Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ralph, was it you who said you wouldn't watch the movie? Like I said, Waller isn't the goody-goody you think she is. But you haven't seen it, and I've already thrown out some spoilers. Do you intend to watch it eventually?
Ralph, was it you who said you wouldn't watch the movie? Like I said, Waller isn't the goody-goody you think she is. But you haven't seen it, and I've already thrown out some spoilers. Do you intend to watch it eventually?
I said, "It would make more sense to conclude that Waller put a group of criminals together in order to perform a criminal deed that justice vigilantes and soldiers would refuse...and then throw them under the bus."
What part of that sentence sounded like I thought Waller was a "goody-goody?"
And like I said in a previous post, she needed to address and cover up the mess she made. Not something you'd call in the Batman to take care of, especially if you're trying to sweep it all under the rug.
But as far as where was Superman, well you must have missed what was said near the beginning where Amanda Waller explained how Superman, who shares our values, his death left a vacancy for having a super ally available to fight against any super threat that would come against Earth. But apparently, Batman, the Flash, and Wonder Woman weren't considered to be powerful enough to be able to fight off the type of threats that Waller had in mind. Although you're probably asking... and the squad was? lol But I guess with the fire guy, apparently Waller thought that the squad was powerful enough. However, now that the fire guy is dead, does that mean that there won't be a Suicide Squad 2?
But as far as Jared Leto's Joker was concerned, I didn't think that he was lifeless, however, he seemed to lack that "fun" element that Heath Ledger's Joker had. And that even Jack Nicholson's Joker had. Both of their Jokers had funny, silly, and even goofy elements that could make you laugh or smile(because after all, they are Jokers), even though they were psychotic and dangerous. However, Jared Leto's Joker was just outright mean, psychotic, and intimidating. And I think that the silver teeth added to that.
oh yes, I missed that explanation. But right, apparently, with the world ending, Batman, Flash, and Wonder Woman are just after thoughts. Let's get the disturbed girl with the baseball bat instead.
Definitely, compared to Heath Ledger and Jack Nicholson, this Joker lacked the oomph. But I think it would have been better to add the Joker to the Suicide Squad. There's loads of humorous, sadistic potential there. Him and Quinn just goofing off during serious and dangerous moments, but also remaining invaluable assets when the time comes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
If the Batman and the Flash each working alone defeated each member the suicide squad, then the Batman and the Flash together can defeat any world threat the Suicide Squad could defeat.
But wait--there were a bunch of elite forces riding herd on the Suicide Squad. So if they could be expected to ride herd on the Suicide Squad, then they're a considerable backup force to the Batman and the Flash.
There is no logical reason for using a group of criminals to save the world when you have the people available who you already know can defeat and contain the criminals. That just doesn't pass any kind of logical muster.
Thank you. I guess Batman and Flash are available to apprehend street villains, but inexplicably absent when the world is ending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
And like I said in a previous post, she needed to address and cover up the mess she made. Not something you'd call in the Batman to take care of, especially if you're trying to sweep it all under the rug.
Clear enough?
That makes sense. But still, the world is ending. Surely, Batman would be aware of such an event. Flash could have neutralized the threat easily. But apparently, stopping a diamond heist is the ceiling of his jurisdiction.
However, Waller demonstrably "had the goods" on both the Batman and the Flash (and Aquaman, too, for that matter). There is no indication that she tried to get them, failed, and thus had to depend on a group of criminals to save the world.
Had the goods in what way? No, Waller didn't have the goods on Batman, the Flash, or Aquaman. Plus, at the end of the movie, Batman(Bruce Wayne) made a deal with Waller to protect her in exchange for her metahumans file, and for Bruce Wayne to be the potential protector of Amanda Waller, pretty much demonstrated that Waller didn't have the goods on Batman. Plus, before Wayne exited that meeting, she hinted to Wayne that she knew that he was Batman, and which didn't sound like something that she "had" on him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
It would make more sense to conclude that Waller put a group of criminals together in order to perform a criminal deed that justice vigilantes and soldiers would refuse...and then throw them under the bus.
No... Waller put a group of criminals together who would be available at her beckon call. Something that she couldn't do with the existing superheroes.
Had the goods in what way? No, Waller didn't have the goods on Batman, the Flash, or Aquaman. Plus, at the end of the movie, Batman(Bruce Wayne) made a deal with Waller to protect her in exchange for her metahumans file, and for Bruce Wayne to be the potential protector of Amanda Waller, pretty much demonstrated that Waller didn't have the goods on Batman. Plus, before Wayne exited that meeting, she hinted to Wayne that she knew that he was Batman, and which didn't sound like something that she "had" on him.
You said "made a deal." That means they needed Waller to do something for them--or not do something to them--or there would have been no basis for a deal.
Quote:
No... Waller put a group of criminals together who would be available at her beckon call. Something that she couldn't do with the existing superheroes.
Had the goods in what way? No, Waller didn't have the goods on Batman, the Flash, or Aquaman. Plus, at the end of the movie, Batman(Bruce Wayne) made a deal with Waller to protect her in exchange for her metahumans file, and for Bruce Wayne to be the potential protector of Amanda Waller, pretty much demonstrated that Waller didn't have the goods on Batman. Plus, before Wayne exited that meeting, she hinted to Wayne that she knew that he was Batman, and which didn't sound like something that she "had" on him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
You said "made a deal." That means they needed Waller to do something for them--or not do something to them--or there would have been no basis for a deal.
No, you are assuming by saying "or not to do something to them" because making a deal doesn't automatically include someone not doing something to someone else.
Plus, I already said it was for Waller to do something for them or him(Bruce Wayne), which was to give him the metahuman files.
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Taylor
No... Waller put a group of criminals together who would be available at her beckon call. Something that she couldn't do with the existing superheroes.
I said, "It would make more sense to conclude that Waller put a group of criminals together in order to perform a criminal deed that justice vigilantes and soldiers would refuse...and then throw them under the bus."
I think that socially the world has changed in the post Korean War going into Vietnam War era that force protection is stressed over take the hill at all cost and force protection now has the highest emphasis. So even if SEAL Team 6 would be the best for a mission to save the world because of the casualties the SEALs would be expected to incur we create an unit of untouchables. The Dirty Dozen in WWII, coming out at the height of Vietnam or a Suicide Squad complete with a baseball bat wielding cannon fodder "soldier" whenever DC Comics introduced them for those missions the best of the best would step forward to volunteer for but now we are not ready to accept an expected high casualty rate.
The key being that the nation would mourn the few good men and demand quitting of the war/mission should they fall in battle and add their names to the memorial walls. But the prejudice guiding the writing of a Dirty Dozen or Suicide Squad is that we don't really care about convicts, and that almost half of the audience would have wanted them executed in real life anyway. The morally bent mission that the good soldiers would refuse changes the movie from being about the ultimate good being done by villains being heroes into just a caper movie. The caper is done for a bad shadow government operative, instead of just personal gain and we follow the bad guys and because we liked them we want to see them survive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But I guess with the fire guy, apparently Waller thought that the squad was powerful enough. However, now that the fire guy is dead, does that mean that there won't be a Suicide Squad 2?
