|
Doctor Spaceman posted:The Avengers was great, but you only need to look at X-Men or the Fellowship of the Ring or any film where a team is assembled through a series of vignettes to know that it's not the only way to do it. Except X-men all share the same origin, and one that supports the major themes of the movies. Fellowship, despite being fantasy, doesn't stretch suspension of disbelief as much because each character doesn't bring physics defying powers to the table. Most of the differences between the cast can be explained by their race and culture. Only Gandalf brings magic to the table, and that is mostly kept subtle. With Justice League, your bringing in god-like aliens, mythical and magical cultures, the results of unrelated scientific accidents, and those who are simply really well trained vigilantes all to the mix. There is no overarching theme to easily sum up why these people do what they do and why they do it together. The same could be said of Avengers, but they introduced the more outlandish characters in their own movies. All Avengers really had to introduce was Shield's inner-workings.
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
quote:Fellowship, despite being fantasy, doesn't stretch suspension of disbelief as much because each character doesn't bring physics defying powers to the table. Most of the differences between the cast can be explained by their race and culture. Only Gandalf brings magic to the table, and that is mostly kept subtle. Seriously, dude.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Yeah! Except the whole walking-on-top-of-snow while barely leaving footprints, never having to sleep, living for thousands of years having ridiculously good eyesight thing Legolas does (include ridiculous physics-defying bowman in the movies). Or Aragorn's magical healing ability and extended lifespan. Or the hobbits and their hide in plain sight thing. Or the ring that makes you invisible or the the palantir or the phial of Galadriel or... Yeah, but we don't see how they get those abilities. Superhero movies almost always have an origin. Jackson didn't show a montage of Legolas shooting targets set to pumping 80s music.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:There is a reason if DC wants to do it like Marvel did it. The reason is "because Marvel did it like that". Everyone's ignoring that more movies equals more money. I'd assume that's another reason to handle it that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Yeah! Except the whole walking-on-top-of-snow while barely leaving footprints, never having to sleep, living for thousands of years having ridiculously good eyesight thing Legolas does (include ridiculous physics-defying bowman in the movies). Or Aragorn's magical healing ability and extended lifespan. Or the hobbits and their hide in plain sight thing. Or the ring that makes you invisible or the the palantir or the phial of Galadriel or... He has a point. You don't question why Legolas can see things from far away because Aragorn looks at him and says "What do your elf eyes see?" That one line tells you that Legolas can see supernaturally well and that it's because he's a magical elf guy. The setting makes the "why" less important. Elves can walk on snow because they're elves and elves are magical. You show a guy doing the same thing in Manhattan and you need to take a second and explain why.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Codependent Poster posted:They should have it say stuff like "I'm not locked up in here with the toast, the toast is locked up in here with me!" and "You'll ask me to not burn the toast and I'll look down and say 'no'." I bought one because it's supposed to have this nifty scheduler feature like on a coffee machine to make toast the same time every morning but mine was busted because it always started thirty-five minutes early.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
^^ This has not gotten enough love. ^^quote:Elves can walk on snow because they're elves and elves are magical. You show a guy doing the same thing in Manhattan and you need to take a second and explain why. Oracle fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Jul 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
glitchwraith posted:With Justice League, your bringing in god-like aliens, mythical and magical cultures, the results of unrelated scientific accidents, and those who are simply really well trained vigilantes all to the mix. There is no overarching theme to easily sum up why these people do what they do and why they do it together. Sarchasm posted:The setting makes the "why" less important. Elves can walk on snow because they're elves and elves are magical. You show a guy doing the same thing in Manhattan and you need to take a second and explain why.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Mutants can do <insert super power here> because they're mutated humans. I'm failing to see the difference other than capitalizing Science instead of Magic(k). The JLA aren't mutants.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Sure, but it doesn't inherently require a whole movie. It's why you have "getting the team together" sequences in films like Ocean's Eleven or Seven Samurai, and why most of the Avengers got a bit of a warm-up fight early on in the movie (because they correctly assumed that people wouldn't have seen all of the previous MCU films). Oh no, absolutely not. I agree with you completely. I'm just saying that if they drop Wonder Woman into this Batman v Superman thing they're going to have to do more than just say "This is Matt Damon's character, he's really good at pickpocketing" because the concept of an Amazonian warrior princess is a foreign thing to both the viewers and the setting. It's okay to introduce a mutant who can open portals because, gently caress it, mutants are weird and that's been established already. Superman and Batman are presented as unique in their world for various reasons, and if you drop in another person who exists on their level you're going to have to provide a bit of explanation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:The JLA aren't mutants. Sorry, Meta-humans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
quote:The JLA aren't mutants. I mean they make freaking underoos for kids of her for jah's sake. This is not some unknown niche property like say, Watchmen was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
As others have said, The Justice League aren't all mutants, or related to mythical gods, or fantasy races, etc. They are a hodgepodge of concepts, which might not be a problem if they weren't being introduced as pre-established characters in a setting where most of that has not been established. I'm not saying it's impossible to do, simply that it hasn't been done well before in such a small number of movies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Still doesn't inherently require a whole origin movie. No, but it does require more than just Batman looking sly and saying, "I might know someone who can help us out," with a smash cut to Amazonia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
Sarchasm posted:I thought you were kidding, but one Google search later: With the tag line 'Hey Daniel, I helped myself to some beans... on toast. Hope you don't mind'
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Still doesn't inherently require a whole origin movie. See Grant Morrison. Batman, Superman, and yes Wonder Woman are iconic enough they don't need a detailed intro like say, Guardians of the Galaxy. Wonder Woman was incredibly huge in the 70s, and most people today if you ask 'who is Wonder Woman' will tell you about the star-spangled bathing suit and bullet-reflecting bracelets and invisible jet and magic lasso who is basically girl Superman. DC's major advantage is that most of their characters have built-in recognition. People know who Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Flash are, no explanation needed. Hell, you could probably have the film start off with the JL being an established group and people would still buy it. The only JL characters that would need explaining are Green Lantern and Cyborg (whose backstory could be summed up in 3 sentences, tops.) I think that using BvS as a way to quickly introduce the formation of the JL is fine, because a JL movie would only need one film's worth of setup at the most. The real reason Marvel had 5 films to set up Avengers was because they were a fledgling studio, and they needed to build up some form of star power and momentum before making a "big film" like Avengers. WB doesn't have that problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Yeah! Except the whole walking-on-top-of-snow while barely leaving footprints, never having to sleep, living for thousands of years having ridiculously good eyesight thing Legolas does (include ridiculous physics-defying bowman in the movies). Or Aragorn's magical healing ability and extended lifespan. Or the hobbits and their hide in plain sight thing. Or the ring that makes you invisible or the the palantir or the phial of Galadriel or... What we need setup in the JLA for each character is Who They Are and What Their Motives are, not What Their Powers Are, and it's very strange to compare that to films that had a planned 10-hours-of-movie arc. Hell, in Fellowship, you don't really understand much about Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, or even Aragorn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Oracle posted:and yes Wonder Woman are iconic enough they don't need a detailed intro like say, Guardians of the Galaxy. Wonder Woman was incredibly huge in the 70s, and most people today if you ask 'who is Wonder Woman' will tell you about the star-spangled bathing suit and bullet-reflecting bracelets and invisible jet and magic lasso who is basically girl Superman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
Sarchasm posted:He has a point. You don't question why Legolas can see things from far away because Aragorn looks at him and says "What do your elf eyes see?" That one line tells you that Legolas can see supernaturally well and that it's because he's a magical elf guy. I want to sort of use a comparison I sometimes use with anime/manga stuff based off of my past experience with it. A lot of anime just present some pretty major things without really explaining it too deep or at all. The plot device or the setting is just there to help tell a story, people accept it on good faith without questioning 'why' this world exists as it does that allows these characters to operate in it the way they do. Maybe an explanation will come along, maybe not, but it's alright. American comics and things like movies based off of comics I think use the notion that you need to explain the plot device or setting because if you don't try to adequately explain why this world exists as it does to allow the characters to operate in it as they do, then people won't accept it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Oracle posted:^^ This has not gotten enough love. ^^ Wait you're just repeating his point. He already said that. He said it works for LOTR and X-Men. Also I don't think Wonder Woman is as iconic these days as people think. Ask an eight year old who Wonder Woman is. Even if they know, they won't tell you her origin or defining personality traits. Unmature fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jul 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Unmature posted:Also I don't think Wonder Woman is as iconic these days as people think. As an eight year old who Wonder Woman is. Even if they know, they won't tell you her origin or defining personality traits. Marvel didn't even have that when they started the MCU.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
glitchwraith posted:As others have said, The Justice League aren't all mutants, or related to mythical gods, or fantasy races, etc. They are a hodgepodge of concepts, which might not be a problem if they weren't being introduced as pre-established characters in a setting where most of that has not been established. I'm not saying it's impossible to do, simply that it hasn't been done well before in such a small number of movies. Why assume they're being introduced as pre-established characters? We know that that's the case for Batman, but not necessarily any others. I agree completely about the conceptual hodgepodge problem, but IMO, taking the Batman approach across the board would actually alleviate a lot of my concerns, as it would allow the origins/backstories to be mostly saved for solo films (or just ignored for characters like Batman for whom it doesn't need to be rehashed). That would just require a massive amount of handwaving to explain such a radical shift from the universe Man of Steel portrayed, as that film didn't include any real fantastical elements other than the Kryptonians and their technology. But since I didn't care much for MoS, I'm not particularly concerned about how much BvS respects its continuity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
The only character of the trinity Batman v Superman has to establish is Wonder Woman and this is presuming she's a major character in the film and not just in it for a little bit to lead up to being fully established in Justice League. Any other hero in the film is just "Hi, this is *insert name* he does *insert power* and doesn't like bad guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:The only character of the trinity Batman v Superman has to establish is Wonder Woman and this is presuming she's a major character in the film and not just in it for a little bit to lead up to being fully established in Justice League. Which is true, but that's also where the bulk of my concerns lie; how exactly do magic, Greek gods, or mythological Amazons fit into what's primarily a Superman/Batman film? Those elements don't all need to be foregrounded in BvS, of course, but unless she's being introduced as a preexisting superheroine in the Snyderverse, or unless radical changes are made to her origin to deemphasize or remove the supernatural elements, I don't see how they can all be completely ignored, either. Waterhaul posted:Any other hero in the film is just "Hi, this is *insert name* he does *insert power* and doesn't like bad guys. That only works if they do the handwavey thing I mentioned above and set BvS in what's already a full-on comic book universe. As of the end of MoS, there's no basis for superpowers other than being a Kryptonian; it certainly didn't set up a universe where superpowered humans, Atlanteans, Amazons, Green Lanterns et al. exist yet, let alone one where they can be introduced without explanation. Barry Convex fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jul 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I want to sort of use a comparison I sometimes use with anime/manga stuff based off of my past experience with it. We also have to keep in mind that different mediums have different audiences with different expectations. Even in western comics you can easily get away with introducing a new character with a weird ability without having to explain all the details of their origin right away, because the audience is used to a world filled with super heroes and villains with hundreds of possible explanations as to how they got those powers. Movie going audiences will not necessarily accept this, however, unless you've somehow gotten across that such a thing not unusual for the setting presented. Barry Convex posted:Why assume they're being introduced as pre-established characters? We know that that's the case for Batman, but not necessarily any others. I know a lot of people disliked MoS, for good reason, but it seems odd to assume that the same people who worked on it might possibly ignore it's continuity while working on it's sequel. I will admit that I am basing a lot of my concerns on assumptions, but I simply don't see how you can introduce Wonder Woman or another DC character in anything more than "they make a small appearance at the end to show they exist and will be in the sequel" without going a little into who they are, and I don't see how they can do that without making their introduction somehow plot relevant. I have no doubt it could be done by very good film makers. The question is, are these film makers that competent?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:None of these things you list are intrinsic to setting up a character or their relationship to each other, which is actually one of the major benefits of the movies prior to Avengers. Exactly this and very well put. Forgetting the money motive for doing the origin films, like others have said you need to establish motivation and backstory for why these characters assemble in the first place. That was a big part of why Avengers actually worked. It has nothing to do with their powers. edit: Wasn't there talk of a Plastic Man movie for a while? Whatever happened to that? Because I think it could be pretty fun if you handled like The Mask and got the right actor and writers for it. BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Jul 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
glitchwraith posted:I know a lot of people disliked MoS, for good reason, but it seems odd to assume that the same people who worked on it might possibly ignore it's continuity while working on it's sequel. Sorry, I'm a bit confused here. You said a few posts above that you were assuming that the various other heroes would be introduced as preexisting superheroes in the Snyderverse (as opposed to the origin-first model that Marvel Studios and most other superhero films tend to use); how would that not largely ignore MoS' continuity?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Sorry, I'm a bit confused here. You said a few posts above that you were assuming that the various other heroes would be introduced as preexisting superheroes in the Snyderverse (as opposed to the origin-first model that Marvel Studios and most other superhero films tend to use); how would that not largely ignore MoS' continuity? It's certainly very difficult to imagine that there were cyborgs and green spacemen and Atlanteans all running around in MoS's universe. Now that I think about it, the knowledge that each Avenger had been established, and that an answer to "what is this guy's deal" was available on DVD if you chose to find out later would probably heavily enhance audience's ability to accept anything they didn't understand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Anyone here that think BvS will bomb needs a serious reality check. Two of the biggest franchises of all time, Batman and Superman who the public adore without reading comics in a film together, along with Wonder Woman, and some other heroes they may or may not have heard of, well this is just a license to print money. I guarantee this movie is going to be one of the highest grossing of all time and will beat The Avengers by a Gotham mile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:10
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:I guarantee this movie is going to be one of the highest grossing of all time and will beat The Avengers by a Gotham mile. That's pretty optimistic. It's definitely going to do well, but record-breaking numbers aren't really a guarantee. I mean Superman Returns was a huge loving flop.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:I guarantee this movie is going to be one of the highest grossing of all time and will beat The Avengers by a Gotham mile. I'm not saying it isn't possible, but how do you think that's a guarantee? And I don't think people are expecting it to bomb, I think a lot of people just think the movie won't be very good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Exactly this and very well put. Forgetting the money motive for doing the origin films, like others have said you need to establish motivation and backstory for why these characters assemble in the first place. That was a big part of why Avengers actually worked. It has nothing to do with their powers. None of the movies established why they would get together other than them simply being Good Guys. The movies showed how they might come together, in the form of SHIELD, but nothing about that needs a half-dozen movies to explain or setup and it wasn't even necessary anyway to have someone corral them instead of having them find each other or meet by happenstance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:a Gotham mile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Sorry, I'm a bit confused here. You said a few posts above that you were assuming that the various other heroes would be introduced as preexisting superheroes in the Snyderverse (as opposed to the origin-first model that Marvel Studios and most other superhero films tend to use); how would that not largely ignore MoS' continuity? Sorry for the confusion. I'm rambling a bit and not expressing my thoughts as well as I'd like. I was assuming that they would treat Wonder Woman like they are treating Batman; having always been around in the setting in the background (probably on Paradise Island), but her existence not being common knowledge. If her role in BvS is just a small appearance that doesn't affect the plot, this is fine. I'm worried they may be giving her a larger role than that, considering the hyping up of her inclusion, but don't see how the movie can support her introduction to the setting as established in a way that doesn't break suspension of disbelief, while also focusing most of the plot on the title characters and any antagonists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:why the hell would you guarantee that it's going to beat the most successful movie of all time I didn't say that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Yeah! Except the whole walking-on-top-of-snow while barely leaving footprints, never having to sleep, living for thousands of years having ridiculously good eyesight thing Legolas does (include ridiculous physics-defying bowman in the movies). Or Aragorn's magical healing ability and extended lifespan. Or the hobbits and their hide in plain sight thing. Or the ring that makes you invisible or the the palantir or the phial of Galadriel or... Other then the Ring, I knew about none of this, and none of it mattered in my enjoyment of the movie, nor did it really come up. Which speaks loudly to the fact that most people will see something and go "Okay" then fret about it. Like a nerd on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:Anyone here that think BvS will bomb needs a serious reality check. Two of the biggest franchises of all time, Batman and Superman who the public adore without reading comics in a film together, along with Wonder Woman, and some other heroes they may or may not have heard of, well this is just a license to print money. Who's saying it'll bomb? I have serious concerns about its quality, but I see it making $750m or so worldwide at bare minimum. Beating Avengers, though? I don't even think breaking a billion is a foregone conclusion; that takes word of mouth, and I'm not sure WB will make a film that gets it. Anyway, Thor: TDW actually outgrossed MoS outside the US, and Cap: TWS has outgrossed ASM2 worldwide. I don't think traditional levels of IP popularity are the best indicator anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:That only works if they do the handwavey thing I mentioned above and set BvS in what's already a full-on comic book universe. As of the end of MoS, there's no basis for superpowers other than being a Kryptonian; it certainly didn't set up a universe where superpowered humans, Atlanteans, Amazons, Green Lanterns et al. exist yet, let alone one where they can be introduced without explanation. Just have her show up and introduce herself and Themyscira in response to the Zod invasion. Say that they kept out of the world until now but things have changed and the usual nonsense. Superman is the catalyst for heroes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:I didn't say that. Fine, the highest-grossing not-James-Cameron movie of all time, earning 50% more than the most recent Batman. It earned nearly as much as Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel put together. (they're about $1.7 billion, Avengers is about $1.5)
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
Lobok posted:None of the movies established why they would get together other than them simply being Good Guys. Yes they did. (?!) Lobok posted:The movies showed how they might come together, in the form of SHIELD, but nothing about that needs a half-dozen movies to explain or setup and it wasn't even necessary anyway to have someone corral them instead of having them find each other or meet by happenstance. Maybe it didn't require all those films, sure, but they DID show how it all connects (Mjolnir, the Cosmic Cube, Stark's technology, etc.) You can't just say "the movies didn't tell us why they unite except for SHIELD" when SHIELD (and the larger enemy, Loki) was the loving reason. The Marvel films absolutely established that. Even Incredible Hulk tied it in with the super serum that Captain America took. Having them meet "by happenstance" makes no sense at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 19:24
|
|