Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Can't wait for this.

Still can't get excited about this.

But, here's hoping it's more Wonder Woman than BvS in the end,

Ouch! That first shot... I thought I was over the end of BvS. No, no, still a punch right in the emotions...

Looking as awesome as expected though.

This actually looks really fun. Might actually watch it in theaters.

Does anyone know why Aquaman is suddenly all Gangsta in his pronounciation?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Does anyone know why Aquaman is suddenly all Gangsta in his pronounciation?

Atlantis has a lower South side too ? I was hoping for a more Brave and Bold take on Aquaman, Mr Momoa can bring the snark as Ronan was a great character in a mehh show

Jason Momoa is ace.

Really not sure about Aquaman.

Also, Cyborg still looks unfinished.

DC sure have made sure we know this isn't like the sombre tone in Man of Steel and BvS. I don't know if it is the same as the preview linked above, but the one I saw had more jokes than the preview of Thor's latest.

What's interesting though is that they've still kept the big drama very serious feel. As a result it kind of feels... just kind of big in every way. Big jokes. Big drama. Big stars. Big money. Big studio that is going to spend every dollar to make sure this thing makes a lot of money and continues the franchise.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, either, but I'm not sure it was the lesson to be learned from why MoS and BvS were bad, and why WW was so good. WW wasn't just good because it had some laughs, it was good because it had a clean plot and a consistent tone, and a hero who showed some maturity and common sense. Well, at least that's what I thought the difference was. One the flip side the Avengers was all about children with superpowers acting like prats for 90 minutes before finally growing up in the last act, and people loved that movie.

But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

Fun is subjective, of course. I didn't have fun, I found it annoying, but that isn't to say that the millions of people who found it great fun and loved that movie were wrong. My point was just that while I think MoS and BvS were harmed by having their leads act immaturely, I am happy to admit I might be wrong about that because the Avengers also had that immaturity but it didn't spot people loving that movie. So it might not have been the immaturity afterall that was the problem for the greater audience.

I don't know what 'fun not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun' means, but maybe that's the real difference?

 sebster wrote:
DC sure have made sure we know this isn't like the sombre tone in Man of Steel and BvS. I don't know if it is the same as the preview linked above, but the one I saw had more jokes than the preview of Thor's latest.

Well, there was a joke at the end. And Ronan got a proverb wrong. But this kicks off with the same somber-but-completely-irrelevant tone that BvS dragged through the whole freaking movie.

What's interesting though is that they've still kept the big drama very serious feel. As a result it kind of feels... just kind of big in every way. Big jokes. Big drama. Big stars. Big money. Big studio that is going to spend every dollar to make sure this thing makes a lot of money and continues the franchise.

Eh. It mostly looks like a generic ensemble movie punctuated oddly with melodrama (with none of the characters actually in this movie- apparently Supes and Lois are going to be the pointless dead family flashbacks for this film), one-liners and mostly explosions. The jokes, drama, and the one 'star' look really small, and the CGI looks like it will drag on forever.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, either, but I'm not sure it was the lesson to be learned from why MoS and BvS were bad, and why WW was so good. WW wasn't just good because it had some laughs, it was good because it had a clean plot and a consistent tone, and a hero who showed some maturity and common sense.

This... doesn't look like it has any of that. The tone is all over the place (from high (or rather, excessive) melodrama to grimderp and randomly inserted laugh tracks), the 'maturity' is apparently just going to be the older heroes rolling their eyes at the kid heroes. Plot just seems to be a basic 'we must team up because aliens are invading for alien invasion reasons.'

Voss wrote:
This... doesn't look like it has any of that. The tone is all over the place (from high (or rather, excessive) melodrama to grimderp and randomly inserted laugh tracks), the 'maturity' is apparently just going to be the older heroes rolling their eyes at the kid heroes. Plot just seems to be a basic 'we must team up because aliens are invading for alien invasion reasons.'

So pretty much the Avengers then, but possibly without 30 minutes spent on the Helicarrier engaging in banter with surprisingly little action or plot development.


It's certainly going to be interesting to see how this one turns out, given that the strengths of Snyder and Whedon are so wildly different. Their contributions may complement each other beautifully...or terribly. Or anywhere in between. *shrug*

I believe that for Whedon to have received a writing credit, he must have contributed at least 30% of the writing. So his part is substantial, and it seems clear enough that Snyder was probably already 'off' the movie to a large degree at the time he stepped down.

 sebster wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

Fun is subjective, of course. I didn't have fun, I found it annoying, but that isn't to say that the millions of people who found it great fun and loved that movie were wrong. My point was just that while I think MoS and BvS were harmed by having their leads act immaturely, I am happy to admit I might be wrong about that because the Avengers also had that immaturity but it didn't spot people loving that movie. So it might not have been the immaturity afterall that was the problem for the greater audience.

I don't know what 'fun not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun' means, but maybe that's the real difference?

Avengers had immature characters in a lighthearted film that didn't take itself seriously. BVS had them in a dark film that was serious business. One works and the other doesn't.

By that quote, I mean that quippy humor is as natural and organic for the Snyderverse characters as stand up comedy was for Lt. Data. (I guess you could say I'm annoyed and he's a droid.). They come across as genuine as the kid whose hobbies involve memorizing sports injury statistics and sewing kittens together does when he invites you to a sleep over so you can watch Saturday Night Live, as people friends do. The trailer felt like the uncanny valley of buddy comedy.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

Fun is subjective, of course. I didn't have fun, I found it annoying, but that isn't to say that the millions of people who found it great fun and loved that movie were wrong. My point was just that while I think MoS and BvS were harmed by having their leads act immaturely, I am happy to admit I might be wrong about that because the Avengers also had that immaturity but it didn't spot people loving that movie. So it might not have been the immaturity afterall that was the problem for the greater audience.

I don't know what 'fun not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun' means, but maybe that's the real difference?

Avengers had immature characters in a lighthearted film that didn't take itself seriously. BVS had them in a dark film that was serious business. One works and the other doesn't.

By that quote, I mean that quippy humor is as natural and organic for the Snyderverse characters as stand up comedy was for Lt. Data. (I guess you could say I'm annoyed and he's a droid.). They come across as genuine as the kid whose hobbies involve memorizing sports injury statistics and sewing kittens together does when he invites you to a sleep over so you can watch Saturday Night Live, as people friends do. The trailer felt like the uncanny valley of buddy comedy.

In other words, "I'm just going to decide to hate this no matter which direction it falls."

My money says this is going to be >20% on Rotten Tomatoes.

I'll almost certainly see it regardless, because I am part of the problem.

 Ouze wrote:
My money says this is going to be >20% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Ooh... high bar there. 20% is like F4ntastic...

 gorgon wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

Fun is subjective, of course. I didn't have fun, I found it annoying, but that isn't to say that the millions of people who found it great fun and loved that movie were wrong. My point was just that while I think MoS and BvS were harmed by having their leads act immaturely, I am happy to admit I might be wrong about that because the Avengers also had that immaturity but it didn't spot people loving that movie. So it might not have been the immaturity afterall that was the problem for the greater audience.

I don't know what 'fun not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun' means, but maybe that's the real difference?

Avengers had immature characters in a lighthearted film that didn't take itself seriously. BVS had them in a dark film that was serious business. One works and the other doesn't.

By that quote, I mean that quippy humor is as natural and organic for the Snyderverse characters as stand up comedy was for Lt. Data. (I guess you could say I'm annoyed and he's a droid.). They come across as genuine as the kid whose hobbies involve memorizing sports injury statistics and sewing kittens together does when he invites you to a sleep over so you can watch Saturday Night Live, as people friends do. The trailer felt like the uncanny valley of buddy comedy.

In other words, "I'm just going to decide to hate this no matter which direction it falls."

Au contraire. I am lowering my expectations in advance so that I might enjoy the movie when I see it.

BVS was a good start, but Wonder Woman might have given me too much hope.

Looks good to me

 gorgon wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
But Avengers was actually fun, not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun.

Fun is subjective, of course. I didn't have fun, I found it annoying, but that isn't to say that the millions of people who found it great fun and loved that movie were wrong. My point was just that while I think MoS and BvS were harmed by having their leads act immaturely, I am happy to admit I might be wrong about that because the Avengers also had that immaturity but it didn't spot people loving that movie. So it might not have been the immaturity afterall that was the problem for the greater audience.

I don't know what 'fun not "I fun now humans with human fun" fun' means, but maybe that's the real difference?

Avengers had immature characters in a lighthearted film that didn't take itself seriously. BVS had them in a dark film that was serious business. One works and the other doesn't.

By that quote, I mean that quippy humor is as natural and organic for the Snyderverse characters as stand up comedy was for Lt. Data. (I guess you could say I'm annoyed and he's a droid.). They come across as genuine as the kid whose hobbies involve memorizing sports injury statistics and sewing kittens together does when he invites you to a sleep over so you can watch Saturday Night Live, as people friends do. The trailer felt like the uncanny valley of buddy comedy.

In other words, "I'm just going to decide to hate this no matter which direction it falls."

I think you've nailed it!

For a few here - and for a few more 'out there' too...

As opposed to the ones here and out there who've decided they'll love it no matter how bad it actually is?

Very slight tangent.

Is Wonder Woman worth a punt? I didn't take to the other DC films, but have heard encouraging things about this 'un.

I can rent it off Amamamaamazon for about £3.49, or pick up the DVD for £10, and flog it on if needs be.

Wonder Woman is one of the best superhero movies of all time, even leaving aside my DC fanboyism. On one hand, it is the fairly standard origin story narrative, but has such a superb script, such likeable charismatic leads in Gadot and (surprisingly) Chris Pine, and such a great sense of hope and heart to it that it's essentially one of the best versions of that narrative that's been done. It easily transcends the limitations of that classic origin story just on the strength of its characters and script, and it's a visual treat with some great action sequences as well (even it if leans a bit heavily on slo-mo at times).

It doesn't necessarily have the ambition of MoS as an origin, and it doesn't set out to deconstruct the character or make you ask any questions about the concept of the comic book superhero, it just tells a relatively simple story with a character that is very faithfully represented and of all DC's offerings so far, is the one that slips most easily into the heroic archetype.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
In other words, "I'm just going to decide to hate this no matter which direction it falls."

Au contraire. I am lowering my expectations in advance so that I might enjoy the movie when I see it.

BVS was a good start, but Wonder Woman might have given me too much hope.

Well...nothing wrong with keeping expectations measured. Like I said, it's hard to know how this one is going to come out, being a Frankenstein monster from two creators. Hopefully it reflects the best of both.

I suspect that WB is, in a way, eager to get JL behind them so they can focus on their upcoming solo films. I think a lot of those projects look promising, and that their new grand plan will be more successful for them.

I also wouldn't be surprised if we get a Man of Steel 2 announcement not long after JL opens. That's not something they'd want to announce until the character is technically 'alive'.

Looks good - nice tune, good action, bit of comedy.

If they can maintain the standards of Wonder Woman it will be brilliant.

(just never ever bring that tedious, dismal travesty of Lex Luthor into a DC Film again - EVER)

 gorgon wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
In other words, "I'm just going to decide to hate this no matter which direction it falls."

Au contraire. I am lowering my expectations in advance so that I might enjoy the movie when I see it.

BVS was a good start, but Wonder Woman might have given me too much hope.

Well...nothing wrong with keeping expectations measured. Like I said, it's hard to know how this one is going to come out, being a Frankenstein monster from two creators. Hopefully it reflects the best of both.

I suspect that WB is, in a way, eager to get JL behind them so they can focus on their upcoming solo films. I think a lot of those projects look promising, and that their new grand plan will be more successful for them.

I also wouldn't be surprised if we get a Man of Steel 2 announcement not long after JL opens. That's not something they'd want to announce until the character is technically 'alive'.

I hope so!

I mean, I have to believe Superman is in the JL movie, and I'd be bummed if he isn't.

But if he is in it, they've done an OK job of 'hiding' that fact, at least to the public in general.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Very slight tangent.

Is Wonder Woman worth a punt? I didn't take to the other DC films, but have heard encouraging things about this 'un.

I can rent it off Amamamaamazon for about £3.49, or pick up the DVD for £10, and flog it on if needs be.

It is definitely worth watching once. I don't want to get your hopes impossibly high, especially because the third act was weak, but WW was up there with Guardians of the Galaxy for me (although they are not the same type of movie). Gadot was as iconic as Wonder Woman as Reeves was as Superman. Pine was far better than I thought he could be. There is comedy, drama, action and romance. It's a great date movie, too.

It's a given that he's coming back. The big question is when/how, and I applaud the trailers for not going near that; the reveal of Doomsday in the third (I think) BvS trailer was very premature and heavily telegraphed the film's final act, so I'm glad they've avoided that here. They pulled the same trick with WW pretty well, not spoiling the big bad, so I think they've learned their lesson.

Some folks are almost certainly screaming bloody murder about the marketing since it's a DC film, but IMO they've done a pretty good job managing the Superman presence. He hasn't been in a lot of the marketing, but he has been in some of it, just to remind people that he's coming back. This trailer is more of the same. And it wasn't like the end of BvS didn't tell everyone that he was coming back already.

Green Lantern is the big question IMO. Most signs point to no. However, "Unite the Seven" was a marketing line used both on a poster and apparently on the JL soundtrack album. The earlier trailer also had Steppenwolf mentioning 'no Lanterns', establishing for the first time that they are a presence in the DCEU.

If I had to place a bet, I'd say that a GL is in it. Which one? I'm gonna say 60% chance it's Hal Jordan, 30% John Stewart, and 10% Jessica Cruz (yes, really).

Personally, I think it'll be pretty cool if they do 'unite the seven' and keep the GL presence under wraps until the premiere.

My guess is that if Lantern shows up (and to be honest, I doubt he will... If they'd cast anyone, I think we'd have heard at least rumours), it'll be Hal and he'll show up as either a final scene or post-credits scene, crashing to Earth with a 'Holy crap guys, Darkseid is coming' warning. Given that Lantern isn't due his own film until 2020 at the earliest, we could well see him in a JL sequel before his solo outing with the Corps.

On a side note, I'd love to see Jessica Cruz make an appearance down the line, but she's not someone you can start with, I don't think. She's a fantastic character but a terrible Lantern, at least initially, and I think we need to see a highly competent Lantern like Hal or John (please not Kyle! ) in a lead role before you can really make that contrast work. The real 'shame' with the Lanterns is that they have such a huge and largely self-contained mythos to draw from, mainly thanks to Geoff Johns' work, and most of that will fall by the wayside in the films... You could feasibly build a whole Lanterns cinematic universe without ever touching the rest of the DC universe, but unless we get 5+ different Lantern films I doubt we'll see more than the headline stuff. Hal, John, The Guardians, Sinestro, maybe some stuff with Parallax. The chances of seeing Guy or Jessica or Larfleez or Atrocitus are pretty low, I think.

I already like the Flash guy and Mamoa.