Justice League (2017) ***½ /5: The DCEU is moving in the right direction but some elements are still rushed. A lot of people will be entertained by this film

Justice League clearly demonstrates that DC/Warner Bros. is moving in the right direction. The main problem is that there is still an element of rushing to get things out in order to compete with Marvel. DC’s failure to effectively compete with Marvel where it matters, $$$, is a good example of  the downside of being competitive. Warner Bros. needs to focus on just making good comic book movies based on DC comic book characters. This is why they should have fired Zack Snyder from the project earlier or given another director a chance. The DC films are mostly under the influence of Snyder stylistically. Man of Steel probably would have been worse if he was the main writer and not Nolan. I have already explained the fundamental differences between the styles of Nolan and Snyder in an earlier blogpost. Suffice to say that Snyder is a second rate version of Nolan. The structure of the DC cinematic universe is being hampered by this rushed and disjointed approach or reaching for things that aren’t there. Again I will make some suggestions of how the DC cinematic universe can reach its full potential without SNYDER; without SNYDER then things will begin to take shape. Snyder leaving this project early as a result of family issues is ultimately a good thing even if the circumstances are unfortunate.

This film stars Ben Affleck (Ben Affleck), Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman) and Henry Cavill (Superman) who, along with the newest additions such as CyBorg, Flash and Aquaman, battle the forces of Steppenwolf who wishes to take control of the entire planet. These heroes end up forming the Justice League.

Positives

The main positive of this film is that the DC cinematic universe is moving in the right direction, somewhat. I found the film entertaining for the most part. It wasn’t a drag like the overly serious and poorly conceptualized BvS. Justice League is definitely a more straightforward film than BvS but it’s a bit rushed. It is a film made on the assumption that comic book fans will know about the particulars so that they can bypass building something meaningful. Otherwise it makes for a good romp and does not necessarily run out of gas. Some people will watch this film and be entertained by the jokes and some of the action on display.

I know about the character Steppenwolf since I did read comic books in the heyday of the ‘90s and it’s clear that he had the potential to be a great villain for this film if there was a proper introduction. One can actually see this film trying to emulate parts of Wonder Woman and there is a moment when an explanation is provided about the mother boxes. I heard some people frowning about the idea but at least they explained it. If it’s an absurd concept then it can’t be any worse than the infinity stones in the marvel films. It is admirable that they (DC) are actually trying to build a universe with its own mythos. Diana refers to the Age of Heroes (taken from Hesiod) and it seems fitting since she mentions the earth realms involved in the DC cinematic universe, with two being mythic. There’s some Lord of the Rings vibe when she makes reference to the world of men. So it seems that going forward the present Justice league will be continuing the fight from a historical perspective. There seems to be a lot of old world conflicts taking place. To be fair in Man of Steel it was mentioned that a Kryptonian space ship visited earth 20,000 years ago. It seems that DC is trying to say that Earth has a long history with these more advanced alien civilizations. In DC comics we know that Steppenwolf is from the planet of Apokolips  and in this film it was revealed that he visited earth thousands of years ago. So far, therefore, two dominant alien civilizations have already visited Earth. This means that while Earth is not as civilized it does have some value and ancient wisdom (Themyscira and Atlantis). So I understand what DC is trying to do and it does work based on their own comic book lore. All that’s required is some more explanation weaved into the story which should give the actors more to work with once they internalize it. The admirable thing is that the composition of the league reflects this diversity based on the stories already told about the so called Age of Heroes. They only have to reveal the origins of the Flash correctly and effectively. It is likely therefore that the Flash might have some connection with an otherworldly force. Thankfully there was a reference to the Green lantern corps which means that Green lantern might have a solo film. The diverse composition of the league reveals that the DC cinematic universe has a lot going for it; it just needs to emerge from the shadows by just making a good comic book film. As I’ve said before the storylines in DC comics have always been superior to marvel. There is a richness of material which suggests that the DC cinematic universe should be story centred instead of character centred like Marvel films. A lot of DC comic characters have origin stories that can be translated into good films.

DC films clearly have a look that’s distinct from Marvel and it shows here. There are less bright colours. It definitely has more of a real world feel which is why they need to work on the CGI

I also liked some bits of the action especially when it wasn’t CGI heavy. The action was pretty good but it could have been better in some areas

Negatives

The primary negative is that the film is rushed. A better film could have been made if it wasn’t so rushed. It goes by in an instant and then you’re asked to tag along or keep up. A good 10-15 minutes setting up the story could have done wonders. How did Batman become aware of these creatures who feed on fear? Why are they here all of a sudden? Why did Steppenwolf decide to strike now? If he’s in exile then where has he been all this time? I thought they would have introduced Darkseid by now and made it clear that Steppenwolf is just his emissary. At least that’s what I expected. The problem is that they are telling everything from the perspective of Earth. There is nothing wrong in featuring the planet of Apokolips. It would have been much more effective if Steppenwolf was seen taken orders from a mysterious authority figure. The authority figure would have clearly given the go ahead for Steppenwolf to launch his attack. Real comic book readers would know that the figure is Darkseid. Nothing would have been wrong in actually revealing Darkseid. The origins of Darkseid should come later for Justice League  2 which will probably come after the next round of solo films. It would also be good if there was an actual reason given in the intro as to the importance of retrieving the mother boxes on Earth. Obviously this would mean that Earth is one planet that the forces of Apokolips have been unable to conquer. This frustration would more than likely explain the decision by Darkseid to invade the Earth. He will do so eventually.

It’s clear by his actions that Steppenwolf is some second in command and so the brief 5-10 minute intro should have introduced the planet of Apokolips. Maybe another villain can be featured in pt, 2  followed later by Darkseid in Justice League 3. This will give DC time to build something meaningful while giving the usual hints about Darkseid. The reality is that Justice League should have begun setting up the clash with Apokolips and not just throw Steppenwolf into the mix. This is why an intro to the planet itself would have been a good thing. These filmmakers are trying to make it into a big mystery and so it backfired.

DC should spend the time building the solo films before the next Justice League. They have too much good source material to be rushing to get the next Justice League out.

Batman looks a bit stodgy here. Affleck’s performance makes it clear that Batman is an old man behind the costume. He looks out of place when the pace of the action increases and there are parademons everywhere. I thought batman was going to cry at one point when superman joined the party. Flash and Aquaman really show up batman’s age.

DC need to get rid of Snyder or make him take a back seat.

One problem I had with the CGI is that if you take the real world approach then the graphics must be at a high level, Steppenwolf looks out of place here. What about old fashion makeup and then fill in the rest with CGI. As usual it was probably rushed. Steppenwolf was probably an afterthought. I just hope that Darkseid doesn’t look out of place.

I hope there are not inconsistencies with this film and the origin story of the amazons as told in Wonder Woman.

Thor: Ragnarok (2017) ****/5: This is a good film but Hulk is the standout character.It is the Planet Hulk story line that makes the movie interesting.

Thor: Ragnarok is a good film with its twists and its superficial humour (I seriously laughed only once). I watched it weeks ago but only now have I found the time to write about it (I’m not getting paid). One important thing to note is that Thor finally has a film to hold his own with Iron Man and Captain America. Thor has been invested with a lot of time and money by Marvel because he’s technically a part of the “holy” trinity which obviously includes Iron Man and Captain America. The solo movies of these three have more or less helped to define the direction of the marvel universe. There are also the Avenger movies but the trinity still takes up the leadership positions. The Guardians are still on the fringes for the time being since the major pitched battles will have to include the Avengers. Well -back to my original point- Thor has finally arrived as part of the big 3. The key to all of this is the Hulk who has been marginalized for a significant period and is only just now being developed as a character apart from being the rudimentary strong man. With the development of the Hulk character Marvel now seems complete as a universe. With his return to the fold then maybe he can form a part of the elite characters in Marvel, if they can come to some arrangement with Universal (I know it might be too late). A film called Planet Hulk would have done some wonders for the marvel universe instead the original hulk story fits strangely into Ragnarok.

Ragnarok stars Chris Hemsworth as Thor who must battle the forces of Hela (Cate Blanchett), the goddess of death, for Asgard. In this movie he comes to terms with his heritage as a son of Odin and he forms key partnerships with the likes of Loki, Hulk and Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson).

Positives

The main positive of this film for me is not the humour but the character of the Hulk. Hulk actually says more than 2 words in this film. The last time I heard him speak was in The Avengers (2012) when he said ‘Puny God’. After that it was all ‘AAAARRRRR’ ‘RAAAAwr’ and ‘Hm’ until Ragnarok. Before Ragnarok he became a rudimentary strong man, almost a secondary character. Bruce Banner was a bit more developed, but he was known for his PhDs and his relationship with another fringe character, Black Widow. The Hulk as a character was hardly developed so it left the Bruce Banner/Hulk conflict undeveloped. It is the Bruce Banner/Hulk conflict which makes the Hulk interesting as a superhero. Here in Ragnarok he is more developed and probably has something to offer going forward apart from his great strength. I’m spending a lot of time with the Hulk because the best parts of the film take part on the wasteland planet of Sakaar which is known to comic book fans because of the Planet Hulk storyline. This really should have been Hulk’s story but they have found a way to get Thor involved. I know about the arrangement with Universal but just imagine if marvel had a movie called Planet Hulk and it was actually good. Ragnarok shows how good it could have been even without Thor’s presence. Without this stopover in Sakaar the Thor franchise would have struggled to reinvent itself even if it had all the comedy in the world.

The movie itself has a fairly interesting story involving Hela. It does go into a lot of exaggerated conflict but it does capture in its own way the original premise of Ragnarok, the destruction of Asgard. The Hela back story is also interesting because Hela is the silent character whose history has largely been forgotten. It does capture the hypocrisy on Odin’s part despite his pretensions to nobility. He needed Hela to conquer but didn’t need her when he became respectable. This goes to show how politics can influence how history is written. One of the good things about the Thor franchise is that it never sought to portray Odin as a heroic figure and the trend continues here in Ragnarok.

The comedic elements are good but they are stronger on the planet Sakaar. A lot of things happen on the planet during the film including a change in Thor’s image and brighter tones normally not attributed to a Thor film. The comedic elements on the planet reflect this change in image for Thor the character and Thor the franchise. The comedy would not have worked without the brighter colours. The character of Valkyrie is also discovered on Sakaar. It seems to be a place where the rejected come and if they manage it they can  be reborn. No character who lands on Sakaar is the same afterwards, apart from maybe Loki. It does apply to Thor, Hulk and the Valkyrie.

The fight between Hulk and Thor in the arena was pretty good. ‘Are you not entertained?’

Negatives

The primary negative is that the film has a superficial quality that does not really fit with a heavy theme like Ragnarok. Now the Ragnarok would have worked if the old style of Thor worked or was successful. Then they would not have needed this sojourn in Sakaar. If the old style of Thor worked then the theme itself would have been more resonant. Ragnarok seems like an afterthought but it gets the job done superficially. What I normally read about the  Ragnarok is much more brutal than it’s portrayed here in Ragnarok. The old Thor style, if it worked commercially, would have captured the pathos of the old Ragnarok. This Ragnarok didn’t have much gravity. This is one of the first Marvel  films where the heroes are incapable of overcoming the villain on their own. So this film is not about who wins; which is good, because of Odin’s hypocrisy. Defeat can be a good thing and so Thor ends on a high. Ragnarok seems like a last gasp for the franchise before going under. Technically a lot of that had to do with the sojourn on Sakaar which is more Hulk’s story than Thor’s. Hulk might come out the better than Thor here. The Hulk has undergone a greater transformation than Thor. Without the Hulk twist then this movie doesn’t work so for me this is just as much Hulk’s movie as it is Thor’s. So while Ragnarok  was a last gasp for the Thor franchise it actually showed what could have been if Marvel was able to release a series of Hulk films.