Justice League (2017) Review

Adam Lester
Writing in the Media
3 min readMar 26, 2018
Ezra Miller (left), Ben Affleck (centre) and Gal Gadot (right) looking as bewildered as audiences were upon watching ‘Justice League.’ Image source: http://variety.com/2017/film/news/justice-league-box-office-opening-preview-1202615406/

DC and Warner Bros deliver a masterclass in the cinematic equivalent of talking without saying anything.

I understand there was a nightmare in the production of this film. The original director, Zack Snyder, had to step down due to tragic personal circumstances, leading to reshoots conducted by Joss Whedon. So with conflicting styles and visions there was always going to be a strange result. However, audiences weren’t quite expecting an end product as ill-conceived and messy as Justice League.

It’s a shame to say this, but I struggled to find anything positive to say about this film. Aside from Gal Gadot trying her hardest with an awful script, strategic Easter eggs and an intriguing post credit scene, this film is just awful. The plot is incoherent, complete with a villain whose superpower of being so non-existent he’s practically subliminal, and a screenplay that completely lacks personality. It’s strange, because while Batman v Superman attempted to cram too much content into one film, Justice League appears to be malnourished. It’s a bag of ideas, tenuously linked together, like smashing mismatched jigsaw pieces together with a hammer.

The worst crime this film commits, is it is stupid. Blockbusters are meant a be a little stupid, with ludicrous set pieces and a questionable plot, but Justice League goes way beyond this. There is a vague villain, with an incredibly vague plan, which for some reason forces characters together for two hours of extreme CG heavy fight sequences which look like they’re taken directly from a PS2 game. And this is a film in which they decided to CG Henry Cavill’s mouth to remove a moustache, and yet that is probably the greatest visual achievement of the film. But the awful visual style isn’t a problem, because the characters are so underdeveloped I didn’t care enough to try to make sense of the action sequences.

I’m sorry to say this, but when you have two talented directors, a passionate cast, a mythology crafted by Jack Kirby himself, and some of the best characters in all of popular fiction in your arsenal, and the resulting product is “mixed”, there is a huge problem. Something has gone spectacularly wrong, beyond the change in directors. The fundamental flaws in this film lie in the writing. The film simply does not have a story to tell because it has underdeveloped characters, in a cinematic universe that consists of four other films. Hence the film can afford to make stupid decisions, like placing Aquaman on land for 98% of the film, and no one bats an eyelid because we simply don’t care. This was a completely missed opportunity, and left me feeling as though Warner Bros were more concerned about pushing a product of any quality onto the screens, rather than taking the time to produce a film the fans want and deserve. Instead, they’d rather desecrate the work of Jack Kirby, and take one last piss on his grave before cashing in a pay cheque.

--

--

Adam Lester
Writing in the Media

Film enthusiast and comic book geek. English Language and Linguistics graduate from the University of Kent. Trying to be quicker on the uptake.