justice league bad reviews

SAVAGE: ‘Justice League’ Reviews Are In And They Are Nasty

Tell us you love Punkee without telling us you love Punkee. Sign up to our newsletter, and follow us on Instagram and Twitter. It'll mean the world.

Landing an abysmal score of 37 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, critics have mostly agreed that DC superhero flick Justice League might not be Batman Vs Superman-level terrible, but it’s definitely not good.

It’s mediocrity is especially glaring since 2017 has been a standout year for superhero movies plunging the genre into new waters, from DC’s own Wonder Woman to Spider-Man: Homecoming, and the far superior (in every possible way) Thor meets Hulk mashup Thor: Ragnarok.

Then there’s the Sadfleck problem. The Batman character is so glaringly unnecessary within the all-star squad, his lack of skills/super powers/any positive attributes has become the film’s weirdest punchline. While Affleck with every passing scene looks like he’s in actual physical pain. Send halp.

Batman is just the beginning though, and while Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman and Ezra Miller’s hilarious take on The Flash make the film tolerable enough to withstand, the film undelivers in every way. Especially so, when pitted against rival universe box-office smash The Avengers.

Here’s Justice League’s most savage reviews so far:

The Telegraph went savage AF, giving the “embarrassing” film one star, writing:

“It feels like a sheepish feature-length retraction of the franchise to date. It’s consistently embarrassing to watch, and features plot holes so yawningly vast they have a kind of Grand Canyon-like splendour: part of you wants to hang around to see what they look like at sunset,” it wrote. “After Justice League, there’s nowhere else any of this can go.”

GQ wrote these amusing words:

“There’s very little about Justice League that’s actually enjoyable—so if you’re stuck watching it in a theater this weekend, you might need to make up a little game to keep your brain occupied.

Having endured all two hours of this movie earlier this week, here’s my suggestion: Play Where’s Waldo? with all the big names in the ensemble cast, and try to figure out how they ended up in this movie in the first place.”

While Vox called the whole thing a “jagged mess”:

“The result is a dazzling, lawless spectacle, pumped so full of origin stories, redemption arcs, heroic introductions, orange villain flares, and blue lightning that it buckles under the weight of trying to cram around four hours’ worth of storytelling into two hours of celluloid.

The only tight thing in this chaotic jumble is the Aquaman costume that strains to cover Jason Momoa’s Atlantean biceps.”

Entertainment Weekly went in on Sadfleck:

“Ben Affleck’s Bruce Wayne/Batman has turned into a bit of a drag (only occasionally leavened by Jeremy Irons’ ever-loyal Alfred). There’s a smugness in his performance that only appeared around the edges in Dawn of Justice. Now it’s the whole show.

When Affleck’s Bruce Wayne heads off to convince Jason Momoa’s Aquaman to enlist, he wisecracks, “I hear you talk to fish…” with a cocky, condescending grin on his mug. At that moment, Affleck looks like the highest-paid captive in a hostage video.”

Guardian agrees and ouch!

“Affleck spreads a pall of dullness over the film. He doesn’t have the implacable, steely ferocity and conviction that Christian Bale had; he seems to have a faint sheen of sweat, as if the Batcave thermostat is up too high, and his attempts at droll humour and older-generation wisdom make his Batman look stately and marginal. Maybe we should get George Clooney back for the role.”

Indiewire called Justice League a wannabe Avengers:

“A tired, conventional attempt to play by the rules, with ‘hold for laughs’ moments shoehorned between rapid-fire action — a begrudging concession that the Marvel formula works, and a shameless attempt to replicate it.”

While IGN echoed their sentiments:

Justice League seldom delivers any truly “wow!” moments of finally seeing these awesome superheroes assembled together onscreen the way The Avengers did. This first big screen union of DC Comics’ top-tier superheroes is ultimately just an adequate adventure flick. It’s marred by a very choppy story, a run-of-the-mill villain, some shoddy visual effects, and an overall haphazard execution.”

Deadline didn’t hold back.

“It plays like a by-the-numbers attempt to cash in on this stable of branded superheroes and not a fully formed screen adventure. Sometimes more is just less when you add it all up. Chemistry is everything, and this crew looks like they were the product of some sort of corporate shotgun wedding and not a cohesive fighting team like the Avengers.”

Header via DC.