Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

They released a special edition of Suicide Squad.  Other than the Joker stuff (that wasn't on either) and the overall non-trailer tone of the movie, do we know what would've been demonstrably different?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … n-superman

No reshoots for the Snyder Cut. Just post production and effects work.

I too thought the extended home release of SUICIDE SQUAD was the Ayer cut.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The only thing I can think of is talk at the time that the movie was re-worked to add more comedy after the trailer was so well received (and reportedly that trailer featured the only comedic bits in the movie at that time).  I got the impression back then that Ayer’s version was supposed to be more in line with the Snyder vision, so the film could have had more changes than one might think.

Edit: Just saw this article illuminating a bit more: … -ayer-cut/

Looks like there was a bit more with El Diablo too: … avid-ayer/

And on a side note, someone briefly tried to start a “Release the Trank Cut!” of Fantastic Four, and Trank himself responded saying no need. … ctors-cut/

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Incredible! I had no idea there was so much intrigue around SUICIDE SQUAD.

David Ayer is hilarious. Someone wrote a thunderingly negative review of one of his films, BRIGHT, and Ayer proceeded to retweet the review, thank the critic for his attention and interest and detailed incisiveness, and put the review on his own fridge. It takes many years to have that good natured warmth towards negative feedback.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

I respect Snyder's vision.  I respect that he wants to create a realistic world where gods walked the earth.  They'd be controversial.  They'd be human.  They'd be fallible.   Superman would be frustrated and would miss a bomb going off.  Wonder Woman would save one group but miss another.  Batman would certainly kill people, either accidentally or on purpose.  If Superman fought another Kryptonian in a major city center, it would cause immense damage.

My only problem with Snyder's movies is that he doesn't give any of those things the proper weight.  Because I don't think he has any emotional tie to any of it.  I think he thinks its cool when two Kryptonians destroy a city, and I don't think he cares about the "people" in the buildings.  I think he thinks its cool when Batman uses Arkham-style violence to break spines, but I don't think he worries about the paralyzed "person" afterwards.  I'm putting "person" and "people" in quotes not because Snyder doesn't care about people, but I'm just not sure he's concerned with extras and faceless people in movies.  They don't have names, we don't see them for the most part so I don't think he cares.  Which I think is fair.

With some time and distance, I've come to feel that BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE ULTIMATE EDITION (actual title) was a non-apology apology for the destruction porn of MAN OF STEEL. There was definitely some effort given to showing human consequence as represented by Bruce's seething rage in the Superman/Zod battle. However, the movie never outright declares that Superman failed to turn Zod's battle out of Metropolis.

Zack Snyder is not interested in ordinary people and his attitude led to bizarre scenes in MAN OF STEEL like Lois and Superman kissing and flirting when surrounded by flattened skyscrapers. When Zod and Superman smashed through buildings, the people inside them were mostly computer generated extras. He just wanted the spectacle. BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE ULTIMATE EDITION (actual title) excuses this by having the Doomsday fight happen in an area that's described as nearly empty. While Batman goes to war with Superman over what happened in MAN OF STEEL, he's ultimately convinced to let it go out of sentiment and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE ULTIMATE EDITION (actual title) declares that Superman's actions in MAN OF STEEL were correct and appropriate.

I think it would have been possible in Batman and Superman's first confrontation to have Batman declare that Superman failed to use his powers to protect civilians and Superman saying he didn't know how at the time, that he'd never been in a fight before, that he was trying to stop someone from obliterating the planet. Maybe a shot where Doomsday and Superman are plummeting towards a residential area and Superman says, "Not again. Not this time" and steers their path elsewhere.

It's interesting that the light, funny, goofy Marvel movies have Tony Stark assuming full responsibility for civilian deaths in the fight against Ultron. He specifically says that "we dropped a building" on people even though he was, in AGE OF ULTRON, actively trying to prevent that. BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE ULTIMATE EDITION (actual title) doesn't ever give Superman any guilt because Zack Snyder ultimately doesn't feel MAN OF STEEL made a mistake and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE ULTIMATE EDITION (actual title) simply tries to excuse itself from the same criticisms.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

And now word of a Slipknot sequence that was cut from Suicide Squad.  It depicted his original capture leading into him “joining” the team. … ted-scene/

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Apparently Michael Keaton is in talks to return to the Flash movie.  But the more interesting part about it is the idea that Keaton could be signing a multi-film deal.

The Flash movie is supposed to be Flashpoint.  If they're looking to swap out Batman, they have a built-in way to swap out Batman with Jeffrey Dean Morgan.  Maybe it isn't Flashpoint and the movie takes him to the Batman 89 universe, and they bring Batman back with him?

I'm very interested in catching up with the Keaton Batman.  But this seems like a really weird option.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'd be happy for Michael Keaton to read the phone book in a movie. To play Batman again? He's not my favourite, but if it makes people happy and makes the DC movies good, then I say go for it. Personally, I'd rather they just keep going with Robert Pattinson and have Pattinson appear in a FLASH movie.

But I'm currently operating on the view that THE FLASH will never, ever, ever be made. That if they were going to make it, they would have by now. That Ezra Miller is just done and even if Ezra Miller isn't done, I am done with him.

I seriously doubt that Ezra Miller is going to play the Flash ever again. But if I am wrong, I will write you another SLIDERS REBORN script where Rembrandt confronts Colonel Rickman and the sliders do what they should have done in the first place.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I tend to agree.  I think Flash has a better chance that Cyborg, and I think the only reason for that is that a Flashpoint movie does make a "soft reboot" easier.

But if I were writing it, I'd use "flashpoint" as a way to recast Ezra too.  So I'd make Flashpoint the plot of Aquaman 2.  Just create some sort of time travel mechanic in Atlantis.  He messes with it and suddenly he's in a war with the Amazons.  And now Batman is either Jeffrey Dean Morgan or Michael Keaton, and the Flash is (insert actor we all still like).

I think Jason Mamoa would be great for the comedy and action, and I think it works for Aquaman as much as it does for Flash (as long as you get the right mcguffin)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

AQUAMAN didn't take place in the same universe as JUSTICE LEAGUE. JUSTICE LEAGUE had Arthur saying his mother abandoned him as an infant on his father's doorstep. AQUAMAN has Arthur saying his mother raised him for several years but was then attacked and presumed dead. Warner Bros. is taking the view that each film has its own continuity even if they use some of the same actors. Or director James Wan simply decided to ignore JUSTICE LEAGUE, but the effect is the same.

Ezra Miller talked about how THE FLASH movie was not just about the DC Extended Universe, but about how the Flash exists in a multiverse. I think the simplest solution: do a FLASH movie with a new actor, have him get a glimpse of the multiverse where a clip of Ezra Miller, John Wesley Shipp and Grant Gustin pass by and have someone narrate that reality takes on different forms. No further explanation is really needed; the DC Extended Universe has become a mix and match playset called the Worlds of DC rather than a clearly defined continuity.

If they want to keep Billy Crudup as Henry Allen but feature Michael Keaton as the mentor to a Barry played by Ben Wishaw or Jaleel White or Matt Smith or Jaden Smith or Corey Fogelmanis or Deron Horton or Ben Schwartz or Donald Glover, they can do that. Commissioner Gordon has gone from being JK Simmons to Jeffrey Wright.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Now talk of the Schumacher Cut of Batman Forever: … acher-cut/

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I've seen the Schumacher cut of BATMAN FOREVER in the theatre of the mind -- which is to say I've read the adult and junior novelizations which adapted the original script and not the final cut that went to theatres. The original cut is definitely an improvement in specific and isolated areas: there's a more psychological arc for Bruce Wayne with an amnesia arc where he loses all memory of Batman, remembering only his Bruce Wayne identity, and has to decide whether or not he wants to be Batman again.

There's a peculiar and poorly-conceived (but beautifully dialogued) resolution where Bruce is haunted by guilt, feeling that as a child, he pleaded for his parents to take him to a movie and if he hadn't, they wouldn't have been robbed and murdered -- and the resolution is Bruce finding his father's journal and realizing that his parents didn't take him to the movie, that he has remembered it wrong, and that his parents' death wasn't his fault (but it wouldn't have been his fault regardless!) -- and he puts the Batsuit on again.

There are darker scenes throughout the film, but they exist within the day-glo, Vegas-style look of BATMAN FOREVER surrounding it, so the overall tone of the film wouldn't have changed. It wouldn't have been a better film, just a longer one and a more complete one. It wouldn't have been less silly; it would have just had the same silliness spaced out and diluted with darker scenes.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Batman Forever gets a pass with many fans, but I was never fond of it.  Schumacher (RIP) reversed what Burton did and went way too campy.  Shame that Burton's "Continues" was derailed by McDonald's of all things.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I liked FOREVER when I was a kid. I can't imagine what I'd think of it today. I found the first two Burton movies joyless and depressing and Batman was barely in them. Call me crazy, but I think the title character should actually be the star.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I probably saw Forever twenty times at the theater; but I had free passes to any movie because of my brother’s radio job; I was in high school; and I was apparently bored.   I do remember laughing every time I walked out of a showing, though.

Fun footnote - one of the ushers at that theater was a guy a few years under me in high school - Clay Chamberlin.  For the past 15 years or so, he’s been doing a lot of stand-in work on films. It started with several turns for Ryan Reynolds; but lately he’s been doing it a lot for Chris Pratt.  Clay pops up on screen occasionally too - such as the training video at the end of the Ryan Reynolds film “Waiting”:

I still remember the time Clay had to escort my group out of the theater because my brother got in a shouting match with a co-worker during a showing of the first X-men movie.  Good times.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Ha ha ha!  Laughing.  Oh, and I loved Waiting and that usher guy was incredibly annoying in that video, too.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I remember liking Batman Forever too.  It wasn't as campy as Batman and Robin or as dark and depressing as Batman Returns.  I probably think Forever is just as good as Batman 89 just in a different way.  I never liked Returns - it's just too dark and weird for me.

I think if Schumacher had dialed back the neon, I think it would've felt right as a sequel to Returns.  But I also think the neon makes sense in a lot of ways.  After the insanity of the Burton movies, I think the city would've gone neon to try and brighten itself after the dark insanity of the beginning of Batman's era.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I remember enjoying BATMAN FOREVER: Val Kilmer was convincing as a troubled and capable warrior. Chris O'Donnell was a bit too old to play Robin but very enjoyable. The costumes were cool and I craved all the action figures of Batman in the sonar suit and Robin in his garb. The Riddler was disturbing. Two Face didn't really stand out to me. Kilmer and Nicole Kidman had amazing chemistry. The action was exciting although a bit random at times with Batman randomly driving around and then being attacked in a coordinated assault (because the scenes had been moved around). I remember liking the novelization from Peter David a lot.

There's a lot of silliness in FOREVER that's at odds with the psychological tone of the film. Two Face is just a clownish presence. The henchmen are irksome. The competing clowning between Two Face and the Riddler is annoying. But the silliness seems quite isolated unlike BATMAN AND ROBIN where it went crazy with Batman attending charity balls.

I didn't consider the film to be in continuity with the Burton movies as Bruce says in this film that he's never been in love when he was clearly in love with Vicky Vale in BATMAN and certainly infatuated with Catwoman in BATMAN RETURNS.

It wasn't a great exploration of Batman, but it had all the charm and fun of creators playing with their Batman action figures and there was care and thought put into the story such as hiring puzzle creator and crossword designer Will Shortz to write all of the Riddler's riddles. It's a good effort and a fun time. It isn't THE Batman movie for me, but compared to the unpleasant BATMAN, the bleak BATMAN RETURNS, the obnoxious BATMAN AND ROBIN and that racist BATMAN TV serial, BATMAN FOREVER hits the dizzying heights of good enough.


Matt Reeves' THE BATMAN will apparently have a TV show called GOTHAM CENTRAL. No word on whether Robert Pattinson (Batman) and Jeffrey Wright (Commissioner Gordon) will appear. But -- it'd make sense if they didn't. How often would any police officer be in the same room as the city's police commissioner? How often would any cop encounter Batman in person?

If Batman were to appear, from the point of view of the police, wouldn't Batman be a distant or shadowy figure glimpsed only in silhouette? And to communicate with any GOTHAM CENTRAL characters through notes? It makes more sense for Batman to (not) appear in this fashion, played by a barely on-camera stuntman, than it did for, say, Dick Grayson's flashbacks to his childhood in TITANS where Bruce lives in the same house as Dick but inexplicably chooses to talk to him through handwritten letters.