Because the first movie was widely hated and most of the characters were one-dimensional anyway. Probably Margot Robbie's popularity is the only reason they're even trying to do a sequel, so Harley's the only character they'd consider essential. Keeping Deadshot is probably more about the fact that he's a stalwart of the Suicide Squad in the comics than out of any misplaced loyalty to a failed first film.
Saying that it's "jettisoned most of the original cast" is extremely premature because we don't actually have a cast list for it given that it is barely entering active development now (previous to this point, it had been confirmed as an eventuality but was not being actively developed). However, it's still a sequel regardless of whether or not it ultimately brings back the previous cast. Because character turnover is "baked into" the very concept of what the Squad is. Amanda Waller is literally the only "connective tissue" a film like this needs. This is not an accurate statement.
I'll take Idris Elba over Will Smith in a film any day. The man is an amazing actor (IMO Will Smith not so much in comparison.) YMMV.
Time will tell but Batman Forever was a sequel to Batman Returns, also featuring a new actor and new director and the title character was portrayed very differently. Hell, the DCEU has shown a willingness to change its depiction of leads where they’re played by the same actor, as can be seen with how Affleck’s brooding Batman of BvS becomes a cheerier wisecracking take in JL, with Superman also undergoing a similar lightening up. We know that Jared Leto, Will Smith, Joel Kinnaman are unlikely to be back. Latest reports are that Robbie and Waller are the only returnees from the original. So my assertion stands.
Agreed. Idris as Deadshot is an upgrade from Wil Smith for sure. Can't see any confirmation of this casting, though. Hopeful for it. Despite accolades from his role as Ali, Wil hasn't grown much as an actor since he broke ground as the Fresh Prince... most of his characters seem to riff off the same characterization. Suicide Squad was kind of a pointless movie: Amanda Waller provides both the crisis and the solution? I missed something, didn't I? There were some fun scenes, though.
The amount of things that we've actually had confirmed about this movie right now can be counted on 3 fingers: 1) It's being written and directed by James Gunn 2) It is a sequel to David Ayers' film 3) Will Smith cannot reprise his role as Deadshot due to scheduling conflicts
Technically it was a sequel, but references to the previous films were minimal. Fans these days want continuity to be black-and-white, either it's a continuation or it isn't, but countless film sequels over the decades have split the difference, being nominal continuations while often paying little more than lip service to continuity. There are many films that are deliberately ambiguous about such things, so you can pretend it's a continuation if you want or can treat it as its own separate thing if you want.
^Yeah, I’ve said before that if BF were made today it’d be described as a soft reboot, but that term wasn’t in vogue in 1995 and it was described as “the third Batman” film at the time.
Because they've already said that this is going to be a soft reboot, with a new writer and director who going to take the movie in a diferent direction from the first. We also have Margot Robbie back as Harley Quinn, so we will have at least one actor reprising their role from the first movie. They've been saying over, and over, and over since James Gunn was announced to be working on it that it will not being bring back most of the original cast. Literally every single article I have seen about the movie has consistently said that, so I think at this point we can pretty much assume it's true. Well, sure technically since it's a second movie, but it sounds like it will pretty much be ignoring the first movie, I've still never been able to figure out exactly how much continuity there was meant to be in the pre-Daniel Craig James Bond movies. Most of them are pretty much stand alone, especially once new actors too over the role, but I think there were a few times where they acted like stuff that happened when an earlier actor was in the role did happen to the current one. I also know of at least one scene with Roger Moore referring to something never happen to "the other guy", but I always took that as a fourth wall breaking joke, rather than in universe confirmation that him and Connery were actually playing different characters with the same name.
^That was Lazenby in OHMSS, but the movie elsewhere has Bond reminiscing about previous films in the series, so like you say it’s essentially breaking the fourth wall. I think the Robbie return story only came out today - hasn’t seen it when I first posted but had seen it by the time of my later post.
Hmmm. I don't buy the scheduling conflict story. Thats always 'the reason.' Wil could have passed on the role.
How do you know that? Variety reported that the studio had never confirmed who would return for SS2 [https://variety.com/2019/film/news/will-smith-the-suicide-squad-sequel-exits-1203151442/].
Uhm, it wasn't. I certainly don't think you'll find many people who'll say it's a great film, but you'll find just as few that truly hated it. Most people seem to have enjoyed it, whether in a fun popcorn flick or even "so bad it's good" way and it's undeniable that the movie was a big box office success that brought in crowds week after week despite abysmal reviews, which couldn't have happened without good word of mouth.
It didn't matter. All that mattered was keeping a lucrative and popular film series going. Everything in fiction is an illusion or a pretense, and that includes continuity. And Bond is hardly the only series like that. The Tarzan movie series ran for over 35 years and went through five lead actors, all of whom were presumed to be the same continuing character. It's no different from comic strip or comic book series that run for decades on end with the characters never aging, or aging only very slowly. Think of the continuity as more local than global. The stories are continuous with the ones around them, but the farther back you get, the less relevance the stories have. The sense of continuity with the current and recent status quo is more important than continuity with the early years of the series.
Widely hated I think is seriously overstating it, but the controversy combined with the level of change we've seen so far is indeed the reason I wonder if they're interested changing Deadshot's characterization along with the actor change. But maybe it really is nothing more than Will having unavoidable scheduling conflicts. 1 The squad's character turnover is not SO high that it would make sense to have an almost entirely new team between installments (at least, not without a specific reason). 2 The first movie already completely ignored that character turnover that is 'baked into the very concept'. For a movie called 'Suicide Squad', it had a better survival rate than the average generic action flick. They even magically resurrected June Moon for a fairy tale happy ending. 3 Your entire argument is 'it's a sequel, of course they won't change a character'. Whether the film 'needs' more collective tissue doesn't matter. If they're willing to start almost from scratch on the cast, there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to tinker with the characterization.
One for the “take with a pinch of salt” file but Collider claims to have the lowdown on the new characters http://collider.com/suicide-squad-2...&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter#images