Let's all have a moment of silence for the DC Cinematic universe, the people in charge of it clearly have no idea what they're doing.
Zack Snyder is not a good director; his stories are far too dark and depressing, and don't really make sense most of the time. The characters don't act like real people, they just do what they need to do to progress the plot.
Hopefully Justice League tanks so the higher-ups will give someone more competent the job.
I haven’t seen any of the films, and I don’t love Snyder’s work, but I do think there’s a lot of blame levelled at him for things that probably aren’t really his fault at the end of the day....
We like to think Directors have complete and total control and ownership over their films and every single part and detail contained therein. The reality is often not quite so clear cut...
Man of Steel is the beste Superman movie ever.
Wonder Woman is a cool and fun movie IMO, (not directed by Zack), but also dark at some moments.
For light shiny fun there is already Marvel. (The first Iron Man was the most serious movie they made.)
I don't mind dark stories.
I haven't seen Batman vs Superman or Justice League, so I can't make an overall opinion about the DC universe or the acting.
I must admit that the reviews aren't really encouraging. Plus: the BvS trailer felt like I didn't have to watch anymore.
I have seen The man of steel, Superman vs Batman and Wonder woman.... everyone says Wonder woman is a fun movie.... I don't want to see more if Wonder woman is the best the could do.
I haven’t seen any of the films, and I don’t love Snyder’s work, but I do think there’s a lot of blame levelled at him for things that probably aren’t really his fault at the end of the day....
We like to think Directors have complete and total control and ownership over their films and every single part and detail contained therein. The reality is often not quite so clear cut...
That's probably very true about Snyder & Warner Bros. It's possible they kept hiring him for these DC films because he's very amenable to doing what they tell him to do. Snyder doesn't have the same track record of box office & critical acclaim Nolan has so the studio is probably more hands on with him. Combine that with his skill in visuals but weakness in story & you end up with films that look good on the surface but are somewhat lacking.
WB is historically hit & miss with their DC movies, where either the studio or director is misfiring, or both. One of the reasons for Marvel's continued success seems to be Kevin Feige, who oversees the overall production of the Marvel Universe. DC needs someone like him who's in tune with popular taste & who the execs will truly listen to.
I liked JUSTICE LEAGUE much more than BATMAN VS SUPERMAN, which was quite dark. LEAGUE did make an attempt to lighten things up. After so many critics savaged it, the movie turned out better than I expected.
The angry ressurrection of Superman
was worth the price of admission, alone!
As for who's responsible for the tone, it would be Zach Snyder and producer, Christopher Nolan. I really like Nolan's serious take with BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT. I didn't enjoy THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, as much, but he is very story and character motivated.
Snyder is more motivated by violent tones, which can be seen in DAWN OF THE DEAD, 300, WATCHMEN (especially), SUCKER PUNCH, and BATMAN VS SUPERMAN. A couple of those I like and a couple that I loathe or don't like. (A little less with MAN OF STEEL and JUSTICE LEAGUE.) Both Nolan and Snyder try for dark subject matter, but Nolan is more cerebral when he directs it.
I really enjoyed Marvel's THOR RAGNAROK, because the humor and cast (Cate Blanchet, Jeff Goldblum) lent itself to that movie well. But, I have to tell you, I haven't taken to THE AVENGERS any more than JUSTICE LEAGUE, because it gets sooooo goofy, in my opinion. I'll take the Edward Norton HULK movie over any of that, because he played the character with some serious credibility. That movie was fun, without getting overtly goofy.
Yes, I said it, I like JUSTICE LEAGUE for its very cool
Superman (is this really a spoiler?)
and Wonder Woman scenes (especially both of their entrances), more so than THE AVENGERS. Cyborg was just okay. The kid who plays the Flash makes an otherwise so so character into something very good. I even liked Aquaman. That dude rocks the part. Great sequence with the Amazon women, too.
I heard that they cut things down to make this 2 hours, so the letdown is not seeing more of the buildup of these characters. I thought the villain could have been more fleshed out, too. Often, a movie is only as good as its villain. This one was decent, but not amazing. As for the superhero characters, they were very cool, overall.
Let's all have a moment of silence for the DC Cinematic universe, the people in charge of it clearly have no idea what they're doing.
Zack Snyder is not a good director; his stories are far too dark and depressing, and don't really make sense most of the time. The characters don't act like real people, they just do what they need to do to progress the plot.
Hopefully Justice League tanks so the higher-ups will give someone more competent the job.
What? Show some respect for opinions different than yours. This forum
should encourage points of view. I respect his opinion and take him seriously.
In fact I agree with much of what he said.
I know too many people that hate the other Universe for no reason whatsoever, just because of their self-righteousness. I am someone who loves both Marvel and DC equally.
"the people in charge of it clearly have no idea what they're doing."
Is that a good thing to say about a movie giving a constructive criticism review?
I promise, I don't mean this to be a troll. I like most Marvel films, and I love a large number of the DC movies pre-Man of Steel.
It's just interesting to watch all of these studios struggle to copy the Marvel Cinematic Universe. DCEU, Universal Monster universe, Legendary MonsterVerse, the Star Wars universe, it looks like no one can quite copy Marvel.
It looks like the execs at DC looked at the Nolan Batman films and said "people liked these dark movies, so let's make our films dark and edgy."
While it took six standalone film to reach the Avengers, DC has Justice League rolled out after three films (not counting Suicide Squad). And speaking of Suicide Squad, it seems incredibly apparent that DC told David Ayer to make things more fun, throw in classic songs, etc.
Is calling someone you disagree with a "troll" giving constructive criticism?
Is telling everyone here to not take him seriously constructive criticism?
He asked "What are your thoughts on the DCEU?" You didn't offer YOUR
opinion, you only put him down for offering his. I'm offended by the disrespect
you show people with different opinions.
I think that movie stars still sell tickets.
The marvel films have RDJ, chris hemsworth, scarlett jo, they have Bradley cooper and vin diesel.
Justice league has... ben Affleck and a dude that was on game of thrones six years ago.
That has nothing to do with whether or not they can be great in the roles i'm just saying that big movie stars sell tickets and these dc films were not cast to sell.
If you had Keanu reeves dressed as batman doing what he does in john wick and the matrix I would watch the hell out of that.
I have seen The man of steel, Superman vs Batman and Wonder woman.... everyone says Wonder woman is a fun movie.... I don't want to see more if Wonder woman is the best the could do.
It's just interesting to watch all of these studios struggle to copy the Marvel Cinematic Universe. DCEU, Universal Monster universe, Legendary MonsterVerse, the Star Wars universe, it looks like no one can quite copy Marvel.
You might think that Marvel invented the Universe thing.
You probably missed the birth of the Star Wars universe in 1977 and all the spin offs and sequels.
You probably missed the abandoned Justice League movies plans that predated the first Iron Man movie.
So it isn't really Marvel who 'invented' this universe idea.
Although they structured it diffently by first introducing a few characters in their own movies before lanching the Avengers, instead of lauching a whole world like Star Wars and then have the spin offs (Ewok movies).
And yet, one can argue that that Marvel approach can be inspired by how Pitch Black (2000) introduced Riddick (Vin Diesel) and then got The Chronicles of Riddick as an epic sequel. (Although it was just 1 character instead of a group.)
Do others try to copy the success of Marvel?
Of course they do!
Making movies is a business.
And a successfull franchise is easier to sell.
That is why Amazon bought LOTR last week.
Btw, both Marvel and Star Wars are now owned by Disney.
Once Disney saw the universe idea worked on Marvel, they must have deemed it worth the money to buy Star Wars from Lucas.
I agree with you. WarnerBros/DC has been struggling to copy the
success of Marvel and failing. They have reached their built-in
fans to a degree but they aren't bringing in new ones. But their
fans are passionate – even calling those who do not like the DC
movies “trolls”. The darker take doesn't seem to resonate with new
fans.
The main issue I have is lack of interesting characters, poor
storytelling and uninteresting villains. I'm not a comic fan but Marvel
has taken characters I had never even heard of and made movies
I enjoyed. DC has characters I know and makes movies I find tedious.
I think Marvel did “invent” the Universe thing. From 1977 to 1985
there were three “Star Wars” movies. Even through the prequels we
didn't call these movies a Universe – they were sequels. No spin offs
until the Ewok TV movies in 1985. Then nothing until 2016. Sure,
Lego did a few sanctioned short films starting in 2005, there was an
animated series in 2003 and there were books and comics but no film
Universe. I saw no attempt to create a film Universe until 2016 – after
Disney took control of LucasFilm and after Marvel had created the
idea of a Universe. Splitting hairs perhaps, but I think it's Marvel that
deserves the credit for inventing the idea a a film Universe for their
characters.
Great link. Isn't it interesting that "Star Wars" isn't listed....
When did we start calling these a "Universe"? When I was working
on the Elm Street films we called them a franchise. I worked on
several of the Empire films. I don't recall anyone calling them a
"Universe". Was Universal putting together a monster "Universe"
with these films or were they following a popular, money making
trend?
I admit I'm delving into semantics, but the interconnected film
"Universe" does seem to start with Marvel. Before that we called
TV series "spin-offs" and movies "franchises". And when characters
from two franchises were joined we called them a "crossover".
I like to consider the recent "universe" movement as largely a post-2008 thing. There were franchises and shared universes before, but when talking about the DCEU, it's obvious they didn't get the idea from Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man.
Marvel starts doing a shared universe in 2008, and based on the Hulk film that came out after Iron Man, and how it has a slightly different tone than the standard they've reached today, it seemed they were still developing the idea, and finding their own style.
Every shared universe/franchise after Marvel seems to largely just want to bring in the $$$ Marvel is, and sell the toys.
DC does not seem sincere, they don't want to appeal to fans or tell a story, they just want that Super-Hero franchise money.
Again, I feel the need to point out the 1978's Superman and 1989's Batman are two of my favorite superhero films. The Nolan trilogy was an incredibly well made, well crafted piece of superhero cinema. It's just the last few years everyone is just putting all their eggs in one basket and banking on one big shared universe to bring in the yearly profit.
Great link. Isn't it interesting that "Star Wars" isn't listed....
When did we start calling these a "Universe"? When I was working
on the Elm Street films we called them a franchise. I worked on
several of the Empire films. I don't recall anyone calling them a
"Universe". Was Universal putting together a monster "Universe"
with these films or were they following a popular, money making
trend?
I admit I'm delving into semantics, but the interconnected film
"Universe" does seem to start with Marvel. Before that we called
TV series "spin-offs" and movies "franchises". And when characters
from two franchises were joined we called them a "crossover".
"Universal Monsters" is a phrase used to describe the horror, suspense and science fiction films made by Universal Studios during the decades of the 1920s through the 1950s.
Of course they were referring to their studio, but that could be the genesis. I've heard it used in film before, more conversationally than as a title, you may be thinking about the term too hard. You know, like a universal screwdriver, not the Milky Way.
