Hela vs Enchantress: Where DCEU Went Wrong

It’s amazing to think that even though the Marvel Cinematic Universe began in 2008, this year (2017) is the first wherein the MCU has presented a female villain after nine years. In contrast, the DC Extended Universe started in just 2013, making it five years younger than the MCU and with a female villain in theaters after only three years. Despite being far younger, the DCEU has provided multiple female villains, as well as a stand-alone heroine film–something that the MCU has not accomplished yet–the first heroine movie will appear in the MCU after eleven years!

 

The only two female-led films in either DCEU (2017) and MCU (2019)

 

 

The DCEU actually boasts the greatest amount of female villains, especially if you include morally flexible Amanda Waller 

 

Even with these accomplishments, DCEU has struggled to create a strong villain that resonates with the audience. MCU isn’t much better, with the most charismatic villain of note being Loki from the Thor franchise and many others being very forgettable.

 

Thor 2 villain: Whats-His-Face / Phantom of the Opera Fanboy

 

But despite being outstripped in volume by DCEU for representation, the MCU has once again provided a more interesting villain than their counterpart for a stand-alone villainess: Hela.

 

Warning: Female Villains are also statistically long-haired, magical brunettes with raccoon-eyes

 

Here is a quick rundown of just how remarkably similar these characters are despite coming from two separate comic universes:

Former prisoner Hela comes in as a strong threat and just gets stronger, easily destroying everything in her path with her magical abilities and an army of slaves. With this army of enchanted slaves made from her victims, she plans on conquering civilizations.

Enchantress starts off a prisoner in the beginning, and then eventually turning into a magical goddess with an army of slaves. With her army of magically enchanted slaves made up of her victims, Enchantress plans on conquering civilizations.

Despite these strong similarities, the audience never really sees Enchantress actively using much violence. Instead, her brother is a source of violence, as well as her slaves. Because of this, Enchantress feels like much less of a threat and more like an evil belly dancer. What a waste!

 

Tangible Threat

Probably the biggest single complaint about the Suicide Squad movie is how muddled Enchantress’ motive is expressed. In the film, she falls into the trope of manifesting a beam of light in the sky that is apparently bad and might destroy technology–somehow. This generic super-villain trope is an Achilles heel for the genre at large, and additionally why many critics fail to take these films seriously. Additionally, the poor explanation for Enchantress creating the beam of light smacks of lazy writing.

 

If these weren’t labeled, I’m not 100% sure I could tell them all apart. (Topmost: Suicide Squad)

In contrast, it is established very early that Hela is equal to Odin and his progeny in strength and has no apparent weakness, as well as taking away the signature weapon from the main character Thor and easily disposing of the strongest Asgardian heroes that stand in her way. This show of strength is not paralleled in the earlier film Suicide Squad with the Enchantress.

Hela on the other hand, comes off as a very magical being, actively using spells often, as well as being consistently violent in a way that makes it clear that she is a threat to everyone around her. Remember, both of these characters are very old, very magical beings that have been imprisoned previously for thousands of years, that are known to act as malevolent conquerers. However, only Hela gives off that vibe.

So in short, what Suicide Squad could have done to create real tension would be to show the more violent, lethal and evil tendencies of Enchantress rather than the angsty belly-dancer they gave the audience.

 

 

Realistic Resolution

Another huge problem (other than many plot holes) with Enchantress’ character is how easily she is dispatched. Honestly, as an ancient goddess of incredible power, a little stab from a gymnast-psychiatrist anti-hero should not have been enough to stop her.

Let’s just look at it this way: her living heart had been cut out from her body, and yet stayed functional for thousands of years. Logically, the conclusion can be drawn that her heart is not really that weak against cutting. So, for many viewers this sudden end felt unsatisfying.

 

For those of you who don’t know, that’s a Thermite bomb next to her  heart that was cut out of her chest thousands of years ago–a bit more destructive than a katana

 

In comparison, Hela was simply too powerful to be defeated by Thor, even when he has extremely powerful allies to assist him. In fact, Thor essentially had to throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bath-water in order to temporarily defeat Hela by resurrecting a god-killing demon (who also wants to kill him) in an even more powerful form that ends up destroying the entire flat-planet of Asgard.

Honestly, recognizing that he was not strong enough and surrendering his pride to a greater power to defeat Hela was far more believable.

To that end, it would have been far better to see the Enchantress be dispatched by either a greater magical force (for which in the comics there is a precedent) or completely unleashing the demon within the only other magical character: Diablo. Just as much as Suicide Squad wasted Enchantress’ potential, they did even worse by Diablo. Since they were adjusting origins for characters, it would have been easy to make Diablo a counterpart to Enchantress. It could have easily been magical Middle-Eastern goddess vs fiery Aztec god. It would have been even better if Diablo had been able to help June Moone take control of Enchantress much like he had control over his demon side.

 

Aztec Fire God? Check!

 

Villains and World Building

To put it simply, Suicide Squad created a very narrow world in an already small cinematic universe, whereas Thor 3 vastly expanded and connected the cinematic universe even more. Often villains are the tools used to force characters into expanding their knowledge and experience of the world, but in Suicide Squad it was hard to feel like anything that happened in that movie affected the cinematic universe. And realistically, there is no mention of the huge amount of city-wide damage from Suicide Squad referenced in any other DCEU film.

Villains as a catalyst for expansion, and forcing a change in characters can make stories much livelier and rich. And in this instance, Suicide Squad squandered the rich history of their first magical character and the repercussions that should have followed her introduction.

The introduction of Hela led to memorable growth and drastic, permanent change in the MCU and overall growth and expansion of her cinematic universe.

 

Conclusion

It’s hard to not draw comparisons between these two characters and how important it can be to create scenarios wherein villains truly threaten the existence of the other characters. Realistically, there is a good chance that audiences will see both of these villains again in the future. In either film, the defeat is at best a set-back or questionable and left on a cliff-hanger. I know for sure that Hela will return, as her role as the goddess of death is significant to Thanos and his motivations. It also seems likely that Enchantress will return, due to her file inclusion in the papers handed from Amanda Waller to Bruce Wayne/Batman.

 

They don’t keep files on the “dead” for posterity

 

What I hope is that the next time we see Enchantress in the theater, that the DCEU will have taken a few notes from the successful introduction of Hela. Will DCEU ever learn how to use villains? Will we see either of these villains again in the future? Or will Suicide Squad simply disappear into history as a failed experiment? Let me know your thoughts in the comment section below.

Trying to Remain Unbiased Thor: Ragnarok Edition

Possible SPOILERS ahead!!

I am fully aware that as an established Marvel Cinematic Universe fan, I already have a positive bias towards any of their movies. What is interesting about the MCU is that the general consensus from viewers is that the Thor franchise has the untenable position of being the red-headed-step-child of the MCU.

 

Though not this redhead, I did actually lose my virginity to one. (mine was a year older, not younger.. and also not British)

 

But, for all of its faults, it actually commits no egregious sins beyond what other far more popular MCU films have been allowed to make. Now, there are many reasons why Thor is treated more harshly than other MCU films, but I feel that it likely comes down to more established deuteragonists than other films that usually maintain a single protagonist.  To that end, Jane Foster and Thor Odinson experience more dynamic character arcs than any other romantic pair in the MCU.

Do I think this means that the Thor franchise did “worse” due to more feminist subtexts? Well, I don’t think the situation is that clear cut, but I do think that may have been a factor.

Going further, there has been controversy against the Thor franchise in the comic world due to Thor Odinson losing the ability to wield Mjolnir and Jane Foster actually becoming the new Thor, God of Thunder.

 

Loved the comic, and the new costume for both Thor and Odinson are amazing!

In all honesty, the change brought a breath of fresh air to the comic series as well as giving real problems to a character who is otherwise literally a God. If you haven’t read it, check it out. However, I can totally see how trying to bridge what is happening in the MCU and in the comics can be confusing. And I can see how old aficionados could be put-off by changing so much of the Thor comics for it to fit better into the logic of the MCU.

All that being said, I actually enjoy the Thor movies (yes even Dark World). This is the one and arguably only superhero franchise that has managed to give us a villain that audiences equally love and hate: Loki. DCEU certainly has not been able to manage any villain to equal popularity–even though they had ample opportunity with Enchantress, yet somehow managed to instead neuter her as a villain and make her bland. Yes, I’m still sore over Suicide Squad–more like Suicide Squandered Chance to Overtake the MCU.

So it was disconcerting to hear from a friend of mine who got an early viewing while in the UK that the movie–though very pretty–was very hasty and the beginning of the movie seemed to be haphazardly thrown together.

 

I’m looking at you purple, don’t let me down!

 

Bad preliminary aside, the information that I gleaned was all second hand and I have not actually seen the movie yet myself. I don’t make a huge effort to stay away from reviews anyway because I am skeptical at best and at worst, defiant. So, despite all the misgivings in regards to previous Thor movies, and poor plot construction, you better believe my butt will be in a seat opening weekend.

And not just to see the latest Stan Lee Cameo.

 

These just came out at Walmart and I kinda need them all…

 

What are your thoughts about the upcoming Thor: Ragnarok movie? Think it will fly or flop? Leave your thoughts in the comment section below.

 

DCEU vs MCU November 2017 Edition

I am totally looking forward to the two upcoming movies Justice League (DCEU) and Thor: Ragnarok (MCU).  From what we’ve seen historically, there is sure to be some parallels between the two movies that are both being advertised with the premise of “superheroes team up to take on an otherworldly villain”.

Honestly, I am looking forward to both but I would be lying if I were to not include that Wonder Woman is 90% of why I am even bothering to see Justice League when it comes out in theaters (instead of Amazon Prime).

Amazon I love you, sponsor me in the future

What I’m hoping for, however, is to be utterly surprised by how different these movies actually are (Please no “Armageddon” vs “Deep Impact” situation here) and to see some interesting storytelling. I’m hoping neither of them fall into formulaic plot lines that become boring and predictabl–because, at the end of the day I am still a fan of both of these huge cinematic universes and I want to see them succeed.

Let me know your thoughts in the comment section below, and whether or not you’ll be watching, both, neither or just one of these movies.

Rose City Comic Con

Coffee+Taco Group had another amazing year at Rose City Comic Con and HERE is where you can see a compilation of some of our photos.

 

The Neutering of Enchantress

This article is about the 2016 film Suicide Squad and may contain some SPOILERS if you have not seen the movie.

The Neutering of Enchantress

Probably one of the biggest pitfalls this movie committed (besides terrible editing) was how the villainess Enchantress was portrayed. Originally, and based off of the trailers, I had thought that the villainess was going to be much more complex and convoluted than she turned out to be. Not only was the Enchantress straight forward, with simplistic goals, she was almost boringly straightforward. All of her potential was neutered in the film presented to audiences in the theaters.

What she suffered from–other than a complete lack of character arc–was a sorrowful lack of explanation that would have made the character not only more interesting, but her actions would have made a whole lot more sense. By offering little explaination for her actions and not giving her a real or sympathetic arc, the editors neutered the character from what could have been the best-to-date villain in the DCEU.

Here are three ways that the story of Enchantress was completely neutered of any interest, charisma or significance in the movie Suicide Squad:

1. That Damn Machine

The Enchantress is–fittingly–a character based off of supernatural and magical forces. However, in the movie Suicide Squad, her plan to wreak havoc is based on a machine. There is even a throw away line from her that sets the tone of using humanity’s love of machines against them.

That’s it.

The audience is given no end-game plan from the character than the vague notion of destroying/converting humanity into mindless slaves. Had the writers bothered to flesh out this idea more, there would have been a greater sense of urgency to stop her. However, her plot line feels more like a side quest to bigger narrative of Amanda Waller and the corruption she represents.

Not only that, it’s never mentioned why she bothers making a machine after the Enchantress becomes a demi-goddess once more. She could have literally only used her own magical powers, been defeated by Harley Quinn in the same way, and everything would have made far more sense.

2. No Sense of Lore

Another travesty that is committed, is that no one ever bothers to even mention where this six-thousand year old character has come from. There is no sense of lore or underlying culture explaining why she is driven to behave in the way that she does. The best guesses the audiences can make about her, is that she might be Egyptian in origin based off of her heart being separated from her body and the belly dancing outfit & sacred dance she uses to perform her magic.

Rendition of Enchantress’s costume that is allegedly “Central American” in origin

Middle eastern inspired belly dancing outfits that are in no way connected to Central America, and literally come from the other side of the globe

Further research shows that the movie says Enchantress comes from an “unspecified central american culture” despite her clothing and dancing indicating something more middle eastern. Arguably as well, her “earthy” mud-covered look could even be interpreted as voodoo inspired. Though honestly, I don’t blame them for having such a hard time keeping her origin more precise, because after looking around I couldn’t find the comic origin of the Enchantress either–as far as nationality goes.

But the point is, with so much left open to interpretation, the writing crew could have created a vastly more unique and interesting origin for Enchantress. In comparison, in the SAME MOVIE, they were able to take a character–El Diablo– that had just as little source material, and create a satisfying and heartbreaking character arc for him. Why they couldn’t do that for Enchantress in addition to El Diablo is simply beyond me.

They could have even referenced the allegedly sacred origins of belly dancing itself to explain why Enchantress was dancing and contorting so much while manipulating the machine–instead there nothing touched upon and the character ends ups looking more goofy than threatening.

3. No Obvious Struggle

Amazon review: Worst bath bomb ever, smells like a swamp in here.

Probably the biggest conflict this character consistently goes through in the comics is June Moone struggling against the villainous Enchantress. Unfortunately in the movie, however, the audience sees virtually none of this turmoil and struggle. It would have been far more interesting to see June break through Enchantress’s control every now and then while her evil machinations were in play. Not only that, it would have made June more sympathetic to the audience, and her apparent (if brief) death at the end of the movie would have been actually heartbreaking.

Instead, her death seems like a relief because it frees Flag from what is obviously a toxic relationship. June literally works for Waller, and Waller uses Flag’s love of June to bring him under her heel. It’s never really touched upon if June is manipulating him–and honestly the movie makes it seem like she is at the behest of Waller–or is June actually returns his love. It’s almost a disappointment that June comes back to life at the end, with the fate of Enchantress being ambiguously being left open.

But lets face it, it’s not even that ambiguous because Enchantress’s dossier is one of the ones included with the future Justice League member dossiers when Waller meets with Bruce Wayne/Batman in the mid-credit scene. And there would be no point in including the dossier of a dead entity in that group.

The audience could have been so much more emotionally invested in June and Enchantress if the writers had bothered to put any real thought into this character. In a movie that is LITERALLY about the ambiguity of good and evil, the dynamic of June and Enchantress should have been the poster-child of this dilemma. Because we have a uniquely conflicted villain that represents the dichotomy of the good and evil in a completely self contained package, there was a huge amount of potential for her to not only be the break out for being the first female villain for not only the DCEU but also the MCU, but she could have easily been the most interesting and yes–enchanting. Enchantress could literally have been a more fleshed out counterpart to MCU’s beloved Loki villain.

Could have been the first lovable villain in the DCEU franchise much like Loki was for the MCU

Was the Enchantress the victim of poor planning and poor writing? Or was she the victim of bad editing like much of the rest of the Suicide Squad  movie? Or do you think perhaps she just simply was too simplistic of a villain? Let me know your thoughts on whether you think the Enchantress was severely neutered in the Suicide Squad below in the comment section.

Suicide Squad and “Rebirth”

Obviously SPOILERS are coming so buckle up and ship out if you don’t want to hear anything about the Suicide Squad movie that was recently released.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Oh look, a smiley face

Probably one for the most exciting things for me while watching the Suicide Squad movie is the apparent confirmation of the cinematic DC Extended Universe (DCEU) to the newest comic arc for DC called “Rebirth”. Probably one of the most controversial moments of Rebirth has been the introduction of another DC owned franchise into the main continuity of the comics: the Watchmen.

Alfred apparently isn’t the tidiest butler if he missed this

Right now the DCEU only consists of three movies: Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and Suicide Squad. What’s interesting about the DCEU right now though, is that there are subtle references to the Watchmen as early as BvS mostly in graffiti as seen below,

Everything is classier in latin

Even the same handwriting as seen by Rorschach

Rorschach with his signature sign

But also in articles much like the diary entries that Rorschach used to write as narration for “The Watchmen” comic itself.

“Do you know how I got these scars?”

However, SS is far less subtle about referencing the Watchmen. In the scene immediately after Harley steals a purse (theatrical version), the camera pans to the left revealing another store front with multiple mannequins and a giant unbloodied smiley face that is exactly like the signature button of the Watchmen’s most notorious member: the Comedian.

Signature pin on the guy we love to hate

As an aside, the mannequins themselves offer and interesting insight into the Watchmen characters themselves.

The comic costumes are always better, especially for the Watchmen costumes in Suicide Squad

The lone female member is sexualized, just as Silk Spectre is, and a watchful Nite Owl hovers close to her reflecting their close relationship that progresses during the comic. On the far left, Ozymandias stands with the group but looking away as if looking toward the future and planning. The Comedian can be identified as the only member who is apparently wearing a military-style backpack, while the brim of his hat throws a shadowy eye-mask upon his face. In the rear distance, near Silk Spectre is Dr. Manhattan who is the most removed from the group and looking into the blue void of the sky and apparently elevated when compared to the heights of the other mannequins. Lastly, Rorschach is front and center, breaking the fourth wall and addressing the audience with his gaze, just as he narrates much of the Watchmen comic and movie.

Other interesting inclusions is not only the destroyed Robin suit from DoJ, but also in SS wherein it is revealed that one of Harley Quin’s crimes was the murder of Robin. This continuity means that the story of “Death in the Family”, is now adopted into the DCEU cannon. Not only that the “Damaged” tattoo on Leto’s Joker is an apparent reference to the story of “The Killing Joke” wherein the Joker refers to the newly paralyzed Barbra Gordon like a book and states that she has a “damaged spine”, a reference to paralyzed Barbra Gordon also pops up in DoJ when in a very brief computer screen moment the words “Oracle  Network” can be seen.

But Barbra is literally referenced nowhere else in the film

All these exciting inclusions could also mean that Leto’s Joker is but one of three that have been revealed to Batman, and carried into the new “Rebirth” arc for the DC.

What do you think about the DCEU apparently confirming the link to the “Rebirth” arc as an inspiration for the entire DCEU? Do you think these are just fun references, or that the movies will follow the comics more closely than DC live action movies have followed the comics in the past? Let me know your thoughts in the comment section below!