David Ayer now fighting “immense political headwind” for his cut of Suicide Squad
The misbegotten villain team-up still has one champion: Its director
Aux News Suicide Squad
The SnyderVerse has fallen, a new DC Universe is coming, and the imminent release of Aquaman And The Lost Kingdom closes the door on one of the strangest fiascos in modern Hollywood history. And yet, it’s not over. There’s still a little matter of the Ayer Cut.
Director David Ayer, who directed the misbegotten supervillain team-up Suicide Squad, released in 2016, is still trying to get his director’s cut before fans. Earlier this year, he tweeted that DC Studios head James Gunn assured him that his cut of the film “would have its time to be shared.” Yet, with the ongoing crisis on infinite cinematic universes, finding the perfect time to remind audiences about the Joker’s “Damaged” tattoo has been complicated.
In a recent interview with Total Film, Ayer remains “hopeful” that his film will see the light of day. However, he also isn’t ignoring the reality of the “immense political headwind against it.” Not to get all JFK assassination about it, but Ayer sees the film’s status as something of a conspiracy, alleging “there are a lot of people that are invested in certain narratives that don’t want it to see the light of day.” If Ayer’s cut were released, the “narrative” of Suicide Squad “blows up” because the world would see “the cowardliness and the whole just general shittiness of how the film’s been treated, and how the actors have had this great work that they’d done taken away.”
Who Ayer is talking about is beyond us because Warner Bros. is a different den of vipers than in 2016. However, it wouldn’t be hard to see how re-releasing Suicide Squad is a danger to the new DCU James Gunn is crafting. Nevertheless, Ayer maintains hope, telling Total Film that “something’s going to happen.”
“The truth always comes out,” he said, channeling Vanderpump Rules’ Kristen Doute. “It always comes out.”
It’s hard not to feel for Ayer on some level. For the last decade, Suicide Squad has been a punchline for writers like this one. As he put it in August, the director is aware of a “group of people that have fun mocking the film,” which must be tough because making movies is hard. His position is that he got royally screwed and humiliated by the released version. But to be fair to those who have fun mocking the film, there is a scene where the Joker pushes Harley Quinn into a vat of white viscous goo, which one has to assume will be in both cuts.
On the other hand, just throw the thing on Max already and let David Ayer move on with his life.
84 Comments
After Gunn’s vastly superior followup, which might just be the best live-action superhero movie ever made, what could possibly be the point of digging this up other than sating Ayer’s own ego?
Sadly, this is exactly the kind of thing that could’ve sold reasonably well on DVD a decade ago, but that market has disappeared.
I’m not convinced there’s anything that would’ve sold well on DVD that won’t perform well on streaming services.
Yeah, but there’s a difference: you can make money from a DVD that sells well whereas WB made jack shit on the $70M they invested in completing Snyder’s JL movie.
But $20 from a DVD sale is a lot different than one stream from a subscriber. I’m guessing that alternate cuts of movies don’t really move the needle when it comes to attracting new subscribers.
Different economies – Warner Bros could sell DVDs in bulk at a reasonable margin, and then retailers had the financial risk of selling them to consumers. Max has to market directly to consumers, while balancing subscriptions against the operating costs of the platform.
Great insight, thank you.
I don’t believe any movie should be buried and gone forever. Even if the movie is bad, it still deserves to be preserved for movie history.
I could the reason for not releasing due to WB possibly not making any money on it. But if the work is already done and the movie doesn’t need to undergo any further production work, they could just dump it on Max with little cost at this point.
Who cares what you believe, though. What are you going to do? Pass legislation mandating all media be permanently accessible forever despite the wishes of the owner? I don’t want my early films available in 2023. They make me cringe. Leave that to collectors and archives.
How is something going to be collected and archived if it’s not released, genius?I don’t care if the owner doesn’t want to release anything, that’s their right. However, in the case of Suicide Squad, the decision to reshoot and re-edit the movie was from the former regime at WB. Not the current one. They can release it if they want to. Or not, I don’t care. But I can choose to not agree with them.
Someone that does care, is Guillermo Del Toro:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/guillermo-del-toro-says-physical-media-owners-are-preserving-film-history/1100-6519370/
the movie is finished and came out in 2016.
Ayer’s cut wasn’t.
directors aren’t entitled to a directors cut, though. that’s not how the industry works. there was a brief 10’ish year period where there was marketing in a directors cut on physical media, but all directors have a give and take with their vision and the people spending the money. i appreciate that you want this fabled ayer cut, but for all intents and purposes it doesn’t and never existed.
Not saying they are entitled to it. Doesn’t mean they can’t be granted it. Like I said, do I care if Suicide Squad Director’s Cut, gets released? No, in fact, I probably won’t watch it, if it does.When you say there isn’t an Ayer cut, can you confirm that? Ayer himself has shared stills of scenes that were in his cut of the film. I don’t know if he ever delivered a finished cut or not, but there is an alternate version of his film out there in a vault. Or at least a collection of material that he shot, that is not in the theatrical release of the movie.
obviously, there were multiple cuts of the movie made through production, but i don’t think studios just hang onto rough cuts in perpetuity in vaults. i’m just a guy on the internet so i can’t confirm anything. maybe ayer has a hard drive in his garage with his perfect cut on it, but that’s why i said ‘for all intents and purposes’. i don’t think it’s a matter of just uploading a different version that’s sitting around at warner bros.all just opinion/estimation (we’re just guys on the internet), obviously. if IT IS just them flipping a switch and ‘suicide squad the ayer cut’ pops up, then yeah let it rip, i think there’s more to it.
Oh without a doubt, in fact it’s probably due more to residuals and who gets paid for what gets released more than anything as the reason for why they won’t release it.
will smith is also still kind of radioactive.
Without a doubt, but he’s not the sell here. Ayer’s cut is, and if they want to bank on celebrity to sell it, Robbie is arguably at the biggest point of her career after Barbie.
Neither do I, but where does the buck stop? Every movie is edited.
But not every movie gets final cut taken away from the director. WB releasing Ayer’s cut doesn’t take anything away from that’s been released or will be released. On the same side of the token, no one is forcing anyone to watch Ayer’s cut if it is released. If WB feels like it’ll be a financial loss to them to release it, so be it. I get that. However, if the work is done and they can just dump it onto streaming or even on their own Archive Collection Blu-Ray label with very little cost, then they can actually make money off it.
I don’t believe any movie should be buried and gone forever. Even if the movie is bad, it still deserves to be preserved for movie history.Some free advice: pick another movie to make this argument. Like of all the examples of a director having their movie taken away from them you want to see another version of this piece of shit?
That’s not my point. I’m not dying on the Suicide Squad hill. You even quoted me, without reading what I was saying. Any movie deserves to be released/preserved. Unless of course, it’s some illegal snuff movie.
My holy grail lost movie is London After Midnight. Had physical media been around back then, this would not be a lost movie.
“Any movie deserves to be released/preserved”But this movie was released.
Ayer’s cut was not. What is hard to understand about this?
Every film gets multiple cuts made. Then they (producers, whoever) decide which one to release. That’s “The Movie.” And it gets released. All the other cuts are just drafts.
Yes, movies get workprints, even multiple, but regarding final cut, that’s a broad generalization. Not true of every movie, not even true of all studio films(see Kubrick, Cameron, Tarantino, Coen Bros, etc).
Also, are we forgetting what a “director’s cut” is and how many different versions and releases of those that there are? Let’s not even get to what Speilberg, Coppola, and Ridley Scott do with their “final cuts”.
I don’t know about “we,” but I’m not. It’s another cut of the movie. One of many. The studio or whoever decides which one gets released. You still haven’t said why the director’s draft should get special consideration besides the fact that some have in the past.
Movie preservation. Pure and simple. Are you familiar with what happened on Terry Gilliam’s Brazil? Terry Gilliam won that fight and his cut got released. Now, did the studio’s “Love Conquers All” cut get buried? It did, until Criterion added it as a supplement to their release.
Why? Movie preservation. It’s something that existed, didn’t get a release, but is now available to see, as a compliment to released the movie. It’s an education on the studio system vs. the creative process. Seeing both movies side-by-side and the story behind the reason is arguably more compelling and evidence of how and studio process works. Same as the Synder Cut. I’m 100% more fascinated about the difference between the two and how it came into existence than the movie itself. But we wouldn’t be having this conversation had that version been completely buried.
Should this get special consideration over other movies? No, but then again, few are fighting as hard as Ayer to get their version seen. Some directors just concede or sign deals where that is a given. Ayer had his cut taken away from him, from fear of failing after Batman V Superman underperformed.
No I get the idea of movie preservation. But what folks are telling you is that the movie was released. What I’m missing is the link from movie preservation to director’s cut must get released. Lots of versions of the movie “exist” and don’t get released.I’m not trying to say they shouldn’t release it. I personally don’t see how it could hurt them that much to release it and what’s really the difference. But why he’s owed a release is what I’m missing. I get what you’re saying as to why it would be nice to see (for someone, I wouldn’t watch it), but it doesn’t sound like “movie preservation” is your best argument since the movie was released. It’s something else you’re arguing for. I don’t know what I’d call it, but it’s not movie preservation. I think that’s where a lot of people are getting hung up on what you’re saying. If it’s the director’s cut in particular you think should be released, I’d just say that–”The director’s cut could teach us a lot about the moviemaking process”–rather than “the movie needs to be preserved.”
People saying the movie released are saying Suicide Squad has been released. Yes, it has. However, Suicide Squad: Ayer’s Cut hasn’t. It just feels like people arguing for arguments sake there. Two completely different products.I’m am arguing for movie preservation. What I would get from it is a fascinating study between commerce(studio) vs. art(director). Now, that isn’t to say that’s all to be gotten from it. Maybe it is a better version, and would satisfy that section of the fandom, but again, we wouldn’t know, because it hasn’t been released. Whatever the reason, it all falls under the category of movie preservation. If we don’t preserve media, they will be lost to time. Hell, sometimes even cut scenes and deleted plots gets “preserved” on physical media or get posted online in some form. If WB can share the stuff cut from Ayer’s version and fans can do their own edits if they don’t feel like putting that much effort into it.
Now, I don’t know Ayer’s clout with getting final cut on his movies, but I’m pretty sure he hasn’t had this much of a problem between released cut and his own until Suicide Squad. So there must be something there worth “preserving” whether it’s good or not, that’s subjective. But there’s a good story there regardless, with his cut being a footnote in this saga.
“Two completely different products.”But why?? Why is “Ayer’s Cut” different from “Draft Cut No. 12″?
I guess we won’t know unless it’s released, correct?
You can go down the rabbit hole if you want, but he has shared stills and mentions on what the differences are, but yes, if you wish to believe what he’s claims, then yes they are completely different. The team that cut the trailer recut/reshot his movie. For reference, this is the cliff’s notes version:https://collider.com/ayer-cut-history-explained-suicide-squad-2016/Like I said, I’m more fascinated by the behind-the-scenes tinkering, than the actual product. To actually release the movie would be a great “put up, or shut” from both sides. Is it as bad as WB made it out to be? Is it as “good” as Ayer claims? Only one way to find out.
“I guess we won’t know unless it’s released, correct?”No, you know now why you are saying it’s the one that needs to be released rather than Draft Cut No. 12, and I’m asking how you’ve drawn that conclusion.“I’m more fascinated by the behind-the-scenes tinkering”Then shouldn’t you also be demanding the release of every draft cut in the name of “movie preservation”?
It’s not a “draft cut”. There was one cut, one that Ayer supervised. WB took all that away from him, got the marketing team that cut the trailer to recut and reshoot(yes, reshoot new scenes) based on the positive reaction to the trailer and their fear of another BvS reception.Ayer’s cut and the released version are two different cuts. For all intents and purposes they are two different versions. If Ayer did not not shoot those scenes, they are basically two different movies. Regardless of how you keep referring to his cut as a “draft” cut, that simply is not true.
I don’t know why you think I didn’t read your post, or specifically the part I quoted. What I was saying is that I understand your argument, this is just a terrible example. I’d rather watch a snuff movie.
Because I was saying, generally all movies deserve preservation. Not just Suicide Squad specifically. Like the line shouldn’t be drawn at “well, I think this one movie sucks, so therefore it deserves to be buried”. That’s a dangerous precedent that studios are more than happy to comply with and notorious for doing already. WB already has a program where they make discs to order for movies they deem won’t make money for the mass market.
Right, and I believe all human beings deserve to be treated with dignity and have some bare minimum living conditions and rights. But I wouldn’t choose a serial killer serving four consecutive life sentences as my poster boy. I’m not saying your quest for better movie preservation is dumb or misguided, I’m just saying the movie sucks.
Yes.People lose their shit over alternate cuts that are fundamentally the same movie but with a couple minutes added back in, or censored by like two seconds.Ayer’s cut actually sounds like different. I have no idea if it’s any better. On a certain level, I don’t even care if it’s any better. But it sounds interesting to me.
But if the work is already done and the movie doesn’t need to undergo any further production work
Is the film actually done or is there still effects work that would need to be done on Ayer’s cut? Even Snyder’s Justice League required finished/redone work. if that’s the case, I can see the studios being hesitant to fork over more money on something that can’t possibly have the same degree of demand as the Snyder cut.
I don’t know for sure, maybe that’s what Ayer is alluding to. He has shared stills of scenes not in the theatrical and has made mention of very little work needed to be done to release his cut.Not sure if this a Batgirl situation where 90% of the movie was done or it was completely done and re-edited.
I think the cost of keeping a movie on a streaming service is higher than we think (at least relative to the return in subscription fees), based on how aggressively services cull their libraries.
I don’t believe any movie should be buried and gone forever. Even if the movie is bad, it still deserves to be preserved for movie history.Last I checked, the movie was actually released into theaters and put on both streaming and physical media. So I don’t know where this is coming from.Is there any reason to think that Ayer has a completed, ready-to-go cut? Because I would absolutely assume that he does not. Nor have I seen him claim otherwise. Instead he’s ranting about conspiracies.It was a shit movie. No “cut” is going to unshittify it. And while Ayer might be correct that studio interference made it worse, Ayer cast Jared fucking Leto as the Joker.
The movie was released.If you take what you’ve said to the natural conclusion, we’ll have to release 2 or 3 cuts of every film made from now on, because the director got annoyed with some part of the process (spoilers: they almost always do)
Gunn’s vastly superior followup, which might just be the best live-action superhero movie ever made
Maybe? There’s a lot to choose from these days.
Yeah I’m wondering who he thinks is clamoring for this? That said, if his cut really is better maybe he’s trying to un-besmirch his name.
Let it go bro (Ayer, not Matt).
I’m going to assume the reason the team gets introduced twice is a matter of the studio making cuts and not something of Ayer’s doing, so Ayer’s cut might be better on that front.On the other hand, Ayer’s cut certainly has more Leto Joker and I can’t see that as anything but a net negative.
The team is introduced twice because the final cut of the theatrical release merged Ayer’s cut with a cut from the trailer production company (Trailer Park) who cut the movie’s original trailers.Turns out, editors who can put together a snazzy 2-minute trailer aren’t necessarily that good with feature-length filmmaking.
The team get two intros is bad. The four music montages in ten minutes at the beginning of the movie is much worse.
You can easily tell that Ayer’s version was one thing, the studios version is another and the tone shifts just don’t work together. The easiest way to see it is by watching the original teaser he cut and then the over-the-top one that company cut.The tones are completely different, the movie itself would probably be widely different. Think “Once Upon a Time in America” type of difference is my guess.
we are only beginning to see the long-term negative side effects of hashtags.
Honestly, they may be what caused Covid
““The truth always comes out,” he said, channeling Vanderpump Rules’ Kristen Doute. “It always comes out.””
I mean…no, it doesn’t.
There have been hundreds of films over the years that have been taken away from their directors and how many have been restored?
By my count it’s Snyder’s Justice League, Donner’s Superman 2 and Fincher’s Alien3. That’s about all the “truth” that has come out.
“On the other hand, just throw the thing on Max already and let David Ayer move on with his life.”Yeah, agreed. It was the worst of the worst of DC movies but if his cut is even so-so it would be an amazing improvement.
That just encourages people to make these claims. He wouldn’t have said a word if Snyder hadn’t been successful getting his cut of Justice League completed and aired.
Fair point, but if they do release his movie as it’s just as bad as the one in the theater, we are then allowed to hunt him down and tie him to the back of a boat! Well at least that’s the deal I would make.
Honestly even if its worse the original cut it would have to be seen to be believed right. The original was a terrible movie
Yeah Original was the worst of the DC movies and that’s saying something. So terrible.
Eh, I’d say Green Lantern was worse.
Was that part of the DCU? Or was it pre Man of Steel?
Is that a real option here, though? Because if they just have it lying around, then yeah, fuck it, then just put that out. But if, like Snyder, he wants a shot at a $70 million redo, that seems like one of the worst investments in recent cinematic history even if you concede that it was a slight improvement on the theatrical version. The idea that it lead to a $70 million boost in subscriptions is unproven at best. There is no real evidence of that and a moderate amount against it. Basically, is the Ayer cut a completed film that was butchered shortly before release or an idea of the movie that he was prevented from realizing at the time? Or somewhere in between?
Is the ‘political headwind’ he’s referring to the fact that nobody gives a shit?
if he couldn’t make it happen during the hbomax gold rush, before will smith slapped chris rock and before another much better suicide squad movie came out, i genuinely don’t see what could move the needle to get this out. i guess the 10 year anniversary is in a few years.
Sounds like what’s produced after Trump eats hot wings.
I like to think it’s actual political content he’s trying to put back in, like there’s a 12-minute long monologue of Harley Quinn espousing the merits of a flat tax system, or Killer randomly telling people that the proletariat needs to rise up and seize the means of production.
Zaslav is not paying good money to recut a nearly 8-year-old movie for his streaming platform. I guarantee you he’s looking at the Snyder cut bills and wondering WTF everyone was thinking.
There is no good version of this movie. It’s just bad. The only reason to watch it is for a little bit of extra (but ultimately unnecessary) context at the very beginning of Gunn’s Suicide Squad.
how do u kno?
It’s underrated.
Decades from now, critics will marvel at all the furor over directors cuts of shit like like this, while the long version of “The Assassination of Jesse James” went unremarked-upon.
The ghost of Orson Welles appears, holding ghostly canisters of his original cut of “The Magnificent Ambersons,” reads through all the squabbling here then flips everyone off and disappears in a puff of smoke.
But first he’ll take a handful of frozen peas for the road.
“Oh SHIT!”“What??”“There’s a headwind!!”“Oh no- what kind?”“A POLITICAL ONE!!!”“Save yourself! RUUUUUUUUUNNNN!!!!”
Jared Leto finding out about the political headwind:
“Have you heard of the pyrokinetic homie?”I mean…the movie fucking sucked. The language Ayer is using makes him sound like a complete nutjob, even without saying it has anything to do with politics. I think he would have a hard enough time getting hired after that movie.That said, if the cut is finished, just put it on Max already, who fucking cares? It sounds a bit like he thinks that if the Ayer Cut was released people would overturn the new DCEU heads including James Gunn, make David Ayer their kind, and make 10 back to back movies about the pyrokinetic homie. TAKE YOUR MEDS DAVE
The original script got leaked a while ago and consensus was it was just as bad as what got released. Didn’t read it myself – only the comments from brave DC fans who did – but willing to accept that conclusion as the theatrical version was one of the worst movies (if not the worst) I’ve ever seen in theaters.
Oh good. This seems to be escalating quickly. Is the culmination of all this him climbing a belltower somewhere or…?
God, that Joker is stupid.
“They won’t release my cut!” sound’s a lot like Ayer’s film version of “hold me back!” It is never going to get released so he could claim it causes spontaneous orgasms for all the good it is going to do.
And even if the dog catches the car, I imagine that it will take the F that was Suicide Squad to F+.
I’ve read a little bit of Ayers screenplay, and its pretty terrible. Assuming it was real, it is comically bad.That being said, just throw him a little bit of money for an edit and let him release it on HBO Max. Can’t be the hardest thing in the world.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to become Slipknot, the man who can climb anything.
I got a Vanderpump Rules notification for this?
Please, for the love of god, get it straight:It’s Academy Award winning “Suicide Squad”.I just love pointing out that Ayer’s movie actually won an Oscar….sure, it was for Best Make up and Hairstyling but an Oscar is an Oscar.
If he felt that screwed there was always the Alan Smithee option. He has no right to complain at that point. Take your name off the product.