Post your random thoughts.

Margot Robbie seemed fine with playing Harley more and I kind of want her to have a comeback in the role like how Ryan Reynolds had a comeback with Deadpool after X-Men Origins. Plus, I mean, I want a fucking gay romance in a superhero movie.

I can't believe I forgot about this song. It makes a great atmosphere for a final battle.

I just wanna see more Harley in film, dammit. And Margot Robbie is damn fine, so it's a win-win.

Ivy<Harley

Though let's be honest, Ivy-Harley lesbionics is good for everybody.

Again, I want an LGBT relationship in a superhero film that's the focus. Deadpool 2 gave us a lesbian couple but they weren't the focus of the film. It's a good step, don't get me wrong, but there can always be further steps.

Oddly, for once I agree with you Adric.

You know, although Suicide Squad was nominated for the Oscar for make-up design for the prosthetics used for Croc and Enchantress, the voting from the general pool of Oscar voters was heavily swayed by "Margot Robbie was hot, so I'm gonna vote for that."

Meanwhile Star Trek Beyond created almost a hundred new alien designs, but no, the Manic Pixie Nightmare Clown version of Harley wears hotpants, so Suicide Squad beat it.

Never been comfortable with a name like 'Suicide Squad' it's not something I'm happy with Googling either

Only award that film should've won was a Razzy. It's a grotesque, poorly edited mess of nonsensical plot points full of forced, awful exposition, a horrible antagonist, and some kinda not good racism (Killer Croc is just...ugh...). I loved Robbie as Harley Quinn but Leto's Joker is awful and the way the film depicts his romance with Harley as being genuine is outright insulting to me.

The name is because they are usually sent on suicide missions instead of prison.

Oh yeah Leto's Joker portrayal sucked big, floppy donkey dick. Although they did show him zap her with electrodes, so it's not a legit romance.

edited 21st May '18 5:10:10 PM by MarkVonLewis

he was no joker,he came from the bottom of deck

The film waffles back and forth on that. They also show him gleefully joining in on the toxic bath in a flashback and have him as a genuine boyfriend trying to save her repeatedly throughout the film. I'd chalk it up to awful editing considering the original script apparently was going to go into the romance more as being toxic, but the film really does not sell it like that for most of it.

The movie was vastly rewritten in the edit. There were a lot of reshoots. The prevailing theory at the time was the studio had seen the success of Deadpool and thought, "wait, so the audience wants lots and lots of comedy and gore? We can do that!"

But also apparently there was a loooooot more of Joker originally that they ended up not using (congrats, Jared. Nobody's going to want to work with you ever again, and you've got less than five minutes of screentime for it), and a big focus of the edit had been about making Harley more of the protagonist than Deadshot.

I completely do not understand the physical stuff Joker put Harley through. The chemical vat, okay, he was making her more like him by dropping her in the same stuff that made him Like That. But why the electrodes? He'd already scrambled her brain with psychology to the point that she was eager for him to turn her grey matter into oatmeal. What's the point?

edited 21st May '18 5:31:32 PM by TParadox

> What's the point?

It's the joker,there's no point,he does it because he thinks it;s fun

That's both stupid and bad writing.

Well I would also say he's so warped that he derives pleasure from people's pain and misery

It is stupid and bad writing but that doesn't make him any less of a threatening villain when in the right hands.

The Joker can be a good villain a lot, don't get me wrong, I just think that A: he gets used way too much, B: he's pretty generic sometimes, and C: after a while, Batman really should've just killed him.

The Joker is a monster,not because what he can to you,but what he do the people you care abouit

See Batman beyond and Nolan's 2nd batman film

> Batman really should've just killed him.

Sure,but that's what the Joker wants,he wants to corrupt him,to break his moral code

edited 21st May '18 5:54:25 PM by Ultimatum

Joker wouldn't be a problem if Frank Castle was in Gotham, Just saying.

That also kinda falls into lazy writing like fridging and stuff. The Joker crippling Barbara Gordon was such a bad case of fridging that even Alan Moore regretted it in hindsight.

And that's also stupid. "You kill me, I win" is fucking dumb.

edited 21st May '18 5:55:24 PM by AdricDePsycho

How is it dumb?Batman has a morel code against killing,Joker knows this and knows he won't kill him so he pushes him to brink,it's a key part of his character

I mean, that's not always what the Joker is. Depends on the writer most of the time but the Joker doesn't have to always be like that. But writers focus so much on that that I'd legitimately wish for Batman to just get it over with and kill him already.

Of course, they won't because sales and money and stuff.

That post just made my day.

It's not so much sales as it is status quo. While I can understand where you're coming from, people are FURIOUS when Batman kills and/or uses guns.

edited 21st May '18 6:07:39 PM by ParaChomp