CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › DC Cinematic Universe Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DC Cinematic Universe Discussion - Page 67

post #3301 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmurdoch View Post

I don't have a link, but apparently Gavin O'Connor has been tapped for Suicide Squad 2.

 

Huh. I adore WARRIOR but found THE ACCOUNTANT hilariously uneven and odd. Not familiar with his other work.

post #3302 of 3338

I guess we can rule him out for directing the last Star Wars movie then.

post #3303 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

Huh. I adore WARRIOR but found THE ACCOUNTANT hilariously uneven and odd. Not familiar with his other work.

I was just about to post my newfound love for The Accountant in its release thread. Warrior was phenomenal and should have won Nolte an Oscar.
post #3304 of 3338

MIRACLE you plebes

post #3305 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post
 
I was just about to post my newfound love for The Accountant in its release thread. Warrior was phenomenal and should have won Nolte an Oscar.

 

Look at my post there! I sorta loved it though I can't defend it. I was cackling with glee when I watched it.

post #3306 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

MIRACLE you plebes

 

Crikey, man. He's got a nice enough resume and it certainly came out of nowhere but I don't know if I'd call it that

post #3307 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post
 

 

Crikey, man. He's got a nice enough resume and it certainly came out of nowhere but I don't know if I'd call it that

 

Not sure if joking. Probably joking. 

 

Miracle is a great sports flick, probably one of the best this century. 

post #3308 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

 

Not sure if joking.

 

post #3309 of 3338

He's not far removed from Ayer really, having made some slightly above average tough-guy movies.

post #3310 of 3338

I'd put him above Ayer in that he doesn't seem to be a gritty nihilist and he seems to have a grasp of basic story structure.

post #3311 of 3338

They've both had their moments. Ayer wrote Training Day which is still fucking great.

post #3312 of 3338

I've seen Training Day once. My hatred of Ethan Hawke's pathetic facial hair is so strong I haven't been able to make myself watch it again.

post #3313 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

I'd put him above Ayer in that he doesn't seem to be a gritty nihilist and he seems to have a grasp of basic story structure.

 

 

You're judging Ayer's grasp of story structure based on Suicide Squad? Considering what happened to him and that film, that's really, really unfair.

post #3314 of 3338

you ever see FURY, michael?

 

I actually thought that was pretty solid.

post #3315 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post
 

 

 

You're judging Ayer's grasp of story structure based on Suicide Squad? Considering what happened to him and that film, that's really, really unfair.


Yeah the structure thing is definitely a case of the movie being edited to shit but to be fair I don't know that his version would've been much better. At no point did I think there was a better movie in there, only a slightly more coherent one. He was just the wrong guy to be making Suicide Squad.

post #3316 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

 

You're judging Ayer's grasp of story structure based on Suicide Squad? Considering what happened to him and that film, that's really, really unfair.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

you ever see FURY, michael?

 

I actually thought that was pretty solid.

 

I've seen FURY and TRAINING DAY. My memories of the latter aren't much; my taste in films was waaay different then (if you think my tastes are safe and middle of the road now, you'd vomit at what I considered a good movie back then) but it didn't leave much of a lasting impression beyond Denzel's performance.

 

FURY was.....ehhhhh. Didn't hate it. Didn't love it. Bleak AF, though, and not particularly enjoyable, in the broadest sense, to sit through.

 

SUICIDE SQUAD is garbage. I've soured significantly on it since first viewing.

post #3317 of 3338
No matter what, Suicide Squad is a solid premise that could make a great movie. The nature of the concept means a sequel could have an almost entirely new cast aside from the obvious standouts, namely Waller, Quinn and Deadshot. And since WB can't decide on much, sequels are the safest bet in the immediate future.

So sure, Accountant guy will do.
post #3318 of 3338

Suicide Squad is a really solid concept, but yes, I think even allowing  that the WB sidelined Ayer for the company that cut the trailer, there are some bad ideas in the film - which Ayer cops to.

 

Chief among them is making Enchantress the villain. Maybe there's a version of the film where she makes sense, but as is, literally everything about and around that character (such as the entire "plot" of the film) is harmed by how haphazardly she is introduced and then almost immediately becomes the villain w/ a backstory that comes out of nowhere and a motivation that is non-existent.

 

I was thinking of screenwriter W. D. Richter and Buckaroo Banzai and Big Trouble in Little China and how he and someone like John Carpenter could have made something like Suicide Squad work back in their day. I haven't seen either of the GOTG films, so perhaps James Gunn is one of the few guys working today who could have successfully balanced all of the gonzo characters, but I guess we'll never know. I like some of what Ayer was cooking and I think there is a story in there about broken people coerced into acting against their own interests by the very same people who ensure that the world will remain a revolving shit-show, but it never coalesced into something that didn't simultaneously work against itself. 

post #3319 of 3338
The Enchantress as villain angle is pretty weak sauce, and I say that as someone who found the film amusing on first viewing (there likely won't be a second.)

Funny thing is it's exactly the kind of overthinking, overreaching choice a writer would make when they're about to do a bad run on an established comic title.

What I'm trying to say is that at least the movie's faults are true to source material.
post #3320 of 3338

This seems to be a clarification of all that confusion Matt Reeves caused with his comments about The Batman. WB's goal going forward is to have a shared universe, but not rely on each movie setting up or acknowledging the others: 

 

http://www.cbr.com/dceu-continuity-approach/

post #3321 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

This seems to be a clarification of all that confusion Matt Reeves caused with his comments about The Batman. WB's goal going forward is to have a shared universe, but not rely on each movie setting up or acknowledging the others: 

 

http://www.cbr.com/dceu-continuity-approach/

Whatever.

post #3322 of 3338

Let us fuck?

post #3323 of 3338
I mean, what is there really left to say about this whole escapade?

The timing of this announcement is definitely suspect considering that Justice League is out in a month and a half.

It doesn't bode well for the quality of it for them to say "all of the movies from now on aren't connected."
post #3324 of 3338

But that's not what they said, friendo. It's more like the movies from now on will treat each other like the Marvel movies treat Agents of SHIELD and Netflix, and how the latter two treat each other. 

 

But yeah, it doesn't really matter. What matters is quality. Wonder Woman was good, and part of the reason why is besides a letter from Bruce Wayne they allowed the movie to be its own thing. I suspect Aquaman will do something similar. 

post #3325 of 3338
It's sounds like an admission of defeat to me but I'm a cynic, so.
post #3326 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by catartik View Post

It's sounds like an admission of defeat to me but I'm a cynic, so.

Yeah whoever is running this shit universe over at DC really should have to lay some kind of belt at Stan Lee and kevin feige's feet and then apologize.


Edited by Waaaaaaaalt - 10/4/17 at 10:17pm
post #3327 of 3338

The optimistic (and undeserved) reading of this is that WB has decided to put story and character over the ongoing shared universe arc. The realistic and deserved reading is "We don't know what the fuck we're doing, so we'll make it all 'connected' only in the sense that there will be mentions or team-ups if/when we want, but otherwise these will be standalone movies."

 

Their fumbling of these properties continues to amaze and confound.

post #3328 of 3338

I think it sounds fine!  it's basically what Deborah Snyder tried to say about Man of Steel back before that came out (except that was said proudly back then, heheheheh)

 

let the movies stand alone beyond referring to each other here and there!

 

more chance of Jenkins just making the Wonder Woman sequel she wants instead of having to make it 'work' with the other movies

post #3329 of 3338

I'm always amazed DC doesn't just make Marvel movies too. If only someone else was making a shared superhero universe, but I guess I just have to keep waiting.

post #3330 of 3338
Warner are damned if they do and damned if they don't, aren't they? Man of Steel was an awfully tone-deaf foundation to build a shared universe on, but at least they eventually arrived at Wonder Woman, four movies into the project. Universal, in contrast, started their shared universe concept over from scratch after The Wolfman bombed, and then again after Dracula Untold bombed, and I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop on whether 2019's Bride of Frankenstein picture acknowledges this year's Mummy picture at all. Maybe there's something to be said for keeping the momentum until you get it right.
post #3331 of 3338
The Wolfman was supposed to be a part of this Tom Snooze fest? The one that's already out?
post #3332 of 3338
Universal didn't start throwing the shared universe idea around publicly until Dracula Untold, so I may be reaching.
post #3333 of 3338
I guess it all started with VAN HELSING, which was supposed to spinoff solo monsters, turn HELSING itself into a franchise, along with a TV series.

Then they tried a hard-R reboot with Wolfman, and when it underperformed they took a more action heavy route with UNTOLD. Then whatever the fuck MUMMY was.
post #3334 of 3338
If there was a plan to connect any of those films together, they failed miserably to convey that to Joe Public.
post #3335 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynis View Post

I guess it all started with VAN HELSING, which was supposed to spinoff solo monsters, turn HELSING itself into a franchise, along with a TV series.

Then they tried a hard-R reboot with Wolfman, and when it underperformed they took a more action heavy route with UNTOLD. Then whatever the fuck MUMMY was.

I don't know if Wolfman was supposed to be part of anything. I know Untold was supposed to be the launching point but then that didn't work out. 

post #3336 of 3338
They absolutely talked about it. About as much as UNTOLD.
post #3337 of 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynis View Post

They absolutely talked about it. About as much as UNTOLD.

Really? I know they set up Werewolf Cop basically at the end....that I would see the fuck out of....but I didn't know they were planning anything else. So would their reboot of Dracula also be rated R if Wolf Man had made money?

post #3338 of 3338
From what I heard they were ready to pull the trigger on del Toro's FRANKENSTEIN if WOLFMAN made bank. When it didn't they just kinda told him they'd hit him up later and he moved on. Not sure about the rating.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › DC Cinematic Universe Discussion