"WONDER WOMAN 1984" (2020) Review

 

"WONDER WOMAN 1984" (2020) Review

Following both the box office and critical success of the 2017 movie, "WONDER WOMAN"; Warner Brothers Studios and the DC Extended Universe (DCEU) franchise quickly set out to capitalize on its success with a sequel that had been scheduled to be released six months earlier than it did.

Like the 2017 movie, "WONDER WOMAN 1984" featured Gal Gadot in the starring role of Diana Prince aka Wonder Woman and Patty Jenkins as its director. And like its predecessor, the 2020 movie featured a period setting and Chris Pine as Steve Trevor, Diana's true love. I know what you are thinking. How could Pine portray the same role, considering his fate in the previous film? Let me explain.

Set in Washington D.C. 1984, nearly sixty-six years after the previous film; Diana finds herself dealing with a greedy and desperate businessman, along with a co-worker at the Smithsonian Institution and her own selfish desire when an ancient artifact that grants wishes goes missing. After Wonder Woman secretly foils a robbery at a local mall, the D.C. police asks the Smithsonian to identify stolen antiquities from the attempted robbery. Diana and her colleague, geologist and cryptozoologist Dr. Barbara Ann Minerva notice one item, later identified as the Dreamstone, contains a Latin inscription claiming to grant the holder one wish. Neither woman is aware that failing businessman Maxwell "Max Lord" Lorenzano seeks to use the Dreamstone to save his bankrupt oil company.

Both Diana and Barbara unknowingly use the Dreamstone to fulfill their personal desires. Diana wishes for the resurrection of her dead lover from World War I - Captain Steve Trevor. And Barbara wishes to become like Diana - which leads her to acquire superpowers similar to the latter's. After discovering the artifact's new location, Max Lord seduces Barbara and steals the Dreamstone from the Smithsonian. Using the item, he wishes to become the artifact itself and gains its wish-granting powers. Diana, Steve and Barbara discover that the Dreamstone had been created by Dolos/Mendacius, the god of mischief aka Duke of Deception. The Dreamstone not only grants a wish, it also exacts a toll on the user until the wish is renounced or the artifact is destroyed. Following Steve's return, Diana slowly begins losing her superpowers. Barbara begins losing her humanity. As for Lord, his wish and new role as the Dreamstone not only makes him a wealthy and powerful businessman, but allows him to create chaos and destruction throughout the world.

When Warner Brothers first released news about "WONDER WOMAN 1984", I must admit that I had a few misgivings about the film. But my misgivings were rather minor. I found it unnecessary that this film would also be a period production, like its 2017 predecessor, "WONDER WOMAN". In fact, I suspect that Warner Brothers, the DCEU franchise and director-writer Patty Jenkins had decided to use this period setting to exploit one aspect of the previous film's success. My misgiving toward the film increased when I learned that Chris Pine would return as Diana's lover Steve Trevor, since his character had died in the 2017 movie. I wondered how Jenkins and the other two screenwriters - Geoff Johns and Dave Callaham - would find a way to bring back Steve.

In the end; Jenkins, Johns and Callaham brought Steve back using the Dreamstone and Diana's wish as narrative devices. I found this acceptable . . . to a certain degree. Diana's use of the Dreamstone also allowed the film to explore her inability to recover from Steve's death back in 1918 and her willingness to succumb to selfishness in order to keep him around. In fact, the film's opening sequence foreshadowed Diana's willingness to embrace selfishness for her own personal desire. The opening scene featured the much younger Diana participating in an athletic event on Themyscira against older Amazons. After falling from her horse, Diana's desire to win the event leads her to cheat during the final race by using a shortcut after her fall. Although Diana's use of the Dreamstone had been more of an act of wishful thinking on her part, her stubborn refusal to renounce her wish and give up Steve exposed her unwillingness to do the right thing and learn to face grief all over again.

When I first learned that Jenkins would also serve as a screenwriter for "WONDER WOMAN 1984", I had feared she would allow reverence for the Diana Prince character prevent the latter from being well-rounded. Fortunately, the director-writer proved me wrong. By writing Diana with a degree of ambiguity, Jenkins allowed Gal Gadot to give a better performance than the one she gave in "WONDER WOMAN".

But there were other aspects of "WONDER WOMAN 1984" that impressed me. Despite my misgivings about the setting, I have to give kudos to production designer Aline Bonetto for her excellent re-creation of Washington D.C. circa 1984. The movie seemed to permeate with that particular period in history, thanks to Bonetto. The art direction team led by Peter Russell, Anna Lynch-Robinson's set designs and Matthew Jensen's cinematography also contributed to the movie's mid-1980s setting. But I especially wanted to point out Lindsay Hemming's costume designs that perfectly captured the decade, as shown below:







"WONDER WOMAN 1984" also benefited from the cast's first-rate performances. There were performances that struck me as solid and competent - including Lilly Aspell, who had returned to portray the younger Diana; Gabriella Wilde as Max Lord's secretary Raquel; Natasha Rothwell as Diana and Barbara's Smithsonian co-worker Carol; Oliver Cotton as Simon Stagg; Lucian Perez as Lord's son Alistair; Stuart Milligan as POTUS; Amr Waked as Emir Said Bin Abydos; Ravi Patel as Babajide; Connie Nielsen as Queen Hippolyta; and especially Robin Wright as Diana's aunt Antiope.

However, I believe the best performances came from those who portrayed the main four characters. Chris Pine gave a warm performance - much warmer - as the resurrected Steve Trevor, who not only found himself a man out of time, but also growing aware of Diana's continuing grief over him. Pedro Pascal gave a very energetic, yet complex portrayal of failing businessman Max Lord. I thought the actor managed to skillfully conveyed all aspects of Lord's personality - his insecurities, capacity for love, desperation, charm, cunning and ruthlessness.

I was very impressed by Kristen Wiig's performance as Barbara Ann Minerva aka Cheetah. I thought she handled the transformation of the geologist-cryptozoologist who becomes a super villain was more than exceptional. I found it subtle, skillful and very effective. Although I was impressed by Gal Gadot's portrayal of the naive Diana Prince aka Wonder Woman in 2017's "WONDER WOMAN", I felt that she gave a better performance in this film. Yes, Gadot did an excellent job in conveying the more positive aspects of Diana's character - her warmth and heroic determination. But I feel that the actress gave an exceptional performance in conveying the more negative aspects of Diana's nature - her willingness to engage in her selfishness and especially her unhealthy and never-ending grief over Steve's original death. Gadot's portrayal of this aspect of Diana's character was especially on full display when Steve tried to convince her to renounce her wish.

"WONDER WOMAN 1984" also featured some pretty decent action sequences. However, I felt there was only one sequence that really impressed me. It featured Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor's fight against against Lord's men and Cheetah inside the White House. I thought Jenkins did an outstanding job in directing this sequence.

I wish I could say that "WONDER WOMAN 1984" was a first-rate movie or a sequel that truly lived up to the original film. I wish I could say this, but I cannot. This movie was mess, despite its virtues. As I have constantly stated in the past, I believe the backbone of any film is its story. The narrative for "WONDER WOMAN 1984" had potential, but screenwriters Geoff Johns, Dave Callaham and Patty Jenkins just . . . they pretty much screwed over the film's potential.

First of all, what was the point in setting this film in the mid-1980s? The 2016 movie, "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE" had established that during the 97 years following Steve Trevor's death, Diana had more or less isolated herself due to her growing cynicism toward humanity and her grief over the former's death. I have a theory about this - either Patty Jenkins was offended by the idea of Diana not engaging in any costume vigilante activities during that near century; she and the Warner Brothers Studio suits wanted to cash in on the success of the period setting for "WONDER WOMAN"; or both. Nevertheless, showing Diana as Wonder Woman foiling a mall robbery in 1984 Washington D.C. pretty much undermined the established canon from "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN". Sloppy writing, folks. Even if it is minor.

Speaking of the mall robbery . . . this scene will probably go down as one of the most cringe worthy I have ever seen in a motion picture. I realize that the robbery had served as the catalyst for the Dreamstone story arc, but . . . oh my God! It was a travesty. The entire scene felt as if Patty Jenkins had pulled out every cliché about the Wonder Woman character and the mid-1980s in general . . . aaaannd ramped it up to the extreme. Another cringe-worthy sequence proved to be watching the world fall into chaos after Max Lord managed to convince a great deal of humanity to make a wish. I never realized that a competent director like Jenkins was capable of going over-the-top.

Another exaggeration I found in "WONDER WOMAN 1984" proved to be Steve Trevor's reaction to the year 1984. I realize Jenkins and the other two writers wanted a repeat of Diana's reactions to London 1918 in "WONDER WOMAN" . . . only from Steve's perspective. But the mistake they made was including Steve's reactions to escalators and subways. Why? Both innovations had already been in existence before 1918. The escalator had been in existence since the late 19th century - roughly 30 to 40 years before the 2017 movie's setting. The subway or rapid transit systems had been in existence in Great Britain since 1863. The innovation first made its U.S. appearance in 1897 Boston and sprung up in New York City a few years later. Since both innovations had existed years before 1918, why on earth did this film have Steve reacting to both like some kid who had stumbled across a prize?

I also had a problem with the resolution of the whole Lord/Dreamstone situation. From what I understood, once Lord had renounced his past wishes as the Dreamstone, Barbara Ann aka Cheetah lost her powers. I do not see how this is possible, considering that she had gained a copy of Diana's powers through her first wish - before Lord became the Dreamstone itself. I saw nothing wrong with Barbara Ann losing her second wish (or Lord's, since he was the one who actually made the wish) - namely being an apex predator. But she had never renounced her first wish - which means she should have remained as powerful as Diana by the film's end.

Did anyone notice how often Jenkins had Diana used her Lasso of Truth as a weapon a lot? I did. Yet, there seemed to be no sign of a shield or sword. I had no problem with Diana not using a sword and shield in this movie; but Jenkins, Johns and Callaham practically had her heavily depending upon the lasso as a weapon like the Jedi in "THE CLONE WARS". It seemed too much. Speaking of weapons, "WONDER WOMAN 1984" also introduced the armor of a legendary Amazon named Asteria. Apparently, Diana had sought out this Amazon in later years, but only found the latter's golden armor. Diana later wore this armor during her last fight with Barbara Ann aka Cheetah. When the media first released images of this armor, I was not impressed. And my instincts proved to be correct. I do not know how Asteria, whom the mid-credit scene revealed as still being alive in 1984, lost her armor. But the latter proved to be a waste of time - not only for Diana, but also to this viewer. Wearing the armor did nothing for Diana. It was not able to protect her from Barbara Ann's claws during their fight. In fact, it did not take Barbara Ann very long to damage the suit. What was the point in introducing the armor in the first place?

"WONDER WOMAN 1984" introduced two new abilities for Diana that were part of comic book canon, but not featured in any previous DCEU movies. One of those abilities left me feeling flabbergasted - namely Diana's ability to fly. That is correct. Wonder Woman flied . . . like Superman. Diana had possessed this ability in the comic books since the 1980s. My only previous experience with Wonder Woman had been the 1970s cartoon, "THE SUPER FRIENDS", and Lynda Carter as the titular heroine between 1975 and 1979. Wonder Woman's ability to fly was never seen in "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN", the 2017 movie or both versions of "JUSTICE LEAGUE". Why was it important for Jenkins to introduce this ability . . . in this film? During this period in Diana's life? I do recall Wonder Woman's invisible plane from the 1970s. But in "WONDER WOMAN 1984", Diana suddenly remembered that she had inherited her father's ability to render something or someone invisible. And she used this ability to make the plane she and Steve had stolen to fly to Egypt . . . invisible. Now, I realized that although the invisible plane was part of Wonder Woman lore, I saw this plot twist as unnecessary. One, why introduce this ability when it was not previously shown in other DCEU movies? And two, why steal a plane in the first place? Neither Diana or Steve ever considered that the man whose body Steve occupied had a passport. The whole sequence struck me as dumb.

Since I had brought him up, I might as well focus my attention on the one aspect of "WONDER WOMAN 1984" that I believe sunk this film. Namely, Steve Trevor's possession of the nameless handsome strange. Why in God's name did Jenkins, Johns and Callaham allow this to happen? Why did the writers allow Steve's spirit to take possession of some man without the latter's consent? Why did they allow Steve to take control of the man's apartment without his consent? Why did they allow Diana to have sex with this man's body . . . without his consent? All of this happened without Diana or Steve even considering the issue of consent. And it was disgusting to watch. The entire situation smacked of rape to me. If the genders of the three characters involved had been reversed . . . what am I saying? This situation managed to generate a great deal of criticism anyway . . . and quite rightly. What I did not like was Jenkins' attempt to brush aside this controversy. If Jenkins, Johns and Callaham wanted Steve back that badly, they could have easily allowed Diana's wish to manifest Steve's body again . . . wearing his old World War I uniform. Why did they not consider this? I could have tolerated this film a lot more, despite its flaws, if Jenkins and the other filmmakers had not pulled this disgusting plot point with Steve Trevor and the handsome stranger's body.

Believe or not, "WONDER WOMAN 1984" had its share virtues - a few pretty good action sequences, costume and production designs that perfectly reflected the mid-1980s and some damn good performances from a cast led by Gal Gadot. Unfortunately, I believe the film's flaws - especially in regard to the Steve Trevor and handsome stranger characters - really undermined it. I have not been so disappointed in a comic book movie since Marvel's 2016 film, "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR". What a damn pity!

"WONDER WOMAN 1984" (2020) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "WONDER WOMAN 1984", the sequel to the 2017 D.C. Comics Extended Universe (DCEU) movie, "WONDER WOMAN". Directed by Patty Jenkins, the movie stars Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman aka Diana Prince:



"WONDER WOMAN 1984" (2020) Photo Gallery

"JUSTICE LEAGUE" (2017) Review

"JUSTICE LEAGUE" (2017) Review

The D.C. Comics Extended Universe (DCEU) released its fifth film utilizing several characters that were either featured or hinted in its previous four films during the fall of 2017. Directed by Zack Snyder (well, most of it), "JUSTICE LEAGUE" proved to be an even more controversial entry than two of its previous films. Only for different reasons. 

Set some time after the present-day events of "WONDER WOMAN", "JUSTICE LEAGUE" begins with the Gotham City costumed vigilante Batman aka Bruce Wayne attempting to arrest a thief. However, his efforts are interrupted by the arrival of an alien creature known as a parademon. Realizing that he had dreamed of a similar creature in "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE", Batman realizes that Earth is about to face another alien threat. Before he can summon Wonder Woman aka Diana Prince, she learns of an even bigger threat from her mother, Queen Hippolyta of Themyscira. A former foe known as Steppenwolf has arrived on Earth to acquire the three Mother Boxes, sentient, miniaturized, portable supercomputers from his homeworld of Apokolips. One of the boxes had been guarded by the Amazons of Themyscira for thousands of years. The pair decides to find the other metahumans - Barry Allen aka the Flash, Victor Stone aka Cyborg (whose body was cured by a Mother Box) and Arthur Curry aka Aquaman - and form a team to fight against Steppenwolf. Bruce manages to easily recruit the Flash, but is unable to recruit Aquaman. And Diana encounters difficulty in recruiting Cyborg. But when Steppenwolf manages to acquire the second Mother Box in Aquaman's world of Atlantis, the "King of the Seven Seas" decides to join the newly formed Justice League to defeat the alien from Apokolips. However, it is not long before the League realizes they need a sixth member to help them defeat Steppenwolf - namely the recently deceased Superman.

Ever since the release of "MAN OF STEEL" in 2013, critics and some moviegoers have been highly critical of the DCEU. With the exception of "WONDER WOMAN", the franchise's movies have either received mixed reviews or panned. In the case of "JUSTICE LEAGUE", it has been panned . . . perhaps even more so than the other four films. Personally, I have been a major fan of the DCEU films before "JUSTICE LEAGUE". Do I believe the movie deserved to panned? Honestly? No. But I do feel that "JUSTICE LEAGUE" is probably the first DCEU film toward which I felt some disappointment.

There was a good deal from "JUSTICE LEAGUE" that I enjoyed. The creation of the Justice League began when Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman formed a team to battle Lex Luthor's creation, Doomsday, in "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE". This creation continued with Bruce Wayne and Diana Prince's recruitment of the Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman. And if I must be honest, I enjoyed how the movie's screenplay took its time in fusing these characters into the League. I found this especially satisfying, since both Cyborg and Aquaman proved rather difficult to recruit. What finally drove them all together as a team proved to be the threat of Steppenwolf. 

This leads me to something else I enjoyed about the film. Steppenwolf's acquisition of two Mother Boxes provided some first-rate action sequences featuring the Amazons on Themyscira and the Atlantis inhabitants' efforts to stop him. And they did not make it easy for him. I especially enjoyed the sequence featuring Steppenwolf's theft of the Mother Box on Themyscira. There were other action sequences that enjoyed. One of them included the League's first encounter with Steppenwolf inside an abandoned facility near the Gotham City Harbor. I also enjoyed the League's second attempt to defeat Steppenwolf and his Parademon army at a small Russian village, where the Apokoliptian planned to fuse the three Mother Boxes and terraform the Earth's surface. I also enjoyed an early action sequence that featured Wonder Woman's confrontation with a group of terrorists in London. But for me, my favorite action sequence featured the League's confrontation with a recently resurrected and amnesiac Superman. Although I found it rather scary, thanks to Henry Cavill's chilling performance, there was a comedic moment that I found very funny.

As much as I enjoyed most of the film's action sequences, I found a good deal of its comedic and dramatic moments even more satisfying. It seemed pretty obvious to me that the film's two comedy relief characters were Barry Allen aka the Flash and Arthur Curry aka Aquaman. And I found both characters more than satisfactory, thanks to Ezra Miller and Jason Momoa's performances. Miller's Barry Allen was an extroverted and nervous personality that was at odds with his inability to easily befriend others. This was especially apparent in one scene that featured the initial meeting between Barry and Bruce Wayne at the former's abode and his attempts to befriend Victor Stone aka Cyborg. But the one scene that truly made me appreciate Miller's comedic talent occurred when the League clashed with a resurrected, yet amnesiac Superman and the Flash attempted to attack the Man of Steel from behind . . . and failed. Jason Momoa's portrayal of Arthur Curry also provided a good deal of the movie's comedic moments. Momoa's portrayal of the blunt and cynical King of the Seven Seas practically had me in stitches. But I especially enjoyed that moment when Aquaman unexpectedly went into a comedic spiel about fighting Steppenwolf and his appreciation for Wonder Woman . . . unaware that he was sitting on her Lasso of Truth.

However, there were many dramatic moments that made me happily realize that "JUSTICE LEAGUE" was not all comedy and action. The movie's opening credits featured a poignant montage that revealed the world's grief over Superman's death. One particular scene - a homeless man holding a "I TRIED" sign next to him - really resonated within me. I thought Martha Kent's visit to Lois Lane in Metropolis and the two women's shared grief over Clark/Superman's demise was particularly poignant, thanks to Diane Lane and Amy Adams' performances. I particularly enjoyed one scene that featured a tense conversation between Cyborg and his father, Dr. Silas Stone over the latter's decision to use a Mother Box to save the former's life. May I be frank? Both Ray Fisher, who portrayed the superhero and Joe Morton, who portrayed his father, really knocked it out of the ballpark in this scene. I was not that impressed by the CGI used for the Steppenwolf character. But I must admit that I enjoyed Ciarán Hinds' voice performance for the villain. The actor projected a good deal of style and menace into the character. 

I enjoyed Clark's reunion with both Lois and Martha. Although I feel that it was a bit too brief for my tastes, I cannot deny that I found it emotionally satisfying. And I enjoyed the tense conversation between Aquaman and future love interest, Mera of Atlantis. The scene seemed to give audiences a preview of the screen dynamics between Momoa and Amber Heard, who portrayed Mera. But if I had to pick my favorite dramatic moment in "JUSTICE LEAGUE", it would have to be the scene that featured Bruce Wayne and Diana Prince's conversation regarding his continuing guilt over his past attempt to kill Superman and her lingering grief over the death of her former lover/colleague, Steve Trevor. Thanks to superb and subtle performances from Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot, the scene was a tense and angst-riddled moment that I truly enjoyed.

Zack Snyder had collaborated with cinematographer Larry Fong on four films - "300" (2007), "WATCHMEN" (2009), "SUCKER PUNCH" (2011) and especially, "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE" (2016). For "JUSTICE LEAGUE", Synder ended up collaborating with Fabian Wagner, who had previously spent most of his career in television - especially HBO's "GAME OF THRONES". However, I am not that familiar with Wagner's previous work. But I must admit that I was impressed by his work in "JUSTICE LEAGUE". His work proved to be a bit brighter than Fong's work in "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN". This is not that surprising, considering that the movie's narrative is slightly less angsty than the 2016 film. But I was especially impressed by his photography of the film's protagonists, as shown below:







One would be inclined to wonder why I had regarded "JUSTICE LEAGUE" as something of a disappointment, due to my positive comments on it. Well . . . I had problems with the film. Hell, I have expressed quibbles for about every comic book movie I have seen. My first problem with "JUSTICE LEAGUE" there were times when it seemed I was viewing a movie with two directors . . . with two different styles. Well of course the movie seemed to possess two different director. As everyone knows, Zack Snyder had experienced a family tragedy while dealing with the film's post-production. Unable to continue, he asked Joss Whedon, who had directed the two Avengers films for Marvel/Disney, to complete the post-production reshoots, using his notes. Well . . . Whedon did more than that. At the behest of the Warner Brothers executives, he chopped out a good deal of Snyder's work, re-shot and re-wrote at least 30 percent of the movie in a similar style he had used for the Avengers films. In the end, there were times when "JUSTICE LEAGUE" seemed like a DCEU film trying to look like a Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) movie. I found this very confusing - especially in the film's third and final act. 

One of the results of this hack job by Whedon and Warner Brothers, was the decision to change the film's composer. They tossed out Junkie XL (who had co-written the "BATMAN V. SUPERMAN" score with Hans Zimmer)'s score and hired Danny Elfman to replace it. Now . . . I have been a fan of some of Elfman's work for years. But what he did for this film's score? As far as I am concerned . . . nothing. Elfman fell back on the nostalgia factor by utilizing his old score from the two Batman films directed by Tim Burton. Worse, there was a moment following Superman's resurrection - I do no know if this happened or not, but I could have sworn that right after the resurrection or when the Man of Steel confronted Steppenwolf for the first time - Elfman even used a few bars from John Williams' score for the 1978 film, "SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE". All I can say that it was a very cringe-worthy moment for me.

Speaking of Superman . . . what in the hell happened? Granted, I really enjoyed the sequences featuring his resurrection, his clash with the League's other members and his reunions with Lois and Martha. But once Superman joined the League's battle against Steppenwolf . . . I just do not know what happened. It seemed as if someone - I suspect it was Whedon - tried to transform him into Christopher Reeve's version of the Man of Steel. Ugh! Look, Chris Reeve's Superman was fine for the late 20th century. But we are nearing the end of the 2010s. Henry Cavill had managed to establish his own version of Superman. There was no need to force him to copy another actor's style. One other fact bothered me. I am referring to the questionable CGI that tried to hide the mustache he was sporting, while filming "MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - FALLOUT". Apparently, Paramount Studios refused to allow Cavill to shave the moustache for the "JUSTICE LEAGUE" re-shoots. Between the cringe-worthy grinning, the cheesy dialogue and that ridiculous race against the Flash in the first post-credit scene, I simply found myself feeling sorry for Henry Cavill. In fact, either Snyder or Whedon (I suspect the latter) tried to lighten up Affleck's performance as Batman by forcing the latter to spew some pretty lame jokes. Poor man. In their attempt to transform the movie into an Avengers film, the Warner Brothers suits damn near sabotaged both the Man of Steel and the Dark Knight.

But for me, the real problem proved to be the film's last act. It brought back bad memories of the last act of the 2015 movie, "THE AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON". The entire sequence featuring the Justice League's battle against Steppenwolf and the latter's parademon army at some Russian village struck me as simply confusing. It was beyond confusing. Between the questionable editing, the unattractive lighting, and the rushed action, I simply found the entire sequence hard to swallow. I can only thank God that Russian village was not rising in the sky, while the Justice League battle Steppenwolf. That shit would have been even more difficult to swallow. The first post-credit scene featuring Superman and the Flash's race to see who was the fastest did not help. Why is it so damn important in a D.C. Comics movie or television production to show a Kryptonian (whether it was Superman or Supergirl) in a race with the Flash? I disliked it in this movie and I disliked it in a Season One episode of the Arrowverse's "SUPERGIRL". Fortunately, the second post-credit scene nearly made up for the film's last thirty minutes or so. I will say that it involved Lex Luthor and one of Batman's former foes, Slade Wilson aka Deathstroke. It proved to be a great surprise.

So, there you have it. Do not get me wrong. "JUSTICE LEAGUE" provided some great action scenes and dramatic moments. It also featured some excellent performances, as well. However, it is quite obvious that the Warner Brothers executives and Joss Whedon made a serious mistake in ignoring Zack Snyder's post-production instructions and trying to transform the movie into their own version of a Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film. In a way, they did. "JUSTICE LEAGUE" strongly reminded me of Marvel's 2015 movie, "THE AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON" - both the good and the bad.

"JUSTICE LEAGUE" (2013) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "JUSTICE LEAGUE", the fifth entry in the DCEU franchise. Directed by Zack Snyder, the movie starred Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot and Henry Cavill: 


"JUSTICE LEAGUE" (2013) Photo Gallery