Upcoming DC Extended Universe (DCEU) Movies

Nervous Wreck

I'd actually be happiest if they never mentioned Leto's Joker again...

Lithium93_

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I'd actually be happiest if they never mentioned Leto's Joker again...

Definitely 2nd this. Leto's take on The Joker was ****ING terrible.

IncognitoMan

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I'd actually be happiest if they never mentioned Leto's Joker again...

Well we can at least agree on that :pac:

Nervous Wreck

IncognitoMan wrote: »

Well we can at least agree on that :pac:

There's always some common ground!

Doctor DooM

Penn wrote: »

It all stems from Under The Red Hood. Jason Todd is furious at Batman for not caring about him enough to kill the Joker when he thought Joker had killed him, but Batman has to stand by the point that he can't cross that line because if he does, he won't be able to come back from it. Whereas now, that's exactly the situation we're in. Batman was willing to kill random henchmen but not the people who killed Robin, basically his adopted son.

I can remember this being a key frustration of a lot of comic fanboys at the time. It LOOKED like they were doing a thing where the death of Jason had turned Batman hard and that's why he was happy enough to kill (and that could be really cool if meeting Supes and Diana was the thing that snapped him back to his senses, redeeming him).

This isn't even implied in the film though, it's a logical jump that's being made entirely based on outside knowledge of the red hood stuff. All we know is that Joker probably killed a Robin in this world, which in itself is an intriguing mystery for future films.

Ben Gadot

@Penn but we don't know what exactly went down with Robin's murder. For all we know Batman did try to murder the Joker but was stopped. Think of their interaction in Hush where he would have killed him if not for Gordon's intervention.

Penn

Ben Gadot wrote: »

@Penn but we don't know what exactly went down with Robin's murder. For all we know Batman did try to murder the Joker but was stopped. Think of their interaction in Hush where he would have killed him if not for Gordon's intervention.

Again, if they do find some way of addressing it, then I'll be happy and I'll accept that. Even if it's done poorly, at least it will have been acknowledged and addressed.

But regardless of which Robin was killed, they're all basically his adopted sons, and given what's sprayed on Robin's suit its clear it was the Joker who did it. If Batman is willing to kill (considering he flattened probably 3 guys in a car, then used the car with their corpses in to flatten another car probably with another 2 or 3 guys in it) just to get kryptonite which is something all these henchmen are doing is collecting and transporting, I can't think of anything that could have stopped Batman from killing Joker or even spending every day working on hunting him down. BvS shows that Batman had retired and only came back once Superman came into the picture. Nothing should have been able to stop Batman from his quest to kill Joker.

Even in Hush, part of the reason Gordon is able to stop Batman from killing Joker is because that's a version of Batman who doesn't kill. The DCEU version of Batman isn't. This version of Batman would not have stopped hunting Joker down to kill him. We can see that in the lengths he's willing to go to to kill Superman not even because Superman is evil, but based on the 1% chance that he might become evil.

FunLover18

Ben Gadot wrote:

@Penn but we don't know what exactly went down with Robin's murder. For all we know Batman did try to murder the Joker but was stopped. Think of their interaction in Hush where he would have killed him if not for Gordon's intervention.

Is Batman's cameo in Suicide Squad not set after BvS?

Penn

IncognitoMan wrote: »

I'd love if they explained it by saying Batman did kill the Joker and it set him down the current path he was on in BvS. Leto's Joker can be explained by being a copycat that appeared after, or something along those lines. Not too worried about what they do with Leto's joker at this stage.

Suicide Squad showed that Harley Quinn was an accomplice to the murder of Robin, and Leto's Joker was the one who turned her into Harley Quinn, so the same issue arises. Leto's Joker has to be the one who killed Robin.

FunLover18 wrote: »

Is Batman's cameo in Suicide Squad not set after BvS?

It's not 100% clear, as while the events of SS take place after BvS, we don't know for sure when Batman captured Deadshot and HQ and how long they were in prison for, though given the age of Deadshot's daughter and the fact Batman was supposedly retired for a few years preceding BvS, I'm guessing it all happens after BvS.

Nervous Wreck

Penn wrote: »

Suicide Squad showed that Harley Quinn was an accomplice to the murder of Robin, and Leto's Joker was the one who turned her into Harley Quinn, so the same issue arises. Leto's Joker has to be the one who killed Robin.

Does it? I've repressed much of that movie... what happens?

Ben Gadot

In those flashy blurbs on each squad member at the beginning Harley's states she was an accomplice.

Nervous Wreck

Ben Gadot wrote: »

In those flashy blurbs on each squad member at the beginning Harley's states she was an accomplice.

Ah yes, the video game character selection screens! Does it call out "Robin" or specify Jason Todd, out of interest?

Penn

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Does it? I've repressed much of that movie... what happens?

In the introduction to each of the main characters, a screen showing some info about them is shown



Says HQ was an accomplice to the murder of Robin.

Slydice

Oh, I don't remember that. I demand a prequel!

Agent Coulson

It's being reported today that most of the reshoots are about adding more Wonder Woman to the JL.

techdiver

Agent Coulson wrote: »

It's being reported today that most of the reshoots are about adding more Wonder Woman to the JL.

On one front you wouldn't blame them for putting their new found biggest star front and centre but on the other it could be just the usual bull**** rumours that just assume since reshoots are happening now, that it must be automatically to do with the success of Wonder Woman.

pixelburp

I could well believe it: DC are super-reactionary in any case, so it's easy to imagine they decided to double down on the first demonstrably good film they managed to produce.

techdiver

From looking online, Cavill is there in his Superman suit for the reshoots too, as he posted on instagram, so he's obviously involved too.

I wouldn't see reshoots as a negative either. They obviously see issues with what they have and want to address it. Better than just releasing what had.

Agent Coulson

Also with Joss doing the reshoots it really wouldn't be a surprise at all that he is adding more girl power to the film.

Nervous Wreck

pixelburp wrote: »

I could well believe it: DC are super-reactionary in any case, so it's easy to imagine they decided to double down on the first demonstrably good film they managed to produce.

This. It makes sense that they do it anyway... let's just hope it makes sense *how* they do it.

Ben Gadot

pixelburp wrote: »

I could well believe it: DC are super-reactionary in any case, so it's easy to imagine they decided to double down on the first demonstrably good film they managed to produce.

Yeah, DC are calling the shots....lol.

pixelburp

Ben Gadot wrote: »

Yeah, DC are calling the shots....lol.

As opposed to what? God-Emperor Whedon pronouncing 'Moar Wimmin'? Wonder Woman is a huge critical (financial?) success, the first genuine reservoir of goodwill built up with a DCEU film, so why wouldn't they include Diana more in Justice League? That's obvious even to me, and I'm a spambot on an internet forum

Penn

I think the confusion is between DC and WB. WB are likely calling the shots rather so than DC.

Lithium93_

I for one wouldn't mind more Wonder Woman in the Justice League film.

IncognitoMan

It's hard to say really without knowing how the film plays out.

If it's true (and that's a big if) then I hope it isn't just shoehorning her in because her film was well received. If Joss came in and thought her story in the film could do with a few extra scenes then great. Should make the film better.

But once again this is all a big if as I'm not too sure on how reliable the sources are. If someone is willing to say they trust one of the sources then fair enough.

Doctor DooM

I don't think most people on the interwebs see a difference between DC and WB anymore, but from the scuttlebutt videos I watch it is indeed WB that makes all these decisions, and has lately been lurching around like a drunk balancing on a trunk rolling down a river.

I cannot see how Whedon led reshoots featuring WW can work out for the worse of this film though. My hopes were at an all time low prior anyway...

Ben Gadot

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I don't think most people on the interwebs see a difference between DC and WB anymore, but from the scuttlebutt videos I watch it is indeed WB that makes all these decisions, and has lately been lurching around like a drunk balancing on a trunk rolling down a river.

I cannot see how Whedon led reshoots featuring WW can work out for the worse of this film though. My hopes were at an all time low prior anyway...

DC are at best creative advisors.

WB are calling the shots, that has always been clear. The dark tone that was established with MOS was their idea when they asked Nolan and Goyer during the production of TDKR for story ideas for a rebooted Superman.

They then hired Snyder to deliver on it.

The great thing about the MCU is their almost holistic approach to bringing their characters to life. They obviously gave a sh1t and had the influence and more importantly the power to show that. DC don't have that luxury.....not that I feel sorry for them given that I'm sure they did very nicely out of selling the film rights to their entire library.

pixelburp

So here's one to take with a massive pinch of salt: apparently Warner Bros. are shopping around for directors to adapt Red Son:

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/superman/50345/superman-warner-bros-pitching-to-directors-for-live-action-red-son-movie

Now, the rumour is based around Tweets between Mark Millar & Jordan Vogt-Roberts (director of Kong: Skull Island), with Millar basically admitting that it's secondhand tattle from his contacts in studios, so who knows how true any of it is.

techdiver

pixelburp wrote: »

So here's one to take with a massive pinch of salt: apparently Warner Bros. are shopping around for directors to adapt Red Son:

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/superman/50345/superman-warner-bros-pitching-to-directors-for-live-action-red-son-movie

Now, the rumour is based around Tweets between Mark Millar & Jordan Vogt-Roberts (director of Kong: Skull Island), with Millar basically admitting that it's secondhand tattle from his contacts in studios, so who knows how true any of it is.

Ah here, can we just get a couple of proper Superman movies, before doing something like this?

It's a great story and all that, but others should come first. It would have to be in a different timeline and not part of the DCEU also.

Nervous Wreck

Jesus that better be for a standalone animated feature...