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.

Friend and I watched it tonight.

Both really enjoyed it, some great moments - even if many had already been seen - good action, great music but pacing was off (eg the bar scene would have worked better at the end then Amanda walks in).

It was somewhat disjointed and not as slick a production as a Marvel film but much better than Bats vs Superman, we felt all the cast worked, Katana was a little underused but no massive misfires like" Loppy Lex" - shudder.

Harley was the star, again nice chemistry between her and Will Smith.

Amanda Waller was a very good bad guy - sort of a darker version of Nick Fury - she was very good, hope she is in more DC films.

Joker was good.

for me the best DC film since the first Tim Burton Batman and if DC can polish iup their act a bit more in terms of plot and pacing, then Wonder Woman should be fantastic.

Going to see this in a few mins!

Some of you guys in this thread might be interested that this is now going to be a thing.




I'm kinda excited.

Ok, so...why the hate? As the "not main bad guy", Leto's Joker got plenty of screen time. He was okay. Ranked below Nicholson, Ledger and Hamill though. The plot was easy to follow. Had no issues with any of it. I got a few chuckles. I'd give it a solid middle of the road rating for a super hero (or villain) movie. It didn't do anything unique, but it was better than MoS and BvS. Critics saying it was as bad as Fant4stic Four are numbskulls. Idiots. Cretins. Etc.

Good, not great. But not bad, either.

I am convinced that the hate is caused by three things.

1) The movie was overhyped and people expected some kind of masterpiece above and beyond any comic book movie out there. I don't know what's so great about some comic book films heralded as the best...i.e. I can't remember a single notable scene from Winter Soldier other than the Dr. Strange easter egg. Even if SS had been on par with say GotG or Civil War I still think it would have gotten lower reviews than either.

2) Jared Leto as Joker. No one will ever be sold on this until he pulls a Batfleck and nearly single handedly almost saves or makes a movie.

3) Horrible decisions somewhere along the line to cut scenes entirely and reorder the rest. The released film is apparently wildly different than the one in test screenings and it's never a good thing when what it appear to be promising scenes (Harley taking orders in the bar) are cut entirely.

 trexmeyer wrote:
The movie was overhyped and people expected some kind of masterpiece above and beyond any comic book movie out there.

Actually, I don't think this movie was overhyped at all because it was released after the gigantic letdown that was Batman v. Superman. I gathered from this forum and most other places on the web that the majority of people were cautiously optimistic at best.

I don't know what's so great about some comic book films heralded as the best...i.e. I can't remember a single notable scene from Winter Soldier other than the Dr. Strange easter egg.

I remember lots of The Winter Soldier (the opening scene on the boat, the Nick Fury car chase in DC, Cap and Black Widow on the lam, the Cap/Black Widow/Falcon car chase/shootout, the elevator brawl and Cap's escape from the Triskelion, the end set piece with the helicarriers) but I don't remember there being a Dr. Strange Easter egg.

Jared Leto

I really, really wish Hollywood would stop trying to make him happen.

It's at 2:40ish

Saw it last night despite all the negative reviews (but still stayed away from BvS and only watched a few minutes of the recent Supes movie).

Other than some odd pacing and kind of weird wrap-up battle, it was a decent enough movie. Wife and I enjoyed it and wondered why it had gotten so much bad press. We both thought Amanda Waller was played extremely well. One thing I think they did with the PR campaign was spoil too many scenes.

Interesting that they did the Marvel post-credits scene thingie.

Bleh. Star Trek Beyond was much more entertaining.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Jared Leto

I really, really wish Hollywood would stop trying to make him happen.

Hey, I like Jared Leto! I didn't think his Joker was the best, but he was terrific in Requiem for a Dream and Lord of War.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
People defending Snyder and saying he does good scene work while the writing is flawed, well, that's STILL his problem. He's the director. He's the guy running the project.

Whether or not the director runs the movie depends on the specific project. Typically the smaller the project the more the director is likely to have control over. Once you get to big studio tent poles like these movies the director is going to have a lot less impact. Batman vs Superman is famous for what Snyder was told to include - all the clunky JL stuff was a forced studio inclusion. There's been rumours about studio re-working of Ayers' Suicide Squad, but it will probably be a little while before we actually know the rumours from what actually happened.

And Marvel is no different. When Edgar Wright didn't like where the studio was taking his Ant-Man project, they booted him and brought in a generic, no finger prints director Peyton Reed. After making the first two Iron Man movies, Jon Favreau declined making the third in that series, and instead went and made Chef, which is basically a two hour rant about creative freedom being lost to management interference.

Both studios interfere, neither studio will let directors go and make the films they want (nor should they, $200 million budgets are a lot of money to let someone go and explore their creative freedoms). The difference seems to be that Marvel knows what it wants out of its directors, from the first frame to the last they want summer popcorn with wisecracks, big action and lots of heroic moments. DC, on the other hand, seems to keep changing the game on its creative teams. At one moment they want the seriousness and big themes of Nolan's Batman trilogy, and the next moment they want the jokes and levity of the Marvel franchise. This would explain why they'd hire an almost completely humourless director like Ayers to make a very dark SS, and then start re-working the script during shooting to add more jokes (if that's what actually happened).

Nothing explains the hiring of Snyder, though. I mean, I really liked BvS, but I've got no clue as to why he was hired for the project.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
Hey, I like Jared Leto! I didn't think his Joker was the best, but he was terrific in Requiem for a Dream and Lord of War.

Jared Leto's Joker was crappy, but I don't think it was the fault of the actor. He's up against some very famous performances, and those others were given whole movies to develop and expand their characters. Leto had maybe 10 minutes of screen time, most of which was in a fairly awkward exposition scene. In the end the character came across as nothing more than a fairly vicious gangster with some terrible taste in fashion.

I'll wait to judge when he gets to the flesh the character out in a bigger role. If nothing else, he'll be the first Joker to make it in to a second movie.

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Hey, I like Jared Leto! I didn't think his Joker was the best, but he was terrific in Requiem for a Dream and Lord of War.

Jared Leto's Joker was crappy, but I don't think it was the fault of the actor. He's up against some very famous performances, and those others were given whole movies to develop and expand their characters. Leto had maybe 10 minutes of screen time, most of which was in a fairly awkward exposition scene. In the end the character came across as nothing more than a fairly vicious gangster with some terrible taste in fashion.

I'll wait to judge when he gets to the flesh the character out in a bigger role. If nothing else, he'll be the first Joker to make it in to a second movie.

That's the thing I find weird about a lot of the comparisons with the other Jokers. All of the other Jokers were the main antagonist within the plot of the film they appeared in, whereas Leto's was barely present due to timing cuts. It's hardly a shocker that he has less "presence" than someone like Ledger when Leto had a 5th of the screen time.

I actually really like this Joker, he actually seems to have a lot more of a vicious air than any of the other on-screen ones, and unlike Ledger's, he's got some objective beyond 'watching the world burn'. I like that he's the top dog in Gotham's underworld, the actual Clown Prince of Crime rather than a loony in a purple suit. Visually, his design is fantastic, the costumes are all really comicy and his mannerisms and attitude do scream 'Joker' to me.

I look forward to seeing him more, him and Affleck could be the best, most comicy Joker/Batman pairing ever.

 Paradigm wrote:
I actually really like this Joker, he actually seems to have a lot more of a vicious air than any of the other on-screen ones, and unlike Ledger's, he's got some objective beyond 'watching the world burn'. I like that he's the top dog in Gotham's underworld, the actual Clown Prince of Crime rather than a loony in a purple suit. Visually, his design is fantastic, the costumes are all really comicy and his mannerisms and attitude do scream 'Joker' to me.

I look forward to seeing him more, him and Affleck could be the best, most comicy Joker/Batman pairing ever.

He is closer to Jack Nicolson's version (my fav thus far) in that he is a criminal and is also insane, enjoys causing pain to others etc. He drips acid on his lover until she commits suicide, kills an entire museum full of people just to be alone with Vicky Vail. Scary scary guy.

Oddly enough H Ledgers version did very little actual killing - except other criminals whereas both the current Joker and JN's slaughter people - he blows up an empty hospital. He had a god like ability to predict the future.

I understand the animated one is also great but not seen it.

 Paradigm wrote:
I actually really like this Joker, he actually seems to have a lot more of a vicious air than any of the other on-screen ones, and unlike Ledger's, he's got some objective beyond 'watching the world burn'. I like that he's the top dog in Gotham's underworld, the actual Clown Prince of Crime rather than a loony in a purple suit. Visually, his design is fantastic, the costumes are all really comicy and his mannerisms and attitude do scream 'Joker' to me.

Same here. The few SS Joker scenes actually kept me engaged with the movie when I was starting to get bored. Leto's performance reminded me a bit of the animated show's Joker (voiced by Mark Hamill), and since I grew up on that show it was a good fit for me Joker-wise.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Jared Leto

I really, really wish Hollywood would stop trying to make him happen.

Hear hear! Did you see he's cast in the Bladerunner remake? Ugh.

I donlt really know who he is - usless at actors

I liked him as the Joker - and the girls I know all think he was hot in the movie - twisted but then i thought Harley was hot as well so same thing I guess.

Crazy is sexy, so long as you remember that you just watch crazy and never date it. That's what Harley did and look what happened to her!

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
I actually really like this Joker, he actually seems to have a lot more of a vicious air than any of the other on-screen ones, and unlike Ledger's, he's got some objective beyond 'watching the world burn'. I like that he's the top dog in Gotham's underworld, the actual Clown Prince of Crime rather than a loony in a purple suit. Visually, his design is fantastic, the costumes are all really comicy and his mannerisms and attitude do scream 'Joker' to me.

Same here. The few SS Joker scenes actually kept me engaged with the movie when I was starting to get bored. Leto's performance reminded me a bit of the animated show's Joker (voiced by Mark Hamill), and since I grew up on that show it was a good fit for me Joker-wise.

I agree, vocally he sounded very Hamill-esque, maybe with a touch of old Hollywood or Vaudeville. Sort of theatrical-like maybe a bit of Bob Hope
mixed with Ed Sullivan.

I didn't hate Leto's Joker, I would like to see more. Very much more Tony Montana than just a weirdo that happens to be able to orchestrate some chaos. He's still a psychopath, but one with a very clear purpose and goal.

 sebster wrote:
After making the first two Iron Man movies, Jon Favreau declined making the third in that series, and instead went and made Chef, which is basically a two hour rant about creative freedom being lost to management interference.

You know, I saw Chef when it came out and I never quite made the connection you just laid out, which in retrospect is a little embarrassing in how obvious it was.

nor should they, $200 million budgets are a lot of money to let someone go and explore their creative freedoms

George Lucas is why directors can't have nice things

 LordofHats wrote:

nor should they, $200 million budgets are a lot of money to let someone go and explore their creative freedoms

George Lucas is why directors can't have nice things

James Cameron and Ridley Scott have been given more, and then manage to return on that investment for the most part.

Can you imagine the sales pitch for Avatar "yeah it's like 7 feet tall blue aliens, who are actually controlled by other people inside their minds. We can have a 7ft tall Sigourney Weaver in 3D!"

There are probably only a handful of people that could have got away with that in Hollywood. But, they wouldn't go anywhere near this kind of franchise, or probably have a strong enough vision (or perhaps be enough of a fan?) where they could overturn the marketing juggernaut, and stop the film being murdered by committee.

You know, it occurs to me that Jared Leto's Joker is a pretty spot on rendition of the Joker from the self-titled graphic novel. Not visually, but his behavior, his attitude.

 Ouze wrote:
You know, I saw Chef when it came out and I never quite made the connection you just laid out, which in retrospect is a little embarrassing in how obvious it was.

I wonder if The Jungle Book was an allegory for how much he hated making Chef?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:

nor should they, $200 million budgets are a lot of money to let someone go and explore their creative freedoms

George Lucas is why directors can't have nice things

I think Michael Cimino is guy who killed the old style. His 1980 movie Heaven's Gate is generally seen as the death of big budget, auteur filmaking in Hollywood. When he killed the old system, it just so happened that George Lucas was standing there with his recent big hit b-movie while the old system was coming apart.

 Pacific wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

nor should they, $200 million budgets are a lot of money to let someone go and explore their creative freedoms

George Lucas is why directors can't have nice things

James Cameron and Ridley Scott have been given more, and then manage to return on that investment for the most part.

Can you imagine the sales pitch for Avatar "yeah it's like 7 feet tall blue aliens, who are actually controlled by other people inside their minds. We can have a 7ft tall Sigourney Weaver in 3D!"

There are probably only a handful of people that could have got away with that in Hollywood. But, they wouldn't go anywhere near this kind of franchise, or probably have a strong enough vision (or perhaps be enough of a fan?) where they could overturn the marketing juggernaut, and stop the film being murdered by committee.

Pretty sure the pitch was 'Fern Gully crossed with Dances with Wolves in space'.

 Ouze wrote:
You know, it occurs to me that Jared Leto's Joker is a pretty spot on rendition of the Joker from the self-titled graphic novel. Not visually, but his behavior, his attitude.

Ya know there was a film theory about how there is actually 3 jokers in the dc universe.

gold silver and modern age.

leto matches up with the silver age one iirc.

since the gold one was about gags and getting rich over just killing people and stuff
silver being the cold murdering kind
and the modern one being the psychologically broken kind.

all 3 matches up with various movies and the ages of comics as well.

 Desubot wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
You know, it occurs to me that Jared Leto's Joker is a pretty spot on rendition of the Joker from the self-titled graphic novel. Not visually, but his behavior, his attitude.

Ya know there was a film theory about how there is actually 3 jokers in the dc universe.

gold silver and modern age.

leto matches up with the silver age one iirc.

since the gold one was about gags and getting rich over just killing people and stuff
silver being the cold murdering kind
and the modern one being the psychologically broken kind.

all 3 matches up with various movies and the ages of comics as well.

As per DC's recent 'Rebirth' event, that's actually the case (or at least heavily implied, since Joker quite rightly still doesn't have a definitive backstory and origin), there have been multiple men to take the name over the years but each is so insane and dangerous that it doesn't really matter, as far as Batman and the rest of the universe goes it s still the same evil entity really.

As far as matching them up to specific actors, I've thought of it like this (in that these are the 'voices' I hear reading each version). The classic one is BTAS-era Hamill Joker, manic and dangerous but also a lot more carefree, silver age is closer to Ledger or John DiMaggio (from Under The Red Hood), New52/Modern version most like Troy Baker's Arkham Origins/Assault on Arkham portrayals, totally unhinged but really vicious and sadistic under all the 'humour'. Leto's version also fits the bill there, which is a lot of the reason I can't wait to see more of him, as it's by far the scariest and nastiest version.

 -Loki- wrote:
Pretty sure the pitch was 'Fern Gully crossed with Dances with Wolves in space'.

I think the pitch was something along the lines of;

"I made you guys a stupid amount of money by making big blockbusters about time travelling robots and the Titanic. Now I want to make a huge movie about a fully 3D world."
"Okay, but what is the movie about?"
"It's a completely immersive 3D world. It isn't like the old blue and red glasses, but with digital tech we can produce actual depth perception on the screen."
"Yeah okay, but what is it actually about? Like, who is the hero, what does he do?"
"I don't know, we'll think of something. It doesn't matter. If we really can't think of anything then I'll just do Fern Gully again. 3D."

Ouze wrote:Hey, I like Jared Leto! I didn't think his Joker was the best, but he was terrific in Requiem for a Dream and Lord of War.

I guess he's okay for an overrated pretentious douchebag "method actor" that plays in a gakky band.

Manchu wrote:Hear hear! Did you see he's cast in the Bladerunner remake? Ugh.

Indeed. I was already skeptical about that movie before I heard that announcement but now I'm doubly so.

AT this point it looks like its taken in $636mm. Thats a massive amount of bank.
"Suicide Squad fell to No. 2 with $12.1 million from 3,582 theaters for a domestic total of $282.9 million. Offshore, the movie took in another $19.7 million from 65 territories for a foreign cume of $353.1 million and a global take of $636 million."
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/weekend-box-office-dont-breathe-923578