DC Extended Universe

Her actual point is sound, but bringing up Wonder Woman in that specific context doesn't work.

I think fundamentally she is saying that women are pretty much always sexualized in some form, if not in appearance than at least have a romantic connection. This is part of the reason behind the ho-hum response to Black Widow and Banner in Avengers 2, because all prior Ship Tease with her and Tony, Clint and Steve she remained aloof enough that it was never serious. But suddenly making her genuinely interested in Banner it continues the trend that even a cold, badass action girl like her HAS to be paired up with someone. Celibate Hero is predominantly male.

In contrast, the better gender ratio for Suicide Squad means they can have some women be there, be badass, not have Stripperiffic / Spy Catsuit / Cleavage Window outfits and not be romantically paired up with anyone. In the case of Harley, she's been sexualized long before this. Her classic jester costume may cover her up but it doesn't leave much to the imagination. Other Harley costumes generally involves short skirts and cleavage, it's the Girlish Pigtails that's her signature look.

edited 30th Jun '15 11:16:46 PM by KJMackley

Agreed.

edited 30th Jun '15 11:53:44 PM by VeryMelon

I actually have heard complaints about Harley's shorts. Not as much compared to her outfits in the comics but they do exist. The Enchantress' outfit is also pretty stripierific making Delevigne's comments even stranger about how the women of the Suicide Squad are the best. One's a woman who slept her way through college, another is basically Dark Phoenix with magic powers and Katana isn't even a villain in the comics.

Harley only slept with one person to get to where she is IIRC(and it was to get to Arkham early instead of having to wait or work somewhere else for a year or two so it was after college was done).

Well, that's the one time it was directly stated. That same comic implies it's been happening for a while.

On the other hand, that same comics makes it very clear she was intelligent and skilled enough to do her job, she just wasn't ready/mature enough. Likewise, she obsessively went to Arkham at a time where she was already one bad day away from a nervous breakdown.

and Katana isn't even a villain in the comics.

The comics Squadron often had a few heroes along the villains to better keep the bad guys in check, so Katana's presence here doesn't mean she'll be a villainess.

Are we going to change the title of the trope page because Entertainment Weekly had an article that called it the DCEU with a trademark.

It was the Comic Con story so maybe the official name that will be announced at SDCC next week is that it is now called the DCEU.

edited 2nd Jul '15 10:31:19 AM by Halberdier17

Link?

edited 2nd Jul '15 10:35:51 AM by VeryMelon

So what villain would you guys like for the Wonder Woman movie(s)? I'd like to see her fight Ares in the first movie, Veronica Cale in the second and Circe in a third who was the woman behind the curtain in the first two.

Ares would be cool to see in the movie.

Never-mind I found it. DC Extended Universe™ huh? I think we should change it.

They might have changed it. I didn't see it on EW I saw it in the comments section of an article about the images from Batman v Superman.

They probably removed it because it wasn't officially announced by Warner Bros. at SDCC.

Edit* Nevermind I saw that you found it.

edited 2nd Jul '15 10:48:59 AM by Halberdier17

Then we should probably wait until the title is officially announced at Comic Con. That way if it isn't we don't have to move everything back.

Metallo was going to be the villain if they made Man of Steel 2 instead of Batman v Superman.

Considering the "No Kryptonite" idea I wonder how he would have been powered.

Snyder and Gadot discuss Wonder Woman's role in the DCCU

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/gal-gadots-wonder-woman-a-gateway-drug-to-the-rest-of-the-justice-league

Flame War time? Flame War time.

• schrugs* it really doesn't matter what anyone says. The deciding factor will be what they bring on the screen - and the box office.

I seriously don't see how this is considered "shots fired".

Get into the comments and you'll see why

But Zack just said what we've been saying forever about the MCU.

i think their points are fair enough.

as much as people complain about the "gloominess" or "pretentiousness" in DC's movies, I don't think there's any point to them copying Marvel's approach. they need to be different and stand out. there are other, equally valid ways of making superhero movies.

not to say that man of steel was necessarily the best way to go about this, but we just have to see what ends up being on the screen for this movie and judge that when the time comes.

edited 3rd Jul '15 5:11:14 PM by wehrmacht

So many people are saying as an argument against DCCU that comic book movies have to be these fun, enjoyable romps like the MCU. Others have said that the MCU often come across as vapid action comedies.

At worst Snyder and Affleck are saying they are trying to take the material more seriously, not be so "funny, quick and glib" about the story. Also that it is a dangerous area to tread just going for the easy consumerist version of the story, they want something a little deeper and timeless.

Like I said earlier, there's no "shots fired". Snyder and Affleck are just taking the only stance they can.

edited 3rd Jul '15 5:27:24 PM by VeryMelon

The only thing which bothers me about the discussion is this notion that the tone has anything to do with how serious or deep the movie is. The Great Dictator is certainly not serious, but it certainly has a lot to say.

Also, both Marvel and DC have shown that they can do both. They can do everything they want in their movies. I honestly don't think that the colour scheme of all things is the big difference.