James Gunn and Peter Safran to be co heads of dc at wb discovery

[HollowSage]

I always thought it was specific to the player who kills every npc on sight totally ignoring the narrative, not an NPC who attacks people.

And yeah, I don't think anyone really did that in either Guardians film or in Suicide Squad or Peacemaker. I mean, Peacemaker is pretty violent but he doesn't kill randomly to solve every problem.

You got it. I’m familiar with the term from MMOs where rather than doing quests a “murder hobo” travels around the game world killing everything in order to gain experience as fast as possible.

As for who best fits that description from Peacemaker it would be Vigilante. His answer to every problem was to kill it but the other characters usually stopped him.

[CliffHanger2]

Seems a strange choice after the failure of his SS. Welp look out MOS here come the dik jokes...smdh...

[Brian B]

I always thought it was specific to the player who kills every npc on sight totally ignoring the narrative, not an NPC who attacks people.

And yeah, I don't think anyone really did that in either Guardians film or in Suicide Squad or Peacemaker. I mean, Peacemaker is pretty violent but he doesn't kill randomly to solve every problem.

Your definition makes a lot more sense than mine. I think you are right. I am wrong.

[choptop]

Seems a strange choice after the failure of his SS. Welp look out MOS here come the dik jokes...smdh...

failure? The movie came out during the pandemic it wasn't really my thing but people liked it.

[Wildling]

Seems a strange choice after the failure of his SS. Welp look out MOS here come the dik jokes...smdh...

His SS was beloved by critics (which I don't really disagree with, and it's even more rose smelling when comparing it to the previous SS) but there are reasons, multiple reasons deep under the hood really, why it "failed" at least financially.

To sum it it up as best as I can, the movie was wildly uncommercial. There's a planet-lifted-by-Superman difference between a Suicide Squad successfully fronted by Bloodsport and Ratcatcher 2, and a Joker movie less than half the SS budget cost where secondary characters are more well known than Suicide Squad ones.

[Scott Taylor]

Who is a murder hobo in Peacemaker or Guardians? I ask because I don’t really think I see that in the show and movie. I’m not saying Gunn isn’t guilty of that, just that I don’t see it in all his work.

I haven't watched Peacemaker.

in GotG they killed a bunch of guards in that prison. All of whom were just doing their jobs. And the guardians were rightfully in there, its not as if they were unjustly imprisoned. Most of the Kree they killed was during a battle, so not the same thing.

In GotG2, the worst offenders are the ravagers killing all the other ravagers and then Yondu killing all those ravagers, many of whom weren't even involved in the original killing. But both of those instances served the story purpose. If all those ravagers hadn't died, the guardians would have had to deal with them in some long drawn out process. So, convenience.

Here I am just wondering what a "murder hobo" is...

There's more than one definition. Mostly I've heard it used for role players when they start killing non-player characters in the game out of convenience:

[Brian B]

You got it. I’m familiar with the term from MMOs where rather than doing quests a “murder hobo” travels around the game world killing everything in order to gain experience as fast as possible.

As for who best fits that description from Peacemaker it would be Vigilante. His answer to every problem was to kill it but the other characters usually stopped him.

Yes, but, that’s actually the character in the comics, too. It’s not like the character differed from the one in the comics except in sanity. (Pun not really intended, except it fits.)

[Brian B]

I wonder, will Gunn being in charge result in a generally funnier DC Universe or DC Studios or whatever they call it?

Also, how much of the Snyderverse will remain in continuity? Gunn’s Suicide Squad movies and Peacemaker are roughly in continuity with the Snyderverse. It’s kind of funny to think Gunn’s humor will rule over Snyder’s dark vision of the DC movie universe.

I always thought Warner Discovery would resort to hiring Snyder again, because he seemed like the only creator with a vision for DC. But Gunn never occurred to me and Gunn certainly has a vision.

[JBatmanFan05]

If Gunn can ever manage to instigate and pull off a successful substantive DC/Marvel crossover film, then he would attain an feat not easily matched.

[Rincewind]

I haven't watched Peacemaker.

in GotG they killed a bunch of guards in that prison. All of whom were just doing their jobs. And the guardians were rightfully in there, its not as if they were unjustly imprisoned. Most of the Kree they killed was during a battle, so not the same thing.

In GotG2, the worst offenders are the ravagers killing all the other ravagers and then Yondu killing all those ravagers, many of whom weren't even involved in the original killing. But both of those instances served the story purpose. If all those ravagers hadn't died, the guardians would have had to deal with them in some long drawn out process. So, convenience.



There's more than one definition. Mostly I've heard it used for role players when they start killing non-player characters in the game out of convenience:

Starlord and pals didn't kill anyone at the prison. All the killing was done by Ronan and his forces after Quill and the gang escaped.

In GotG 2, the Ravagers were not main characters or even supposed to be good people.

[HollowSage]

How crazy is it that the new co-head of the DCEU will be at the Marvel premiere of GOTG 3. Wild times.

[TheCasualReader]

I haven't watched Peacemaker.

in GotG they killed a bunch of guards in that prison. All of whom were just doing their jobs. And the guardians were rightfully in there, its not as if they were unjustly imprisoned. Most of the Kree they killed was during a battle, so not the same thing.

No, they don't. The worst is Rocket (and Groot) who uses a machinegun (that the prison was using on the inmates) to fire aimlessly and later, hits a couple of guards while he's trying to fly the detached command center - it's not apparent how deliberate that last one is, but it probably killed those guards.

It's not clear if Drax kills the guards because Drax doesn't seem to care, but it's more recklessness than deliberate, and they don't seem dead. Garona is just subduing them either by knocking them or by disabling them as threat (such as by breaking a guy's arm)

Quill is specifically shown not killing the guards while he's trying to get his walkman back; he either knocks them out or stuns them.

In the second movie, they fight a monster on behalf of a race. Later, they fight said race in a space battle because the latter wants to kill them for theft which means that even if the ships weren't automated, the GoTG would still be defending themselves against a very disproportionate punishment for a crime that only two of them had knowledge of. Later, they fight the Ravagers and the Ravagers are, well, the Ravagers.

The Guardians of the Galaxy aren't murder hoboes. Murder hoboes kill indiscriminately or for very insensible/poor reasons. Also, speaking as a murder hobo, they don't do enough looting.

[Scott Taylor]

The Guardians of the Galaxy aren't murder hoboes. Murder hoboes kill indiscriminately or for very insensible/poor reasons. Also, speaking as a murder hobo, they don't do enough looting.

That might be the best defense I've read!

[Tofali]

I don't play games so I don't know what ppl are talking about lol! but does Yondu and his arrow fit that definition?

[Brian B]

How crazy is it that the new co-head of the DCEU will be at the Marvel premiere of GOTG 3. Wild times.

Extremely crazy. I wonder, will Marvel let Gunn finish Guardians 3? Or will they bring in another director to finish it?

Note, I do not see Feige as being vindictive like that at all. Feige is known as a complete professional. However, having your biggest competing studio’s head directing and promoting one of your star properties might be too much for Disney to stomach. It’s not even that there’s a real conflict of interest if Gunn promotes Guardians 3 professionally. But it’s too much bizarre, and even possibly bad PR for Disney to take. Imagine the questions by the press. The whole thing could be so cringe that they just wouldn’t go through with it.