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

https://www.ign.com/articles/zack-snyde … 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:

https://www.cbr.com/suicide-squad-what- … -ayer-cut/

Looks like there was a bit more with El Diablo too:

https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a3259 … 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.

https://www.slashfilm.com/david-ayer-su … 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.

https://bleedingcool.com/movies/suicide … 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:

https://bleedingcool.com/movies/batman- … 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”:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zej_1n_uN0

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.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Affleck will return (!) and co-star with Michael Keaton in THE FLASH movie (!).

https://www.cbr.com/ben-affleck-return- … ash-movie/

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It's crazy, but I think it's necessary.  The film shouldn't rely on a cheap trick (some sort of newspaper clipping of Bruce Wayne or something) to pull off the Flashpoint-level shock that Batman has changed (in the comics, that it's Thomas and not Bruce, here that it's Michael Keaton and not Ben Affleck).  So it could be a simple scene shot with Affleck out of costume and filmed at his easiest convenience to establish that Affleck is Wayne before transitioning to Keaton as Wayne.  Think of it as the Tom Welling approach.

I guess the biggest question is...who will be playing the Flash?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm starting to wonder if WB is going to stick with Ezra Miller and just refuse to address his on camera assault. He hasn't addressed the video. He is going to be at an online DC convention to promote THE FLASH film. I'm still doubtful this film will ever be made.

I'm starting to wonder if we should find some new adjective for "crazy" when describing a story idea that seems outside the bounds of the established conventions of a specific format or genre. Crazy is when someone's actions are in contradiction to their goals -- such as starting a new shared universe with Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and the Flash only to somehow alienate the actor playing Batman and fail to maintain a contract with the actor playing Superman while hiring a violent loon to play the Flash.

But we've been seeing so much joyfully 'crazy' stuff in recent years -- accepting all DC comic book adaptations as part of a TV and film multiverse and having Ezra Miller meet Grant Gustin; having Tom Welling and Brandon Routh and Tyler Hoechlin play Superman in the same story; and now, having Ben Affleck and Michael Keaton play Batman in a movie for... THE FLASH. All this makes our 'crazy' magnum opus where we had the sliders fight all the Season 3 monsters attacking San Francisco seem rather mundane by comparison.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Snyder cut trailer: https://youtu.be/z6512XKKNkU

I'm not a huge fan of Zack Snyder, but I think that when a studio hires Zack Snyder, they should expect a Zack Snyder movie instead of a Joss Whedon movie and as much as I enjoyed JUSTICE LEAGUE (and I enoyed it a lot) -- WB, Geoff Johns, Diane Nelson and Jon Berg should have just let Snyder make the movie he was hired to make and let his team complete it instead of bringing in Whedon to change it. Would a Snyder film have been more successful? It would have at least had the benefit of standing or falling on its on merits.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

THE BATMAN trailer: https://youtu.be/NLOp_6uPccQ

Goth rock version of Batman.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Quick thoughts from this stupid DC Fan day or whatever.....

Synder Cut JL - This is like when you play the same video game over, make different choices, and get new cutscenes, right?

The Batman - As I often bickered with Info over, just too dark, sadistic, graphic, violent, etc. for me.  I truly don't understand the need for these films.  Leave the gore for horror and violence for war movies. 

Wonder Woman 84 - Glad to see it's still got humor in it.  The film though will rise/fall based on the villainous performance of Kristin Wiig, and that is probably too tall an order.  She's just not "menacing."

Suicide Squad Roll Call - What was the point, had no footage?

And so have to be honest, at least WW84 looks like fun, and The Suicide Squad is a combat adventure.  The other two, blehhhhh, I mean, they're joyless.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

While I'm not a fan of Zack Snyder making a horror movie version of the JLA, he might as well be permitted to finish it.

There are so many versions of BATMAN that Matt Reeves should do whatever he wants. If it's bad, it won't matter and won't define the character in perpetuity.

I'm sure that both, whatever our enjoyment levels may be, will turn out as professional, presentable products.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Snyder’s movie should have been allowed to rise or fall for what it was.  As it is, Geoff Johns damaged himself trying to fix it.  Why get down in the mud like that?  All Geoff did was make himself look guilty for the failure when he could have stood back, watched it burn, and then stepped in after to rebuild it.  It was just a really dumb move on Geoff’s part; but maybe that’s a signal that he couldn’t have done any better than Snyder at developing DC movies.  Green Lantern with Ryan Reynolds was a signal too.

Geoff is a really talented writer; I’ve been a big fan since he started.  But now he’s pretty much pushed out in the comics scene.  Maybe he’ll get to come back with the recent changes; who knows.  And they do at least still let Geoff have involvement in the CW shows.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

ireactions wrote:

Snyder cut trailer: https://youtu.be/z6512XKKNkU

I'm not a huge fan of Zack Snyder, but I think that when a studio hires Zack Snyder, they should expect a Zack Snyder movie instead of a Joss Whedon movie and as much as I enjoyed JUSTICE LEAGUE (and I enoyed it a lot) -- WB, Geoff Johns, Diane Nelson and Jon Berg should have just let Snyder make the movie he was hired to make and let his team complete it instead of bringing in Whedon to change it. Would a Snyder film have been more successful? It would have at least had the benefit of standing or falling on its on merits.

So.....I don't get it. 

I understand why everything happened the way that it did.  WB was all in with Zack Snyder because they spent the early 2000s wasting most of their IP.  They had the Dark Knight the same year the MCU started.  They had the better movie, and the better cast of characters, but they were so late to the party that they had to try and catch up.  So they give Snyder full reign to get the universe kickstarted.  And because there was no one there with a love for the characters, Snyder's pitch of "EVERYONE IS BATMAN" worked because Batman was successful both critically and financially.  And because they were so rushed to compete with Marvel, they didn't have time to see if BvS worked.  It got a standing ovation internally and that was good enough.

But then like they did with everything before and after, they panicked.  And instead of letting Snyder do his thing, they literally got the Avengers guy to put a cheap Halloween costume on Zack Snyder's movie.

And now there's a pandemic and HBO Max needs content and they can give him a few million bucks to finish his movie.  A hundred things had to go this exact way for us to get here....


....but here's the thing.  I cannot get excited about this movie.  Because we saw it.  Sure, there were some dumb things that were obviously added by Whedon, but Whedon also gave us the first likable version of Superman.  I think there are fun character beats that I think were Whedon.  And I think the biggest thing is...Whedon was given a broken movie.  I don't think Whedon would've made the Justice League that his name is attached to.  It's completely unfair to refer to the theatrical version as Whedon's.  One is Whedon/Snyder and one is Snyder.  Snyder had a hand in both.

We aren't getting a totally new film.  It's the Ultimate Edition of BvS again.  Sure, it cleaned some stuff up, but the Ultimate Edition didn't solve my biggest problems with BvS.  And the Snyder Cut isn't going to solve my biggest problems with Justice League.  I mean, heck, Snyder essentially outlined his version for the Justice League trilogy and it sounded terrible.

I admire Zack Snyder because I think his vision is uncompromised.  And I'm glad that he's getting to finish his version of the movie because I'm sure he feels like he's going to finally heal from what was a very horrible and traumatic time in his life.  But BvS was Snyder's vision.  Snyder likes cool visuals and fun action sequences, but he doesn't have any interest in real character.  And that's why all his characters are essentially the same.  They're all Batman.  But not even the real Batman - a stylized version of Batman that only vaguely corresponds to the comic version.

I watched the trailer and it's just a new coat of paint on a movie we've already seen.  So I watched it and haven't thought about it since.

978 (edited by ireactions 2020-08-24 11:27:48)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm not that keen on THE SNYDER CUT personally -- but it's important to remember that Snyder's approach has an audience and is very popular. It just wasn't popular to the point of earning the one billion in box office that WB hoped for. But a lot of people watched and enjoyed MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title) and a lot of people wanted THE SNYDER CUT. The majority of the people who watched JUSTICE LEAGUE were not happy with it. The only people I know to enjoy JUSTICE LEAGUE are you, me, Informant and Kevin Smith. I've personally never met or talked to anyone else who had any fondness for it.

Snyder, to me, is like Bryan Singer: Singer came aboard the X-MEN film for 2000 and he didn't like the X-Men. He found the costumes, codenames, backstories and the superhero universe to be ridiculous.

A lot of the X-MEN movie is making an effort to be serious, to take these absurd concepts and place them in a world that resembles our own except for the one fantasy element -- mutants -- spurring all other fantasy elements. And redressing them in a genre that Singer actually did like. So you have the school for mutants and technology and surroundings that, if they aren't like our world, exist due to mutants -- but everything else is close if not identical to our reality and with the look of a high tech military espionage thriller rather than the superhero genre.

Snyder's genre is horror. And with MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title), he made a superhero film both times that used the style of a horror film, redressing superheroes in that style. Whether that worked or not is purely subjective, but JUSTICE LEAGUE suffers from Snyder's horror aesthetic having been ripped out of the film, replaced with Batman and Superman cracking jokes and pretty much every surviving frame of Snyder's film having been recoloured and brightened. The way in which a story is told is just as important as the content itself and for people who liked MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title), the SNYDER CUT version of JUSTICE LEAGUE will offer a satisfactory conclusion.

I've personally never met or spoken to any of those people outside of Informant, but they exist in sizable numbers and enough of them will subscribe to HBO Max.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

One thing we haven't gotten into -- there were recently MASSIVE layoffs across all of Warner Bros. and the DC Comics division took huge hits. At last 12 senior editors were laid off and their office staffers were shuttered, leading to about one-third of DC Comics being let go as part of the 800 WB dismissals. Of course, CEO compensation remains at an all time high in WB. A small fraction of CEO salaries could have easily covered most of the costs of the lower level staffers being cast aside.

Looking at DC Comics and comic book publishing, however -- comic books aren't working economically and have not been working for a long time. As Temporal Flux has pointed out, you could buy 2 - 3 chocolate bars for the cost of one DC comic, buy a video game for the cost of 10 issues and you could get 15 - 30 hours out of the average video game but finish all 10 comic books inside 45 minutes. Comic books are overpriced, offer poor value for the content, and the industry has refused to change its format and business model because it is being kept afloat by comic stores that have a dwindling number of readers come in every Wednesday to buy the latest issues.

Marvel has survived because publishing isn't required to be particularly profitable and notorious cheapskate Ike Perlmutter ran Marvel Comics like a startup on the grounds that it was the Marvel movies and television shows and video games and merchandise that earned money. The comics were treated as research and development. DC Comics, in contrast, has never had that kind of protection or minimalism, and it was likely viewed as a publishing arm that generated a lot of product with a lot of labour for very, very, very little reward. With Marvel, the comics division was for a long time also working on TV and film. There was a separation around Season 3 of AGENTS OF SHIELD where TV and comics were under Perlmutter and film was under Kevin Feige. Last year, however, Feige was promoted to handle the TV and comic book branches as well.

In contrast, DC Comics has very little influence over DC properties in film, television and merchandising. While individual DC creators are hired to specific DC properties (comic book writer Geoff Johns runs STARGIRL and consults on CW shows), the DC branch was not considered to be part of the TV and film teams. With a third of DC Comics gone, the output of the comics will likely be cut as well. There could come a point when WB no longer sees the value in publishing DC characters in monthly comics that few people read and they'll exist in TV, film, video games, audio dramas and commercials -- but not comic books.

But it doesn't have to be that way, of course. If comics can be made affordable and accessible, it can work, but the industry is currently locked into monthly 20 page pamphlets sold by specialty stores. I stopped reading comic books regularly around Season 2 of SUPERGIRL, realizing that I wasn't a fan of comics as much as superheroes and everything I wanted from superheroes was now on Netflix, especially when the SUPERGIRL comic book was an unfathomable mess while the SUPERGIRL TV series was a delight.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

So I finally saw Birds of Prey.  I think the movie itself was fine, but I just kept thinking that it was incomplete.  I think the tone and the aesthetic are good.  I think if all the DC films were like this, it would've accomplished what Snyder seems to have wanted to do.  It feels like a world where Shazam and Superman and the Flash can exist with street level heroes.

The problem is that it's another movie set in Gotham where they don't really do anything with it.  They mention Joker but the entire movie takes place in Gotham's underbelly.  Where's Penguin and Riddler and Two-Face?  And not even just not shown - there's no clue of any of them existing.  Batman is briefly referenced but where is he?  And outside of the one in-joke to Boomerang, where is the reference to Suicide Squad?  Where's Waller?  Where's Flagg?  Is Harley wanted by any of them?

I mean, heck, where's Katana?  She's a badass female hero.  Why not throw her on the team?  She wasn't used in the last movie - flesh her out here?

I know it's a spinoff and Iron Man doesn't drop in to say hi in Ant-Man.  But this is a huge DC universe - why not go all out?  If you can't get Affleck or Leto, that's fine.  Get someone else.  Bring in Barbara Gordon or Jason Todd or Tim Drake.  Tease another movie.  Hint at the bigger established Gotham.  A ton of people were after Harley but they were all nobodies. 

I get it - DC is doing standalone films now with a light connection to everything else.  But at least use something from the movie Harley debuted in.  If you want it to be Girl Powered, Katana and Waller and Ivy and Batgirl are all women that would fit naturally into this story.  Instead you have a movie that barely features the Birds of Prey themselves in a plot about the Gotham underworld with just one comic book character.  It just felt like a missed opportunity.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

And to catch up from 8 months ago....on the title.

I don't understand the titling either.  Birds of Prey is a cool title, and I think there's a version of this movie that works both as a Harley movie and a jumping off point for a Birds of Prey franchise.  But since this movie has no idea what it wants to be, I blame it all on a lack of focus.

I think they could've easily taken some notes from the Harley cartoon.  I think it would be interesting if Harley, after Suicide Squad, tries to go back to being a straight up villain.  She finds herself in a situation where her plan is working.  She and Joker have Batman incapacitated (so no need for Affleck, a body double would do) and they're about to release Joker gas across the whole city.  When she realizes....why is she doing this?  She doesn't *really* want to hurt people.  She is months away from saving the world from Enchantress...she liked being the good guy.  So she rewires the device, rescues Batman, and blows up the Joker's hideout instead of releasing the gas.  Is Joker dead?  Maybe - the movie won't say.  Where's Batman the rest of the movie - recuperating.

So with no Batman, Harley decides to try and recreate the team she had with the Suicide Squad.  But instead of people like them, she tries to find people like her.  A lounge singer who's in too deep with a mobster.  A vigilante out for revenge.  A pickpocket.  A cop who doesn't get the respect she deserves.  And a woman she and her ex really hurt.  No one trusts her, but she's able to prove to them that she's trying to be good.  She wants to be heroic.  And gets them to fight as a team.  And at the end of the movie, Harley realizes that she's not the right person to lead this team - Barbara is.  She shouldn't even be on the team - she's not a hero and she's not a villain.  She's her own thing.  Maybe she even turns herself in so that she can be back on THE Suicide Squad.

And so you have a Harley vehicle that has a clear connection to the rest of the universe (direct connections to both the first and forthcoming Suicide Squad movies, a Batman tie in that explains his absence, etc) while also sending the characters in a new direction.  Now there's a Birds of Prey team ready to protect Gotham.  Now Harley has grown as a character.  There's a vision from point A to point B and point B to point C and D.

But I wouldn't have called that Birds of Prey either.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I feel like Margot Robbie's insistence on an R-rating and the title BIRDS OF PREY really harmed the success of the film. I like Slider_Quinn21's vision of a more DC Extended Universe oriented Harley Quinn movie. But I like the BIRDS OF PREY movie exactly like it is except that it has the wrong name and it has a few expletives that, if cut, would have allowed teen girls to watch it in theatres. I didn't even realize this was a Harley Quinn movie because of the title until my cineplex changed the marquee and online ticket listings to read HARLEY QUINN AND THE BIRDS OF PREY. Teenaged girls who would love to imagine themselves as Harley Quinn or in Harley Quinn's girl gang could not see this movie. It hid itself from the audience to whom it would have meant the most and even if they could find it, they wouldn't be allowed to see it.

With BIRDS OF PREY, Margot Robbie insisted on keeping a title and a rating that were ultimately irrelevant to her content, simply because she had a vision of Harley Quinn in an R-rated movie called BIRDS OF PREY. And it was pointless and self-destructive and I just do not understand this person at all and neither could the movie theatres which changed the name of the movie in their listings.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I too finally got around to watching Suicide Squad and Birds of Prey.  I thought both were pretty good.  They had a clear formula, well acted and with good effects.  Light years better than the Justice League trash and frankly I'd put Aquaman in there too.  My only complaint was they were too violent, but I actually expected them to be far more so.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

ireactions wrote:

But I like the BIRDS OF PREY movie exactly like it is except that it has the wrong name and it has a few expletives that, if cut, would have allowed teen girls to watch it in theatres.

I would also add that, if it were me, I'd have moved the movie out of Gotham.  Again, this is a movie within the underground of Gotham and featuring the Gotham PD where there are no A-list Batman villains nor any real mention of Batman himself.

If this was all happening anywhere else, then there's no narrative issue.  You can even have a plot where Sionis has moved out of Gotham because it got too weird and moved to a place that was more-easily conquered.  The one plot change you'd have to make is the whole "everyone in town wants to kill Harley" but you could either have that at the beginning of the movie before she moves or give any other reason why Harley is hated (my thought - Harley goes "home" after the breakup and the town hates her because their claim to fame is being home to Harley Quinn).