I wonder if my apprehension over this movie has anything to do with the personality of Justice League versus, say, X-men?

X-Men, though it presented challenges in adaptation, was workable because over the years, there'd been layers upon layers of very human drama established; sociopolitical undertext; minor disposable characters; and a central core of personalities we'd all come to expect to carry an X-men story. And the suspension of disbelief could be pulled off because marvel had made mutation a fairly mundane reality in their world.

Justice League, on the other hand, is a consortium of absolute superdivas! Which characters could we spare the development of? Heck, even their costumes are indispensable characters -- even cultural icons -- at this point! I just don't see the workability of that arrangement on screen. It'd be far too much to successfully wrestle with.
[Edited 1/18/08 7:51am]

I wonder if my apprehension over this movie has anything to do with the personality of Justice League versus, say, X-men?

X-Men, though it presented challenges in adaptation, was workable because over the years, there'd been layers upon layers of very human drama established; sociopolitical undertext; minor disposable characters; and a central core of personalities we'd all come to expect to carry an X-men story. And the suspension of disbelief could be pulled off because marvel had made mutation a fairly mundane reality in their world.

Justice League, on the other hand, is a consortium of absolute superdivas! Which characters could we spare the development of? Heck, even their costumes are indispensable characters -- even cultural icons -- at this point! I just don't see the workability of that arrangement on screen. It'd be far too much to successfully wrestle with.
[Edited 1/18/08 7:51am]

Lammastide said:

well that's why it needs to be stretched over a trilogy. altho i do think that the general movie going public has low tolerance for superhero films. look what happened to Batman 3 and 4. Even Spiderman 3 got panned.
A gargantuan task like the JLA NEEDS to be done right and yes the iconic status sounds like it could be way too much for Hollywood to bare.
I mean how could you really do the Lord of The Rings as just one movie? you couldn't. Star Wars? no way. The story and all the other sub-stories and plot and characters (Atlantis, the origins, the Watchtower, individual characters hometowns, etc, etc) of the JLA is far far too immense to contain to just one film with two sequels.

Milty said:

I think the reason some of those movies got panned is because of the script...I mean seriously how hard is it to write a script for these movies? Read the comic and implement it to screen...the dialog is there already just get an actor and put him in there.

Instead especially in the Spiderman franchise they try to make the actor the star...How many times do we have to see Spidermans mask taken off, blown off or misplaced to remind us "Hey everyone remember Spiderman is being played by Toby Mcguire!" It's irritating to see....That is why I loved Sin City...no rewrites they did it just like the book and it made money and was a critical success. They always try to hollywood crap up and it destroys what the book is about...Was Jessica Alba really a good fit for Sue Richards? Did Punisher REALLY need John Travolta in it? Hell the oldschool Lou Gossip Jr Punisher was better....

Every Marvel movie so far is tainted with either BS actors who are not right for the role or bad scripts or both. I am pumped about this Iron Man movie though...Not only did they get the perfect Tony Stark but it actually looks solid from top to bottom.

Lammastide said:

I agree completely!

The difference I think between the way they did X-men and doing Justice League is X-men 1 and 2 (wont watch 3 if you paid me with money and Halle Berry clones) is it's Wolverines vehicle...Oh they loosly introduce a few supporting characters but its based around Wolvie and his "cool" factor. The stories deal primarily with him and main characters like Cyke, Storm even the professor become backround noise.

Magneto got to shine as did Striker in the 2nd film cause they are the bad guys. I didn't consider those 2 movies true X-men movies...just Wolverine movies in disguise.

The reason the Justice League movie is hard to do is you have the big 3 of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman who all command nothing but attention. Add fan faves and popular characters in their own right like Flash, Green Lantern, Aqua Man then you got a problem.

That is too much star power for one movie to be done right...and if your not using the actors that played them or are going to play them in their solo movies that is even more of a issue.
[Edited 1/18/08 13:03pm]

Sinister said:

About X3, if you are as much a stickler for detail and faithfulness to the book as I suspect, 3 may annoy you a bit. But I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised at how well it turned out. I thought it was gonna be an absolute trainwreck without Singer, and it wasn't.

OMG, could you imagine an AQUAMAN movie?!

That would be unbearable

i'm actually kinda looking forward to the speed racer movie. i don't think it's going to be anything monumental or revelatory, but i'm betting it's going to be really pretty eye candy.

OMG, could you imagine an AQUAMAN movie?!

That would be unbearable

ehuffnsd said:

true true. for the record, i still haven't seen Catwoman. At the first look atthe costume Halle Berry wore and I was like "uh uh no way".

Milty said:

I didn't think Halle Berry made a good catwoman or storm (Iman would have been great for storm). Halle Berry would make a good vixen.

i'm actually kinda looking forward to the speed racer movie. i don't think it's going to be anything monumental or revelatory, but i'm betting it's going to be really pretty eye candy.

Anxiety said:

I'll watch any movie with Christina Ricci in it. Even that godawful werewolf movie for which I've successfully mentally blocked out the name.

Warner pulls plug on 'Justice League'

"Justice League" is no longer moving faster than a speeding bullet.
Warner Bros. let the options lapse on the young cast that director George Miller chose to play DC superhero staples. The studio, which had set Tuesday as its greenlight deadline for the pic, confirmed Wednesday the project is on indefinite hold.

Project now most likely won't get under way until late summer or fall at the earliest.

Cast members were informed late Tuesday their options would not be exercised, but they were also assured the studio is determined to make the film with them in it. But before that can happen, there are several problems to be resolved.

The studio's reasons included not getting the official response it needed on tax breaks from shooting in Australia. And while WB execs like the script they got from Kieran and Michele Mulroney, it would benefit from a little more work, something that isn't possible because of the writers' strike.

Some were surprised the studio didn't exercise cast options anyway. The deals gave WB the flexibility to exercise the deals immediately, or in July, and the actors will be making salaries in the low six-figure range. While Adam Brody, cast as the Flash, has a track record, most of the cast comprises such newcomers as Armie Hammer Jr., who plays Batman, and Megan Gale, who will play Wonder Woman.

The studio risks losing them to other film jobs. But it is likely most if not all the cast will make sure to be available starting late summer and fall, just in case. That's because of the starmaking potential of "Justice League."

Studio had set this week as the deadline to greenlight the superhero tentpole, which it was racing to get into production for 2009 release. That was always considered a dicey proposition, particularly when the writers went on strike, and because the film needs to be completed before the SAG deal expires in June.

With "Justice League" on indefinite hold, the studio has a superhero gap on its 2009 slate; status of the next "Superman" pic is also uncertain.


Here's my official statement:

sextonseven said:

prozac nation?

Anxiety said:

That's not it. I have that DVD, but haven't watched beyond Christina's nekkid scene. I'm saving the rest for a day when I'm feeling really "up".

And stop trying to get me to recall that other bad one. I'm not going to undo months of...oh damn, I just remembered. It was Cursed.

sextonseven said:

So you don't watch movies from the beginning to the end, but you refuse to skip awful songs on albums and always listen to an album from the beginning to the end ! You're totally crazy .
Or maybe there was a reason while you didn't watch it beyond that scene .
[Edited 1/20/08 14:05pm]

Serious said:

It was the first five minutes--the equivalent to watching a trailer. Stop trying to get me to contradict myself.

Fortunately for you, I like it when you harrass me.

here's how bad it could be...check out this unaired pilot for a JLA television series

Warner pulls plug on 'Justice League'

"Justice League" is no longer moving faster than a speeding bullet.
Warner Bros. let the options lapse on the young cast that director George Miller chose to play DC superhero staples. The studio, which had set Tuesday as its greenlight deadline for the pic, confirmed Wednesday the project is on indefinite hold.

Project now most likely won't get under way until late summer or fall at the earliest.

Cast members were informed late Tuesday their options would not be exercised, but they were also assured the studio is determined to make the film with them in it. But before that can happen, there are several problems to be resolved.

The studio's reasons included not getting the official response it needed on tax breaks from shooting in Australia. And while WB execs like the script they got from Kieran and Michele Mulroney, it would benefit from a little more work, something that isn't possible because of the writers' strike.

Some were surprised the studio didn't exercise cast options anyway. The deals gave WB the flexibility to exercise the deals immediately, or in July, and the actors will be making salaries in the low six-figure range. While Adam Brody, cast as the Flash, has a track record, most of the cast comprises such newcomers as Armie Hammer Jr., who plays Batman, and Megan Gale, who will play Wonder Woman.

The studio risks losing them to other film jobs. But it is likely most if not all the cast will make sure to be available starting late summer and fall, just in case. That's because of the starmaking potential of "Justice League."

Studio had set this week as the deadline to greenlight the superhero tentpole, which it was racing to get into production for 2009 release. That was always considered a dicey proposition, particularly when the writers went on strike, and because the film needs to be completed before the SAG deal expires in June.

With "Justice League" on indefinite hold, the studio has a superhero gap on its 2009 slate; status of the next "Superman" pic is also uncertain.


Here's my official statement:

Looking at the cover. I like Black lightning with an afro instead, well thats just me, they did the same with John Stewart shaving his head. Guess DC feels the need to update stuff (hey let's update the mona lisa, make her more hip). They are turning Black Canary into a Victoria Secrets model already, go back to the black & blue look. Is that speedy???? Get rid of the sidekick and put the man in there instead, Green Arrow.

kpowers said:

I'm all for updating the characters as long as it's within reason. There's a scene in one of the recent issues of JLA where Black Lightning and John Stewart are joking exactly about how BL used to sport an afro. If characters don't change with the times then how will they appeal to new readers? No one will take Luke Cage seriously if he still wore his yellow blouse and tiara.

sextonseven said:

I like it old school, but thats just me. I hated when the try to change suerman, that whole blue lighting and red lightning look. Aquaman with the hook hand lame, nows it's water I think (and he needs to wear the orange).