Alright who is in the JLA movie, debate

[violiav]

Re: Justice League cartoon- yes, the first two seasons were weaker than Unlimited. Also- it's a cartoon. The kids I know/knew that watched it didn't really critically analyze it. I mean, it's a cartoon that holds up pretty well in comparison to some other cartoon fare that was on TV at the same time. Yeah, they "meet" each other within the first five minutes (except WW they already all know each other), yeah their powers aren't really explained. So what? Do you really need to be told why Superman is strong, or why Batman has gadgets? Or why Flash is super fast?

The show isn't about their powers or how they work. It's about them working as a team. Why do they just roll with WW? Because purple? Because there's some weird alien stuff going on and it's not important? Because Manhunter summoned everyone?

The first 3 episodes dealt with introducing the audience to Martain Manhunter /Jonn Jonnz, the member that the viewing audience is least likely to have knowledge of.

Re: Deus ex machina- You're failing a cartoon for using the very same techniques (ex:Manhunter summoning them) that are used in the very comics the cartoon is based on?

This is fun escapist entertainment, not high brow drama. I think a little slack can be given.

Casting Justice
Assuming they'll keep Henry Cavill as Superman
Batman- I saw a list the had Jon Hamm. Adrian Pasdar or Karl Urban
Wonder Woman- Rachel Nichols, Olivia Wilde, Anna Silk
Manhunter- Idris Elba (or anyone, really)


Flash- I really see Ryan Reynolds asFlash, rather than GL. Or Chris Pine.
Green Lantern- Chris Pine for Kyle Rainer
Green Arrow- Karl Urban or Timothy Olyphant or Jeffery Donovan
Aquaman- Benedict Cumberbatch

[Gravekeeper]

Yeah, they "meet" each other within the first five minutes (except WW they already all know each other), yeah their powers aren't really explained. So what? Do you really need to be told why Superman is strong, or why Batman has gadgets? Or why Flash is super fast?

Those are pretty self evident. But Green Lantern, Wonder Woman and Hawkgirl need a bit of explanation at least.

The show isn't about their powers or how they work. It's about them working as a team.

You're arguing a super hero cartoon isn't about their powers? -.-

Re: Deus ex machina- You're failing a cartoon for using the very same techniques (ex:Manhunter summoning them) that are used in the very comics the cartoon is based on?

Back up a moment, how is bad writing/pacing my fault? Just because something is a cartoon doesn't mean bad writing is suddenly okay. Kids deserve good writing as much as anyone else. Also this show aired in the early 2000s, long past the "Cartoons can be stupid they're just for kids" era. It was also preceded by fantastically written shows like the Batman animated series and obviously DC must have some talented comic writers too. Otherwise they would not be a major comics label.

Its fine if they all get summoned by Martian Manhunter. But he basically what "Lawl, oh I did that." after the fact as a toss away explanation.

This is fun escapist entertainment, not high brow drama. I think a little slack can be given.

Quality is not genre dependent.

[Duelist925]

Actually, I did read his wiki before posting anything to make sure I was remembering my impressions right. The wiki did nothing to change my mind about his corniness. The water vulnerability was only finally removed in 2011 and while they tried to make it more realistic, he still has the talk to sea creatures with his mind thing.

Hell, one of the plot points with his most current reboot is that the general public finds him unimpressive compared to all the more awesome people around him. I also never said that he was a bad character, just that he has a corniness to his concept that's basically a left over from the golden age that DC still seems to have trouble figuring out what to do with.

Aquaman rules literally every part of earth that is covered in salt water. That's roughly 3/4's of it. And he has the power to control some of the mightiest creatures on earth (whales, giant squid, etc) and thats without even getting into the monsters that exist in the DCU.

When his son was in danger, he willing hacked off his own hand to save him, and has since sported a hook/harpoon/something fake hand.

He is only a joke because people remember the super friends, and don't update themselves past that, and because people will make fun of any super hero.

Others have pointed out how he is still extremely powerful, beyond the whole "ruler of the seas' thing, with super strength and invulnerability.

Also, most of DC's big names have been horribly embarrassed by shows and comics. Its in no way limited to Aquaman. Aquaman didn't become a joke because of shows like Robot Chicken, but rather, shows make a joke out of him because he's rife with material for it.

Partly true--any hero can be made fun of, because they are all fundamentally ridiculous to a degree. Aquaman is no more ridiculous than Batman in fundamentals, and with a half decent writer, can tell damn good stories.

Superman is a well documented asshole ( Superdickery~ ), Batman is a hilarious lunatic ( I'm the Goddamn Batman ) and Wonder Woman was a vain, air headed moron that kept getting herself tied up. Those three have arguably been more embarrassed by writers than Aquaman ever has. But it really sticks to Aquaman because he's already down a peg from the rest of them in terms of concept and general superhero awesomeness.

Seriously?

Superdickery: The vast majory of examples come from the silver and gold ages, when shit was weird. (And cracked out LSD tripping weird when it comes to Silver). Again, in any competent writers hands, Superman is a damn fine character. Read All Star Superman sometime. It's awesome. Or Superman:Birthright. Or hell, if you want a good example of a flawed Supes, read Kingdom Come. It's brilliant.

Goddamn Batman: Allstar Batman and Robin is not about Batman. It's about a crazy hobo named Steve who stole a batman outfit. Go watch Linkara Atop the 4rth Wall reviews of them to understand why I say this. Goddamn Batman is not a well written Batman. it is an insane parody of batman, and is truly ludicrous. There are many complains that can be leveled at Batmans sanity, but citing ASBAR is weak.

Wonder Woman: Seriously, do you only read Golden Age comics? She hasn't been that for DECADES. And she kept getting tied up in the beggining because her creator was a bondage fetishist. Seriously.

Wondy has seen a lot of slings lately, thanks to the faild pilot (dear god that was awful, largely because it completely ignored just about everything about Wonder Woman that makes her Wondy other than the costume and lasso), but again, she is a damn fine character in the hands of even a competent writer.

But thanks for making several assumptions about what I think on my behalf. -.-

Dude, no one made assumptions. You made it abundantly clear what you think.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

Grave

We may be dealing with my standards (which have honestly sunk passable movies before just because I didn't have the tolerance for less than steller at the time) here and a difference of opinion more than anything else. RottenTomatoes wise, IM 2 comes in behind IM1, IM3, Thor, Captain America, Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, The Avengers, X-Men, and X2.

I personally get bored for extended periods in Thor, Captain America, and X-Men (interestingly, also 70's RT scores and a low 80). Iron Man 2, I never cared to see twice which is rare for me. What I remember was an unaffecting father and son story (possibly made worse by the fact that there are a LOT of great movies that have this plot angle in them), a by-the-note alcoholism sub plot, and then IM and the Patriot fight things. I remembered not caring about Mickey Rourke and then being utterly confused how that happened.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy it, and it certainly had 73% of the critics that didn't hate it, but that's middling at best for Superhero films. At 50 or 60, that's when people generally consider something bad. Low 70's for Marvel just isn't good. And perhaps not here, but on various other blogs like IO9 'n such, I haven't heard the idea that IM2 isn't a good film is an uncommon opinion, although we've never argued box office to make that point. The reason is, that's a shifting target anyway with IM2 grossing about 6 million less domestically but making up for it in the foreign market. The only problem with using foreign market as a guide is that it's been a rising tide in everything for the last four years or so. If you made less in the foreign market with a sequel recently, your movie REALLY sucked. Hell, Man of Steel will probably barely eclipse IM2's totals which is essentially what IM2 did to IM.

Now don't get me wrong, I can make cases for movies in the 50's and 70's that are good. I just don't see anything in that movie that matches the cast. In fact many of the reviews talk in terms of "saved by RDJ" or the actors which isn't shocking when you're dealing with Cheadle, Downey, Paltrow, Rockwell, and Rourke and roughly replicating the mood of the first. Had they sat around an empty room trying to guess what was in a brown paper bag for two hours, that movie probably starts with 40% critical approval.

Now honestly a lot of that may be taste. After all, we're debating movies in the 70's that you find have charm. I find them rather cynical constructions honestly and RDJ's comic beats are mind numbingly predictable for me. I found Iron Man fun. I found the Avengers fun. I found IM 2 and 3 to be meh. But at the same time, you find no charm in Batman, find him unlikable as a character in Nolan's world and find Bane meh. I actually find Bane's amused, rather sardonic reaction to the people of Gotham incredibly funny as is Kyle's unabashed pragmatism and her chemistry with Wayne. I find Bruce's lavish spending as a means to an end silly for two films silly, his relationship with Alfred fun and warm for the first two films and borderline tragic in the third. And yet both Batman Begins and TDKR are critical successes in the terms of 85 and 87%. Again, people were absolutely taking shots at Nolan for having lost it on a film that 87% of critics liked and 92% of fans tended to give a passing grade.

So maybe that's just the key. Depending on viewpoint, all films (including a Justice League film) are impossible to pin down in terms of what will work and what doesn't. You need the vision to start with and someone to execute it. Goyer and Nolan could execute Batman. Goyer and Suckerpunch couldn't execute Superman. Jon Favreau knocks it out of the park with RDJ for a single film but can't get it to the next level while Joss Whedon can. Realism or romanticism can work just fine, you just need someone that can pull it off.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

There are many complains that can be leveled at Batmans sanity, but citing ASBAR is weak.

Fun fact: there are two books out which are essentially psychoanalyses of the character from the comics. At least one says flat out: Batman is sane, unless the writer doesn't want him to be.

[Gravekeeper]

Aquaman rules literally every part of earth that is covered in salt water. That's roughly 3/4's of it. And he has the power to control some of the mightiest creatures on earth (whales, giant squid, etc) and thats without even getting into the monsters that exist in the DCU.

But most of that territory is empty. The majority of the super villain threats are on land unless they're specific enemies of Aquaman. Also, he is currently NOT the ruler of the ocean. He gave that up in the new 52. Plus, his marine telepathy was retconned. Its no longer control, he can only influence their natural impulses.

Also, what good is a whale in a land battle? Hence the problem again. Excuses to get him into the water where he can use the full range of his abilities.

Others have pointed out how he is still extremely powerful, beyond the whole "ruler of the seas' thing, with super strength and invulnerability.

Super strength and invulnerability are pretty much par for the course though. Every main member of the JLA save Batman and Green Lantern has that in some form. And in Green Lantern's case he's pretty much has the power of a god anyhow. Leaving Batman the only guy that Aquaman could beat in arm wrestling.

When you subtract all of Aquaman's powers that are the same as other characters on the team, he's not left with a lot that really sets him apart. Because you're mostly left with ocean specific powers.

He really needs a do over. Like if they focused in more on the hydrokinesis he has sometimes and less on the things that really require him to be in or underwater to work properly. Let him drown/crush people with toilet water or go all bloodbending on some poor fucker by waving a trident around.

Partly true--any hero can be made fun of, because they are all fundamentally ridiculous to a degree. Aquaman is no more ridiculous than Batman in fundamentals, and with a half decent writer, can tell damn good stories.

Again, I never said Aquaman was a bad character. But rather he's saddled with an old fashion corniness of a 40s superhero that did not transition well into more modern comics. Batman transitioned very well ( and was almost as ridiculous originally ).

Seriously?

I think you may have completely misunderstood me. I didn't mean that those characters are like that now. I meant that all three of them have pasts that are as embarrassing as Aquaman or worse when you look back at the earlier days of comics and TV. That was my point. All three have, despite hilariously embarrassing early histories, moved past that. While Aquaman can't seem to get past his in the mainstream.

Dude, no one made assumptions. You made it abundantly clear what you think.

Neko assumed I had not read the wiki and formed my opinion based on 4 TV shows ( 3 of which I don't watch or haven't seen, the 4th I've seen in the occasional amusing Youtube clip ). While you likewise assumed I was saying Aquaman is a bad character. When in the very post you responded too, I said he was not a bad character. But rather that he was saddled with an old fashion superhero concept that's kinda corny in this day and age. Much like Captain America.

Yet you proceeded to argue about his character while quoting me saying his character wasn't the problem. So you either made an assumption or you misread something.

We may be dealing with my standards here and a difference of opinion more than anything else. RottenTomatoes wise, IM 2 comes in behind IM1, IM3, Thor, Captain America, Spider-Man 1, Spider-Man 2, The Avengers, X-Men, and X2.

Probably, I was trying to look at it objectively rather than subjectively. ( But then I didn't think Green Lantern was completely terrible ). I think you sort of hit the nail on the head though about where I was coming from.

IE, Iron Man 2 is a good movie by most standards, its just not a great movie by Marvel standards.

[Nekojin]

Fun fact: there are two books out which are essentially psychoanalyses of the character from the comics. At least one says flat out: Batman is sane, unless the writer doesn't want him to be.

I blame Frank Miller.

[Mytical]

Ok, to be fair lets look at the other side, marvel. How in the past (and sometimes in the present) each has also been somewhat bleh at times.

Lets start with the green whale in the room, the Hulk. The hulk really when you get down to it is not interesting (that is why some movies they made about the hulk failed). He is Supes on a very bad day. Invulnerable, strongest there is, etc etc. When the human side of him was boring, people found him boring..and just watched it for the next "HULK SMASH".

Captain America had to overcome his own checkered past, much like Aquaman (except you know, no water powers). Like Aquaman, take away what powers he shares with the rest of the avengers, and you just have a flag waving soldier. He doesn't even get the powers in the water bit.

Thor. Even worse then superman in some ways. He is a blasted God (not demigod like supes)..you have to give him ridiculously powered enemies OR rely on his team to pick up the 'wow' factor. True, he has the whole thee and thou which is cool, but again..not really that much different then supes to be honest. In fact since he is from a different place (much like WW) he could be compared honestly with WW except of course a ridiculously overpowered WW ('Great Hera!' 'By Odin's Beard!')

Ironman, well you got me here. Ironman really has been done very well. Even the playboy snarkiness is awesome.

The point being, that everything mentioned about the JLA can be put on the Avengers also. Only instead of ONE superman, they have TWO. TWO that they have to put up against godlike beings for the movie not to be boring. Why do you think that for the majority of the movie that Hulk was kept out as much as possible? Sure they hit the nail on the head with Loki, and the next one looks like its going to be Darkseid (or is it Apocolypse ? Sorry mind drawing blank here).

The moral of this is, that if done right, anything can be over come. They just have to do it right.

Oh and this is coming from a person who enjoys Marvel MUCH more then DC.

[Duelist925]

But most of that territory is empty. The majority of the super villain threats are on land unless they're specific enemies of Aquaman. Also, he is currently NOT the ruler of the ocean. He gave that up in the new 52. Plus, his marine telepathy was retconned. Its no longer control, he can only influence their natural impulses.

Also, what good is a whale in a land battle? Hence the problem again. Excuses to get him into the water where he can use the full range of his abilities.

I have got to start reading New 52... >.< Fair enough about the whale, but when he was king, that basically meant he could stop most shipping/sea fairing, and had access to avenues of attack on every single landmass. It was interesting, politically speaking, though admittedly they did more with that with Namor in Marvels U.

Super strength and invulnerability are pretty much par for the course though. Every main member of the JLA save Batman and Green Lantern has that in some form. And in Green Lantern's case he's pretty much has the power of a god anyhow. Leaving Batman the only guy that Aquaman could beat in arm wrestling.

There...there are a LOT of members of the JLA dude. Tons. Some are speedsters, some are bricks, some have weird powers, many have no powers beyond punching things or shooting things with arrows, or being stretching, or escaping anything. Like, seriously, a lot.

When you subtract all of Aquaman's powers that are the same as other characters on the team, he's not left with a lot that really sets him apart. Because you're mostly left with ocean specific powers.

He really needs a do over. Like if they focused in more on the hydrokinesis he has sometimes and less on the things that really require him to be in or underwater to work properly. Let him drown/crush people with toilet water or go all bloodbending on some poor fucker by waving a trident around.

This I would actually love to see. Though the bloodbending would likely be taking it too far. I have seen more than a few stories contrasting his viewpoint more than the rest--as a king (before he evidently gave it up), who had to deal with his people along with saving the world. I really dug it when he and Wondy would discuss political issues of being super heroes who were beholden to their people. It was neat.

Again, I never said Aquaman was a bad character. But rather he's saddled with an old fashion corniness of a 40s superhero that did not transition well into more modern comics. Batman transitioned very well ( and was almost as ridiculous originally ).

Fair enough. I may've been reading more into your words than what you meant. However, many of the faults you find are with how he's potrayed--that not the character, thats a failure on the writers side. With proper writing, Aquaman can be damn cool. (And for what happesn to Batman with piss poor writing, I refer you to ASBAR).

I think you may have completely misunderstood me. I didn't mean that those characters are like that now. I meant that all three of them have pasts that are as embarrassing as Aquaman or worse when you look back at the earlier days of comics and TV. That was my point. All three have, despite hilariously embarrassing early histories, moved past that. While Aquaman can't seem to get past his in the mainstream.

Fair enough, and yeah, I did misread that.

I do wonder how much of Aquamans issues, however, stem from just not getting good writers, and never recovering from the blow Super Friends delt him. (Seriously, that show stuck a knife in his dignity). I really wish his beard/hook hand look could have come into the mainstream. It was damn cool while it lasted.

Neko assumed I had not read the wiki and formed my opinion based on 4 TV shows ( 3 of which I don't watch or haven't seen, the 4th I've seen in the occasional amusing Youtube clip ). While you likewise assumed I was saying Aquaman is a bad character. When in the very post you responded too, I said he was not a bad character. But rather that he was saddled with an old fashion superhero concept that's kinda corny in this day and age. Much like Captain America.

I would argue against Caps concept being very corny (its initial presentation, yeah, but hey, that was the golden age for you), though I suppose that could vary depending on what you term his concept. Much the same with Aquaman.

Again, I'd lay the blame for this at simply not getting decent enough writers, or big enough stories to drive the Super Friends image from the public mind.

Yet you proceeded to argue about his character while quoting me saying his character wasn't the problem. So you either made an assumption or you misread something.

Bit of both I'm afraid, and my apologies concerning it.

Probably, I was trying to look at it objectively rather than subjectively. ( But then I didn't think Green Lantern was completely terrible ). I think you sort of hit the nail on the head though about where I was coming from.

IE, Iron Man 2 is a good movie by most standards, its just not a great movie by Marvel standards.

I rather enjoyed the Lantern movie, and IM 2 was decent, myself.

I blame Frank Miller.

Don't we all.

[violiav]

be Darkseid (or is it Apocolypse ? Sorry mind drawing blank here).

Thanos. He looks very similar to those two. Darkseid, the ruler of the war world Apokolypse, is Supermans foe. Apocolypse did something to the X-Men, I think.

[Gravekeeper]

I have got to start reading New 52... >.< Fair enough about the whale, but when he was king, that basically meant he could stop most shipping/sea fairing, and had access to avenues of attack on every single landmass. It was interesting, politically speaking, though admittedly they did more with that with Namor in Marvels U.

Yes, Namor is a good example of an Aquaman like character could be portrayed well. Namor was more of an anti-hero and was actually the villain sometimes as well.

There...there are a LOT of members of the JLA dude. Tons. Some are speedsters, some are bricks, some have weird powers, many have no powers beyond punching things or shooting things with arrows, or being stretching, or escaping anything. Like, seriously, a lot.

I know, but I was focusing on the core well knowns. There are a ton of members of the Avengers too, but there's still the core well knowns.

Fair enough. I may've been reading more into your words than what you meant. However, many of the faults you find are with how he's potrayed--that not the character, thats a failure on the writers side. With proper writing, Aquaman can be damn cool. (And for what happesn to Batman with piss poor writing, I refer you to ASBAR).

Oh, I don't disagree, I was even kind of getting at that. I see characters like Aquaman and they annoy me precisely because it doesn't seem like anyone is trying hard enough to work with him. Thats also conversely why I liked Captain America. They were really clever about giving him depth and embracing the 40s corniness of his outfit while at the same time moving past it to a more modern take.

I do wonder how much of Aquamans issues, however, stem from just not getting good writers, and never recovering from the blow Super Friends delt him. (Seriously, that show stuck a knife in his dignity). I really wish his beard/hook hand look could have come into the mainstream. It was damn cool while it lasted.

From what I see, dignity was in pretty short supply on that show all around. >.>

[Ginger Tea]

I knew of Aqua Man, but not much past the name and the look, most of my exposure is during the robot chicken shared house skits, which had the Hulk for some reason, not that I minded "Dishes clean".

Had Downey not got his shit together a few years prior we might not have taken to the actor charged with bringing him to life and as posted above, about Cummerbuch (sp) who I wanted to just write as cucumber patch, it reads as "well this character is culturally tainted, but if we cast him it wont matter too much as the female audience will be cucumbering themselves later when they get home.
I'm not saying that the poster would be in that camp, but that recent post on CS (or two weeks ago by now?) about having photo shopped gay sex between Iron man and someone else, perhaps Caps. it gives me the impression the movie could suck, but if there is enough to fanwank fanwanking will happen.

And Downey JR sure supplies the man candy, yet if they cast the 2nd choice, who knows.

But this thread going more and more into the back story and mythos of hero's from the golden age of comics just means that viewers like myself and those with even less comic knowledge (though mine is Marvel bias) might be shafted in the whole "who the fuck are they and why should I care?" case in point the JLA cartoon where it is a given that people know who everyone is, if I'm as much in the dark by the end of the episode as I was at the start, I probably would not watch the next one.
Then it just becomes a show for the fans and a movie just for the fans, well enjoy a low budget affair, because if I cant sit down and get it early on, damned if I wold be hyped for the next movie.

As I said a few posts before, it's finding a common ground between fans and strangers to the team or DCU in general, I don't want to see a name sake just to make it easy for the guy next to me to get it, but I also don't want to have it assumed I'm going to know who everyone is and what their story is as soon as the credits end (short of a Watchmen montage).

[Gravekeeper]

As I said a few posts before, it's finding a common ground between fans and strangers to the team or DCU in general

And that right there, frankly, is what I think is DC's biggest weakness with is portrayals in TV and film. They have a habit of just assuming you know everything already. Except when it comes to Batman, oddly. That sort of assumption can be excysed for Batman or Superman. But that's about it. Half of Aquaman's problem is the Who Cares? factor he has with the mainstream audience.

That problem is even bigger for characters like the Martian Man Hunter or Cyborg. These are not household names.

Marvel was very smart about who it picked for the first round of the Avengers. The main stream audience was at least generally aware of the existence of each character and who they were. While they skipped on other main members of the Avengers ( Antman, Black Panther, Wasp, Ms Marvel, Vision, etc ) who were not as well know.

Now that the Avengers is the greatest thing ever Marvel can bring in the other characters in their own movies because people will come watch them just by being related to the Avengers. Hence we have an Antman movie coming up as the first of Marvel's phase three Avenger movies. With Black Panther and Ms Marvel in the works as scripts.

Also, oddly Guardians of the Galaxy. ( I am GROOT ).

I wish they'd sneak in an Alpha Flight reference for lawls in phase three.

[Ginger Tea]

Yeah Superman Batman and up until a point outside of animated shows Wonder Woman the holy trinity as I've seen them referred to, needed little introduction, with WW I never saw much of the show if any, I just remember clips, but that could be due to my fragmented memory.
Each had a film and or TV show (or B&W matinee serial) running since god knows when well in WW case it was afaik just the TV show from the 70's, but the others had matinee exposure within the same decade of their printed debut, least it seems that way without checking the dates.

I saw little to no DC animation growing up, but I did Marvel, more specifically Spiderman and his amazing friends.
But I also saw the first two 'unofficial'? Spiderman 70's and the Hulk TV show to know about them, but all my X-men cartoons happened after the first movie and each one was a reboot, so it was irksome to continually show origin story after origin as with Batman and Spiderman, part of me was thinking "Come on now, we know this." but also part of me remembers I'm old enough to have teenage children (none that I am thankfully aware of) and we are getting to the stage where people my age who grew up with a few comic characters on TV might be replaced with a generation raised either on a different genre of super hero or a show I never even knew existed, nor cared about missing.

[Mytical]

While I do like JLA, I do see another huge problem with a movie about it. We've already covered the part that regardless how great/amazing/etc the movie could be it will still be "Oh they are just copying Marvel". It could be the biggest, most epic thing EVER, and it will still be 'just copying Marvel'. There is yet another strike to consider against it also.

The last batman movie, sad to say, pretty much stomped out the epicness that was the batman movie before it (just because it happened to share the name). It was so boring, that yet another Batman movie would have to come out..and people are getting a little tired of Batman movies. If they would have stopped at the Joker, it would have made a great intro into a JLA movie. Now I don't know if they can salvage it, without yet another retcon, and well..you can only retcon something so many times I am afraid before you have to take a break from it because of audience fatigue with it.

The JLA NEEDS Batman, he is the one that 'keeps them honest'. Almost any other hero you can have an excuse why they are not there (Supes went to some distant world to save them from "X", WW is battling Ares and can't come help, Flash went past the speed of light and won't be back until 2 minutes before he left (ok that one is not really serious, but meh). If you have Supes though, you have to pretty much have Batman. The two are mostly opposite, and that makes good chemistry. With the last Batman being what it is, they need to actually lighten up batman a bit so he isn't so EMO (never thought I'd say that).

Figure since my other posts have been glossed over by a few (not all), I'd change things up. I am, after all, a bigger fan of Marvel then DC.