|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 29, 2017 1:26:39 GMT
After finally watching this movie, I was actually a little curious at how three of the characters (Boomerang, Kroc, and Slipknot) did absolutely nothing and could have been written out completely without missing them at all. And then we had Katana who didn't do anything but bring a sword, and the villain's plot was literally described as "phase 1, she doesn't like technology for some reason, so she's going to build a machine, phase 2  , phase 3 profit." The most shell of a character villain I've ever heard of, and the same goes for these other people who just show up, we learn nothing about them, and they do nothing.
But what really surprised me is that Harley doesn't do anything either. The entire Joker side story had zero effect on the plot and could have been dropped entirely. She doesn't need to be brought on a team who's goal is to deal with the next Superman. She has no character arc. She adds nothing to the plot other than hitting things. Anybody could have picked up the sword at the end. Seriously, she's completely pointless.
I was genuinely shocked at how there was virtually zero character development for anybody. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 3:37:36 GMT
Honestly, they should have just set the story to take place at the same time as the Justice League movie to justify the absence of the superheroes. So The Joker gets the villains together to pull off a mega-crime wave while the Bat out of town. Meanwhile, The Enchantress breaks loose from Waller's hold (who was about to try deploying her against Stephenwolf). She gets loose in Gotham and tries to it over, and the villains gang up to oppose her because "HEY! THIS IS OUR TURF!" There. Done. The Joker and all the low level villains now have a purpose, because now they're just there to steal stuff, not combat the next Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Aug 29, 2017 4:08:22 GMT
Honestly, they should have just set the story to take place at the same time as the Justice League movie to justify the absence of the superheroes. So The Joker gets the villains together to pull off a mega-crime wave while the Bat out of town. Meanwhile, The Enchantress breaks loose from Waller's hold (who was about to try deploying her against Stephenwolf). She gets loose in Gotham and tries to it over, and the villains gang up to oppose her because "HEY! THIS IS OUR TURF!" There. Done. The Joker and all the low level villains now have a purpose, because now they're just there to steal stuff, not combat the next Superman. That's actually a pretty good idea. The only thing I would change is that Enchantress should be scrapped altogether. I would have the Joker actually be working against the criminals and simply using them to take the city by force, then waste them. Enchantress was a useless and silly character. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 4:25:30 GMT
Honestly, they should have just set the story to take place at the same time as the Justice League movie to justify the absence of the superheroes. So The Joker gets the villains together to pull off a mega-crime wave while the Bat out of town. Meanwhile, The Enchantress breaks loose from Waller's hold (who was about to try deploying her against Stephenwolf). She gets loose in Gotham and tries to it over, and the villains gang up to oppose her because "HEY! THIS IS OUR TURF!" There. Done. The Joker and all the low level villains now have a purpose, because now they're just there to steal stuff, not combat the next Superman. That's actually a pretty good idea. The only thing I would change is that Enchantress should be scrapped altogether. I would have the Joker actually be working against the criminals and simply using them to take the city by force, then waste them. Enchantress was a useless and silly character. I'm conflicted here. I see your point, but at the same time, I still like the idea of the villains banding together to save Gotham against a greater threat to protect their turf. Hear me out, what if Enchantress, or a similar highly powered villain, was reworked into being a parody of the mega-serious Apocalypse or Nolan-style villain. I think that would work and be entertaining in its own right as long as long as the Batman Rogues she/he/they are put up against are akin to their comic book counterparts (competent but quirky and entertaining as all hell in their own right). |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 29, 2017 4:32:47 GMT
That's actually a pretty good idea. The only thing I would change is that Enchantress should be scrapped altogether. I would have the Joker actually be working against the criminals and simply using them to take the city by force, then waste them. Enchantress was a useless and silly character. I'm conflicted here. I see your point, but at the same time, I still like the idea of the villains banding together to save Gotham against a greater threat to protect their turf. Hear me out, what if Enchantress, or a similar highly powered villain, was reworked into being a parody of the mega-serious Apocalypse or Nolan-style villain. I think that would work and be entertaining in its own right as long as long as the Batman Rogues she/he/they are put up against are akin to their comic book counterparts (competent but quirky and entertaining as all hell in their own right). I'm fully of the opinion they should have taken the technology theme they tried to give to enchantress in only one sentence and explored that with some sort of global terrorism villain angle who exploits technology. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 4:35:52 GMT
I'm conflicted here. I see your point, but at the same time, I still like the idea of the villains banding together to save Gotham against a greater threat to protect their turf. Hear me out, what if Enchantress, or a similar highly powered villain, was reworked into being a parody of the mega-serious Apocalypse or Nolan-style villain. I think that would work and be entertaining in its own right as long as long as the Batman Rogues she/he/they are put up against are akin to their comic book counterparts (competent but quirky and entertaining as all hell in their own right). I'm fully of the opinion they should have taken the technology theme they tried to give to enchantress in only one sentence and explored that with some sort of global terrorism villain angle who exploits technology. So... Brainaic? |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 29, 2017 10:56:28 GMT
I'm fully of the opinion they should have taken the technology theme they tried to give to enchantress in only one sentence and explored that with some sort of global terrorism villain angle who exploits technology. So... Brainaic? I didn't want to say his name just to see if somebody would say it. Nice work sir. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 14:42:40 GMT
I didn't want to say his name just to see if somebody would say it. Nice work sir. Can he still be a parody of the mega-serious villain you see in the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy and X-Men films? |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 29, 2017 21:01:56 GMT
I didn't want to say his name just to see if somebody would say it. Nice work sir. Can he still be a parody of the mega-serious villain you see in the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy and X-Men films? That won't work if it's Brainiac. He'll come off as a parody of Ultron. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 29, 2017 21:09:29 GMT
After finally watching this movie, I was actually a little curious at how three of the characters (Boomerang, Kroc, and Slipknot) did absolutely nothing and could have been written out completely without missing them at all. And then we had Katana who didn't do anything but bring a sword, and the villain's plot was literally described as "phase 1, she doesn't like technology for some reason, so she's going to build a machine, phase 2 , phase 3 profit." The most shell of a character villain I've ever heard of, and the same goes for these other people who just show up, we learn nothing about them, and they do nothing.
But what really surprised me is that Harley doesn't do anything either. The entire Joker side story had zero effect on the plot and could have been dropped entirely. She doesn't need to be brought on a team who's goal is to deal with the next Superman. She has no character arc. She adds nothing to the plot other than hitting things. Anybody could have picked up the sword at the end. Seriously, she's completely pointless.
I was genuinely shocked at how there was virtually zero character development for anybody. You'd think that they'd be all over character development since they are all villains and you know how much WB and Fox love their villains. And Harley did bring something. She brought Harley Quinn. Fox and DC work off the popularity system. Who's the most popular character and what's their most popular story? Superman? Death of Superman. Batman? Dark Knight Returns. Harley Quinn? Mad Love. Flash? Crisis on Infinite Earths, but can't use that yet so Flashpoint. Wonder Woman? Her origin... Aquaman? ... The story when he cuts his own hand off? Can't do that yet either... Or can they... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 21:10:24 GMT
Can he still be a parody of the mega-serious villain you see in the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy and X-Men films? That won't work if it's Brainiac. He'll come off as a parody of Ultron. Okay, Lex Luthor, Sr. then. He takes over HIS company again now that his idiot son is in Arkham. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 29, 2017 22:24:28 GMT
After finally watching this movie, I was actually a little curious at how three of the characters (Boomerang, Kroc, and Slipknot) did absolutely nothing and could have been written out completely without missing them at all. And then we had Katana who didn't do anything but bring a sword, and the villain's plot was literally described as "phase 1, she doesn't like technology for some reason, so she's going to build a machine, phase 2 , phase 3 profit." The most shell of a character villain I've ever heard of, and the same goes for these other people who just show up, we learn nothing about them, and they do nothing.
But what really surprised me is that Harley doesn't do anything either. The entire Joker side story had zero effect on the plot and could have been dropped entirely. She doesn't need to be brought on a team who's goal is to deal with the next Superman. She has no character arc. She adds nothing to the plot other than hitting things. Anybody could have picked up the sword at the end. Seriously, she's completely pointless.
I was genuinely shocked at how there was virtually zero character development for anybody. You'd think that they'd be all over character development since they are all villains and you know how much WB and Fox love their villains. And Harley did bring something. She brought Harley Quinn. Fox and DC work off the popularity system. Who's the most popular character and what's their most popular story? Superman? Death of Superman. Batman? Dark Knight Returns. Harley Quinn? Mad Love. Flash? Crisis on Infinite Earths, but can't use that yet so Flashpoint. Wonder Woman? Her origin... Aquaman? ... The story when he cuts his own hand off? Can't do that yet either... Or can they... WB has done really bad with the DC villains so far though, ironically.
And Harley just being Harley, or any character not doing anything and just being there, isn't really enough. All the people in the world can show up to see it, but that's just hollow writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 30, 2017 4:22:54 GMT
Honestly, they should have just set the story to take place at the same time as the Justice League movie to justify the absence of the superheroes. So The Joker gets the villains together to pull off a mega-crime wave while the Bat out of town. Meanwhile, The Enchantress breaks loose from Waller's hold (who was about to try deploying her against Stephenwolf). She gets loose in Gotham and tries to it over, and the villains gang up to oppose her because "HEY! THIS IS OUR TURF!" There. Done. The Joker and all the low level villains now have a purpose, because now they're just there to steal stuff, not combat the next Superman. Not to defend this movie, but...that's not what the Suicide Squad is. Assault on Arkham (the animated film) and the better issues of the 80s run I read had Waller using the team for dirty jobs, which I think is the best idea. Their lack of conscience is the only reason you'd send them to do anything a regular costumer wouldn't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2017 4:35:53 GMT
Honestly, they should have just set the story to take place at the same time as the Justice League movie to justify the absence of the superheroes. So The Joker gets the villains together to pull off a mega-crime wave while the Bat out of town. Meanwhile, The Enchantress breaks loose from Waller's hold (who was about to try deploying her against Stephenwolf). She gets loose in Gotham and tries to it over, and the villains gang up to oppose her because "HEY! THIS IS OUR TURF!" There. Done. The Joker and all the low level villains now have a purpose, because now they're just there to steal stuff, not combat the next Superman. Not to defend this movie, but...that's not what the Suicide Squad is. Assault on Arkham (the animated film) and the better issues of the 80s run I read had Waller using the team for dirty jobs, which I think is the best idea. Their lack of conscience is the only reason you'd send them to do anything a regular costumer wouldn't. I know. That's obviously not what Warner Bros wanted, though. They were looking to cash in on that sweet money "Guardians of the Galaxy" pulled. What they really wanted were down and dirty, grungy snarky underdog good guys, and the Suicide Squad is the best their drug-addled brains could come up with. I'm just shooting to work within the perimeters they had Ayers in, but in a way that still allows Joker and everyone to not be good guys. |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 30, 2017 4:56:23 GMT
Not to defend this movie, but...that's not what the Suicide Squad is. Assault on Arkham (the animated film) and the better issues of the 80s run I read had Waller using the team for dirty jobs, which I think is the best idea. Their lack of conscience is the only reason you'd send them to do anything a regular costumer wouldn't. I know. That's obviously not what Warner Bros wanted, though. They were looking to cash in on that sweet money "Guardians of the Galaxy" pulled. What they really wanted were down and dirty, grungy snarky underdog good guys, and the Suicide Squad is the best their drug-addled brains could come up with. I'm just shooting to work within the perimeters they had Ayers in, but in a way that still allows Joker and everyone to not be good guys. Ah, I gotcha. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 30, 2017 15:24:39 GMT
You'd think that they'd be all over character development since they are all villains and you know how much WB and Fox love their villains. And Harley did bring something. She brought Harley Quinn. Fox and DC work off the popularity system. Who's the most popular character and what's their most popular story? Superman? Death of Superman. Batman? Dark Knight Returns. Harley Quinn? Mad Love. Flash? Crisis on Infinite Earths, but can't use that yet so Flashpoint. Wonder Woman? Her origin... Aquaman? ... The story when he cuts his own hand off? Can't do that yet either... Or can they... WB has done really bad with the DC villains so far though, ironically.
And Harley just being Harley, or any character not doing anything and just being there, isn't really enough. All the people in the world can show up to see it, but that's just hollow writing.
Maybe that's what they were counting on. Suicide Squad was them trying to make a Guardians of the Galaxy without knowing how. So they upped the popularity of some of the actors (Will Smith, Viola Davis, Cara Delevinge) and the characters (Harley and Joker with cameos by Batman and The Flash). You can see how DC was thinking they have to do something to make this movie sell-able. The X-men movies do the same thing. Wolverine, then Mystique, then Quicksilver. Quicksilver had one small scene and they brought him back and did nothing with him. Even his defining moment didn't happen because they wanted Magneto mostly alone. So it's either not have him tell Magneto or kill him off and they need his popularity. Think about how opposite the MCU is on how they do their characters and actors as opposed to Fox and DC. Yeah, Benedict Cumberbatch is a big name to get, but people have been asking for him to be Dr. Strange and he looks like him. It's not like stunt casting Will Smith for Deadshot instead of getting him for Black Manta or John Stewart. But back to DC. Suicide Squad would have worked, as an origin movie for the concept, if it was based before Man of Steel. Waller's pitch was about Superman deciding to become a villain someday. But what about the powered people before Superman showed himself? This movie should have been about the concept (because different members join the group) already being a thing. Do it Mission: Impossible style and that she picks who she wants to send on a mission. They can use so many DC villains that can't really sustain a big budget blockbuster, but they still want to use. They don't even have to be characters that were members in the comics. |
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Aug 30, 2017 15:34:14 GMT
Now come on, she did have one purpose in the movie: Sex appeal |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 30, 2017 16:19:57 GMT
Ooh. That gave me an idea for a DCEU movie and to get Will Smith into a different character. Hear me out. What if... the Deadshot we see in Suicide Squad is actually... Martian Manhunter? The flashback we see of him with his daughter and Batman appears is MM instead of Floyd. He has some kind of backlash going into Floyd's mind and starts to see himself as Deadshot (maybe memeories of Floyd's daughter. The hit scene we can say is and isn't Floyd. With all those cuts we can say that MM was there and the real Deadshot was running from him. MM caught him and had the psychic backlash. The rest of the escape is the real Deadshot with the mask on (white actor to have a difference in them). All the flashbacks are in MM's head cutting out MM and placing his human form into Deadshot's place. The daughter we see in the next scene is his actual Martian daughter (not actually there). That's why Batman is mostly trying to subdue him. Because he knows he's J'onn and heard the conversation he had with nothing (mentioning the daughter).
This could both explain why J'onn isn't in Justice League and bring him in in a sequel.
|
|
dnno1
Sophomore
@dnno1
Posts: 321
Likes: 151
 
|
Post by dnno1 on Aug 30, 2017 18:26:27 GMT
After finally watching this movie, I was actually a little curious at how three of the characters (Boomerang, Kroc, and Slipknot) did absolutely nothing and could have been written out completely without missing them at all. And then we had Katana who didn't do anything but bring a sword, and the villain's plot was literally described as "phase 1, she doesn't like technology for some reason, so she's going to build a machine, phase 2 , phase 3 profit." The most shell of a character villain I've ever heard of, and the same goes for these other people who just show up, we learn nothing about them, and they do nothing.
But what really surprised me is that Harley doesn't do anything either. The entire Joker side story had zero effect on the plot and could have been dropped entirely. She doesn't need to be brought on a team who's goal is to deal with the next Superman. She has no character arc. She adds nothing to the plot other than hitting things. Anybody could have picked up the sword at the end. Seriously, she's completely pointless.
I was genuinely shocked at how there was virtually zero character development for anybody. If you actually paid attention to the film, every one of the main characters had a critical part in the film. Slipnot, who a lot of folks think was the most useless character was placed in the story to show the others that the explosive implants were no joke. His sacrifice sent a stern message to the other members of the team. Not only was Boomerang the one who suggested that Slipnot escape, but he was also the one who provided a surveillance camera via his remote controlled boomerang. Croc helped the rest of the support troops get the bomb to the target by fighting off the Enchantress' minions in the underwater sewers. Of course if there was no Harley, we would not have Joker involved in the story. She also helped the audience understand the other characters by psychoanalyzing them with her playful taunts. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 30, 2017 19:14:22 GMT
If you actually paid attention to the film, every one of the main characters had a critical part in the film. Slipnot, who a lot of folks think was the most useless character was placed in the story to show the others that the explosive implants were no joke. His sacrifice sent a stern message to the other members of the team. Not only was Boomerang the one who suggested that Slipnot escape, but he was also the one who provided a surveillance camera via his remote controlled boomerang. Croc helped the rest of the support troops get the bomb to the target by fighting off the Enchantress' minions in the underwater sewers. Of course if there was no Harley, we would not have Joker involved in the story. She also helped the audience understand the other characters by psychoanalyzing them with her playful taunts. I did pay attention, and you could take out almost all of them without losing anything or even changing the script.
If you had thought about the movie at all you would have realized,,,,
They didn't need Slipknot to show the bombs were real. They could have exploded one by itself, or used any of the characters if they really felt like killing somebody. There's nothing about the Slipknot character that makes it more appropriate to make him the one for this. It's just randomly assigned to him.
They didn't need Boomerang to provide surveillance either, or to suggest Slipknot try to escape. These aren't things that effect the plot in any way, or even relevant to his character. Again, anybody else could have done this. Have Flagg fly in a drone, have deadshot use a sniper scope. Why is Boomerang there specifically?
Croc didn't help shit. They established they had a team of scuba divers, so the only reason for Croc is to then say those scuba people just could make it in time? I mean the explanation for why they didn't need croc is in the actual movie, so what is Croc doing? Throwing the bomb at the end? Once again, something anybody else could have done.
None of these things have anything to do with a character arc. They're just random things a character does. NO CHARACTER HAS AN ARC. Have you thought about that?
Fighting off the minions? You mean the random unexplained, hey we need some bad guys to show up out of nowhere for an action scene zombie people? Every time they showed up it was like a video game level where there's just bad guys you have to beat suddenly. How do they get made? Are there any left at the end or were they only in the buildings and streets the characters went in? Let's face it, the only reason they exist is so the characters don't get to the bad guy the moment they step off the helicopter. It's not like they provide any story advancement.
If Harley wasn't there, you're right, we would not have had the completely pointless Joker side story that didn't have anything to do with the rest of the movie. Have you realized that if you cut out everything to do with the Joker that nothing changes? That's how poorly thought out this movie is.
And she helps us understand the others, how? By the end of the movie I realize they are all criminals, which I knew at the beginning. How did Harley add anything to them?
|
|
, phase 3 profit." The most shell of a character villain I've ever heard of, and the same goes for these other people who just show up, we learn nothing about them, and they do nothing.
