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.

Trailer:

https://youtu.be/p5npfFzwWqw

John Cena as Peacemaker. I hope he brings a couple of wrestling moves to the set.

I don't know if I'm more shocked that WB is doing another one, that some of those people came back, or that some of the new cast members signed up.

The favor trading involved must have been crazy.

The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

I'm sure quite a few will rather quickly meet their (allegedly) humorous demise though...

That's not a good thing though.

The last film had one cannon fodder guy to get across the point that the neck-bombs were serious business.

This film is going to introduce us to a shopping list of new characters, and then slaughter them very quickly.

That did work splendidly for Deadpool 2 with the X-Force.

Hopefully they'll do something like 2 missions, with a few replacements added to the program to replace the first wave of casualties.

I'm just surprised the only returning convicts are Harlie and Capt. Boomerang.

I'm surprised that Flag's back in it.

For some of them, it's the opportunity to work with the Guardians director without being in a Guardians film.

It's an interesting mix of Squad members, even if some of them (such as Nathan Fillion, who appears to be playing "Arm-Fall-Off Boy" from the Legion of Superheroes) have got to be there purely as comic relief.

Could be that they’ll have a training/selection montage, to show that the government have got a whole vault of goons to use, but then only bring some of them along for the missions?

Margot Robbie apparently loves playing HK so no suprise - but great to see her back

Should be a fun ride like the first half of SS.

I’m willing to give James Gunn the benefit of the doubt.

Cast reminds of the video game SUPER HERO LEAGUE OF HOBOKEN.

I wonder who will have the power this time to be able to look through pizza boxes. My money is on Polka Dot Man but I guess he will have his hands full stopping his nemesis STRIPES from conquering the world.

This movie will be silly in a good way.

S.T.R.I.P.E. is a hero actually, but since Polka Dot Man is a villain that works out better.

 AduroT wrote:
S.T.R.I.P.E. is a hero actually, but since Polka Dot Man is a villain that works out better.

Stargirl's back-up (and step-father), if I recall correctly - Pat Duggan?

That is a motley crew......

... is King Shark a Great White?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

Needs Condument Man

 LordofHats wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

I mean, that is part of the point of the Suicide Squad - especially if they're willing to kill some off.

I have no idea who is going to be here the duration (with the possible exceptions of Harley, Flag and Waller), and who will get killed off within ten minutes of appearing on screen (though I wouldn't bet against Nathan Fillion suffering such a fate).

 LordofHats wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

The SSquad characters are also going to drop like flies.

 gorgon wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

Which ones are you thinking of?

Thor 1... no. Everyone who was there was appropriate except maybe the Hawkeye cameo (but that served the MCU cycle as a whole).
Thor 2 took time to put Hogun on a bus, actually lowering the character count.
Thor 3 got fairly busy, but largely worked.

Captain Marvel? Very light on extra characters.
Iron Man films were overly light on 'other characters' in my opinion.
Doctor Strange had functionally no one beyond his teacher, his canonical sidekick, the villain for a sequel and his primary antagonist as an extra-dimensional force of nature rather than a character.
Cap 1 & 2 were rather restrained.
Cap 3 had a problem, but it was legitimately the premise of the film.

Not seeing the 'cram' in Marvel solo films overall.

Voss wrote:
... is King Shark a Great White?

It depends on who draws him, but usually since that is what most people think of when they think of big killer sharks. He’s been a hammerhead on a few occasions as well though.

“Polka Dot Man”!!??

Voss wrote:
... is King Shark a Great White?

No, he is an IT Specialist and low level Hackerman.

Voss wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

Which ones are you thinking of?

Thor 1... no. Everyone who was there was appropriate except maybe the Hawkeye cameo (but that served the MCU cycle as a whole).
Thor 2 took time to put Hogun on a bus, actually lowering the character count.
Thor 3 got fairly busy, but largely worked.

Captain Marvel? Very light on extra characters.
Iron Man films were overly light on 'other characters' in my opinion.
Doctor Strange had functionally no one beyond his teacher, his canonical sidekick, the villain for a sequel and his primary antagonist as an extra-dimensional force of nature rather than a character.
Cap 1 & 2 were rather restrained.
Cap 3 had a problem, but it was legitimately the premise of the film.

Not seeing the 'cram' in Marvel solo films overall.

Well, you did kinda dismiss it at every turn. You forgot "Spider-Man became an Iron Man sidekick, but I liked that so that doesn't count either."

Meanwhile, The Batman has a main villain in the Riddler, with appearances by a mob boss and thief who aren't even going to "be" the characters they'll become. What were the DC solo films that were so horribly overstuffed? Shazam? Aquaman? Man of Steel? Wonder Woman?







Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:

Voss wrote:
... is King Shark a Great White?

No, he is an IT Specialist and low level Hackerman.

Spoiler:

That show is hilarious.

 gorgon wrote:

Voss wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The movie has too many characters. It looks like a disaster.

Getting some deja vu too, eh?

I admit, I had the same reaction to the Batman thread, and that had fewer characters. I'm not sure what it is with these DC adaptations where they seem to want to throw as many characters are the screen as they can squeeze in.

Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

Which ones are you thinking of?

Thor 1... no. Everyone who was there was appropriate except maybe the Hawkeye cameo (but that served the MCU cycle as a whole).
Thor 2 took time to put Hogun on a bus, actually lowering the character count.
Thor 3 got fairly busy, but largely worked.

Captain Marvel? Very light on extra characters.
Iron Man films were overly light on 'other characters' in my opinion.
Doctor Strange had functionally no one beyond his teacher, his canonical sidekick, the villain for a sequel and his primary antagonist as an extra-dimensional force of nature rather than a character.
Cap 1 & 2 were rather restrained.
Cap 3 had a problem, but it was legitimately the premise of the film.

Not seeing the 'cram' in Marvel solo films overall.

Well, you did kinda dismiss it at every turn. You forgot "Spider-Man became an Iron Man sidekick, but I liked that so that doesn't count either."

Actually I forgot Spiderman because I don't actually give a fig about Spiderman (seriously, it just wasn't on my mental list of MCU films), but thinking about it, those movies were fairly crap. But I don't particularly feel 'and Iron Man is there for a few minutes' counts as 'cramming in' characters. He was an unnecessary addition to the Spiderman story (but not the MCU arc), but I wouldn't characterize it as adding in characters for the sake of "as many characters are on the screen as they can squeeze in."

I also forgot Black Panther, but I'd say that one isn't burdened with a lot of extra characters either.

I did dismiss the rest at every turn (except Thor 3 and Cap 3, which I agreed were overstuffed with extra characters), because none seem to meet the criteria of 'cramming in' characters. If anything, most had the right amount for the story being told, and Doc Strange and Iron Man had too few characters.

If you mean something else by 'cramming in,' you're going to have to explain.

 gorgon wrote:
Spider-Man became an Iron Man sidekick...

Which movie was that?

 gorgon wrote:


Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

Marvel put in the work.

Marvel also doesn't pack multiple big name characters into one movie from the get go. Most of their films feature 1 big name hero, 1-2 big name villains, and then supporting cast. They don't say "let's have a movie with 8+ big names" every time. It's notable that the better DCU films follow the former formula, while the worst follow the latter. DCU keeps doing this thing where it seems to think that shoveling as many names into one movie as possible will make it better, but it's produced their worst movies.

 LordofHats wrote:

 gorgon wrote:


Works fine for Marvel, right? I mean, cramming in other characters even with “solo” films is like the whole gameplan.

Marvel put in the work.

Marvel also doesn't pack multiple big name characters into one movie from the get go. Most of their films feature 1 big name hero, 1-2 big name villains, and then supporting cast. They don't say "let's have a movie with 8+ big names" every time. It's notable that the better DCU films follow the former formula, while the worst follow the latter. DCU keeps doing this thing where it seems to think that shoveling as many names into one movie as possible will make it better, but it's produced their worst movies.

So what DC films did what you describe?

Justice League was a team-up concept...it introduced new characters, but the MCU team-up films have done that also. Suicide Squad and Birds of Prey are ensemble cast concepts, just like Guardians of the Galaxy...which also had no additional 'work' put into it. SS may be pretty awful and BoP may be just okay, but the concept isn't to blame for that.

That leaves us with Batman v Superman. And yeah, that's overstuffed in ways beyond characters. But that was 2016 under a certain director and different execs. I look at their more recent efforts and the overstuffed comment doesn't make sense to me. And the subject of this thread is a film written and shot by the guy who created GotG. Seems like he might know what he's doing?