Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This one hurts worse than Independance Day for me :(

The year's most muddled piece of storytelling.

The weaker characters and generally weak plot keep it from being one of the better comic book movies.

The result is not so much Suicide Squad as Death by a Dozen Disappointments Squad.

So much happens in David Ayer's DC Comics adaptation Suicide Squad that by the end, it's as if you've seen nothing.

Most of the reviews indicate it has all of the same problems as BvsS - it tried to do too much, it's an incoherent mess and it never really comes together. Rolling Stone is saying it makes Fantastic Four look good (!).


I'm still going to see it but man, this is disappointing.

You should!

In reality, it is probably no worse than "OK" and it will be fun.

There really does seem to be an anti-DC thing going on...maybe?

Also, this:

So much happens in David Ayer's DC Comics adaptation Suicide Squad that by the end, it's as if you've seen nothing.

is one of the dumber things I've read - in a long time.

And remember, I have to Moderate the OT Forum here!

I can only speak for myself, but I definitely don't have any anti-DC slant. When I was a kid, I inherited a giant box of comic books from my brother - a big, moldering pile from the late 70s to early 80s. The person who assembled that collection has no bias, so neither did I growing up - i loved the X-men, I loved Batman, I loved Iron Man, I loved The Flash.

It does seem as though the studios have a different approach, though - like the MCU is proud of their work, and the DC movies, they just don't seem to get the source material as well.

So far as that last bit, I think I sort of understand what they mean. I watched the directors cut of BvsS and it felt like when you pack 4 hours of movie into 2.5 hours, you simultaneously get a movie which is too long, and has too much stuff packed into it so it wasn't long enough - the worst of both worlds.

I didn't think BvS was a great movie, but I didn't think it was terrible either - nowhere near as bad as the reviews were - so maybe this will be like that, lots of neat scenes thrown together poorly.

Still, I probably was looking forward to this more than probably any movie this year, so sad to see it's going to be possibly a big letdown.

Seems to be one of the films where audiences love it but critics hate it. Still going to see it either way because of morbid curiosity.

I don't know if I can handle another Batman vs. Superman. At least people seem to like Margot Robbie's Harley.

Is this the price we pay for Deadpool and Civil War? They absorbed all of the year's allotted comic book movie goodness?

I grew up a DC fan. I love Batman and Superman, but the recent DC movies have been quite hard for me, especially with Marvel consistently hitting it out the park.

I will give Suicide Squad a chance, but man has the new interpretations of Superman and Batman made me sad. Batman straight up murders some folks in BvS. Why is it so hard for the movies to follow the no killing rule for Batman? It's been a core part of his character for a good part of his history...With that out the way their is no reason for Joker to be alive.

I'm hoping that Will Smith can charm his way through this film and make it enjoyable.

I'm fine with them being flexible on the 'no killing' thing, but I also never felt it was a core part of his character either. He tries, sure, but it doesn't always work out that easily. It is part of what makes him interesting.

 Alpharius wrote:
There really does seem to be an anti-DC thing going on...maybe?

Or maybe it's because their movies just haven't been good?

 Ouze wrote:
So far as that last bit, I think I sort of understand what they mean. I watched the directors cut of BvsS and it felt like when you pack 4 hours of movie into 2.5 hours, you simultaneously get a movie which is too long, and has too much stuff packed into it so it wasn't long enough - the worst of both worlds.

I had high hopes for the director's cut of BvS and in the end, I was let down. It was too long, didn't really add anything of note, and the CGI blood splatters looked gakky.

I didn't think BvS was a great movie, but I didn't think it was terrible either - nowhere near as bad as the reviews were - so maybe this will be like that, lots of neat scenes thrown together poorly.

I'm in the same boat. I didn't hate the movie, but I certainly didn't love it either. There were some awesome parts (the warehouse brawl being the best) so I don't really feel like I wasted my money or time seeing it in the theater. The Honest Trailer pretty much summed up everything wrong with the movie.

If I can find the time to get to the theater I'll probably see Suicide Squad and hopefully I won't be too let down.

What annoyed me about the Ultimate cut was that it was sold as BvS Ultimate Cut 3D but on the back, near the bottom, in 2 point font it says the Ultimate Cut is only available in 2D and that the 3D version is the Theatrical cut.

Same sort of reaction as BvS? Excellent, I can tell I'm going to love this one! Especially after seeing the Ultimate Cut, I still rate BvS as my favourite comic book movie of all time, rivalled only by The Dark Knight and Man of Steel (and maybe X-men First Class), so if this is similar in tone and style then bring it all on! Everything we've seen from SS so far looks like it's going to be a hilarious, explosive, action-packed thrill ride, so I'm not surprised critics are bashing it, but it all looks awesome to me!

The only thing that could ruin this film for me is a mishandled Joker (by which I mean all that 'Joker is Robin' crap panning out or Leto's performance being flat). and that doesn't look at all likely from what we've seen/heard so far. Can't wait!

They sure promoted the @#$5 out of this one. There must have been a dozen 'news' stories about it in my facebook feed for the last few weeks.

Was never intending to see it in theater anyway. Will wait for the extended directors cut to come out on dvd and will probably enjoy it, as Ultimate Edition of BvS is my favorite superhero movie.

 Alpharius wrote:


Also, this:

So much happens in David Ayer's DC Comics adaptation Suicide Squad that by the end, it's as if you've seen nothing.

is one of the dumber things I've read - in a long time.

And remember, I have to Moderate the OT Forum here!

CNet's review may have explained it better when they said that the movie keeps bouncing from character to character and story to story so quickly, without spending enough time on each one, that it felt less of a movie and more of a really long movie trailer.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
There really does seem to be an anti-DC thing going on...maybe?

Or maybe it's because their movies just haven't been good?

In my experience, bad movies get bad reviews, and mediocre movies often get good reviews in spite of their mediocrity (50-60% range).

DC's recent movies have just plain sucked.

And Will Smith isn't that charming. Hollywood really needs to stop throwing him into every gakky script that it wants to pretend he can save, because the guy can't carry all that weight and his own

WHo knows?

I mean, sure, this might actually be a bad movie.

That's possible!

But, 'people' (ha!) seem to want there to be a 'comic book movie overload bubble collapse' - but at the same time, Marvel Movie Universe movies get what appears to be a pass.

DC Movies get a few extra kicks in the ribs.

Maybe?

I'll go see it and decide for myself - I mean, I did enjoy BvS...

I think the difference between Marvel and DC is that DC already had a huge cinematic/TV legacy to live up to. No matter how good Bale or Affleck may be, to an entire generation Adam West or even Michael Keaton (or Kevin Conroy!) is Batman. Christopher Reeve is Superman. Etc.

I enjoyed B vs S, but that honest trailer posted above is very accurate.

I will watch this for the crazy, hot chick. At least once in your life you should try one.

Yep. Can't tell if I'm happy or sad about this one bombing. Suicide Squad looked and sounded like a good movie, but between Harley's new age look, whatever the hell Joker Jared Leto is supposed to be, and Will Smith as Deadeye??, this is turning out to be a bomb.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I think the difference between Marvel and DC is that DC already had a huge cinematic/TV legacy to live up to. No matter how good Bale or Affleck may be, to an entire generation Adam West or even Michael Keaton (or Kevin Conroy!) is Batman. Christopher Reeve is Superman. Etc.

The difference from what I can see, as an "outsider"(ie, I watched a few cartoons with comicbook characters when I was young and I collected 2000AD and Dredd religiously for about two years, but I've never been big into comics or the whole "Marvel vs DC" thing), the main difference is Marvel don't seem to be halfway ashamed of themselves.

Marvel(in movie terms) is the middle-aged nerd who's long past caring what other people think of their hobbies and responds to sneering accusations of "childishness" etc with "Yes, and?".

DC(in movie terms) is the still-defensive and a touch angsty university-age nerd who'll wave a copy of Killing Joke or Watchmen at critics of the medium and demand it be taken seriously.

Relevant.

http://www.dorkly.com/post/79961/angry-dc-fans-have-started-a-petition-to-get-rid-of-rottentomatoes

 jreilly89 wrote:
Relevant.

http://www.dorkly.com/post/79961/angry-dc-fans-have-started-a-petition-to-get-rid-of-rottentomatoes

Another case of: "You don't have the same opinion as me, therefore you're wrong"

I've read reviews that said it needed to be lighter. Then on the other hand, Peter Travers called Ayer "limp-d*ck" for apparently compromising his hardcore nature. Underlining the nonsense going on, I also read a review that blamed Zack Snyder. How to make sense of this...?

Right now I'm convinced that both things are true -- 1) it's a flawed movie, and 2) there are critics that simply have a hate-on for the DC films. I get the value of brand equity -- I work in advertising -- and Marvel has clearly built theirs up with their films. But I'm convinced that if WB had released Age of Ultron, critics would have *BURIED* that movie.

It is what it is, and if the environment has become that toxic -- if critics and audiences have decided that the very narrow Marvel formula is the only acceptable one -- then WB should probably just lop this thing off after JL even if the films have been profitable and save themselves the heartburn. The DC films haven't been great -- although I think Man of Steel *IS* a good film that will be remembered better with time -- but I think WB has to be shocked by how they've been received, and especially by some of the nature of the criticism.

I mean, I've see so many complaints about BvS and now SS -- plenty of it from critics -- about "tone," as if there's only one possible correct one. It makes my head hurt. The tone is what it is, just like how one cop film is a zany buddy comedy and another is dark and brooding...just review the fething movie, you failed English major.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
So far as that last bit, I think I sort of understand what they mean. I watched the directors cut of BvsS and it felt like when you pack 4 hours of movie into 2.5 hours, you simultaneously get a movie which is too long, and has too much stuff packed into it so it wasn't long enough - the worst of both worlds.

I had high hopes for the director's cut of BvS and in the end, I was let down. It was too long, didn't really add anything of note, and the CGI blood splatters looked gakky.

I tend to have a real hatred and roll my eyes at conspiracy theories but... There does seem to be some kinda of thing out there that gives Marvel (or maybe it's Disney? Considering Apocalypse was considered 'free game') immunity, while DC has an open season from anyone that can claim some sort of authoritative opinion.

EG, the sheer amount of times I've seen people dismissing the Legends/Arrow/Flash/Supergirl as worthless because "everyone is too attractive looking in them."

Apparently the Killing Joke film is getting bashed as well (I don't know myself yet, it's not out here until the end of the month.)

Oh, I saw the Ultimate Edition of BvS yesterday and I enjoyed it. All of Gorgon's post there has pretty much nailed it on the head. The Ultimate cut doesn't change any of the characters actions or events (EG the Batmobile/Batwing still machine guns the heck out of people), but it makes a LOT of things that didn't make 'sense' in the film, or seemed contrived or unexplained, well, make sense.

 Compel wrote:
I tend to have a real hatred and roll my eyes at conspiracy theories but... There does seem to be some kinda of thing out there that gives Marvel (or maybe it's Disney? Considering Apocalypse was considered 'free game') immunity, while DC has an open season from anyone that can claim some sort of authoritative opinion.

Apocalypse is Fox, not Marvel/Disney.

It'd be a shame if SS is poor because I was really looking forward to it. I'm not a DC or a Marvel fan (Transformers is the only comic I have a long history with, and Michael Bay is busy stomping all over that ), I just find the DC ones only score well for me visually (apart from Doomsday).

That was my point. Apocalypse is free game for reviewers to go after because it's not Disney. (Indeed, rumours have it that Marvel/Disney are trying to torpedo the fanbases for it and Fantastic Four, by, for example, removing the licenses for making new Fantastic Four products.)

Marvel has a long history of making their heroes and villains very human.

DC has leaned more toward the "larger than life".
I think DC is not catching a break because they ARE trying to make the characters more human and that is not what they were known for.
I always felt that DC characters are known for being scary/formidable/fierce and anything more than passing attention to their emotional vulnerability seems contrary to their literary style.
If seems too much "me too" with Marvel.

I think Suicide Squad may be suffering from what the Star Trek Next Gen movies had issues with: too many main characters to fit in.
I have friends that HATE books or movies with multiple characters to jump around to: they like one storyline.
I would have to see if they felt obligated to give much of a back story for each of the characters: that would eat up a fair chunk of the movie if not done well.

I will go see the movie.
The cartoon the movie was based on was terrific fun so an ADHD live action extravaganza I would expect not too many issues unless the acting is really bad.

I read a few reviews and one complaint was that only Deadshot and Harley have any real focus on in the film. - Seems kinda a weird thing to complain about. In Assault On Arkham... Only Deadshot, Harley and the Joker (the villain) have any real focus on them...

Like someone touched on earlier, I think it's DC's and Marvel's approach to the tones. DC is trying very hard after the success of Dark Knight to recapture the dark and gritty feel of superhero movies.

Counter that with the smash hits of the Avengers and Captain America, with the mix of comedy, drama, and action. Guess which is harder to pull off?

@Compel: Indeed. Regardless of what iteration of the Squad you're talking about, it's always one or two headliners (in this case, Harley, Deadshot and maybe Boomerang) and then an assortment of random villains that will have a 'cool thing about them', contribute a few different ways to kill people in fight scenes, and one to get 'suicided' early on to demonstrate what happens when they step out of line.

On the subject of critics and the DC vs Marvel thing, I do think a lot of it is that there are certain types of reviewers that don't rate comic book movies at all, and need a way to rant about them; Marvel kind of snuck in under the radar with Iron Man and Thor and all of a sudden comic book movies were mainstream... now, Marvel are untouchable, so DC and Fox with the X-men become the targets, hence BvS getting panned, Apocalypse getting mixed reviews at best and Civil War getting wall to wall praise despite being (in my opinion) the least engaging of the three (which isn't to say I didn't love it, but Apocalypse and BvS had much more to them, I think).

Of course, SS could just be getting poor reviews because it's poor, but I seriously doubt that given what we've seen so far.

 Compel wrote:
I tend to have a real hatred and roll my eyes at conspiracy theories but... There does seem to be some kinda of thing out there that gives Marvel (or maybe it's Disney? Considering Apocalypse was considered 'free game') immunity, while DC has an open season from anyone that can claim some sort of authoritative opinion.

I don't think there's a conspiracy, just because how the heck would that even work? I just think WB is caught in this zeitgeist thing going on with superhero films. Yes, Deadpool from Fox was "different," but that movie is still about the laughs. The WB films are asking serious questions about their heroes at a time when a good chunk of the audience doesn't want those questions asked. They really just want superheroics and some laughs.

SS probably also has its problems. I just can't trust critics right now to know if those problems are mountains or molehills.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Like someone touched on earlier, I think it's DC's and Marvel's approach to the tones. DC is trying very hard after the success of Dark Knight to recapture the dark and gritty feel of superhero movies.

I think WB saw that as the natural next step coming off the success of the DK films, and a differentiator to the Marvel offerings. That's why I think they were probably blindsided by people turning on them so harshly over "tone."

Remember that MoS was never meant to be part of a DCEU. Nolan and Goyer came up with an idea of how to do a Superman film while working on the Batman films. Nolan had other stuff going on and didn't want to direct it, so Snyder got the job while Nolan produced. Nolan's fingerprints are all over that one, though. After MoS, WB wanted Nolan to be their DC 'godfather' once they caught the bug for the extended universe, but he declined and stepped away from it all. So Snyder kinda moved into that role, although it wasn't what he originally signed on for. BvS was only supposed to be MoS 2, and not the launch of a 'universe'.

So it would probably be fair to say that these shifting plans -- and changing cast of characters -- hasn't exactly helped the DCEU. There's also a growing sense that WB is behaving in a reactionary fashion to the criticism, which it doesn't give you a strong sense that WB has their eye on the ball.

I feel a little bad for Snyder, honestly. He's kept his mouth shut, played the company man, executed a plan that wasn't really his and dealt with what seems to be an increasingly involved studio, and now people act like he's the devil incarnate.