MovieChat Forums > Justice League (2017) Discussion > will watch it tonight, but one thing wor...

will watch it tonight, but one thing worries me....


with all those heated discussion and fanboys being at each other's throads, there are hardly any posts that simply suggest "hey, i just watched it and it was great".

reply

Ha, ha, ha... You are worried because you cannot find a post saying JL is great. Well, it wasn't. It is a bad movie, although not as bad as its predecessors, but awful all the way, as it is suggested in most of the threads in this forum. The same threads you are ignoring while looking frantically for one that says how great it was.

It's a shame someone will spend money in this crap, but looking at your posts, it is obvious your mindset is made. People like to delude themselves, so it wont be a surprise when you comeback here to tell us how good it was. Yeah, right... However, if you can convince youself it is good and that you like it, good for you.

reply

who says that i am ignoring those? it is just worrying that usually you find at least a certain amount of people simply stating "i liked it", instead of attacking the "other side" as the only pro-argument for this film. for the most part it seems to burn down to "at least it wasn't marvel", which is rather pathetic.

"It's a shame someone will spend money in this crap, but looking at your posts, it is obvious your mindset is made. People like to delude themselves, so it wont be a surprise when you comeback here to tell us how good it was. Yeah, right... However, if you can convince youself it is good and that you like it, good for you."

because i want to form my own opinion while watching it? interesting mindset. says a lot about you.



reply

Unfortunately, I did not learn my lesson with MOS and went to BvS. Agiain, I forgot the lesson and went to crappy Suicide Squad. No more for me. Not just from this site but from closer sources I know this movie is bad. Well, it is not a sin to like bad movies... I just don't go around hoping that other people like them, when they clearely didn't.

reply

for me it isn't all that black and white. personally i think MOS was the best version of superman since smallville, while i found Bvs much more flawed. that luther incarnation alone ruined a lot for me. i would have enjoyed suicide squad a lot more without the worst joker imaginable. xD

"I just don't go around hoping that other people like them, when they clearely didn't."

you are projecting, my man.

reply

Just to let you know that you are being manipulated by a studio troll. Of course he will say the movie is bad. Its a good movie and not a straight up comedy like Thor 3.

reply

he seems a bit block headed, but i have read worse conversation partners. a bit out of line and childish, but not psychotic. at least not so far.

"Its a good movie and not a straight up comedy like Thor 3. "

hmm, please elaborate how you mean that. if you mean it as a neutral description, stressing the serious tone of JL then ok, but if you meant to say "Its a good movie as opposed to a straight up comedy like Thor 3", then you are actually on the same argumentative level as ranmast so far.

reply

The first 2 Thor movies were fairly serious with a few jokes to lighten the mood but in Thor 3 it starts with Thor being funny and it ends with Thor being funny. Its not who he is. There are some funny jokes in the movie but it never stops. It goes against everything Thor is, he was not this funny in the Avengers or Age of Ultron either. Go see both movies and let me know what you think.

reply

while they went a bit overboard, i think it was an improvement. the character took himself too seriously in the first two films. the guy is still a bit too self absorbed and narcissistic, so what i liked more than his own jokes was the fact that some of the incidents, where he was the butt of practical jokes from the producers that took him down to earth. but the occasional funny one liner from him does not hurt either. its shows a certain evolvement of his personality that he accused loki of not having, which loki also disproved at the end of the film.

overall it was great, but yeah they could have toned it down a bit.

in general i have a problem with taking most of the mainstream superheroes seriously, expect in some rare incarnations. no matter if it is marvel or dc. antiheros like punisher, legion ...etc make that much easier for me. i would even put batman into that category.

reply

The first 2 Thor movies didn't work that well,so they changed it to improve the character. This is the opposite of DC who can't seem to make the proper correction to put a good movie on the screen.

reply

The movie isn't good by any measure. It's riddled with visual and script problems and it will be very apparent for you from the start that it will only get worse. Near the ending it gets really atrocious.

You may enjoy the characters themselves, but then you end up asking yourself "wtf did I just watched?"

I had the feeling that Gal Gadot was the only one who took her role somewhat seriously; the rest were just there as if they had nothing better to do.

reply

i finally saw it and i agree for the most part, but some minor details positively surprised me. the beginning was rather terrible, but towards the middle it became kinda enjoyable, which was completely obliterated by the third act.

first of all their attempt of creating a aquaman/neptune hybrid had potential, but started off more deadweight than anything else, had interesting moments towards the middle as well and was utterly useless towards the end. yes, the dude was sexy as long as he did not open his mouth, but overall that's it. but look at the positive side: they could have gone for green lantern instead.

bafflleck did rather well and while i agree that gal was by far the best, ole ben did a good job i gotta admit.

cyborg was even worse than i expected. i can hardly find worse to describe how bad they managed to mess that character up.

superman was the worst. i am one of the few people that consider man of steel the best superman incarnation since smallville and have some sympathies for bvs, but in this case? nope, eff him. a total waste and even worse they went back to DCs usual mistake, putting his already ridiculous powers above all of the other superheroes' ones combined. why then even have a JL to begin with?

best thing about the film, except for ww and i am surprised beyond belief, because i hate the character and even more hate the shitty costume: the flash. damn, that dude was funny, sympathetic and i am not sure if i would even put him above gal's performance. perfectly casted as well.

steppenwolf and his minions were a waste as well, if i compare that to hella in ragnarok and her brigade, i have no idea what they were thinking.

as you have said, i enjoyed some of the characters, but as an overall story it just does not work... at all. while ragnarok's 2.5 (?) hours went by like nothing, this felt like 3 hours, while it was only like 1.5 H.

reply

the movie was beyond help. Oh man, that Cyborg flying scene to hold Superman... the CGI made me gag.

reply

me too. also, let's not forget the flash vs superman race scene, which concluded with superman flying by, while holding an effin HOUSE (!!!) in his hand. xD

reply

lol "good for you pushing that car... I'll just drop this house over there"

reply

hahahaha.

it just comes to me at this very moment: wasn't one of the fainboys main argument that "at least JL isn't a comedy"? that was the corniest moment i habe seen in years.

didn't the supposed level of superman's powers also bother you? the team was worthless without him. then why even have a team?

reply

Don't forget Aquamans' Lasso moment. And the "I need friends" Flash moment.

The thing that bothered me the most about Superman [besides his fake upper lip] was the Flash vs Superman scene. I was watching it and all I could think was "didn't I see this before?"... and I sure did, in X-Men Apocalypse.

Besides... wouldn't Supes kind of stink after being dead and start to decompose?

reply

"Don't forget Aquamans' Lasso moment. And the "I need friends" Flash moment.

The thing that bothered me the most about Superman [besides his fake upper lip] was the Flash vs Superman scene. I was watching it and all I could think was "didn't I see this before?"... and I sure did, in X-Men Apocalypse. "

lol. true. didn't really think about that before.

"Besides... wouldn't Supes kind of stink after being dead and start to decompose? "

another "the cash cow is above it all" moment. they should concentrate more on ww. best dc release in years. i just hope they spare us the aquaman (unlikely since it is already almost finished as far as i heard) and cyborg solo movies. movie version flash solo movie maybe, but set before the JL film? kinda needless.

reply

It seems WB is relinquishing the Crossover movies for Solo movies. I want a GOOD Green Lantern movie set in Space.

reply

Imo 'I watched it and it was very good'.
My rating, 8/10.

Not perfect but no movie is.
I've seen 17 films in theaters this year and so far "JL" is my favorite.

But I respect those who disagree. Most mass market movie taste has moved in a different direction from what I enjoy and I accept that.

BB ;-)

It's just imo; in my opinion 🌠

reply

i politely disagree. this isn't an 8 by any means.

did you watch "radius", "ragnarok" and "happy death day"? they all beat this easily.

reply

Of course we will disagree.
But since you mentioned "Raganarok", it is not my kind of movie. I liked Iron Man and Avengers but after that, Disney Marvel to me had gotten too silly or imo it sometimes fundamentally doesn't make sense.
I prefer more grounded superhero films like Logan or Justice League.

* I'm not trying to change anyone's mind.
Everyone has the privilege of their personal taste.

BB ;-)

It's just imo, in my opinion 🌠

reply

"Disney Marvel to me had gotten too silly or imo it sometimes fundamentally doesn't make sense. "

but we are still talking about a movie where superman is flying through the air, holding a house in one hand, while poking fun of the flash, right? but "marvel disney" is too silly? c'mon, man. let's at least try to talk like adults here.

"I prefer more grounded superhero films like Logan or Justice League. "

i give you logan, but putting JL into the same category even makes it worse. like what you like, but let's cut the crap, ok?

reply

"we are still talking about a movie where superman is flying through the air,"

That is a rule in the Superman franchise. "JL" pretty much follows DC movie/TV franchise story rules.
- As a contrast, when the god of thunder, Thor (in Ragnarok) throws a ball against a window where it bounces back and he doesn't have the coordination to get out of the way of the ball and it hits him on the head;
What rule in the Marvel MCU films does that follow? After all Thor can catch a hammer flying at tremendous speed.
- But it doesn't matter to our discussion. Because I don't think being consistent with franchise rules matters to 90% of the audience.
And that's fine with me that people have that kind of reaction to films.
It's all for fun to them which leads to silly humor. Star Lord singing into a rodent (right after a scene where his mother died). Ha ha for lots of people.

But since I have a different reaction, there is no need to get insulting about it.

"let's at least try to talk like adults here"
"let's cut the crap"

I am talking like an adult here.
I have a view point. You have yours.
I'd like to agree to disagree and move on.

BB ;-)

It's just imo, in my opinion 🌠

reply

there are no rules of a transmedia conversion, except for a good end result.

i appreciate your attempt of misleading from the original argument, for entertainment reasons, but i also honestly offered you to deal with this like adults, which you seem to have no interest to accept, which is fine by me.

we were at JL vs ragnarok. your argument was that you did not appreciate the silly humor in ragnarok, while insisting on JL being a serious movie like "logan". i pointed out the silly humor in JL, rendering your supposed point obsolete. i never denied the silly humor ragnarok had.

that's what it boils down to. man of steel had no silly humor, neither had smallville and neither had the christpher reeve movies. well except for the third one, maybe. also the dark knight trilogy had any of this and neither did logan. so much for your "rules of the franchise" nonsense. and if we consider all the characters involved, please don't get me started on the flash tv series or gotham.

and to make things worse, you bring star lord into this, a character from guardians of the galaxy, a series which taken as 100% seriously would have been a similar disaster as JL was. what's next? bring howard the duck into it? or grasp the last straw and go into the amalgam series and construct an argument around lobo the duck?

reply

"your argument was that you did not appreciate the silly humor in ragnarok,"

I have two arguments.
1. This first one has to do with rules in a franchise.
You brought up the point that;
"we are still talking about a movie where superman is flying through the air,"

I responded that this was an established rule of the DC franchise. (Since the 1940s, Superman can fly.)
- Then I brought up an example from Ragnarok where Thor, god of thunder, can't avoid a ball bouncing off a wall.
That imo violates the rule in the MCU franchise of Thor's godly coordination skills, such as his ability to catch a hammer at high speed.
That argument has nothing to do with humor.

2. The second argument centers on my personal taste about humor. Singing into a rodent after a scene about cancer I personally consider to not be funny.

BB ;-)

It's just imo, in my opinion 🌠

reply

ah, so you are one of those forum people that just keep repeating their initial statement, no matter what counter argument.

well, good luck with that. xD

reply

Once repeating my argument becomes futile, then I write this;

I agree to disagree and I'll move on.

BB ;-)

It's just imo; in my opinion 🌠

reply

see above. goodbye.

reply