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.
2016/08/10 21:29:02
Subject: Re:Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
I saw this Monday night. I liked most of the characters in it, Will Smith and Margot Robbie were really good, and Viola Davis was excellent. And there were lots of good laughs and some great looking sets.
Ultimately though, this was a film that was very plodding, when its characters and very nature needed it to be free wheeling, almost chaotic. The team got assembled in some stylish but repetitive introductions, then they walked to their objective, then when that didn't go to plan they walked to go fight the big bad guys exactly like we knew they would from the beginning. This film needed to be way more chaotic and unpredictable. It would have given it a sense of fun that just wasn't there.
I mean, don't get me wrong, the film was funny and had plenty of good one liners, but it wasn't that much fun.
I don't think the movie deserves the very negative critical scores it's been getting. It misses the mark, but it isn't terrible and has many good elements. It's more disappointing and kind of okay, more than actually bad.
The only thing that left a bad taste in my mouth was the Joker. A lot of people have criticised Leto, but I'm not sure it was his fault. The character on the page simply wasn't anywhere near the previous film versions. There was no greater philosophy behind the character, there was nothing truly subversive about him, he was just a particularly violent gangster with some loud fashion. Hopefully they'll do something better with the character in later movies, but given the mess they've made of Zod and Luthor, there seems to be a pattern forming.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/11 09:22:20
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2016/08/11 13:51:10
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
Critics sure are standing up the strawmen. The question isn't whether the movie has problems, it's whether the problems are as great as they claim, and whether there are films equally or more flawed that were received much better by critics. You can poke holes in Oscar-winning films if you want to.
I don't think there's a conspiracy. However, I do think there are critics already rolling their eyes when walking into the screenings, and blogger types going well OTT in order to pile on and claim their bonafides.
I don't think there's a conspiracy. However, I do think there are critics already rolling their eyes when walking into the screenings, and blogger types going well OTT in order to pile on and claim their bonafides.
I think the first part there is definitely evident in that article. The author is so overtly dismissive of comic book movies as a whole that of course he's not going to like a bloody comic book movie, and that has to colour his review somewhat. Ultimately, it undermines his entire review in the first place, as it means that from the outset, he's not talking about what makes the film good or bad, he's talking about what he liked and disliked but based on very heavy preconceptions. I appreciate that all media is subjective and it all comes down to opinions in the end, but he's in no more position to give Suicide Squad a fair go than I am to give an unbiased opinion on the latest foreign language indie movie that I have absolutely no interest in seeing.
Which perhaps makes sense of the disparity between critic and audience reviews that seems endemic to big movies at the moment. Especially on sites like RT where everything is a binary 'good/bad', it breaks down thus; the 1/3 (for example) of critics who give something like Suicide Squad a good rating are doing so because they happen to actually like the style and genre, the other 2/3 are giving it poor reviews because it's not their area of interest in the first place, and are only watching it because it's their job to, and ordinarily wouldn't even touch the film with a 10 foot pole.
On the other hand, the audience score is taken from a sample of people who are actively interested in the film, enough to pay money to see it and be motivated to write a review; if 3/4 of them are walking away happy, then I don't see why anyone would give a damn for the critical scores, as the film is clearly pleasing it's target audience, and thus is doing its job.
That is of course ignoring the overriding issue with sites such as RT where a 1/10 review means no less than a 5/10 and a 6/10 equates to a 10/10 thanks to the 'fresh/rotten' system that allows no middle ground, but that's a whole other kettle of fish (though it does contribute to why I cannot take the ratings on such sites seriously).
2016/08/11 17:33:29
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
If you're using RT as your example and 1/X fractions, you should be saying something more like this:
1/4 are giving it a "good" because they are heavily-biased geek media and predisposed to liking superhero movies, despite the clear and obvious flaws.
1/4 are giving it a "bad" because they don't like action movies at all, so the clear and obvious flaws are all that they can see.
1/2 are giving it a "bad" because it's their job to see movies and evaluate them, and they conclude that the movie is more flawed than likable.
That's more in line with the actual 3:1 ratio that RT is actually showing. As opposed to the 2:1 split that you had supposed above.
And, of course, one merely has to look at Guardians (91%/92%) and Deadpool (84%/91%) as evidence that the reviews aren't necessarily so biased. With more than 9 out of 10 critics (and audiences) liking Guardians, I think it puts an upper limit on just how much anti-superhero bias is out there. And Deadpool being liked by at least 5 out of 6 critics (and 9 out of 10 ticket buyers) shows there's a fairly high tolerance even for an R-rated version.
The rational conclusion is that SS is not as good of a movie as what people would like. And it's not like they're totally savaging it. Recall that Fanastic Four only got 9%... 1/4 is much better than 1/11. ETA - I watched FF on video, and it was pure crap. I'm glad I didn't pay $20 in the theater. If I had paid for it. I'd have been mad about it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/11 17:34:35
@John; if you HAD seen Fantastic Failure in theaters, after all the warnings and hate it rightly deserved, and hated it, I'd have thrown a dreadsock at you!!
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
2016/08/12 01:16:32
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
If I were a rabid FF fan, I might have pre-bought my non-refundable tickets over the Internet, for a super-special Thursday screening before the reviews really came out...
Actually, that's what Warner did with BvS, not allowing critical screenings to publish until *after* the movie hit the theaters...
But I didn't, so no dreadsock for you!
Of course, you need to be careful - I'm old school, and can legit arm myself with a dreadbola (3 dreads in 3 socks)...
Getting back to SS, the reviews came out early enough, as Warner legit thought this would be better received compared to BvS, by dint of being different characters and creative team. Maybe they should have embargoed SS, too?
I *am* a rabid FF fan (comics, obviously) and since I've consistently been let down by every FF movie ever, I didn't buy advance tickets for the latest one either - and I'm glad I didn't.
I still haven't watched it, but I will eventually, I suppose.
But I'll probably be watching Suicide Squad this weekend though!
2016/08/12 01:24:55
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
No need to be angry about wasted money. Every theater I've ever walked out of a movie from has given a full refund.
But let's be fair here; if you stay to the end credits, you don't deserve your money back no matter how bad the movie was. And sometimes a truly gakky movie is the best experience--my circle of friends are still getting our money's worth at the expense of Prometheus and Peter Jackson's King Long. BVS will surely recoup it's cost for me in entertaining rants by the end of the fiscal year.
I think part of the difference in the critical reception of Marvel and DC is in the kind of films the two franchises are making. Both companies are making very different kinds of comic movies.
Marvel is making movies with a comic book skin. The Winter Soldier is a spy thriller that happens to be set in a world with superheroes. Ant Man is a heist movie that has superhero elements added to it.
Whereas DC are trying for something very different, they are starting with the format and logic of comic books, and adding them to the big screen. Both BvS and SS had a series of character driven subplots that were kind of loosely hanging around the central plot. It felt more like a comic book story told over 12 or 24 episodes, possibly over two different series. The Joker's story kind of felt like a cross-over.
I'm not saying one approach is good and the other bad. But it might possibly explain why critics might be more dismissive of the DC movies, whereas fans seem pretty happy with what they're getting.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2016/08/12 03:07:43
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
Alpharius wrote: I *am* a rabid FF fan (comics, obviously) and since I've consistently been let down by every FF movie ever, I didn't buy advance tickets for the latest one either - and I'm glad I didn't.
I still haven't watched it, but I will eventually, I suppose.
But I'll probably be watching Suicide Squad this weekend though!
IMO, the biggest problem with the FF movies is that they try to make Reed a nice guy hero, rather than portraying him as the reckless, arrogant know-it-all jerk that he actually is. If the movie would just revolve around Sue and Ben, it would be actually be fantastic. Tom Cruise, for example, would make an excellent Reed Richards.
You're not missing anything at all. The latest film has basically nothing to do with the comics. I was mad at the way they story was written.
sebster wrote: I think part of the difference in the critical reception of Marvel and DC is in the kind of films the two franchises are making. Both companies are making very different kinds of comic movies.
Marvel is making movies with a comic book skin. The Winter Soldier is a spy thriller that happens to be set in a world with superheroes. Ant Man is a heist movie that has superhero elements added to it.
Whereas DC are trying for something very different, they are starting with the format and logic of comic books, and adding them to the big screen. Both BvS and SS had a series of character driven subplots that were kind of loosely hanging around the central plot. It felt more like a comic book story told over 12 or 24 episodes, possibly over two different series. The Joker's story kind of felt like a cross-over.
I'm not saying one approach is good and the other bad. But it might possibly explain why critics might be more dismissive of the DC movies, whereas fans seem pretty happy with what they're getting.
I think the main difference is simply the Marvel movies are fun, and Man of Steel and Suicide Squad are not. I haven't seen Batman v Superman so I can't speak to it. The DC movies kind of remind of the Indy books during the 90s, ultra violent and grim without much in redeeming qualities. They don't represent the DC universe I am a fan of. Of course my fandom died with the introduction of the Nu52.
2016/08/12 07:55:44
Subject: Re:Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
Crimson Devil wrote: I think the main difference is simply the Marvel movies are fun, and Man of Steel and Suicide Squad are not. I haven't seen Batman v Superman so I can't speak to it. The DC movies kind of remind of the Indy books during the 90s, ultra violent and grim without much in redeeming qualities. They don't represent the DC universe I am a fan of. Of course my fandom died with the introduction of the Nu52.
Sure, but the question is why one set of films are enjoyed more than the other set of films. It isn't simply a matter of tone or outlook, because the Marvel films are absolutely filled with death and disaster. They are absolutely cynical about any and all institutions - the heroes have to do it all by themselves because everyone and everything else is either useless or secretly evil. And those main characters are self-absorbed man children. Sure there are plenty of good jokes, but Suicide Squad had plenty of good jokes as well. The Marvel films have a brighter colour palette, but I doubt that's all it is.
When you mention the DC movies reminding you of the indie comics of the 90s, that's very much my point. I was actually thinking of 90s comics when I watched SS - I kept looking for the extra pouches and guns with oval barrels to appear. SS really does feel like a comic book put on the screen, for good and for bad. The negatives were mostly with cohesion and pacing - what works in a serial release on the page doesn't work when crammed in to a few hours of screen time.
Whereas the Marvel films are films first and foremost - the plots are the plots of genre movies, and they work as genre movies that just happen to have superheroes in them. This give them pacing and momentum, and gets rid of that 'plodding' feel that's plagued the DC films.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/12 07:57:11
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2016/08/12 16:32:27
Subject: Re:Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
Crimson Devil wrote: I think the main difference is simply the Marvel movies are fun, and Man of Steel and Suicide Squad are not.
The DC movies kind of remind of the Indy books during the 90s, ultra violent and grim without much in redeeming qualities. They don't represent the DC universe I am a fan of. Of course my fandom died with the introduction of the Nu52.
Marvel has more variety in tone both between movies and within movies. Every Marvel movie has moments where they pause before something big happens, or they catch their breath after something big, and Marvel uses those moments rather deliberately to illustrate on interpersonal character relationships. A good example would be the farmhouse scene in Avengers 2, which runs for 15 minutes with no real "action" - does DC really do that? No, of course not. The farmhouse scene is pure Whedon, and DC is hiring directors based on their visual shooting ability, not their ability to film ensembles and create characters. When I think back on the Marvel movies, it's the little conversation scenes that always come back to me. Even Iron Man 1, when he's building his new suit, he's having a conversation with his goofy robots - whereas Batman is just doing Crossfit in the dark... To me, that's the big difference - Marvel always has their characters interacting, vs just acting.
The other big thing is that Marvel doesn't need to keep doing origin stories to introduce characters. How many times have we seen Batman's parents die? Do we really need to see the Waynes die again and again to know that Bruce is tortured by their death, driven insane by it? Consider how Guardians introduces their characters. It's not the AR rap sheets as they're in-processed at the Kyln. Rocket exists as a fully-formed character with a clear personality and social position in his group before we even see him. And it's not really a shock that he's revealed to be a talking animal - to me, that is arguably the best superhero intro I've ever seen on screen. Now, consider the first sightings we have of the Justice League... iPad clips. Remote, impersonal, artificial. Compare those with the Kyln, where the guards are having a conversation as the information comes up in the background and the actors are indirectly interacting with them and the audience.
It's a fundamental question of showing vs telling and interactng vs acting.
Getting back to the "the 90s, ultra violent and grim without much in redeeming qualities" comics, I'm pretty sure that's DC Comic in the nutshell, rather than the indies. At least if DC's Lobo was anything to go by...
I'm sure they are. But knowing DC, they'll put Lobo in his pink & orange footie-jammies, working under Vril Dox, with no nudity or sex... Wolverine Deadpool Lobo, if you will.
JSF wrote:... this is really quite an audacious move by GW, throwing out any pretext that this is a game and that its customers exist to do anything other than buy their overpriced products for the sake of it. The naked arrogance, greed and contempt for their audience is shocking.
= Epic First Post.
2016/08/13 21:20:52
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
I saw it earlier, walked out thrilled. It delivered on everything I'd hoped and that the trailers promised; great performances for Deadshot and Harley (and Diablo, not something I expected!), more of a taste of Joker and Batman, good humour, kickass action sequences and just an all-round fun script. Excellent score and solid soundtrack, nice tight plot, one of the most comic booky comic book movies in a while as well (particularly in the opening character reel and costume design and such).
I did feel Katana was underused and Killer Croc might as well have not been in it, but those are minor quibbles in what was ultimately a pretty awesome couple of hours. I shall probably see it again at the cinema, and keep my fingers crossed for an extended edition down the line as there was a fair bit across various trailers that didn't make it in.
2016/08/14 01:58:43
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
Suicide Squad is reported to have a BvS-like -79% drop going into it's second weekend, so those negative critical reviews and negative word of mouth are having an impact.
Saw it last night. It was okay. Harley and Deadshot were the best parts in it.
But it felt like something was missing, like a great big chunk of it was removed
Spoiler:
Like when at the end, they all start saying that they were a family. Like how? When did you find the time to bond? Harley literally tried to escape from them twenty minutes earlier.
. And some of the squad might as well have no existed because they didn't really do anything.
On another note, could Harley's hotpants be any shorter? Like seriously she might as well have walked around in a thong, the coverage would have been the same.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
2016/08/14 20:02:47
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
welshhoppo wrote: But it felt like something was missing, like a great big chunk of it was removed
There are reports that the disjointedness was due to Ayer originally producing a Batman-esqe "dark & gritty" cut, and then producing a GotG-like "music & mayhem: cut, and the DC Warner suits ultimately having the two cuts mashed into a single thing, with reshoots to connect the two. The result is that there are big chunks missing from both sides.
It does amaze me Zack Snyder is still heading these projects. Setting aside that I don't like his DC films, but others do, (and of course, none of these films have bombed they've just performed under expectations) I can't help but feel like it would be very hard for anyone to do worse with this property. The popularity of the IP is what's selling these films more than anything, and I don't understand why the big wigs at Warner are so dense they can't realize that Snyder isn't contributing as much as a director should. If anything the creative team from the writers to the director seem to be the foremost obstacle to success being ludicrous success.
Also this;
You just don't get it. And it's not just DC movies, it's your whole slate. Jupiter Ascending. Get Hard. Hot Pursuit. Max. Vacation. Pan. Point Break. fething PAN, you jerk. People lost their jobs and you decided Pan was a good idea.
Amen brother. Amen.
I liked The Jungle Book though XD
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/15 01:04:49
JohnHwangDD wrote: Suicide Squad is reported to have a BvS-like -79% drop going into it's second weekend, so those negative critical reviews and negative word of mouth are having an impact.
You appear to post these types of things with a lot of...satisfaction?
Why is that?
2016/08/15 03:34:55
Subject: Suicide Squad is getting terrible reviews (26% RT)
It does amaze me Zack Snyder is still heading these projects. Setting aside that I don't like his DC films, but others do, (and of course, none of these films have bombed they've just performed under expectations) I can't help but feel like it would be very hard for anyone to do worse with this property.
The popularity of the IP is what's selling these films more than anything, and I don't understand why the big wigs at Warner are so dense they can't realize that Snyder isn't contributing as much as a director should.
If anything the creative team from the writers to the director seem to be the foremost obstacle to success being ludicrous success.
Also this;
You just don't get it. And it's not just DC movies, it's your whole slate. Jupiter Ascending. ...
Personally, I really like Zack Snyder's work. I don't think there is a director alive today who does a better job of literally bringing a comic book "to life" on the screen. None. By far. As a director, he is singularly gifted at crafting beautiful shots and visual storytelling in short scenes. Also, for the record, Snyder's Sucker Punch was a clear flop, basically grossing its budget. Which is too bad, because the DC is excellent. Having recently watched Jason Bourne, that guy did a really gakky job, and I fething despise his shakey-cam close-crop "action" work. And the story was much stupider than the previous book adaptations. If BvS (or SS) were shot like Jason Bourne, Warner definitely would have done worse.
As far as directing goes, Snyder is doing fine. Where the DC movies fail really hard appears to be in the writing and story. Sucker Punch was a Snyder story, and it was OK, if you like his style. But it definitely could have benefitted from better writing. BvS was a disaster of writing. So Garbage in = garbage out - Snyder is only as good as his source material. Give him something acclaimed like Watchmen, or something like 300 to make shot-for-panel, and it comes out just fine as long as he doesn't deviate from the book. Give him a muddled hash written and reworked by committee, and it's still going to be a mess.
Oh, yeah ... Jupiter Ascending was nowhere near as good as the Wachowski's prior work, double the flop of Sucker Punch on double the budget. I can understand Warner wanting to make something happen but, without the fun pop psych of the Matrix, it wasn't going to happen. Also, the whole anti-Cinderella thing was just wierd.
Anyhow, the whole thing is disappointing. I wonder if Warner will let Ayer release a DC of SS - that would be very satisfying.
I really enjoyed 300, and I thought the deviation from the original story in expanding Queen Gorgo's character was well done. I will never bash Snyder's camera work, cause when his competition is the likes of Michael Bay's constant shifting cuts that make action scenes incomprehensible, well I have to go with the guy who can actually put together a coherent fight on screen (and the fight scenes are easily the parts that are most enjoyable of his DC entries).
The story is definitely where these movies have fallen apart, but there's also the running trend I've seen in Snyder's work that I don't think can be wholly blamed on writers. Snyder tries to invoke these really big thought provoking ideas in his films, except unlike Hideki Ano who just threw references into his anime to troll anime fans, Snyder throws them in and seems incapable of making them actually come out to mean anything. It results in films that have this facade of "deepness" that's really just a shallow puddle. He confuses loading a film with symbolism with giving a film meaning and so much time is wasted on the muddled meanings that the film fails to be enjoyable.
And yes. Jupiter Ascending was dreadful in a way I didn't think a big budget block buster could be (sure they can be bad, but they're not usually what I'd call dreadful). It had all the rottenness of a poorly made indy film with all the overblown CGI and editing work of the Prequel Trilogy XD Talk about a disaster playing out on screen.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/15 03:55:48
JohnHwangDD wrote: Suicide Squad is reported to have a BvS-like -79% drop going into it's second weekend, so those negative critical reviews and negative word of mouth are having an impact.
You appear to post these types of things with a lot of...satisfaction?
Why is that?
Spoiler:
Pretty much an obligatory response there, with basically zero wiggle room.
Also, Lord of Hats is spot on that Snyder's action work is top notch. It's on par with what we see coming out of Asia, where the director has confidence in the actors and stuntpeople and the fight choreographers to make the action look good, so he just needs capture it at its best. But the other thing that Snyder does really well are the freeze shots which line up panel for panel. We saw that in Watchmen and BvS, pulling things right off the pages. It's uncanny the detail that he works in for those things. Re: symbolism, I see it as Snyder wanting to make things absolutely clear what people are supposed to take away from his film, rather than trying to have something deeper. He really wants people to see Superman as Space Jesus, simple as that.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/15 04:06:04
Well, I saw SS this past weekend with a whole bunch of friends of mine, and well, it wasn't terrible. I went in with low expectations, and wound up having a fun movie-going-experience. Now, it's certainly not a masterpiece, and most of the criticisms I've heard of it are broadly on the money, but were were some cool moments, and it was sufficiently coherent, and didn't feel totally soulless. The casting worked pretty well as well, with Viola Davis making an excellent Amanda Waller, with Will Smith, Margot Robbie & Jay Hernandez being pretty good to.
I reserve a special category for bad super hero film (that I've actually seen), there are currently 4 entries in it; Amazing Spiderman, The Fant4stic Four, Man of Steel, and BvS. Suicide Squad is a category above that, so I am thankful for that.
-- $k 
-- 9k 
-- 6k 
-- 4k 
-- 
~1.5k
