Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Yes yes I know I know.
But super hero movies, especially the ones suceeding embrace being FUN and exciting. not dark and brooding and missing the point of the hero entirely and no i wont get over Man Of Steel.
Did you watch Winter Soldier? Or the entire Dark Knight trilogy?
I was about to post something along similar lines. As much as Marvel are meant to be the 'fun' ones and DC are meant to be the 'grumpy' ones, both do both styles equally well. The Winter Soldier and Daredevil are the best things Marvel have put out, and the most grounded/realistic/dark/whatever. while The Flash and Supergirl are easily the two best current TV superhero series, and both are very bright, light-hearted and funny. It's not about being light or dark, gritty or fantastical, fun or grim, it's about doing the source material justice.
A 'fun' Batman wouldn't work any more than a 'dark' Spiderman would. Back to the Suicide Squad, then, they have the scope to be both. I fully expect this to be like the Assault on Arkham animated movie, properly brutal and violent, a little over the top, but not take itself too seriously and have plenty of humour in it.
I think the cinematic universe thing works best when there's a strong emphasis placed on making each movie stand on its own, rather than making them fit some kind of tone or brand identity.
Winter Soldier and GotG both clearly tied into the MCU, but also felt like they were true to themselves. And they worked really well. On the other hand, you have Avengers 2, which is basically a 2.5 hour object lesson of the MCU's "sins" -- formula, forced wisecracks, CGI action set-pieces, scenes that set up the next movie instead of advancing THAT movie, and a strong feeling of moviemaking by committee.
WB folks have been saying and hinting strongly that their films will be closely tied together. But I also think they've learned some lessons from watching Marvel, and that we're seeing that with this first batch of official DCEU films. SS and BvS are going to be different because the directors are making the movies they want to make. WW will be Patty Jenkins' movie, and Affleck's Batman movie (I don't know why they're avoiding making it official, unless they're waiting until after BvS drops) will be the movie he wants to make.
I'm excited for this, and I hope they can find a balance between a dark theme and a humorous one. I'm also curious as to who/what is the antagonist of the move. It could be the Joker, as he isn't really shown with the group as a whole, I only saw him with Harlie in one scene in the trailer, but I could've just missed him.
Irishpeacockz-Blackjack needs a pay raise for being the welcomer to the crusade
Palleus-Write a school essay about Kroot! Pride. Prejudice. And Cannibalsim.
There's a theory that Enchantress is the main villain, there are few if any actual shots of her with the Squad, and the brief glimpses we get of various villany things have a sort-of magicky look to them,
I think a chunk of people are working off of the 'Assault on Arkham' animated film, with the assumption that it's the suicide squad assembling to take down The Joker.
The thought did occur to me, why does Harley Quinn need to sound 'charming?'
hotsauceman1 wrote: Yes yes I know I know.
But super hero movies, especially the ones suceeding embrace being FUN and exciting. not dark and brooding and missing the point of the hero entirely and no i wont get over Man Of Steel.
I still can't be sure if DC are trying to make superhero movies more mature and varied--or if a suit somewhere said "The Nolan Batman movies did well, so we need to make every other superhero we put on screen just like them!" I think this one and BvS will answer it one way or another.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
2016/04/11 09:11:14
Subject: Re:Suicide Squad new trailer 10th April page2
They're taking a page out of GOTG to be sure, but so far it's working. Still not sold on Harley (sorry, the Arleen Sorkin/Tara Strong version is the one I'm most attached to), but the rest of it looks like fun. Yes, fun. Remember that DC? "Fun"? Your TV department seems to understand that concept, so maybe fire Snyder and get someone else in. Someone who doesn't display such abject disrespect for the characters he's using.
gorgon wrote: Winter Soldier and GotG both clearly tied into the MCU, but also felt like they were true to themselves. And they worked really well. On the other hand, you have Avengers 2, which is basically a 2.5 hour object lesson of the MCU's "sins" -- formula, forced wisecracks, CGI action set-pieces, scenes that set up the next movie instead of advancing THAT movie, and a strong feeling of moviemaking by committee.
And it would've worked perfectly fine if not for all the damned quips.
Compel wrote: I think a chunk of people are working off of the 'Assault on Arkham' animated film, with the assumption that it's the suicide squad assembling to take down The Joker.
Remember that in Assault on Arkham, Joker wasn't the team's objective. They were there (unbeknownst to them) to kill Riddler as he'd figured out how to stop Waller's suicide collars. Joker just got in the way because he makes a great wildcard. I hope the same happens here.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/11 09:38:52
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
gorgon wrote: Winter Soldier and GotG both clearly tied into the MCU, but also felt like they were true to themselves. And they worked really well. On the other hand, you have Avengers 2, which is basically a 2.5 hour object lesson of the MCU's "sins" -- formula, forced wisecracks, CGI action set-pieces, scenes that set up the next movie instead of advancing THAT movie, and a strong feeling of moviemaking by committee.
And it would've worked perfectly fine if not for all the damned quips.
Scooby villains have far smarter schemes than Ultron's ludicrous plan. They also chew less scenery. Then again, it was Whedon who was apparently so in love with Spader that he let him perform the mo-cap as Spader being Spader and use his unaltered voice. Every time Spadertron was onscreen, it took me out of the movie. Marvel is lucky that it had a lot of built-up goodwill and past achievement chips to cash in. AoU wasn't a good film, and it could have been panned just as hard as BvS had the critics not given it a mulligan.
Yeah, AoU was one of the weaker releases in a while (going back to IM3). I enjoyed it but that was because I already liked a lot of the characters (see building a universe) and enjoyed the new additions with Jarvis getting a body and Elizabeth Olsen getting added to the cast. Plus expanding on Hawkeye, the human in the bunch was a nice touch.
Ultron was actually worse for me than Lex was in the BvS movie. And some of the quips, while funny the first time because I was busy with the spectacle, take you out of the movie on the second go round.
Essentially it's not one I'd put on regularly to watch like GotG, Winter Soldier, Avengers 1, and others including even Ant-man.
I'm way more excited for Suicide Squad than I was for BvS and it's looking good.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/11 14:05:25
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
gorgon wrote: Winter Soldier and GotG both clearly tied into the MCU, but also felt like they were true to themselves. And they worked really well. On the other hand, you have Avengers 2, which is basically a 2.5 hour object lesson of the MCU's "sins" -- formula, forced wisecracks, CGI action set-pieces, scenes that set up the next movie instead of advancing THAT movie, and a strong feeling of moviemaking by committee.
And it would've worked perfectly fine if not for all the damned quips.
Scooby villains have far smarter schemes than Ultron's ludicrous plan. They also chew less scenery. Then again, it was Whedon who was apparently so in love with Spader that he let him perform the mo-cap as Spader being Spader and use his unaltered voice. Every time Spadertron was onscreen, it took me out of the movie. Marvel is lucky that it had a lot of built-up goodwill and past achievement chips to cash in. AoU wasn't a good film, and it could have been panned just as hard as BvS had the critics not given it a mulligan.
Indeed, I find so much of the BvS criticism completely unfair when AoU got a free pass for the same 'problems' in overcrowded cast, off pacing, big flashy CGI pieces ect. I say 'problems'; personally I have no issue with either film (though I prefer BvS and think it's more competently made), but it really annoys me that the critics won't dare touch Marvel, so BvS becomes a punching bag for them to rail on about their pet hates and issues that really can be found in a good 75% of comic book movies.
Suicide Squad will probably get a pass because it's not your typical superhero film and it's more 'human' and 'funny' and the Deadpool connection will be made (another odd one, I really don't see how so many people got excited about that one...), which is good for the future of the DCU but from what we've seen thus far, it should be getting a pass for being an awesome film in its own right, not just because it's new and edgy.
Can't wait to see it, though, and I still reckon Harley's going to steal the show...
gorgon wrote: Winter Soldier and GotG both clearly tied into the MCU, but also felt like they were true to themselves. And they worked really well. On the other hand, you have Avengers 2, which is basically a 2.5 hour object lesson of the MCU's "sins" -- formula, forced wisecracks, CGI action set-pieces, scenes that set up the next movie instead of advancing THAT movie, and a strong feeling of moviemaking by committee.
And it would've worked perfectly fine if not for all the damned quips.
Scooby villains have far smarter schemes than Ultron's ludicrous plan. They also chew less scenery. Then again, it was Whedon who was apparently so in love with Spader that he let him perform the mo-cap as Spader being Spader and use his unaltered voice. Every time Spadertron was onscreen, it took me out of the movie. Marvel is lucky that it had a lot of built-up goodwill and past achievement chips to cash in. AoU wasn't a good film, and it could have been panned just as hard as BvS had the critics not given it a mulligan.
Spader was the only thing we liked in the movie, actually.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2016/04/11 14:33:56
Subject: Suicide Squad new trailer 10th April page2
AOU critics: Yay, we get to see Iron Man again, and Cap, and Thor, and Black Widow, and Hulk, and even Hawkeye is fun to see again. But the film could really have used some work.
BVS critics: Jesus, please not more Snyder. And the film could really have used some work.
gorgon wrote: AoU wasn't a good film, and it could have been panned just as hard as BvS had the critics not given it a mulligan.
Oh come on! A mulligan? The critics, collectively, just gave it a pass? No... that's not how it works.
What are you going to tell us next, that Disney are paying off the critics to rate BvS poorly?
As I said in the BvS thread, I don't think there's a conspiracy at work. I think there's a mix of factors that add up, and that the BvS filmmakers provided enough material for the negativity to stick. (A version of Dakka's own "Play better next time"?)
What I also think is that framing has a lot to do with how we view reality, and that critics are no more immune to this than anyone else. Especially when we're talking about a sequel and the concept of a cinematic universe. AoU had a lot of weight and momentum behind it from a largely successful Phase 2, as well as familiarity with the cast, characters, and (importantly) what to expect from a Marvel film.
I don't think AoU is a good film, and I think it unravels as soon as you start looking closely and pulling on threads. But Marvel has established a very familiar, strong brand for itself, and I think critics viewed the film through that frame and focused on the film's strengths rather than picking at its weaknesses.
Contrast this with BvS, which only had the somewhat controversial Man of Steel preceding it and a director that some critics clearly don't like. From a strategic standpoint (with the situation being that they're trying to estabish their own brand), it would have been better for WB to have made a simpler, more family-friendly romp with an unoffending director rather than a dark, TDKR-inspired film from Snyder. They could have saved that stuff for later after they had some capital built up.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BobtheInquisitor wrote: AOU critics: Yay, we get to see Iron Man again, and Cap, and Thor, and Black Widow, and Hulk, and even Hawkeye is fun to see again. But the film could really have used some work.
BVS critics: Jesus, please not more Snyder. And the film could really have used some work.
Actually, that's not a bad summary.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/11 16:11:18
That new trailer is as great as the first - wonderful Hoping the film matches it and it will be great.
Joining in the off topic:
Lots of people, me inlcuded loved Age of Ultron - its nearly as good as Avengers 1 - great cast, with actual people as characters, good bad guy, plenty of action,
Bat v Sups - great cast - Bats, Sups and Wonder Woman nail it - BUT and its a HUGE BUT Lex is horrific and simply ruins the film which is shaky without him already due to the plot and pacing issues.
Best thing to do : NEVER listen to film critics - watch the trailer, see if you like what you see and watch if you do - don't if you dont. You'll be happier
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
SOme good chemistry between her and Mr Smith - see if it continues in SS
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Lots of people, me inlcuded loved Age of Ultron - its nearly as good as Avengers 1 - great cast, with actual people as characters, good bad guy, plenty of action,
Its like we watched a completely different movie.
*The writing was Jr. high at best. The forced one liners fostered explosive anal leakage.
*The plot didn't hold together, at all. Additionally it was choppy-where did Thor go during the pond-why the hell was he there in the first place? The whole angsty issue was really forced and frankly boilerplate for these movies now. Whatever.
*The action felt like a complete rehash of Avengers. Lots of very explody robots vs. very explody aliens before.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2016/04/11 17:00:28
Subject: Suicide Squad new trailer 10th April page2
Lots of people, me inlcuded loved Age of Ultron - its nearly as good as Avengers 1 - great cast, with actual people as characters, good bad guy, plenty of action,
Its like we watched a completely different movie.
*The writing was Jr. high at best. The forced one liners fostered explosive anal leakage.
*The plot didn't hold together, at all. Additionally it was choppy-where did Thor go during the pond-why the hell was he there in the first place? The whole angsty issue was really forced and frankly boilerplate for these movies now. Whatever.
*The action felt like a complete rehash of Avengers. Lots of very explody robots vs. very explody aliens before.
No its like we have completely different tastes in films (and likely everything) - people like different stuff - thats the world.
The writing was fine for ME and many others - the one liners were great - flowed perfectly and in character - quotable brilliance
The Plot was fine - yeah that one bit was a bit wierd - but is was not as stupid as say (IMO) - anything in BvS that Lex ever did or said. (or in fact the casting and direction of that role)
Rehash of an awesome move - nope but so what if it was - it worked first time, worked second time.........
d-usa wrote: So far I'm still optimistic about this Joker.
Liked evey clip of him in last two trailers - my fav remains Jack but he could be as good
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/11 17:03:30
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Remember that in Assault on Arkham, Joker wasn't the team's objective. They were there (unbeknownst to them) to kill Riddler as he'd figured out how to stop Waller's suicide collars. Joker just got in the way because he makes a great wildcard. I hope the same happens here.
Yeah, you're right and, going from the trailer, it looks like that's the way the film is going to go. From the looks of the trailer there, the villains look like they're some sort of ash monster type thing. - Actually reminding me very closely of the baddies in Guardians.
2016/04/11 22:07:44
Subject: Suicide Squad new trailer 10th April page2
d-usa wrote: So far I'm still optimistic about this Joker.
Im still "cautiously optimistic" with this Joker... I just hope his line delivery being so odd in the trailers is due to not matching up with actual scenery and whatnot.
Overall, this movie does look like it should be quite a bit of fun.
2016/04/11 22:12:19
Subject: Suicide Squad new trailer 10th April page2
