I have a feeling that despite previous misgivings Justice League will finally be the movie to turn things around for...

The problem with DC is that their competition at Marvel essentially has chokehold on the superhero movie game.
With that in mind, DC feels the need to try and be different, to be that little bit more darker, to be a little more real, but sadly what they go for, doesn't really deliver as well as it should.

All I want is DC to do well in the films, I enjoy some of the MCU flicks, but tey do play it safe, they've essentially got a formula to appeal to everyone, casuals and fans alike.

DC made a mistake with Snyder though, I'm amazed that they still keep him on when he's consistently fucked up.
Fucking amazing that you can take Batman and Superman, two of the biggest characters ever, and fuck up that bad.

Justice League looks alright so far from trailer, looks like it has a good tone... But that's the Snyder trick. Fantastic trailers.

I want to say the Affleck Batman movie is gonna be the best thing to come out of it, but the Deathstroke news/leaks/whatever don't inspire confidence.

...

nah senpai
Suicide Squad was the movie to set things right

Justice League is going to be a mess with Zack snyder directing and pushing the light hearted tone he isn't suited for

So true, I'm big enough to admit I fall for this too.

Well, SS turned things around at least box office wise.

isnt he directing JL?

Which is why that user said "after".

I enjoyed during the retarded shitposting where anons would "bitch" that Civil War was a cluster fuck mess because introducing 2 heroes and a villain on top of such a large cast was to much for the film and I point out that Justice League has to introduce 3 heroes a villain and his home word and explain Superman being not dead all in a 2 and half hour block. You quickly saw how many post where just shitposters messing with you. Sadly they learned quick and changed tactics to avoid that trap.

ok im sorry.

>implying he is getting off this ride
Enjoy the Snyderverse user

>they've essentially got a formula to appeal to everyone, casuals and fans alike.

Is that supposed to be a bad thing?

Yes. People liking something means a unique intellect has to go against them and hate the thing to show they have their own identity.

It has nothing to do with Marvel. Warner simply doesn't care about DC properties beyond the profit they could generate, and don't know how to find their voice.

They aped "Iron Man" with "Green Lantern" and it failed. They aped Nolan's movies with "Man of Steel" and "Batman VS. Superman" and it failed. They went back to aping Marvel with "Suicide Squad", which ripped off "Guardians of the Galaxy", and it only sort of failed, so I guess that's the model they're sticking with.

>They aped "Iron Man" with "Green Lantern" and it failed
I don't remember GL anymore, please elaborate.

Who here is actually going to see JL?

I fell for with BvS so I'm out until Snyder is gone.

>On the surface, the two movies are pretty similar you have a hero who's sort of an overgrown boy, a womanizer who refuses to take anything too seriously. He's flying high, soaring on the awesomeness of the military-industrial complex until he's brought low by his own hubris. Tony Stark gets captured by rebels, Hal Jordan crashes his fighter jet. And then both men get an amazing widget that lets them soar through the air, and project energy.
>both movies have a lot of the same elements, including a hero who starts out somewhat unlikable and immature, and a brilliant device that turns him into a superhuman. So what happened with Green Lantern?

io9.gizmodo.com/5835470/why-iron-man-succeeded-where-green-lantern-failed

...says increasingly nervous fan for the 5th time this decade

Ah, indeed.

Zack Snyder

Nope.

Yes but I'm buying a ticket to another film.
If it's actually good I'll buy two tickets for it as an apology

>The hero is a charming womanizer affiliated with the military who gets humbled after an extraordinary occurance
>Furthermore, the heroe's outward behavior is shaped by daddy issues
>His love interest is a corporate woman who often criticizes the hero for his immaturity, but can't help but swoon at his charm
>The main villain is a childhood acquaintance of the hero who is envious of the hero's success and charisma and lashes out as he believes the hero to be undeserving of the awesome life he leads. Also, he aspires to steal the hero's great power
>A agent of a mysterious government organization with a vested interest in superhumans is hanging around to set up future movies
>A light tone with emphasizes on chatter comedy
>A CGI-heavy suit

The Superman resurrection is going to be stupid no matter how they do it. He'll either be benched for a good bit, or revived by the most ridiculous means. I seriously can't fathom how WBs thought killing him second installment was a good idea

But you see, ah, he's Jesus, and he sacrificed himself for us. Isn't it clever? Isn't it deep?

Last one is not comparable.
GL suit was cgi 100%
Iron Man 1 had a full suit made.
The Iron man scenes were 80% particle effects till the last arc with Monger then it mixes up a lot.

Yes I'm sure 5th time's the charm.

Also, team movies are always mediocre at best.

Nope, that will be WW.
Movie itself will be shit, but it will be liked by critics and casual audience because of "muh femenism".

At least the have the balls to kill off a character unlike marvel

In terms of commercial success? The DCEU has never had problems in that regard. I'm sure it'll be an Avengers-tier success

In terms of critical reception? Maybe if Snyder learned to stop taking his men in tights so seriously which he won't

It was.

Jimmy Olsen's death was the ballsiest move in superhero movie history.

Dude they show he wasn't dead at the end of the film
That's not having balls so much as bullshitting you have balls

>killing characters is the only way to make a movie worthwhile, even if it's shit and doesn't make any sense
You have to be 18+ to post on Cred Forums kid.

Killing a character to bring him back from death immediately after is lazier than not killing characters at all. It has no function or consequence other than cheap drama or the shallow symbolism Snyder loves

>Maybe if Snyder learned to stop taking his men in tights so seriously
Why should he have to?

I seriously doubt it will make 1.5 billion to be an Avengers-tier success.

If BvS didn't manage to do 1 billion, what makes you think this will? I doubt people will come in droves just because this one also has Cyborg and Aquaman.

>I'm sure it'll be an Avengers-tier success

Remember when people said this about BvS?

>I doubt people will come in droves just because this one also has Cyborg and Aquaman.
Isn't there a meme where China likes robots? That'll have some effect I think. And normies are loving Aquaman now, which is crazy. Batman is already a draw, and Wonder Woman will become one if her movie is good. Superman fans will come to see how he comes back (maybe a week after it comes out so they know for sure that he comes back). And girls like Flash.

>In terms of commercial success? The DCEU has never had problems in that regard.

>Three movies in, two underperformed

I'm not so sure about that, senpai.

>Isn't there a meme where China likes robots?
Yeah, but China also doesn't like black people.

>And normies are loving Aquaman now
Sauce?

>kill him off

>show him returning by the end of the film

>implying that takes balls

I wonder if it was three days later.

Also remember when they kept Enchantress alive even though the only way Flagg's story arc makes any sense is him killing her and thus choosing duty over

Becuase it loops around to childish again. Constant misery and darkness is no better then consequence-free comedy, Snyder has no median mode.

BvS is the epitome of adolescent filmmaking, from the cartoonishly sombre tone regardless of scene context to the grade-school symbolism. Plenty of dark, somber filmmakers allow some measure of humanity or humor to come through in their stories, when you're making Superman films that take themselves more seriously then fucking Children of Men you might want to step back and re-evaluate your storytelling.

>Isn't there a meme where China likes robots?

Cyborg isn't a robot. And he's a black guy, which cancels out China's love for mecha.

>And normies are loving Aquaman now
Where?

>And girls like Flash.
They don't even know Flash.

Because he's a shit writer uncapable of handling serious themes in any way but muh edgy grimdark and who thinks making obvious references and adressing the same topics the whole comic book industry has circlejerked over for the last 20 years makes his capeshit movies artistic masterpieces. Even when he's not trying to be serious a lot of his films turn out as vaguely "somber" but shallow emo shit

>grade-school symbolism.

Is the idea then to have symbolism so subtle that no one notices it?

They will revive Superman and have him solo Steppenwolf.

>They don't even know Flash.
Flash is one of the superheroes almost anyone can immediately recognize, even if the extent of their knowledge is that he has super speed. He is also starring in a pretty popular show right now

You can be more nuanced than "THIS GUY STANDS FOR JESUS CHRIST, LOOK AT HIM MOTHERFUCKER" and still have most the audience pick up on the significance of the scene

To cite a popular film, The Godfather's baptism scene

You overestimate the Flash.

And liking the show doesn't translate into liking a completely different version entirely divorced from the show people actually like. Especially for girls, who generally watch it for the character interactions rather than the superpowered action.

>Godfather's baptism scene
That was fun even when I was a kid.

Why not?
Or better yet why not substitute character and narrative for symbolism?

That's one of the things that blows my mind. Superman is ALREADY an archetype. You don't need to keep drawing allegorical comparisons to other ones.

>Yeah, but China also doesn't like black people.
That's right, I forgot about that. This should be interesting then.

>Sauce?
Just a supposition based on Internet conments. There's no way to effectively gauge something like this unless there was a poll or something. It's all anecdotes for now.

Batman v Superman was actually good though. Justice League feels like a cynical capitulation.

No, but Snyder thinks the symbolism is all he needs to craft the story. He doesn't put in anything equating to character moments or humanising scenes, he just thinks refences to classical literature and art are enough to sustain the entire film. He uses it like a lot of bad filmmakers do, as a shorthand for actually making you care about the narrative or characters.

It's the difference between the first Matrix film and the sequels. That first movie layered its deeper thematic concepts in an entertaining action movie, so if you really liked the film you could analyse waht was there and pull deeper meaning out of it. The sequels abandoned the pretense of narrative and just doubled down on Biblical symbolism while stripping the characters of any recognisable humanity, they all became ciphers for action scenes and thematic ideas.

Symbolism is not the meat of your movie unless you're someone like Lyn ch and you're deliberately making something with a lack of a cohesive narrative and breaking the standard "rules" of filmmaking. And while Snyder flirts with that at points, it never tips over to the point where it could be defended on that level.

I'm. But maybe during the third week, Snyder killed all of my hype with BvS.

>Or better yet why not substitute character and narrative for symbolism?
>No, but Snyder thinks the symbolism is all he needs to craft the story.

This meme needs to end. Snyder develops characters and has proper narrative in both the DCEU films. Adding symbolism doesn't take that away.

What if it ends up not being shit?

>Snyder develops characters and has proper narrative in both the DCEU films

He really doesn't. I think there's no better example than completely changing what "Man of Steel" established about Jonathan Kent in "Batman V Superman" just to give Superman more angst fodder.

What if pigs fly and Scarlett Johansson gives me a blowjob?

Snyder uses symbolism like the kid in the cafeteria that drowns his plate under ketchup. Yes, there might indeed be fries under there but the odds he's tasting anything but ketchup are slim.

Snyder was so busy saying that Clark was King Arthur, Jesus, and Apollo, that he forgot to sell me on Clark as an individual. Or even give a clear picture of the guy without all those comparisons.

>I think there's no better example than completely changing what "Man of Steel" established about Jonathan Kent in "Batman V Superman"

How was he changed? Pa Kent's viewpoint seems consistent to me.

You will believe a pig can fly.

>Snyder develops characters and has proper narrative in both the DCEU films

Strip away the symbolism and Superman has no personality or character in BvS. His entire character is defined by his relationship to Lois and literally nothing else, the movie actively resists allowing his to interact with any other aspect on the story on a human level.

He's a plot device. The movie is so poorly written that his agency is even taken away for the final battle, Lex Luthor literally has to kidnap MARTHA and ask Superman to start the third act of the movie he's starring in.

That entire movie is about Batman and Lex. Superman's character is left with symbolism, Lois and that Pa Kent monologue.

Mmm, airborne bacon.

In "Man of Steel", he wants Clark to stay in the farm and advises him that if he chooses to somehow reveal his powers to the world, he should do it as an adult, but until then he's willing to even let kids drown in order to keep Clark's powers a secret.

In "Batman VS. Superman" Clark acts as if Jonathan actively encouraged him to use his superpowers to help people and outright calls Superman Jonathan's dream when that was never even alluded to in the previous movie.

That's just poor storytelling.

Yeah, but they were expecting to make so much from BvS and SS combined that they'll still be playing catch-up; that it's done better than expected is great for them, but if you're planning next year's spending based on what you make this year, and this year comes way under your predictions... ehhhh.

>In "Batman VS. Superman" Clark acts as if Jonathan actively encouraged him to use his superpowers to help people and outright calls Superman Jonathan's dream when that was never even alluded to in the previous movie.

Well in MoS he does say "You have to decide what kind of man you want to be, because whoever that man is, good or bad, he's gonna change the world." And the whole bit at the end where Martha says that Jonathan saw his potential to be a hero.

>a blowjob

really

that's all

if you had one thing to pick from like a menu you'd pick that

my god man look at that body and you want the only hole with teeth?

what in the sam hill is your major malfunction soldier

at least get a soapy titwank

You're right, I was a fool.

Why do people think Suicide Squad is better than BvS? BvS had better cinematography, soundtrack, and characters that were actually used unlike SS. SS just focused on Dead Shot and Harley Quinn while ignoring Killer Croc, Katana, and Captain Boomerang. The entire theme of SS is about the "worst of the worst" coming together to fight, yet these fuckers don't do anything "evil" within the entire film. And Jesus fucking Christ that god awful soundtrack of a mish mash of random popular songs that did not fit at all. What the fuck was with Enchantress and her brother anyway? Two insanely powerful magical beings get destroyed by a bomb, what the fuck is that. Also who thought it was a good idea to have the SS go up against a world destroying villain their first fucking mission. God that movie was awful.

>no GL
>no hal and barry banter during battle and in the watchtower

I'm thinking a lot of SS praise comes from it trying to be a fun time, lack of artsy bullshit, and seeing a cast of new characters being adapted. The problem though is that SS doesn't really do anything exceptionally well, and the final product is a ADD mess with forced or non existent character relationships

What's Superman symbolism and purpose in the movie then? What's the point of the character?

I'm curious.

SS is "fun". So if there are jokes and funny moments in a cape movie people will enjoy it.

Clark has zero character movement either in Mos or BvS.

That's just wrong.

Literally nothing happens in MoS that changes Clark in any way. We see that from his childhood his only personality trait is that he wants to save people, but then his father tells him he can't do that, so he doesn't until Zod comes and he decides he's gonna save people again. That's the definition of a static character.

BvS kinda sorta gives him an arc, expect that's done with even less personality than in MoS so he's an even bigger cypher there.

Was pa Kent right?

He mistakenly thought that his father lesson were that humanity would never accept him, because he felt guilty about letting his father die, and instead of blaming himself decided to blame everyone else. This filled him mistrust, not just at others but at himself. Thanks to Lois he slowly began to trust in others and and thanks to Jor-El he regained a bit of trust in himself.
Then throughout the movie he took a leap of faith placing his trust in humanity, which was rewarded back when he and the military worked together to fight Zod and his crew, and thanks to his confidence in himself as well they were victorious.
In the end he learned from his mother that his father always believed that Clark would do good and help humanity, that he never thought that humanity would never accept him, but rather that Clark needed to be ready first and that his future would be bright when it happened.

So yeah, there were changes.

That's the smile of a man who successfully murdered his victim and crashed a packed building into rubble.

How many years will we wait until proper reboot? I mean, WB will throw to us this mix of edgy quip snyderverse for, like, 3-4 years, because it's still make money. I mean, if EVEN Batman solo movie will have low reviews from both audience and critics, DCEU will end.

JL is going to be shit.

The DCEU won't turn around until Snyder is gone and New Line Cinema blows WB the fuck out with Shazam.

Even then, the future is still kind of grim.

Theres nothing to turn around though

Well the haters need to turn around, but not the films. Put some quips in there for em

literally the only thing wrong with this is the typo in the filename

Mostly because it came out in one of the worst movie summers in a decade.

and it still underperformed

Nice meme.

Nah, didn't say it was m9, just they need to shake it up.

It's sad that when I look at my summer blockbuster movie watchlist for the year it's so bad that I've got Apocalypse in the Top 5, because it was at least light and passable.

This was a painful summer. At leas the horror movies were good.

We got any pics or info from the set?

I hope Martian is the villain.
This weird ass op morphing psychic alien that whenever you meet him everything turns into an acid trip with reality warping into a Mars like environment with the sounds of martian birds chirping in their ears.

Or he can just be a nigger painted green.
Whatevs

It's confirmed to be Steppenwolf, where have you been?

aw

Should have been the first response to OP.

The whole plot basically leaked.

>son
>invincible
>fast

But they didn't have that information at the time.

Fuck Cred Forums's memes and fuck this board.
I will remain hopeful for JL and the DCEU and nobody will change this thought until after November 17th, 2017.

You're wrong, Pa just didn't want Clark to be forced to reveal himself. And even then he wasn't sure, thats why he said "maybe" in response to the kids because he just honestly doesn't know. He wants his child to be the hero he is obviously trying to be, but he also wants to protect his son.

at that point Clark had only done super strength, super vision, and super hearing you dummy

this

>Fuck Cred Forums's memes

stop being such a fucking child, I was posting on Cred Forums and reading comics back when Cred Forums was love, and never post on Cred Forums, and I loved BvS.