Wednesday, June 20, 2018 • Evening Edition • "Your boob-window into the world of comics."

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!

Advertisement

Justice League Review

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

User avatar

uz000

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby uz000 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:13 am

achilles wrote:Huh, Thor: Ragnarok had now beaten both Wonder Woman and Deadpool at the box office, with $833 million worldwide. That's a movie that initially had few expectations, until the trailers hit.



Ragnarok deserves the success, best superhero film of the year.

Of course I think JL deserves some success as well, nowhere near as bad as critics say.
User avatar

uz000

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby uz000 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:18 am

Rebirth NoctourneM wrote:
I am shocked, I dare say SHOCKED, that you would have the gall to insinuate Zryson doesn't read the links he posted. I find that to be as uttely preposterous as the idea that Zryson doesn;t watch the things he comments on. Exactly as preposterous as that statement. :P


Or read the comics he says he does. I remember the Hickman Secret Wars thread where he was saying what a great story it was. I mentioned the time jump in the story which was filled in on other books was outrageous, to which Zryson asked me where did that happen?

He doesn't read or watch anything. He just thinks Disney and Marvel are good and everyone else is bad.

zryson

YOU WILL NEED A NURSE

Postby zryson » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:08 am

uz000 wrote:
Or read the comics he says he does. I remember the Hickman Secret Wars thread where he was saying what a great story it was. I mentioned the time jump in the story which was filled in on other books was outrageous, to which Zryson asked me where did that happen?

He doesn't read or watch anything. He just thinks Disney and Marvel are good and everyone else is bad.


LOL Maybe if you had a life of your own you would stop obsessing about others.

zryson

YOU WILL NEED A NURSE

Postby zryson » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:10 am

uz000 wrote:

It's not going to get near $800 million? I disagree. Well we will see who is right ;)


I dont know if its sad or funny that you think Justice League will get near $800 million.

zryson

YOU WILL NEED A NURSE

Postby zryson » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:27 am

Justice League Movie Review

Justice League is a half-baked, rushed, and inconsistent mess of a superhero movie. The cracks and holes of its troubled post-production are incredibly clear, cutting down scenes, unnatural dialogue, force-feeding exposition and backstory, cringe worthy jokes, and terrible quips. By the 376th attempt at Joss Whedon-branded humor, I was rolling my eyes harder than Regan in The Exorcist.

https://www.thegatewayonline.ca/2017/12 ... ce-league/

Image
User avatar

IvCNuB4

Staff Writer

Postby IvCNuB4 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:33 pm

Spacedog wrote:Some rumors indicate that WB is moving ahead with their plans for a Flashpoint movie. If a Flashpoint movie becomes a reality, looks like they are setting themselves up for another failure.

Ideally, solo superhero movies should work on their own, expanding and developing the main character's backstory and motivations. Considering the fact that he's not much more than a comic relief tool in Justice League, the Flash certainly would benefit greatly from a bit more character development.

Using his solo movie as some kind of 'deus ex machina' to correct the shared DCU seems like an incredibly equivocal and cynical move. They should have learned something by now, right?
Image


Or maybe they did learn something. Flash does need more backstory but that's what "Flashpoint" is for. They can easily convey that and his motivations to the audience in 20 minutes or less. Although Flash wasn't a great action character but he scored as #1 or #2 in viewer polls across most demographics so that would bring in the largest potential audience. They have the Rebirth turn-around to adapt to this also.
User avatar

Spacedog

Expert Post Whore

Postby Spacedog » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:55 pm

IvCNuB4 wrote:
Or maybe they did learn something. Flash does need more backstory but that's what "Flashpoint" is for. They can easily convey that and his motivations to the audience in 20 minutes or less. Although Flash wasn't a great action character but he scored as #1 or #2 in viewer polls across most demographics so that would bring in the largest potential audience. They have the Rebirth turn-around to adapt to this also.

Although I admire your optimism, it has become really difficult to not get cynical in regards to DC's movie plans. "They can easily convey his motivations to the audience in 20 minutes or less". They can? I dunno. "Easily" isn't a word I usually associate with the shared DCU. So far, they displayed a special talent to complicate even the most simple concepts.

For the foreseeable future, my stance in relation to DC's movies is "...I'll believe it when I see it".
User avatar

rustyrusty

Garbage Collector

Postby rustyrusty » Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:36 am

Is it just me or does it seem like so much of the discussion about movies these days, by fans, is about how much money they took? Feels like that's something the media used to talk about and the fans would talk more about plots and characters, scenes and scripts and whatnot. I dunno, I find it odd. I mean, I know it affects whether or not other films get made etc, but the popularity of a film or any artistic endeavour really doesn't reflect how good it is.

Take 'The Big Lebowski' for example, that's a classic film these days, largely ignored at the box office at the time.

Just seems weird to me for fans to talk about box office takings so much, and comparing different movies and franchises in that way. I guess a lot of it does seem to stem from Zyson.


Anyhoo. I thought Justice League was okay, though kind of a mess. You've got an old Batman, a Superman who's barely got started but already died (and a mess of a character that doesn't really stand up to the essential positive nature of the character), and a very very young Flash. Seems like the timeline is all over the place. The only character that really stands up to any scrutiny for me is Wonder Woman, the rest of them they don't seem to know what to do with, or what era of their life they want them to be in. It's that lack of confidence in their own characters that means the film doesn't really hold together.
User avatar

cbikle

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby cbikle » Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:52 am

rustyrusty wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like so much of the discussion about movies these days, by fans, is about how much money they took? Feels like that's something the media used to talk about and the fans would talk more about plots and characters, scenes and scripts and whatnot. I dunno, I find it odd. I mean, I know it affects whether or not other films get made etc, but the popularity of a film or any artistic endeavour really doesn't reflect how good it is.

Take 'The Big Lebowski' for example, that's a classic film these days, largely ignored at the box office at the time.

Just seems weird to me for fans to talk about box office takings so much, and comparing different movies and franchises in that way. I guess a lot of it does seem to stem from Zyson.


1. JL is an important cog in an interconnected, multi-franchise shared universe and how well it does, will affect if & how other movies will be made (some already announced, that may not be made after all).

2. In the case of superhero movies, how well it does at the box office, usually is a pretty good barometer for its quality and how id did or didn't work as a film.
User avatar

Jack Charlemagne

rubber spoon

Postby Jack Charlemagne » Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:22 pm

cbikle wrote:
1. JL is an important cog in an interconnected, multi-franchise shared universe and how well it does, will affect if & how other movies will be made (some already announced, that may not be made after all).

2. In the case of superhero movies, how well it does at the box office, usually is a pretty good barometer for its quality and how id did or didn't work as a film.


Terminator Salvation and Terminator Genysys were both failed opening chapters to new trilogies, in both cases failing so badly that all immediate plans were scrapped. In both cases I think box office returns and quality agreed with one another, but generally I don't think box office success is much of an honest indication on the quality of a movie. Movies can be total shit but make loads of dough (hello, the Transformers and the Fast & Furious series and everything the Rock has ever been in). Movies can be genius and bomb bomb bombs away (It's a Wonderful Life, which was a theatrical bomb and failed to connect with the public until something like 3 decades after its release).

Each and every theatrical movie is ultimately a company unto itself. It's a full-time job for a couple hundred people or so over a year, year and half- and that's just the production itself. Regardless of its marketing material every company on the planet exists only to make money. Most of the people who can finance a big production do not do so for any reason other than hopes of getting that much more back from it. So at the end of the day the financials really are all that matter. Anything else really is entirely subjective. The Rock's movies have big fan followings even if they only offer brain herpes. James Gunn is in a great but rare balancing point, where he is breathing a lot of life into the MCU (so much that Thor 3 had to ape his style), while at the same time making some bank.

JL will ultimately make a lot of money, but the fact that it will not make as much as it should have will nudge out some careers and some planned projects. And this has nothing to do with how closely to the source material they portrayed Supes or whatever, but everything to do with it being a structurally and stylistically inconsistent piece of shit. While that kind of stuff means everything to us, that kind of stuff will never be a huge concern for most movie-goers because most movie-goers are responsible for people like Michael Bay, Zack Snyder and the Rock maintaining careers.
User avatar

chap22

Rain Partier

Postby chap22 » Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:24 pm

Jack Charlemagne wrote:
Terminator Salvation and Terminator Genysys were both failed opening chapters to new trilogies, in both cases failing so badly that all immediate plans were scrapped. In both cases I think box office returns and quality agreed with one another, but generally I don't think box office success is much of an honest indication on the quality of a movie. Movies can be total shit but make loads of dough (hello, the Transformers and the Fast & Furious series and everything the Rock has ever been in). Movies can be genius and bomb bomb bombs away (It's a Wonderful Life, which was a theatrical bomb and failed to connect with the public until something like 3 decades after its release).

Each and every theatrical movie is ultimately a company unto itself. It's a full-time job for a couple hundred people or so over a year, year and half- and that's just the production itself. Regardless of its marketing material every company on the planet exists only to make money. Most of the people who can finance a big production do not do so for any reason other than hopes of getting that much more back from it. So at the end of the day the financials really are all that matter. Anything else really is entirely subjective. The Rock's movies have big fan followings even if they only offer brain herpes. James Gunn is in a great but rare balancing point, where he is breathing a lot of life into the MCU (so much that Thor 3 had to ape his style), while at the same time making some bank.

JL will ultimately make a lot of money, but the fact that it will not make as much as it should have will nudge out some careers and some planned projects. And this has nothing to do with how closely to the source material they portrayed Supes or whatever, but everything to do with it being a structurally and stylistically inconsistent piece of shit. While that kind of stuff means everything to us, that kind of stuff will never be a huge concern for most movie-goers because most movie-goers are responsible for people like Michael Bay, Zack Snyder and the Rock maintaining careers.


Lools, the Rock kicked Jack's puppy. :lol:
User avatar

Jack Charlemagne

rubber spoon

Postby Jack Charlemagne » Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:27 pm

chap22 wrote:
Lools, the Rock kicked Jack's puppy. :lol:


Twice! And then he showed pictures of me in my laundry day clothes to the prettiest girl in class.
User avatar

Spacedog

Expert Post Whore

Postby Spacedog » Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:36 pm

rustyrusty wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like so much of the discussion about movies these days, by fans, is about how much money they took? Feels like that's something the media used to talk about and the fans would talk more about plots and characters, scenes and scripts and whatnot. I dunno, I find it odd. I mean, I know it affects whether or not other films get made etc, but the popularity of a film or any artistic endeavour really doesn't reflect how good it is.

Take 'The Big Lebowski' for example, that's a classic film these days, largely ignored at the box office at the time.

Just seems weird to me for fans to talk about box office takings so much, and comparing different movies and franchises in that way. I guess a lot of it does seem to stem from Zyson.


Anyhoo. I thought Justice League was okay, though kind of a mess. You've got an old Batman, a Superman who's barely got started but already died (and a mess of a character that doesn't really stand up to the essential positive nature of the character), and a very very young Flash. Seems like the timeline is all over the place. The only character that really stands up to any scrutiny for me is Wonder Woman, the rest of them they don't seem to know what to do with, or what era of their life they want them to be in. It's that lack of confidence in their own characters that means the film doesn't really hold together.

I honestly don't pay much attention to articles about comic book sales and statistics data on box office. This kind of info doesn't affect my personal experience as a moviegoer and reader.

On the other hand, I think that the growing interest in box office statistics is just a natural consequence generated by the existence of shared universes composed of multiple franchises and its dependency on box office results. This is a trap the superhero genre have set for themselves.

This formula is working like a well oiled machine for Marvel so far. Unfortunately, the same can't be said about its competitors.
User avatar

cbikle

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby cbikle » Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:30 pm

Jack Charlemagne wrote:
Terminator Salvation and Terminator Genysys were both failed opening chapters to new trilogies, in both cases failing so badly that all immediate plans were scrapped. In both cases I think box office returns and quality agreed with one another, but generally I don't think box office success is much of an honest indication on the quality of a movie.


I agree 100 %, but I was only talking about superhero movies, which, IMO, are the exception.

Going as far back as the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, I can't think of one financially successful superhero movie that wasn't well-done or one superhero bomb that wasn't half-assed produced.

There are a few on the fringe like Watchmen and Thor: the Dark World.

EDIT: Forgot about Batman Forever, which did very well at the box office, but wasn't so good.
User avatar

SporkBot

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby SporkBot » Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:28 pm

Jack Charlemagne wrote:And then he showed pictures of me in my laundry day clothes to the prettiest girl in class.


But...Jack! Didn't you know? That's what The Rock was trying to show you: It was YOU! YOU were the prettiest girl in class!

WHY WON'T YOU LET THE ROCK HELP YOU?!

leave a comment with facebook


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chap22 and 30 guests