• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Suicide Squad - Grading & Discussion

Grade it!


  • Total voters
    107
You do realize that Rotten Tomatoes has a numeric rating scale too, right? They have Suicide Squad at 4.8 out of 10. Pretty much the same as Metacritic.
 
I feel exactly the same way Gaith does. I stopped going to Rotten Tomatoes when I realized I didn't recognize the majority of the publications on there, while I have heard of pretty much every publication on Metacritic.
Yeah, but it's not like RT doesn't take reviews from the same sources as Metacritic. It requires one extra click to see them. There are just "new media" sources to go along with them.
 
I prefer RT to Metacritic. I mostly trust youtube/"new media" reviewers (at least the ones I follow) over big magazines/sites anyway, and when its all just reviews put together into a percentage I prefer how RT does it to how Metacritic does it.
 
I just got back from the theater and I had a really good time. Ayer killed it. The movie was fun, funny (actual jokes), well directed and well acted. Go see it, mates.
 
If you missed it, what I said was that in cases like this, the critics clearly don't have the same view as someone like me will have. They're inability to understand what they're watching is utterly irrelevant to whether I'll enjoy it or not. Rather than accepting the movie for what it is, they clearly expected something entirely different, and it shows in most of their reviews.

I also said -- and I'm fairly sure you'll edit out this bit if you reply again, too -- that I may end up agreeing with them after I see the movie. But as it stands, based solely on their reviews, those reviews are largely meaningless to me because it is, in fact, clear that they didn't understand what kind of movie this is. It may still suck, but if it does, I doubt it'll be because of most of the reasons they've cited in their reviews.

That I can agree with. Sorry it my reply seemed sarcastic, but before it seemed like you were mad at the critics for not agreeing with you. I see I was wrong on that one.

But I also think that no matter what kind of movie a particular movie might be, it shouldn't require the viewer to be a certain type of person or know certain things or even read the comic tie in/web promotional stuff. A movie should be good on it's own. Sure, some movies are not going to be as popular because of subject matter, but that doesn't make them bad, just not as popular. And the reverse is true, bad movies that are popular are not good movies.

Some people rely on reviews to choose their movies. Some don't. Neither tack is wrong. You don't judge a movie until you've actually seen it? Good on ya, mate! There's no law anywhere that requires the rest of us to follow your lead.

Agree! It'd be different if movies had a money back guarantee, but they don't, so no matter how much it sucked, you're still out your money. I don't blame anyone for holding off and not spending $7+ when you can rent for $1 in a few months.
 
I've seen the movie. Here's my review without having read all of this thread or any other reviews...

The Bad:
  • It wasn't the screwball comedy or even the dark comedy that the trailers made it out to be. It was a straight-up action movie with the requisite humor. I couldn't tell what parts were retooled but it wouldn't surprise me if they added some music to change the tone in a few spots at the very beginning and very end. Music makes all the difference and that was a big part of what made Guardians of the Galaxy what it was. This movie didn't go all out but it had touches. The trailers are misleading.
  • The story wasn't clear. It had a decent first act that introduced some of the characters but like BvS, it was poorly put together. The second act was a bit of a mess with even less clarity but in the third act, things came together a bit more and we got some decent character moments.
  • Jared Leto as the Joker was pretty good but he didn't really serve a purpose beyond playing off of Robbie.
  • I'm a big fan of Adam Beach and thought that he was sorely wasted.
The Good:
  • Viola Davis killed as Amanda Waller. She was every bit the Amanda Waller you all know and love (to hate).
  • Will Smith was Will Smith but he was also a pretty decent Deadshot.
  • Margot Robbie was a fantastic Harley Quinn. Crazy and demented. There was even a nice little surprise. You'll know it when you see it if you haven't been spoiled already.
  • It was actually nice to see Smith and Robbie working together again after Focus.
  • Cara Delevigne was great. Scary like in a Japanese horror film, dangerous and sensual. She was sexier than Harley by a mile and I was fascinated by the dual character that she played. If there was one bad thing about her character it was that she wasn't explored a little more.
  • Batman.
  • The whole ensemble was generally good. Good cast, bad plotting.
  • The movie was nicely connected to the larger DC movie universe with the U.S. government's view of Superman and references to events in the last two movies.
The Verdict:
  • Man of Steel A+
  • Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice C
  • Suicide Squad B+
 
Last edited:
i just got back from an early screening of Suicide Squad, and I am giving it a solid B. It's not without its flaws, and the ending is a itlle messed up, but it was a fun action flim with lots of great characters.

Harley, Deadshot and Waller stole the move. I loved how Waller was the worst of the lot. And the mid credits trailer was fun. And helps tie into the greater DCEU.
 
I'm sure we've all read that Hollywood Reporter story by now?
It looks like an unfortunate pattern has revealed itself: WB studio execs create their own "better" edit of the movie, then the director has to smile through gritted teeth while "his" movie is condemned as a mess.

This reminds me of what Genesis P. Orridge said about music company execs: they are all essentially mediocre people with no talent who don't understand or care about the product they're pushing, and you can never trust their word.

At this point we have to cling to two hopes:
1. The actual director's version will be released (even those who despise BvS admit the UE is better)
2. The studio has LEARNT IT'S F***ING LESSON.


COLLIDER does a non-spoiler panel review. Majority opinion is the characters are great, and there are many fun things about the movie, but the structure was a mess and the climax was weak:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Also: Jared Leto Says There Are A Lot of Deleted Joker Scenes

Well, this is one reason why Rotten Tomatoes sucks on toast: it's filled with dozens upon dozens of random, no-name reviewers, whereas the far superior Metacritic only includes scores from serious publications. (Not even IGN makes their cut!) Why so many people cite and pay attention to RT when Metacritic is around is beyond me; most reviewers quoted by Metacritic I've at least heard of, and I respect many of them
Exactly. The way so many people cite RT as THE source for ratings is purely an indicator of herd behaviour, especially as it's obvious most people don't even understand what the "fresh" rating means. (Whether it means anything, or provides any useful info, is also up for debate.)
This Friday night I can either see a film that film critics say is mediocre at best or terrible at worst or I can have dinner at a restaurant that food critics say is excellent.
You know that "fine dining" is an archetypal example of the emperor's new clothes? :lol:
 
Last edited:
I have to add, it wouldn't bother me if I never say this Joker again. His entire characterization was as a love-sick puppy chasing after his Harley. I just didn't find any menace in him, and the film would have been better if he ended up on the cutting room floor.
 
When BvS was getting so much bad fan/audience reaction and SS was said to go into reshoots I was afraid because at that point SS already looked like it was going to be a fun movie, I think we had the Bohemian Rhapsody trailer by then. It sounds like the studio meddling may have harmed this one but it still more or less came out on the upside but I wouldn't be surprised if it too has an Unrated Cut on BD because the common theme I hear is that some of the reshot scenes stand out and there's some gaps and stumbles in the plot and narrative that are obviously due to scenes being reshot or removed.

I still look forward to it big time and expect to love Margot's take on Harley Quinn as she's gotten the lion's share of what little praise the negative reviews are giving the movie.

On the RT vs. Metacritic thing. Usually when I look at the reviews/scores on Rotten Tomatoes I limit it to the "Top Critics" filter which limits it to critics from established publications and not some person with a blog. But in most cases the Top Critics and All Critics scores more-or-less align.
 
Sigh China, China, China. Why not treat your citizens as adults and let THEM decided whether or not a movie is good for them to see?
 
I guess that's what it's like to live under a communist governement.

Information is censored. The young adults and kid today (more than 25 years later) don't know about Tiananmen Square masscare, because the Chinese government suppressed the information about it.

The Chinese government has attempted to censor Google searches.

There is a board of censors who decide what kind of media can be consumed by it's populace. This year so far, Deadpool, Ghostbusters and potentially Suicide Squad have been banned from being viewed in China for perceived harmful subject matter.


Crazy, to think we live in a world like this. Russia is freer than this.
 
I've seen the movie. Here's my review without having read all of this thread or any other reviews...

The Bad:
  • It wasn't the screwball comedy or even the dark comedy that the trailers made it out to be. It was a straight-up action movie with the requisite humor. I couldn't tell what parts were retooled but it wouldn't surprise me if they added some music to change the tone in a few spots at the very beginning and very end. Music makes all the difference and that was a big part of what made Guardians of the Galaxy what it was. This movie didn't go all out but it had touches. The trailers are misleading.
  • The story wasn't clear. It had a decent first act that introduced some of the characters but like BvS, it was poorly put together. The second act was a bit of a mess with even less clarity but in the third act, things came together a bit more and we got some decent character moments.
  • Jared Leto as the Joker was pretty good but he didn't really serve a purpose beyond playing off of Robbie.
  • I'm a big fan of Adam Beach and thought that he was sorely wasted.
The Good:
  • Viola Davis killed as Amanda Waller. She was every bit the Amanda Waller you all know and love (to hate).
  • Will Smith was Will Smith but he was also a pretty decent Deadshot.
  • Margot Robbie was a fantastic Harley Quinn. Crazy and demented. There was even a nice little surprise. You'll know it when you see it if you haven't been spoiled already.
  • It was actually nice to see Smith and Robbie working together again after Focus.
  • Cara Delevigne was great. Scary like in a Japanese horror film, dangerous and sensual. She was sexier than Harley by a mile and I was fascinated by the dual character that she played. If there was one bad thing about her character it was that she wasn't explored a little more.
  • Batman.
  • The whole ensemble was generally good. Good cast, bad plotting.
  • The movie was nicely connected to the larger DC movie universe with the U.S. government's view of Superman and references to events in the last two movies.
The Verdict:
  • Man of Steel A+
  • Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice C
  • Suicide Squad B+

Nice review. I pretty much agree with your grades for MOS and BvS, so would be perfectly fine with this movie being a B, considering Suicide Squad wasn't something I had any great attachment to before anyway.

Obviously I know the bad reviews and lackluster box office so far aren't good for the larger DC brand or reputation, but on a personal level I'm actually feeling pretty happy and content so far. The only movies I really cared about were MOS (which I loved), Wonder Woman (which looks freakin amazing), and Justice League (which looks very promising).

BvS seemed problematic to me from the start, with trying to force a conflict between those characters, and just wasn't a story I was dying to see anyway. And while I hope the Flash and Aquaman movies are good, I'm not going to feel all that crushed by it if they're not.
 
Something that bugged me:

The whole "shoot Harley" bit when her nanite thingy didn't work. They acted like Will Smith was the only one who could do it. Uh, the rest of you have guns too, did you somehow forget? :shrug:
 
God this film was an utter mess. I give it 4/10. An F. Batman V Superman was better (though again that film also wasn't a good film, bit it did feature more scenes that I actually did like), and Man off Steel a film I was extremely disappointed in now ranks easily higher then either of the two that followed.

The pluses were easily (and in order) Deadshot, Waller, and Harley. Wasn't impressed with most of the rest though didn't dislike them much either, with the major exception of the Enchantress which I hated. Leto's Joker bored the living shit out of me and I was glad that the role was so minimal, actually outside of one brief seen I think I would have preferred him not in the film.

The real foundation of the film, its plot, structure and Editing were absolutely terrible. Not to the level of Fantastic Four, but it was really bad. If it wasn't for the three characters above this would have easily been a 3/10 star film for me. The friends I went all ranked it better then I did, but their highest score was 6/10. Letter grades they had were from C- to D-. I was the only one who said F. But they also call me a film snob. Which I think is funny because I actually like Airplane, Naked Gun and Something About Mary more then they do, so go figure.

I've not seen a ton of films this year (Civil War, Tarzan, Trek, Bourne, Bats v Superman, x-Men), this is the worst in my opinion. And it sucks because there are talented people here, some give really good performances, and some moments and scenes really work. But as a whole it is an utter mess.

Audience was good sized for the earliest showing. One that was very excited based on noise level especially during the beginning of the film and a few scenes, but the audience level was almost nothing by the time the film ended. One of the first times I have been to the first showing where a film had literally no applause (this is normal for me when I see a film much alter in its run, but opening night audiences are usually much, much more vocal) at the end. Should do absolutely huge numbers this week, but I expect some extremely large drops after.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious about one thing...in the trailer, Waller talks about Superman and what they can do if things go bad again. How is this team supposed to handle something like that anyway? Harley with a baseball bat, the rest with guns, one has fire...these guys can't even take out Batman, so what luck would they have against a Superman-level threat?
 
I'm curious about one thing...in the trailer, Waller talks about Superman and what they can do if things go bad again. How is this team supposed to handle something like that anyway? Harley with a baseball bat, the rest with guns, one has fire...these guys can't even take out Batman, so what luck would they have against a Superman-level threat?
In the movie they talk about they hypothetical "next Superman". A super powered being who doesn't "share America's values". Superman is always viewed as being on America's side, despite how much they may drag him for his unsanctioned actions in other countries. Task Force X in the movie and the comics is about creating an unofficial team of metas to combat metas.
 
From the Vox review:

"The volume level never sinks below ear-splitting."

As I keep saying, this is theater-dependent. Probably theater-chain-dependent as well. Just because the volume level is found to be "ear-splitting" by one reviewer does not mean that others will necessarily experience the same thing.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top