS and her own film was a massive hit. But too often, I do think an obsession with continuity and spin-offs can be a needless constraint.

Shared universes are basically just re-branded spin-offs, the only difference now there’s an effort to have everything exist concurrently.

MCU had that formula down-pat, but nearly everyone else has suffered from chasing that initiative. With regards to DC it’s a double-edged sword. I firmly believe had the MCU not existed, we would have better Superman and Batman films out the gate, and both those series’ would be flourishing as the directors would be left to their creative whims.

On the other hand I also believe their other heroes would have been left on the bench like they were for decades. Avengers assured a fire was lit under the studio, and pressured to make successes out of B/C/D-listers.

I don’t mind cinematic universes, but unless you can execute with precision Marvel had, it’s always felt muddled and half-baked. I still feel the ideal plan is to have separate creative teams for each IP, and have a specific crew to work out the logistics of the ensemble pics (e.g. Justice League) without interfering the solo properties.

You have to have a product that works.

The MCU works.

Trying to building around Spider-Man (See TAMS2 or even Venom), I don't think worked/will work.

Trying to build around Tom Cruise and the Universal Monsters didn't work.

Trying to do a take on Batman and Superman that wasn't general audience friendly didn't work.

We wouldn't be talking about all this if in the end, those studios released movies that were "general consensus" good.

I'm not sure what was established time-wise in TLS, but they were training against sentinels in the danger room.
It's because of DOFP that they can go any where & when they want to since there's now officially such a multiverse of timelines.

Storm, Iceman, Rogue, Kitty, Wolverine, Magneto and Xavier (post-credit scene added to with the Wolverine post-Credit) scene were the Future X-Men who were all shown (if you count the Rogue cut) in DOFP.

I agree. The worse side effect I feel has come from it is that as a result of this ongoing sharred universe, its no longer about the film, its always about the NEXT film. Whats next? When The Dark Knight came out, people talked for years about THAT movie. Its impact, the themes, what it meant. We've sort of lost that mentality with everything wanting to be part of an ongoing franchise because every movie ends on "to be continued next issue..." And also as a result,the individual films feel less satisfying.

When Aquaman comes out, I want it to be its own stand alone epic. A movie that tells its own story and ends with a "The End." And then obviously if successful it can pick up on threads for the sequel. I'd like DC films going forward to get back to crafting stand alone epics that just tell their own story and dont care about an ongoing series of films

As a fan, I understand the pros and cons of doing a shared universe.

What I don't want to see is Orm, Dark Phoenix, Thanos destroy half the earth/kill half the population and then see a Shazam, X-Force, Captain Marvel 2 where everything is just fine.

 

[MbJ]

I agree. The worse side effect I feel has come from it is that as a result of this ongoing sharred universe, its no longer about the film, its always about the NEXT film. Whats next? When The Dark Knight came out, people talked for years about THAT movie. Its impact, the themes, what it meant. We've sort of lost that mentality with everything wanting to be part of an ongoing franchise because every movie ends on "to be continued next issue..." And also as a result,the individual films feel less satisfying.

When Aquaman comes out, I want it to be its own stand alone epic. A movie that tells its own story and ends with a "The End." And then obviously if successful it can pick up on threads for the sequel. I'd like DC films going forward to get back to crafting stand alone epics that just tell their own story and dont care about an ongoing series of films

Agreed completely. One of the things I really loved about Black Panther was that it was one of the few recent MCU films that felt it was standalone and that you didn't need to watch 8 other movies to understand (for the most part) or end on an unsatisfying note. I'm hoping for the same with Aquaman, which I'm very jazzed about right now.

 

[kguillou]

Yup. Black Panther was great in that way, which makes it one of my favorite recent cbms. I mean, dont get me wrong, the whole "build up to main event" model is a cool one and that obvioisly has paid off for Marvel in spades but thats them. No one else has been able to replicate it or do it better so let them do them. I want DC to continue tk hire directors who are going to bring unique visions to the screen. I want every DC film to have its own distinct feel tonally, cinematography wise and musically and just follow its own agenda. I know a lot of DC fans want DC to replicate the Marvel formula where we build up to a big Justice vs Darkseid movie 10 years from now but perhaps its best to follow the old model of...just making great standalone films.

 

[MbJ]

Yup. Black Panther was great in that way, which makes it one of my favorite recent cbms. I mean, dont get me wrong, the whole "build up to main event" model is a cool one and that obvioisly has paid off for Marvel in spades but thats them. No one else has been able to replicate it or do it better so let them do them. I want DC to continue tk hire directors who are going to bring unique visions to the screen. I want every DC film to have its own distinct feel tonally, cinematography wise and musically and just follow its own agenda. I know a lot of DC fans want DC to replicate the Marvel formula where we build up to a big Justice vs Darkseid movie 10 years from now but perhaps its best to follow the old model of...just making great standalone films.

You are very wise.

 

[herolee10]

I dont know if I will ever be able to forgive Warner Bros for deleting these shots from the final cut of the film.

 

[Tra-El]

Zack was building to Darkseid. That was his vision. Having those (probably bada$$) scenes in there would have left on a cliffhanger. Once Zack was gone, so was Darkseid, which is why the softboot of the Justice Leaguer's was in full effect to have their own respective; individual moment at the finale to set up loose and open ends to whoever was going to tackle each standalone next. It was a backdoor ending. With Zack, we would of got Darkseid and the InJustice timeline. WB instead opted to end on individual possiblilties signifying the official softboot of the DCU.

 

[misslane38]

Zack was building to Darkseid. That was his vision. Having those (probably bada$$) scenes in there would have left on a cliffhanger. Once Zack was gone, so was Darkseid, which is why the softboot of the Justice Leaguer's was in full effect to have their own respective; individual moment at the finale to set up loose and open ends to whoever was going to tackle each standalone next. It was a backdoor ending. With Zack, we would of got Darkseid and the InJustice timeline. WB instead opted to end on individual possiblilties signifying the official softboot of the DCU.

I think a lot of that is true probably applied more specifically to the original JL1 followed by JL2 plan rather than the revised JL that Snyder, Terrio, and WB worked on during pre-production and production (before Whedon came on board). Since we know, though, that Snyder filmed the Superman shirt rip scene, then I have to believe a full on Darkseid cliffhanger was not as emphasized in JL as it would have been in at JL1/JL2 plan. The final Whedon cut, however, I suspect was more open-ended than any incarnation of Snyder's vision.

 

[herolee10]

Zack was building to Darkseid. That was his vision. Having those (probably bada$$) scenes in there would have left on a cliffhanger. Once Zack was gone, so was Darkseid, which is why the softboot of the Justice Leaguer's was in full effect to have their own respective; individual moment at the finale to set up loose and open ends to whoever was going to tackle each standalone next. It was a backdoor ending. With Zack, we would of got Darkseid and the InJustice timeline. WB instead opted to end on individual possiblilties signifying the official softboot of the DCU.

If reports are true, then they could have simply just omitted out any images involving Darkseid that were originally present while keeping in the money shots shown above. It just makes no sense that they would throw away money spent in creating those shots just to spend more money on creating shots like this...

 

[GothamBat]

If reports are true, then they could have simply just omitted out any images involving Darkseid that were originally present while keeping in the money shots shown above. It just makes no sense that they would throw away money spent in creating those shots just to spend more money on creating shots like this...

Looks like a kick-starter funded youtube fan film...

 

[heatvision38]

Agreed completely. One of the things I really loved about Black Panther was that it was one of the few recent MCU films that felt it was standalone and that you didn't need to watch 8 other movies to understand (for the most part) or end on an unsatisfying note. I'm hoping for the same with Aquaman, which I'm very jazzed about right now.

This is why the MCU movies I like most are Iron Man, Winter Soldier, Ragnarok, and Black Panther. I also like the first Avengers and IW very much. Most of the solo movies feel like what I call pilot movies. Their job is to introduce the character to the audience and be fun, but not much more than that. I know technically WS connects to other parts of the MCU, but it still is very enjoyable as its own movie.

I love the idea of a shared universe, but I just don't want the movies to feel short shrifted because it's just a part of a larger whole. For example, of the phase 1 solos, Thor was my favorite from an enjoyment perspective, but I also felt it was kind of thin and had it not been a part of a larger universe, I would have felt differently about it. Same goes for a lot of the solos.

You can have a movie be in continuity with the larger universe and also stand as its own movie. Iron Man stood as a complete movie. Winter Soldier did as well. So did Black Panther. Guardians as well. On the other hand, Thor, Captain America, Dr. Strange, Ant-Man, etc, these movies felt like they get a pass because they were part of a universe. Had they been discrete, individual movies unto themselves, say, a studio decided to make a Captain America franchise, and the first movie was the one we got, would it have been well-received or thought of as just ok-ish?

 

[heatvision38]

I think a lot of that is true probably applied more specifically to the original JL1 followed by JL2 plan rather than the revised JL that Snyder, Terrio, and WB worked on during pre-production and production (before Whedon came on board). Since we know, though, that Snyder filmed the Superman shirt rip scene, then I have to believe a full on Darkseid cliffhanger was not as emphasized in JL as it would have been in at JL1/JL2 plan. The final Whedon cut, however, I suspect was more open-ended than any incarnation of Snyder's vision.

I imagine that we would have seen Darkseid and that the League recognizes that there is another threat out there, but then future movies could have subtly planted the seeds for when Darkseid does arrive, similar to the MCU movies. Thanos was shown in Avengers, but it wasn't a cliffhanger. Probably a similar idea was had when Snyder was asked to make JL a single movie.

 

[Arachnerd]

Sorry. I did a scientific survey of the Earth's population and still came to the same conclusion: nobody would care.

MbJ, I love you mate, but you're coming across really arrogant lately.

 

[The Guard]

How so?

"You are my world" ring a bell?

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

But I agree with whoever said it'll likely be a soft reboot. It's why I'm willing to bet money the movie isn't actually gonna be called Man of Steel 2.

Yes, I cannot see any way MoS 2 will be the release title.

Eh, i say screw continuity if it allows the filmmakers to make the best movie possible without shackles. Xmen DOFP is arguably the best Xmen film theyve made thus far and its one that disregarded continuity and did its own thing.

DoFP is easily my favourite X-Men film. Of course that movie gave an in-universe explanation for any changes in continuity going forward.

 

[MbJ]

MbJ, I love you mate, but you're coming across really arrogant lately.

I’m mostly having fun because I was challenged on what was obvious hyperbole.