All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 4

[Kane52630]

Oh, please. It's simple deduction. Oh, look, there's a Robin costume. Appears to be fit for a male, so that excludes Stephanie Brown. Oh wait, what's that text on his costume... he was killed by The Joker! Which Robin was famously killed by The Joker... Jason Todd! Case closed.

Stop it Greens, you're making too much sense.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Don't worry guys! It was all part of the plan! In the #SnyderCut of Justice League, the Joker shows up and it's revealed that he's actually Dick Grayson, genetically modified so that he can alter his physical appearance and can survive having his head chopped off, just like in Frank Miller's masterpiece, The Dark Knight Strikes Again (Zack Snyder's #1 comic book influence). In the end, Batman drops him into a volcano and nearly dies himself, only to be saved at the last second by Superman.

#VisionaryDirector

#ReleaseTheUnwatchableCut

 

[misslane38]

I will never admit to him thinking of my favorite character as a prop for his Batman's already hollow to begin with path out of darkness.

Never never never. Its stupid and I'm glad a lot of his ideas will never see the light of day. He should never be allowed to play with fictional characters who already exist, especially ones who are so universally beloved. Let him come up with his own characters to put in stupid scenarios.

My favorite character is Lois Lane. You don't see me having a juvenile temper tantrum about the Knightmare. You're getting upset about something that was never onscreen and would never affect the future of the DCEU. He didn't play with Nightwing and didn't put him into a stupid scenario. He toyed with an idea in his own mind because it made sense of Bruce's pain and cynicism. It was never something that was going to made explicit.

Dick leaving him and Jason dying is just as effective as whatever dumb idea he had floating around in his head. He was just trying to be different for the sake of being different.

My mind isn't changing and I know for sure yours isn't as well, so I'll end this now. I'm just glad he'll never get to further sully the reputation of these characters for future generations.

He didn't sully anything because he didn't make any of the things you are whining about canon.

Oh, please. It's simple deduction. Oh, look, there's a Robin costume. Appears to be fit for a male, so that excludes Stephanie Brown. Oh wait, what's that text on his costume... he was killed by The Joker! Which Robin was famously killed by The Joker... Jason Todd! Case closed.

It is not simple deduction. When other filmmakers playing around with mythologies massage the canon to suit his or her needs, then there is nothing that is absolutely certain. It seems so odd to me that the Joker text definitely proves it must be Jason Todd, but even if "Jimmy" announces himself as a CIA agent codenamed "Talon," then he's still 100 percent the real Jimmy Olsen.

Needless to say, thank Almighty God that Dick wasn't explicitly name-dropped in the film. So yes, in the grand scheme of things this isn't all that important.

It isn't.

Don't worry guys! It was all part of the plan! In the #SnyderCut of Justice League, the Joker shows up and it's revealed that he's actually Dick Grayson, genetically modified so that he can alter his physical appearance and can survive having his head chopped off, just like in Frank Miller's masterpiece, The Dark Knight Strikes Again (Zack Snyder's #1 comic book influence). In the end, Batman drops him into a volcano and nearly dies himself, only to be saved at the last second by Superman.

#VisionaryDirector

#ReleaseTheUnwatchableCut

There's no need to worry because there's nothing in the film that provides any definitive direction or plan. It is an ambiguous reference that is neither commented upon nor addressed.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I don’t recall throwing a temper tantrum there, but whatever you say

 

[misslane38]

I don’t recall throwing a temper tantrum there, but whatever you say

There was a lot "never" as well as "stupid" and "dumb" thrown around for something that isn't even real.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Fine, so you can take solice in being right, as you always insist you are

I’ll take solice in knowing that he’ll never touch a meaningful DC film property ever again.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Fine, so you can take solice in being right, as you always insist you are

I’ll take solice in knowing that he’ll never touch a meaningful DC film property ever again.

If only that had been the case after the mixed response to Man of Steel. Then the DCEU probably wouldn't be the mess it is right now.

 

[Boom]

Fine, so you can take solice in being right, as you always insist you are

I’ll take solice in knowing that he’ll never touch a meaningful DC film property ever again.

Two films too late.

 

[Superchan]

I will never admit to him thinking of my favorite character as a prop for his Batman's already hollow to begin with path out of darkness.

Never never never. Its stupid and I'm glad a lot of his ideas will never see the light of day. He should never be allowed to play with fictional characters who already exist, especially ones who are so universally beloved. Let him come up with his own characters to put in stupid scenarios.

Dick Grayson is my 2nd favorite comicbook character and thank god Snyder didn't get to ruin him (or erase him completely) like he did my favorite character.
Honestly if Snyder wanted to destroy a character he should've killed off lois lane, a useless character that most people don't give a **** about. If there was one good thing Whedon did in JL it was minimizing her role to a few scenes.

Two films too late.

Sadly yes.

 

[The Guard]

Actually, there's no verification that it was Robin in that scene, because Robin wasn't established as a character in the DCEU.

It's a red costume with an "R" on it...inasmuch as an audience has a knowledge of red costumes with R's on them, I suspect they can make the Robin connection if they're paying attention. Plenty of bloggers and critics and casual audience members did. I suppose it could have been a character named something else...again, there are several possible ways to interpret the sequence, that doesn't make it bad.

That scene was just stupid because it assumed audience knowledge based on other Batman series/universes. Pretending I've never seen a Batman story before the DCEU, this is how that scene read to me pre-Suicide Squad:

What about the scene assumes the audience has knowledge of the mythology? Even someone with no knowledge of the mythology can understand Bruce has stopped at another superhero costume with a mocking message written on it. There's more for fans to think on, but the sequence itself doesn't really assume you know anything.

[/I]I mean, really, what about that scene was supposed to say, "Batman had a sidekick who was murdered by a psychotic clown, and that was part of why he was so messed up"?

I don't know that anyone has reasonably said the scene was supposed to say that. Again, it was left ambiguous for a reason. The existence of the suit doesn't necessarily have to mean that Robin was killed.

 

[The Guard]

Oh, please. It's simple deduction. Oh, look, there's a Robin costume. Appears to be fit for a male, so that excludes Stephanie Brown. Oh wait, what's that text on his costume... he was killed by The Joker! Which Robin was famously killed by The Joker... Jason Todd! Case closed.

So your assessment is that no fictional story could ever have a version of the events where someone other than Jason Todd is harmed or killed by The Joker or another villain?

Just because it's that way in the comics?

Again, the average audience member probably doesn't know the story of Jason Todd, and perhaps doesn't even know that a Robin was killed by The Joker.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Fine, so you can take solice in being right, as you always insist you are

I’ll take solice in knowing that he’ll never touch a meaningful DC film property ever again.

With you dawg

I honestly love BvS but Snyder had horrible ideas if the intent was to build a universe off of that movie

If the universe was intended to last just like 4 or 5 movies, his movies would be better received I think

Killing Dick would’ve been such a huge **** up. Pretty much unforgiveable, seeing as Dick is my favorite character. Glad that this was just Snyder’s head canon. I have a feeling that future Batman movies will ignore Affleck’s version

 

[Fincher]

I don't know that anyone has reasonably said the scene was supposed to say that. Again, it was left ambiguous for a reason. The existence of the suit doesn't necessarily have to mean that Robin was killed.

The problem is that without any particular meaning attached to it, it's random and out-of-place. That point in the movie was supposed to be dramatic, him leaving to carry out his plan, and then he stops in the middle to look at some suit for some reason, and then it continues like nothing happened.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Killing off Dick Grayson seems antithetical to creating a shared DC universe on film or doing future solo Batman movies where Batman is an older more experienced crime fighter.

Its much more interesting that Bruce and Dick have a falling out (or Dick just outgrows the Robin role) and Bruce tries to fill that void with Jason (and gets Jason killed in the process). It makes Batman a more interesting and complex character when Dick is alive to interact with him and play off of him and challenge him on his viewpoint (and take the piss out of him occasionally).

But we're talking about Zack Snyder here. He clearly doesn't see value in sidekick characters. Look at how he treated Jimmy Olsen.

The supporting characters in superhero stories help keep things grounded and give the audience people they can see themselves as in the story. That is why characters like Jimmy Olsen and Dick Grayson are vital and necessary. They humanize the larger than life godlike heroes.

 

[Flint Marko]

Everything done in BvS seems antithetical to creating a shared universe.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Everything done in BvS seems antithetical to creating a shared universe.

I agree. It was a horrible way to start a shared universe, and I disagree with a lot of the choices that were made. I still think it’s an ambitious and thoughtful film that just comes across as stupid because of the execution.

The Ultimate Edition is honestly one of my favorite comic book movies

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Everything done in BvS seems antithetical to creating a shared universe.

I thought including Wonder Woman was a step in the right direction.

The Ultimate Edition is honestly one of my favorite comic book movies

It's still worse than the theatrical version.

 

[The Joker]

Again, the average audience member probably doesn't know the story of Jason Todd, and perhaps doesn't even know that a Robin was killed by The Joker.

But millions of comic book fans who make up the audience numbers do know that.

 

[RomanticPenguin]

really? I liked the pacing/room to breathe more

and some more things were explained

a little more clark kent in UE

 

[Spider-Aziz]

really? I liked the pacing/room to breathe more

and some more things were explained

a little more clark kent in UE

All the extra footage is basically useless stuff that serve no real purpose, even the Clark Kent stuff is pretty much useless.

 

[2kt09]

All the extra footage is basically useless stuff that serve no real purpose, even the Clark Kent stuff is pretty much useless.

Go full detail. I still haven't come across a decent breakdown beyond folks blowing things out of proportion or misinterpreting what's on screen.

• The contextualization of the drone set-up
• The apparent existence of the Lois subplot.
• The Clark story where he does investigate that woman who spoke against Superman, but ends up coming back from Gotham with a different story
• Lex's right hand man making sure a prisoner kills the branded criminal from earlier
• Kahina tells Finch she lied
• Lex's right hand man making sure Kahina dies on her way back
• Superman still being Superman directly after the bombing as the paramedics state they can take the rest from here
• Lois finding out the bomb was covered in lead and that Lex was behind it all

 

[TheVileOne]

And yet Lois still never informs Superman of any of this. The man she loves and wants to marry...

"Clark, it was a setup the whole time. Luthor framed you for Africa and you couldn't see the bomb because it was hidden from your powers! He's the one behind all of this! He's manipulating the public against you and toying with your emotions!"

 

[Superchan]

All the extra footage is basically useless stuff that serve no real purpose, even the Clark Kent stuff is pretty much useless.

Actually Clark meeting the heartbroken family of the bat-branded guy who got killed in prison (unbeknownst to Clark it was a plot by lex and not because of batman's branding) was very significant. It showed Clark first hand the consequences of psycho batman's actions and allowed him to empathize with the young kid who lost his dad too early (like CK did with pa kent in that asinine tornado scene). All that served to explain why Superman was so pissed when he gave batman "the bat is dead" speech as opposed to the TC where it made it seem like Superman was pissed because....well because he's an emo superman.
Overall the UC is an improvement over the abomination that was the TC (focused more on Superman and gave a better flow to the story) but not by that much or atleast not enough to make the movie an enjoyable experience, to me atleast.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Go full detail. I still haven't come across a decent breakdown beyond folks blowing things out of proportion or misinterpreting what's on screen.

• The contextualization of the drone set-up
• The apparent existence of the Lois subplot.
• The Clark story where he does investigate that woman who spoke against Superman, but ends up coming back from Gotham with a different story
• Lex's right hand man making sure a prisoner kills the branded criminal from earlier
• Kahina tells Finch she lied
• Lex's right hand man making sure Kahina dies on her way back
• Superman still being Superman directly after the bombing as the paramedics state they can take the rest from here
• Lois finding out the bomb was covered in lead and that Lex was behind it all

All of these details feel very minuscule and unimportant extension plugged together.

• I forgot what that is, it's just that forgettable and uninteresting in a mostly incoherent poopy movie. So I guess that's an improvement.
• Which still feels worthless waste of time. "It's Lex" "I know you know, that's why I kidnap you to throw you off a roof for him to come and save you to be killed by someone else. I know everything about him, but I did not account that he has x-ray vision, and neither did he".
• Which also goes nowhere. She dies, senate explodes with nothing of value to come before that, and all we have is Superman still hating Batman.
• We saw Clark see that in the news in the theatrical release, whooppe-dee-doo-daah, so important to show the details we were already sufficiently briefed on.
• Which also goes nowhere
• Another things that is just a waste of budget, because nothing comes out of it.
• I'll give that this was actually something of value, it's a nice bit that needed to stay in the theatrical release.
• Superman enters with no time to check, all we see is the peach tea and boom.

Actually Clark meeting the heartbroken family of the bat-branded guy who got killed in prison (unbeknownst to Clark it was a plot by lex and not because of batman's branding) was very significant. It showed Clark first hand the consequences of psycho batman's actions and allowed him to empathize with the young kid who lost his dad too early (like CK did with pa kent in that asinine tornado scene). All that served to explain why Superman was so pissed when he gave batman "the bat is dead" speech as opposed to the TC where it made it seem like Superman was pissed because....well because he's an emo superman.
Overall the UC is an improvement over the abomination that was the TC (focused more on Superman and gave a better flow to the story) but not by that much or at least not enough to make the movie an enjoyable experience, to me at least.

Instead of being a clever investigative reporter who is willing to see beyond what his heart tells him and smell something fishy in the subject of "Why would he brand them to be killed in prison when he can kill them on sight?", when he was willing to investigate the matter of a guy who brands people who are killed in prison.

It's just a time waster that serves nothing except "We show Clark the same thing he saw about on TV and came to Gotham to investigate, just in different manners".

 

[Abudefduf]

So apparently the dead Robin alluded to in Batman v. Superman was not Jason, but Dick.

Yikes. Snyder, king of bad ideas. Why was this man put in charge of the DCEU again?