I read that comic a year ago, in a Showcase. I have a shelf full of Essentials and Showcases…I’m on an old comic kick lately.
Oh, two shelves…my bad.
SDCC teaser
Just searched for the thread to say “wow, no one has posted the Comicon footage yet?”
I guess Warner Bros is in full “pay attention to us!” mode after BvS. Otherwise I don’t think we’d be seeing footage this soon (outside of leaks). Looks decent except:
-
Icky Thump is a terrible choice for music, even though I realize it’s probably just for this edit, not anything that will be in the movie. Still jarring.
-
Stop trying to make Cyborg happen.
First off, haven’t seen BvS but did generally enjoy MoS (didn’t like the last BM though).
Haven’t been really interested in JL. At this point I’m not so sure that WB isn’t just trying to poison the Superhero well for Marvel. However…
I kind of liked the humor they showed. And Affleck is fine as Bruce (stupid gravel-voice being the exception). Flash was ok, though kind of channeling the new versions of Spider-Man and TV Flash. Still, it’s a fun enough idea for a character.
WW/Wayne interaction was nice enough.
Cyborg…other than AA, why? Even a lower strength Green Lantern would be better if they wanted a black character. I can’t believe Cyborg has more name recognition with the general public just because of the cartoon. Aquaman…um…so far removed from any Aquaman I’m familiar with it’s hard to say, but leaning towards ‘too dark’.
Still, it’s better than I expected but then I’ve had pretty low expectations.
Hmm, with what I’ve seen of Suicide Squad clips, the recent WW clip, and this JLA clip, my poor, abused comic book geeky heart is feeling a slight ray of hope that somewhere among these three, there might finally be a good contemporary DC superhero movie.
Cats and dogs living together!
If the trailer is any indicator, Warner Bros. is really trying to make the DC movies a bit more humorous now. I know they denied reports that this was the reason for the additional footage shot for Suicide Squad, but it feels like the JL trailer has more banter than BvS (the movie.)
Needs more WHYDIDYOUSAYTHATNAME.
-Tom
Said nobody ever!
Come on Cyborg is the best
Btw, I looked it up, and Ben Affleck is not directing Justice League. That always bothers me about these old thread titles. For example, every single damn time the Hobbit thread was resurrected, I’d be left wondering, “is Peter Jackson directing the new Hobbit movies or not?” And going into the thread usually provided no answers in the beginning or end of the thread, because people were just using the thread to talk about other news about the movie at the end of the thread, and the answer was not known at the beginning of the thread. I guess it’s the same with this thread. I’m sure the answer is somewhere in the middle of the thread.
Hey, sounds like the topic title needs editing, calling @tomchick!
(This is a bit of a joke as Tom thinks editing a topic title after the fact is always wrong.)
Oh, great, let’s have this discussion again, wumpus…
The current situation is that the person who started the topic has exclusive power to edit the subject header whenever he wants to whatever he wants. Discourse doesn’t have any option to change that setting. Right now, Dave Markell could rename the discussion whatever he wants. “Batman is a dillweed,” for instance. Or “Everyone who has posted in here is a Bernie Sanders fan!” Or even “avlaweigualkgjaoiyt”.
My opinion is that once people jump into a discussion, control over the subject header shouldn’t belong exclusively to the person who started the conversation.
-Tom
Well, old Dave the topic owner hasn’t been seen since late 2015. Consensus is, we should change the title. So why not make like a coherent community and … do that? It’s a normal trust level 2 ability to edit titles, not just on your topic, but on anyone’s topic. For exactly this kind of gardening and curation reason.
We can like, create new threads people, there is a button for it and everything!
The reveal of the comicon trailer would have been a perfect time to start a new thread on the basis of this one now perhaps being stale.
Not that I’d advocate NeoGAFs model of a new thread every time there is a hint of new info on a given topic, but I hardly think there is an issue retiring a four year old thread.
FWIW, I definitely agree with Tom, at some point, once something is written in a public forum, it should become a record of permanence. This medium is not a wiki.
I’m with Sharaleo. Start a new thread and link to the old one if you want your bizarre continuity rules to continue.
However, I also have to say that reading the speculation regarding Affleck in 2012 was interesting at the very least.
That’s fine if anyone has the necessary discipline to create the new topic. Even better if you put a link to the previous topic in the first post as that links them bidirectionally.
Most people just do the easy thing and keep replying, so someone has to do the needful.
In fact at least in traditional forum system, I think performance wise it’s preferable to make new threads instead of trying to coalesce everything into a long mega-thread.