Justice League

Wait, I thought Aquaman wasn't white. Neither is WW.

edited 12th Aug '17 11:37:21 AM by RAlexa21th

For what I see, Cyborg is gadet like Batman but he have a ofensive capacity that no other chararter have, if they add is hability to make boom tunels he can prove with something diferent that other members.

and in term of outlook, Cyborg is intersting because he was fully normal person who become a little bit inhuman, contrasting Clark and Diana who never were human to being with and Batman who is just a "regular guy"

Both of them are white in the comics. That's why they tried to make the League (marginally) more diverse in the first place.

I am sure by the time Jason Momoa and Gal Gadot were cast, WB already had some idea of the line-up they were going with for the Justice League movie.

edited 12th Aug '17 12:29:19 PM by comicwriter

Yeah, Cyborg was chosen for a number of reasons, it wasn't just a dart board. Batman hasn't been gadget oriented for 40 years; grappling gun, batarangs and smoke bombs are his standard arsenal, and occasionally he brings along a new device or vehicle for a specific purpose rather than just having anything he could possibly need. By all accounts, Cyborg DOES have spontaneous gadget generation and can hack better than Batman ever (realistically) could, which is a key plot point in Justice League Doom and Justice League War.

Like I said, Vixen could work if emphasized her magical abilities, rather than just using magic to replicate physical attributes. Martian Manhunter was well utilized in the cartoons (JL and YJ), and in fact it's been a trend the last 15 years to portray him as at least an Ambiguously Brown human form, but it's theorized that Cyborg was included in the comics over J'onn because making a movie version of the League would be simpler. He's a human infused with technology rather than another alien with superpowers. From a writing standpoint it's much easier to differentiate what Cyborg can do from the rest of the League than J'onn or Vixen. I would even argue that is a big reason why he was so successful as a Teen Titan, as very few superheroes are tech oriented like that, most being Badass Normals like Robin, metahumans like Beast Boy, magic user like Raven or superpowered alien like Starfire. Blue Beetle was essentially his expy in the Justice League vs. Teen Titans movie.

Japanese poster for the movie. The unmasked faces is an interesting touch.

edited 12th Aug '17 2:42:44 PM by comicwriter

I am thinking that all these posters sans Superman are going to get a revamp with Superman closer to release. They would be stupid not to. I noticed too that the -te- katakana symbol has a star cutout, like in the JL crest.

Apparently a front view of the Flying Fox. Aerodynamics are thrown out the window, but funny enough that front observation window makes me think the ship will be a prototype of the Watchtower. Suddenly I'm reminded of that NASA superplane that remained in continuous flight for two years in low orbit.

They're reshooting it because the film's "too dark".

Suicide Squad, anyone?

Oddly, or perhaps not, the star cutout from the Japanese poster, as it appears to be positioned on Ben Affleck's chest, keeps reminding me of Captain America.

A new banner◊.

That looks like a pic someone took with their friends at Comic Con. And Cyborg looks like someone ran him over in a forklift.

Not sure where the Comic Con part comes into it unless you mean the pose? They're going for an Alex Ross painterly look, but it would've been cool if they actually got Alex Ross to do it. And if Cyborg's cybernetics had more practical components, that'd probably help too.

Nothing really new here because it was hinted at during the ending of Batman v Superman; Ben Affleck states that in Justice League Batman will be more traditional.

edited 16th Aug '17 7:29:07 AM by Halberdier17

More obvious clickbait:

Casey Affleck saying his brother Ben won't be Batman in The Batman movie.

In all seriousness though, I should probably stop even mentioning clickbait pages, right? I'll cut it out if that's the case.

Is just me or WB and other really like to said jsutice league will be more tradicional movie?

its getting annoying actually.

It's entirely understandable. Batman v. Superman didn't get the reception they wanted, so they have a vested interest in trying to convince people it'll be different this time.

edited 16th Aug '17 11:52:15 AM by comicwriter

Thing is, it was made clear this was their plan all along but their insistence make them look like they are chiken out after Bv S results.

Also one of the point of DCCU was they were darker tone to distance themselves for marvel or Fox, it look is not going to be that way anymore.

It may have always been the plan, but it's clear they were taken aback by what ended up happening with bvs.

It's not rocket science. If people didn't like your product last time, you don't tell the new one is exactly the same.

Except that for whatever problem Bv S have, the tone wasnt one, also that was one complain of Suicide Squad: they play safe with group of scumbags into what can be call Guardians of the galaxy decaf.

this sound one of those "learing the wrong thing" about Bv S.

When it comes to news it's better to discuss it than ignore it. Casey Affleck seems to be largely joking around, and it has to be said that the interviewer asked him point blank about the rumors Ben is not doing more Batman movies so it wasn't something that came out of nowhere or a tangent. It does leave room to take it at face value, and implies that the discussion of Ben leaving has weight to it. Whether or not it actually happens is likely not set in stone, but doomsaying gets old.

Justice League was said to be much lighter in tone to BVS before BVS even came out. Several weeks earlier Chris Terrio said they envisioned BVS as "The Empire Strikes Back" where things are at its worst and that Justice League is a triumphant "Return of the Jedi." This is something that needs to be understood and reiterated in these discussions.

The set visit said that Snyder and crew recognized the backlash to the darkness of BVS and so they started skewing even lighter than they originally intended. but there is only so much you can change while filming. So having a chance to step away after principle photography, then modifying some scenes in reshoots seems to have been expected even back then. And making something "lighter" doesn't mean it's becoming more traditional. A good balance can make the darker stuff stand out more, the problem with both MOS and especially BVS was more "incessantly dark" that became numbing.

As for the Alex Ross inspired posters, it would have been cool to see one done personally by him, but he doesn't like digital manipulation and these posters need to have a number of variants (and already have).

Is MOS dark?, it serious indeed and dosent joke around, but I wont call that dark, the closet would be the destruction and Zod death but that is side efect of taking the scale seriously rather than just let there linger.

Bv S...yeah is dark, but I feel is more bad because superman was talk more that he is seen while this is the darkest take so far in the movies.

anyway, I want to see what Justice league got.

I like MOS, but yeah a lot of people found it to be too dark, especially for a Superman film.

You have Clark himself meandering around feeling mopey, depressed, and unsure of himself. You have him letting Jonathan Kent die (and honestly even as someone who liked the film, that particular part of it was poorly-handled imo). Then once Zod shows up, it just gets flat-out apocalyptic at times with the imagery. The Black Zero destroying Metropolis is filmed in such a way as to be as intense as possible (ground-level shots of people being brutally killed by the gravity beam, or by missiles from the military's fighter jets going off-target, etc). Superman basically incinerating the last of the Kryptonian race when he destroys the birthing machine, and then him not just killing Zod but full-on snapping his neck on-camera.

So yeah, a lot of people found all of that rather "dark." And then BVS just doubles down on it.

Really to use the Star Wars analogy, it'd be more like if both of the first two movies were like ESB and then we got ROTJ, with no ANH to start out with.

MOS is not as bleak as BVS, but it has a serious tone and so the moments that ARE quite dark make the movie feel intensely dark. Like, the revisionist idea that Bruce was in Metropolis during the Black Zero Event isn't a mood whiplash compared to what we saw in MOS, but it fits in exactly with the overall tone of the event as depicted (compare the heroic, fun tone of Avengers, Winter Soldier and AOU and then the revisionist home video footage of those movies shown in Civil War).

As said, MOS has scenes like the destruction of Krypton, Jonathan Kent's death, the mountain of skulls swallowing the hero, the Black Zero Event (you seriously see a building collapse on a crowded city street) and killing Zod. It doesn't quite compare to Batman about to spear Superman in the face or Martha being held hostage with a flamethrower next to her head, but it's more than just a "serious tone."

To put it one way: the movie is GRIM but not really dark, it dosent dwell in what is happen but is pretty damn brutal.

Also I disagree on Winter soldier being much fun or heroic, it is when steve is in charge but the rest is....well let call it "cold" since it lack the typical sarcasm heavy jokes of both avengers movies.

I wouldn't describe Man of Steel or Dawn of Justice as particularly dark, save a few of Batman's more brutal moments. I'd argue Wonder Woman, despite being the most hopeful and optimistic thing so far, was far darker than anything seen in the DCEU so far. It didn't go into the full horrors of WWI but it didn't shy away from them entirely either, and for a good five minutes Diana gave on fucking humanity entirely in one of the darkest and bleakest times of human history. "Dark" doesn't mean piles of skulls or a guy in a bat branding people. "Dark" is thematic ideals being deconstructed and torn to shreds - but most importantly there has to be a light at the end of that tunnel that suggests maybe those ideals can be put back together, even if they aren't by the end; you can't cast a shadow without light, after all - even if all hope is extinguished at the end, the fact that it was there at all enables something to be truly dark.

Given how dour Clark was in either film, the "hope" that was promised in Superman was never believable enough to amplify the supposed darkness that Bv S was trying to generate. Eight Deadly Words and all that. If Supes doesn't care to be Supes why should we want him to be?

Of course the opposite is true as well. For a work to be bright and optimistic and have a hopeful, "light" tone there needs to be some degree of darkness. Sam and Frodo destroyed the Ring but seemingly will perish in the lava of Mount Doom until the last second, GOTG 2 is dumbass humor galore but reminds you that Ego's a literally cancerous prick and Rocket needs to learn to let people love him and Nebula has the world's worst daddy issues. Jokes and humor a light-toned movie do not make - just as dark imagery and excessive violence a dark-toned movie do not make. Hopefully DC recognizes this by now.

He did want to be Superman. But he also realised it wasn't as easy as he wanted it to be.