Where we've got to with the graphic violence - not a PG-13 film

Rating: 8/10 (4 December 2017)

There are a lot of things that don't work about Justice League. First off, the plot tries so hard to resurrect Superman that we literally have the League handing over the super-weapon to the villain.
The film plays "keeping up with the Joneses" for action sequences that they include an unending supply of humanoids who are killed in graphic neck-breakings, stabbings, shootings, impalings, and every other kind of graphic violence imaginable. Human deaths are treated with a slightly more delicate touch like horses falling on them... seriously.
Funny thing, most criticism of the film has focused on lack of character development, disconnect between the tone of Superman-Lois storyline and the flash-bang conflict, the pathetic chemistry between Batman and Wonder Woman, and also those misogynistic Amazon costumers (seriously? were you expecting them to become Quakers as penance for Affleck the allegations that Affleck acted like most heterosexual men do around women who inventory their visual attractiveness as a major assets). In those departments, actually, the deficiencies of Justice League have been greatly exaggerated. The team members are certainly flushed out just as well as Hawkeye and Black Widow (and arguably the Hulk 3.0) were in Avengers. The flash is there for comic relief. Aqua-man, unexpectedly, is the bad ass. And Cyborg brings the deep thinking, tech-wielding "mysterious" element to the team. Batman is unlikable enough after the pile on that followed the death of superman. Wonder woman delivers the kind of impossible girl-power feats that 21st century would appear to be demanding in terms of equality (basically she's been promoted to Superman level power, but Superman has gotten a promotion himself, leaving the comic glass ceiling in-tact) so that progressive mom's bringing their little girls to the film will leave with smiled on their faces. Criticism in those departments is just the Hollywood press and bloggers drinking their own Kool-aid.
The movie is vastly superior to anything put out in the Avengers franchise in years -- which were little more than attempts to serialize the infinity stone story line that has gotten about as compelling as a buddy movies starring Jason, Freddy and Jaws. Should Aquaman or Flash have gotten a stand along film before JL the same way Ant-Man got his own film? There are very strong arguments against that approach, given that characters like Ant-Man or Rocket Racoon are so obscure that there is immense freedom in a solo film that just wouldn't be there for Flash or Aquaman. I think given the poor box office of JL, we can kiss the possibility of stand along post-JL movies for Aquaman or Flash goodbye. Which is a real shame because a shirtless bad-boy Jason Momoa could have provided the necessary quid pro quo of sexual objectification that women are ostensibly clamoring for from Hollywood. And a film starring dorky Ezra Miller could have been service-ably enough loaded with cougar bait.