# Suicide Squad - no spoilers



## cronux (Aug 4, 2016)

Watched it yesterday and for me the movie is really good.

I would say 8-8,5/10. 

I went in not knowing what to expect but at the end I was blown away. DC finally has a proper super hero (villan) movie. Pacing was good, MUSIC WAS AWESOME, story is ok, has some "DAMN!" shots and twists and I am really happy with the movie. Joker was great, Harley was OMG, Deadshot was on point (pun intended), action scenes were great, jokes were good etc.

In short it's a bit darker and has a more serious tone than any Marvel movie but still has enough humor and doesn't take itself too seriously (like Batman Vs Superman) to be boring or repetitive. Casting is on point too.

It has maybe one or two minor flaws but other than that the movie kicks ass. 

Go watch it!


----------



## JohnTanner (Aug 4, 2016)

Really? from what I have read it's an absolute flop. But I have also come to learn to never trust those snobby mainstream critic websites from past experiences. I'll still definitely check it out based on your review.


----------



## blacai (Aug 4, 2016)

-


----------



## cronux (Aug 4, 2016)

JohnTanner said:


> Really? from what I have read it's an absolute flop. But I have also come to learn to never trust those snobby mainstream critic websites from past experiences. I'll still definitely check it out based on your review.



Just look at the Gamespot review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuBJ24cyt5w

See how much negative rep it has, so yeah - you are right about snobby mainstream critic. 

I really don't know what people were expecting if there are to many bad reviews out there... have to check them and come back.


----------



## setsuna7 (Aug 4, 2016)

Here's my take, saw the midnight show last night.

Done with Suicide Squad. Verdict = Go see it!!! 
Spoiler alert:


Spoiler



good stuffs
1. Harley Quinn was amazing. 
2. Batfleck still awesome 
3. Joker was great, not Ledger great, more like Mark Hamill's Joker(should've had more screen time)
Bad stuffs
1.Pacing and cinematography is way confusing 
2. Still had that instagram tint as with MoS & DoJ
3. Deadshot was more like Will Smith played by Deadshot, not the other way round.
4. Not sure where is that "Batman from the point of view of the baddies" as Ayer claimed. 
5. Dialogues could've been better.
All in all, worth the money, the chemistry between Leto & Robbie is magic. Plus there's Batfleck.


There's a mids credit scene.. Don't miss it.
&#128512;


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Aug 4, 2016)

The film is a flop. Only people who are easily entertained by the most simple of action flicks and a handful of special effects (i.e. - almost every Marvel/DC/comic movie) will enjoy it.


----------



## TedEH (Aug 4, 2016)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> Only people who are easily entertained by [...] Marvel/DC/comic movie [...] will enjoy it.



Wait, so the movie is a failure because their target market will enjoy it? It's an action flick, not an art film.

I'm entirely of the opinion that anyone's view of the film is going to depend heavily on the angle they go at it from-
From a technical point of view, it's a perfectly good film. They had the budget, and you can tell. It has polish. It has good CG. It's got some pretty decent action. It's got a big budget cast. It's entertaining. If you're not picky, the camera work and lighting and things like that are as good as you would expect for this kind of movie. The acting isn't going to win any awards, but it's not "bad". Sometimes the characters feel more like caricatures than people (maybe that was intentional?), and there are some cases where it's hard to see through the actor to the character they're representing, but it's certainly no worse in that regard than any other comic/hero/action film lately. It's a good film in that respect- it accomplishes what it set out to do, and what I expected it to do.

If you're expecting some kind of deep, meaningful, life-changing experience- you're not going to find it here, cause it's an action movie.

If you're hoping for a piece of "artistic" film, something that innovates or makes a statement about the medium, you're also not going to find that here.

If you're a fan of the comics expecting an in-depth and accurate treatment of the characters or the IP as a whole, you might leave feeling unfulfilled.

It's not without some pretty clear flaws if you pick it apart, but it's more a question of expectations than it is about the quality of the movie itself. It's worth the night out, IMO.


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Aug 4, 2016)

Going to see it Saturday with my wife. I'm going in expecting some good dumb fun and nothing spectacular because that's what I'm expecting. I'm going in knowing three things:

1.) Leto probably won't hold a candle to Ledger
2.) Most of the characters shouldn't be taken seriously
3.) It's going to be more of an action comedy than anything.

I think as has been noted before, people need to decide what their expectations are before going and seeing a movie. And if at the end of the movie, my wife and I are the only ones who enjoy it, well I guess we're just a couple of stupid hipsters who are far too edgy for the mainstream.


----------



## TedEH (Aug 4, 2016)

PunkBillCarson said:


> 1.) Leto probably won't hold a candle to Ledger



This is one of the first things I thought coming out of the movie- that even if this movie's Joker does a "good" job, there's too many really good Jokers to compare him to. Anything less than spectacular will fall short of everyone we're comparing him to.


----------



## Captain Butterscotch (Aug 4, 2016)

Yeah...after this I'm done with the DC movies for a while. 

Man of Steel was pretty okay for a Superman movie. Too obsessed with it's own grimdark for my taste, especially since it's f4cking Superman for Christ's sake. 

Superman vs. Batman was just...bleh. If MoS was obsessed with grimdark, SvB seemed like they wanted to beat it by being the mostest grimdarkest of all the darkest darkness. Bland, boring, character motivations were hollow and I couldn't even enjoy it on a "shut up and watch the explosions" level. After waiting nearly my entire life to see Bats and Supes in that match up and what we got was lackluster at best.

Suicide Squad is exactly what the reviews say. It seems like they made two movies and smushed them together and called it a day. If I had a time machine, I'd go back in time and slap sense into myself right before I purchased tickets.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Aug 4, 2016)

TedEH said:


> Wait, so the movie is a failure because their target market will enjoy it? It's an action flick, not an art film.


You edited the heck out of my initial post while quoting it, and then you tried to respond with your falsely conceived version of what I said. Nice straw man fallacy there.



Captain Butterscotch said:


> Suicide Squad is exactly what the reviews say.


Which has me laughing at this: http://comicbook.com/2016/08/03/petition-to-shut-down-rotten-tomatoes-over-bad-suicide-squad-rev/

^ This is why some easily butthurt fanboys do not need to experience the Internet. 

If it wasn't for the social media over-hyping, Leto playing the role of the Joker, and everyone's newly-found faux obsession with Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn (which came out of nowhere), this film wouldn't have anywhere near as much attention as it does. I'm willing to bet that after half of the fans and supporters actually see the film, they will pull a complete 180 and walk away shaking their heads in disappointment.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 4, 2016)

You guys realize if you agree with critics, that makes you snobby too, right? THIS MOVIE IS FUN, DAMMIT!!!

After the ENDLESS parade of promo stuff for this, I feel really fulfilled that it's bad. I can't remember the last time I was so buried by pre-release material. Even with movies I wanted to read everything about, I couldn't find nearly as much as I was confronted with here. Nothing against DC, just a lot against this marketing campaign!!


----------



## Xaios (Aug 4, 2016)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> Which has me laughing at this: http://comicbook.com/2016/08/03/petition-to-shut-down-rotten-tomatoes-over-bad-suicide-squad-rev/



I actively became dumber reading that petition.


----------



## cronux (Aug 5, 2016)

PunkBillCarson said:


> 1.) Leto probably won't hold a candle to Ledger
> 2.) Most of the characters shouldn't be taken seriously
> 3.) It's going to be more of an action comedy than anything.



1. to me Leto is more scary than Ledger... sure, Ledger performance is out of .... world but Leto's Joker is more scary and mad then Ledger

2. Like any movie.

3. Nope, it's DC so it's more serious and has a darker tone than anything Marvel witch I really really like. Despite the serious tone it still has great comedic performances... you'll see.

I think you'll be surprised


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Aug 5, 2016)

is the movie at least on par with the second Thor movie? 

idk, i find a lot of the non-Captain America films (exception being GoG) to be pretty ....e with the only redeeming quality being the characters are lovable.


----------



## Varcolac (Aug 5, 2016)

Ibanezsam4 said:


> is the movie at least on par with the second Thor movie?
> 
> idk, i find a lot of the non-Captain America films (exception being GoG) to be pretty ....e with the only redeeming quality being the characters are lovable.



Nothing beats "myer-myer" and pantsless Skarsgård at Stonehenge.


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Aug 5, 2016)

Varcolac said:


> Nothing beats "myer-myer" and pantsless Skarsgård at Stonehenge.




the only way you could top that is if one of his sons went pantsless at stonehenge. A guaranteed way to put female butts in theater seats


----------



## TedEH (Aug 5, 2016)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> You edited the heck out of my initial post while quoting it, and then you tried to respond with your falsely conceived version of what I said.



I edited what you said to demonstrate how I interpreted what you were saying- or maybe to demonstrate that I don't quite get what you were getting at. You used the same description ("action flicks and a handful of special effects") to both describe comic movies in general, and the types of movies that fans of comic movies should enjoy. ....so, yes? The movie appeals to it's target audience, doesn't it? Or did you mean to suggest that the movie isn't enjoyable unless you're specifically a big fan of flashy action hero movies? If I misunderstood, then feel free to clarify.


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 5, 2016)

wankerness said:


> After the ENDLESS parade of promo stuff for this, I feel really fulfilled that it's bad. I can't remember the last time I was so buried by pre-release material. Even with movies I wanted to read everything about, I couldn't find nearly as much as I was confronted with here. Nothing against DC, just a lot against this marketing campaign!!



I think that worse than the conventional marketing (if Hot Topic product tie-ins are now conventional ) was the endless string of "OMG- the making of the movie was soooo crazy" articles in the press as if the cast was making Exile on Main Street and not a popcorn comic book movie. All the crap about Jared Leto sending people condoms & dead animals, David Ayer making cast members fight, the need for an on-set psychologist, et cetera- either this .... didn't happen and is therefore the lamest way to curry interest in the movie OR it did happen and supplants Dustin Hoffman's "It's called _acting_" incident in cinematic history w/r/t unnecessary preparation.

That said, I really wanted to see the movie and am encouraged by some positive reviews... but I may be at the wait-for-the-$5-theater-that-serves-beer level of eagerness to see it.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Aug 5, 2016)

Just saw it. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I dont know why the critics are crapping on it, it's a fun popcorn flick.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Aug 5, 2016)

cronux said:


> 1. to me Leto is more scary than Ledger... sure, Ledger performance is out of .... world but Leto's Joker is more scary and mad then Ledger


I really disagree with this, watching Ledger's Joker for the first time I actually felt unnerved whenever he got close to people with a blade, talking about his scars. Leto's Joker just felt like EdgeLord5Ever and was really disappointing.

The 2 movies smushed together comment is exactly how I felt coming out of it, I really disappointed, especially for all the talent that they had in the movie. Margot Robbie killed it as Harley, Will Smith killed it as Deadshot, Viola Davis was awesome as Amanda Waller, but other than that it started out pretty solid but then devolved into a really dumb super hero movie plot.

This post sums up most of my problems with the movie:
https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBatmanMemes/posts/1070792696374011

I'm a big fan of the Suicide Squad comics and this definitely did a poor job of pandering to the comic nerds in my opinion; for one Joker could've been used for so much more in the movie, if he was taken out entirely it probably wouldn't even change anything in the plot. It's not like I hated it but it was really just okay. Wouldn't watch it again unless it was on TV.


----------



## Xaios (Aug 5, 2016)

Demiurge said:


> I think that worse than the conventional marketing (if Hot Topic product tie-ins are now conventional ) was the endless string of "OMG- the making of the movie was soooo crazy" articles in the press as if the cast was making Exile on Main Street and not a popcorn comic book movie. All the crap about *Jared Leto sending people condoms & dead animals*, David Ayer making cast members fight, the need for an on-set psychologist, et cetera- either this .... didn't happen and is therefore the lamest way to curry interest in the movie OR it did happen and supplants Dustin Hoffman's "It's called _acting_" incident in cinematic history w/r/t unnecessary preparation.



Somewhere, Daniel Day-Lewis is shaking his head.



BlackMastodon said:


> I really disagree with this, watching Ledger's Joker for the first time I actually felt unnerved whenever he got close to people with a blade, talking about his scars.



Indeed:


----------



## wankerness (Aug 5, 2016)

KnightBrolaire said:


> Just saw it. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I dont know why the critics are crapping on it, it's a fun popcorn flick.



Maybe they have higher standards than "fun thing that you won't remember in a week"? Half the POSITIVE reviews sound negative with this.

I guess I'll have to sit this one out too. I hate contributing money to a bad cause like this. I don't regret watching the long version of BVS, but they just released a statement here saying "this is the only version!!!" I think the director may have just been playing politics and been lying to avoid pissing off the studio by telling the truth (aka, they took his movie and messed it all up to try and make it more marketable). I dunno, though. I think his films all have a very common theme of bro-tastic d-bags with stupid nicknames slapping each other on the back and busting each other's balls and talking about all the women they're going to bang and acting like total dicks and maybe throwing in one girl that has to be massively overcompensating for something by acting even more like a brotastic d-bag. I HATED End of Watch and slightly less hated Sabotage, but I will say that Fury starts off the exact same way until he legitimately deconstructs that very idea (that scene with the two German women is even tenser than the opening in Inglorious Basterds), so I don't think he's an idiot. This probably could have been interesting. It sounds like they made him come up with the entire script and plan for directing it in like, 6 weeks. Marvel has never done that to a director, which is a good thing in terms of allowing the scripts to not be messes (but, they also exact a lot more control over keeping them in the "house style").

I guess we'll see if it is a success. Evidently this one only has to make 800 million to be considered successful, unlike BvS's billion.


----------



## Sephiroth952 (Aug 5, 2016)

Went and saw it today. Tbh its not a bad flick. Was it as good as the hype made it to be? Naw, but it was certainly a fun little action flick. The only problem I have with it is that it couldn't choose whether it wanted to be a grimdark modern superhero movie or a comedy action romp. I would have rathered it lean more toward the latter, but it still had some pretty funny moments.
All together 6/10, would recommend at least one viewing.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Aug 6, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Maybe they have higher standards than "fun thing that you won't remember in a week"? Half the POSITIVE reviews sound negative with this.


Yeah critics and the public generally don't agree. Look at the scores on metacritic/rotten tomatoes given by critics and those given by the public. Very rarely do they line up unless the movie is exceptionally good or bad.


----------



## Xaios (Aug 6, 2016)

KnightBrolaire said:


> Yeah critics and the public generally don't agree. Look at the scores on metacritic/rotten tomatoes given by critics and those given by the public. Very rarely do they line up unless the movie is exceptionally good or bad.



User scores for movies like this are an extremely useless source of information, and this is why:

A) The movie will receive an excess amount of worst possible user scores because:
- Some people will go see it wanting to hate it because they either play for the other camp (Marvel films in this case) or they hate superhero movies in general, but want to be able to claim that they saw it so that their opinions are "totally my own, man."
- Some people, for very similar reasons, will rate it as such without even bothering to see it.
- Some will rate it as such because, while they don't truly believe that the movie is as bad as the rating they assign, they feel they must "compensate" for unwarranted 10/10 best possible review scores.

B) Conversely, they will receive an excess amount of best possible user scores because:
- Some people will go see it wanting to love it because they're fans of the source material, and no amount of visible flaws will dissuade them from the opinion that they've just watched the greatest movie ever. (Although, at least in the case of people who love it, they will almost certainly have seen the movie before rating it)
- Some will rate it as such because, while they don't truly believe that the movie is as bad as the rating they assign, they feel they must "compensate" for unwarranted 0/10 worst possible review scores.

C) *MOST IMPORTANTLY*, typical moviegoers, unlike critics, often aren't able to separate their ego from the thing they're reviewing, and so for some reason feel that a review that doesn't line up with their opinions about a movie is a personal attack on their feelings. Additionally, typical moviegoers will often assign different and wildly varying weight to each aspect of a film, while a true critic must weigh each aspect on its own merits. For example, in the eyes of a fan, one or two great performances or awesome special effects can more than make up for weaknesses in things like plot, pacing, dialogue, or any number of the subtler aspects that really make a good movie good. The inverse is also true, although it doesn't come up very often. There are plenty of movies that are critical darlings that fans really don't enjoy because one or two very specific aspects of that film, despite it being otherwise well executed, drag it down.


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 6, 2016)

^These things are all true and, really, considering that user scores are solely comprised of those from people who felt strongly enough to provide one, the sampling is not going to be helpful.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 6, 2016)

Plus, everything in the theater has way higher ratings than it eventually gets to once the dust has settled. New movies often end up in the top 250 on IMDB and are nowhere close a couple years later. Tons of people have a "THAT WAS AWESOME" rush after the theater, then watch it on TV a couple years later and go "actually...that was pretty bad!!!" The sound and fury is gone after it's out of theaters and you're more left to confront actual plot and dialogue issues.

Jurassic World and Attack of the Clones were two examples of this for me. I'd have given both about a 7/10 in the theater, and more like a 2/10 now that I've had to watch them on home video.


----------



## FEcorvus (Aug 6, 2016)

my opinion, the start was great I enjoyed it a ton, then about halfway through it became terribad, it's like the dialogue was written by a elementary student, I assume that the scriptwriters ran out time or the ability to care or both

if the movie had continued being as good as the first part before they actually started their mission I'd have given it a 8.5 or a 9

but the second part was so badly written and seemed so glued together that I'd give it a 3

so I'll split the difference and say it was a 6/10 worth watching once


----------



## flint757 (Aug 6, 2016)

Didn't they go into rewrite after BvS didn't do well and people were being mislead by early trailers? If that actually happened it kind of makes sense why it would feel like two different movies mashed together because it basically would be if they kept any of the original script.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 6, 2016)

flint757 said:


> Didn't they go into rewrite after BvS didn't do well and people were being mislead by early trailers? If that actually happened it kind of makes sense why it would feel like two different movies mashed together because it basically would be if they kept any of the original script.



They supposedly did a lot of rewrites/reshooting to make it zanier. I haven't seen it, so I don't know how much of that there is. There are some documented deleted scenes that would have made it heavier, like scenes with the joker hitting Harley Quinn etc.


----------



## Triple-J (Aug 6, 2016)

So I saw it this morning and well I'll get the bad out of the way first....

I was one of the few who felt Leto was a good casting choice so I'm sad to admit that I found him quite disappointing and lacking in personality. 
Throughout the film Shaggy2Jok3r comes across a bit of a clotheshorse as he's painfully thin (a dead ringer for Joker of the Batman RIP arc) his outfits look great and he's constantly preening but he's not scary and he isn't funny either(imo the Joker should always be a mix of both) he's irritating and in a way he's surplus to requirements so I felt the film could have worked out better without him.

Any cast members that aren't Waller, Deadshot, Harley or Rick Flagg get zero time to shine which is a shame as I loved Boomerang and felt like he could have been the breakout character if there were more of him in the film Katana & Diablo got shafted hardest but Diablo really bothered me as he's a particular type of cliche that I thought we'd left in the 80's.

Cara Delevigne as a seasoned archaeologist is pretty unbelievable because she looks like she's still in high school.

The good....

Smith as Deadshot was quite refreshing his cockiness fits the character his verbal sparring with Flagg was great and showed good chemistry plus he gets a good story arc here so I hope Deadshot ends up a protagonist in one of the Batfleck films instead of them hiring Leto to do the tired old "Batman vs Joker" thing. 

Viola Davis as Amanda Waller was brilliant she doesn't mess around owns every single scene is scarier than Leto's Joker and rather like Deadshot I hope we see more of her in future DC movies.

Cap Boomerang is a loveable idiot and yes he is pretty useless in terms of powers but I think that's the point really. 

Overall it's a decent movie but with better editing it could have been magnificent it's not as bad as some would have you believe though and after the dour cynical miseryfest that was BvS it's a step in the right direction, I did find myself wishing they'd just made a live action adaptation of the animated Suicide Squad movie (Assault on Arkham) though because that uses the same characters/plot but takes a much better approach. 



Demiurge said:


> I think that worse than the conventional marketing (if Hot Topic product tie-ins are now conventional ) was the endless string of "OMG- the making of the movie was soooo crazy" articles in the press as if the cast was making Exile on Main Street and not a popcorn comic book movie. All the crap about Jared Leto sending people condoms & dead animals, David Ayer making cast members fight, the need for an on-set psychologist, et cetera- either this .... didn't happen and is therefore the lamest way to curry interest in the movie OR it did happen and supplants Dustin Hoffman's "It's called _acting_" incident in cinematic history w/r/t unnecessary preparation.
> 
> That said, I really wanted to see the movie and am encouraged by some positive reviews... but I may be at the wait-for-the-$5-theater-that-serves-beer level of eagerness to see it.



I don't think you can blame the movie for the amount of sensationalist rubbish written about it plus Leto has also said that he bought cakes & doughnuts for cast & crew on most days but the press have failed to mention that because it doesn't fit their "OMG Leto is soooo dedicated to his craft he's probably going to die of a sleeping pill overdose too!!" angle which shows how ott it's become.
Personally I feel like the root of the problem is that no matter who it is the press love to romanticise method acting (even though the reality is it's pretty self indulgent) and it's become one of the myths of art/creativity but it's not just movies that fall into this trap as the press have dined out for years on those tales of Corey Taylor recording vocals with Ross Robinson naked and covered in blood etc.


----------



## TedEH (Aug 6, 2016)

Triple-J said:


> Amanda Waller was [...] scarier than Leto's Joker



 IMO she was probably the best part of the movie.


----------



## RUSH_Of_Excitement (Aug 6, 2016)

I don't understand why everyone hates Batman V. Superman. I thought it was a great movie


----------



## TedEH (Aug 6, 2016)

^ I haven't seen it yet, but I kinda want to now.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Aug 7, 2016)

RUSH_Of_Excitement said:


> I don't understand why everyone hates Batman V. Superman. I thought it was a great movie



Not everyone hates BVS, if anything it's more polarising than universally hated. 

I however, am one of those that hated that movie. 

As for Suicide Squad... haven't seen it yet and currently approaching with extreme trepidation (largely thanks to being aware of all the post production interference and reshoots and edits from the responses of BVS's box office performance). I'm not rushing to see this honestly, but I really find it fascinating seeing Warner Bros and DCEU feeling the domino effects from building their entire superhero plans from whatever the hell Man Of Steel and BVS were.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 7, 2016)

http://heroichollywood.com/speculation-rumored-deleted-suicide-squad-scenes/



> In early cuts, the movies opening detailed June Moons possession by Enchantress in real tome. Reshoots reshuffled the scene to be later in the movie in flashback form in favour of a new opening centered on Deadshot.
> 
> Deadshot in the prison cell, watching the rain fall and thinking about his daughter.
> 
> ...



So, uhh, maybe Ayer is just giving the studio line, and this will be another which has a massively improves extended version down the line (it seems like already no one ever recommends watching the theatrical version of BvS unless you really want to see it in 3D). Director's Cut Extended Universe is apparently the new term getting thrown around derisively. Sounds like this one might actually be a box office success, which unfortunately may have the side-effect of meaning the long version might be delayed more. 140 million this weekend in the US alone, if it can do another 660 million worldwide it will be good.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Aug 7, 2016)

Demiurge said:


> ^These things are all true and, really, considering that user scores are solely comprised of those from people who felt strongly enough to provide one, the sampling is not going to be helpful.




The whole point of sites like rotten tomatoes and metacritic is that they average scores for critics and regular people alike. granted they don't weight the outliers (which there are many for a film like this or BvS) but it is still a decent metric for gauging popular opinion of films imo. I'd say the sample sizes depend on the sites, as rotten tomatoes is generally a better gauge due to the ease of leaving a score without having to write a review. 83,000 rated Suicide squad on RT, which is a pretty big sample size. If we take the population of the U.S (600,000,00) as the total movie going population for Suicide squad then we only need a sample of about 16641 people to have a confidence interval of 98-100%. Even if we drop the population size to say 3,000,000 we only need 16,549 people as the sample size. 
TLDR: RT is a good metric for public opinion on a film even with huge outliers as the sheer amount of data negates any skewing.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Aug 7, 2016)

That was pretty bad. Not as bad as BvS but it had obvious signs of studio interference which brought it down. We really shouldn't live in an era where its the norm to frantically re-write and re-shoot films based on the success and failures of other films. 

A group of people walked out near the end getting the biggest laugh of all from the audience.

Will Smith was on point though.


----------



## mongey (Aug 7, 2016)

really was looking forward to this . trying to hook up some babysitting so me and the wife can go but we watched superman vs batman over the weekend and I thought it blowed .putting me off a little


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Aug 7, 2016)

Wife and I just came back from watching and we absolutely enjoyed it. I guess we have low standards or we're just hipsters, I don't know.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 7, 2016)

PunkBillCarson said:


> Wife and I just came back from watching and we absolutely enjoyed it. I guess we have low standards or we're just hipsters, I don't know.



Hipsters? I don't follow that one!


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Aug 7, 2016)

Well I mean, there seems to be only a select few that like it at least on a massive level, so naturally the ones who like it compared to the ones who don't like it would be considered hipsters I would think.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Aug 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> http://heroichollywood.com/speculation-rumored-deleted-suicide-squad-scenes/



So, the extended cut is more or less, a completely different movie?

Warner Bros and DC is making it really hard for me to root for them...


----------



## Ibanezsam4 (Aug 8, 2016)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> So, the extended cut is more or less, a completely different movie?
> 
> Warner Bros and DC is making it really hard for me to root for them...




one can only hope the interference happened prior to the shakeup following BvS.... if not.... well WB is screwed


----------



## bostjan (Aug 8, 2016)

It looks like I'll be going to see this tomorrow. I was pretty hyped for the film until it was going around that they were doing a lot of rewriting and reshooting, and then the film came out and the reviews were so bad. Now I'll be going into it with low expectations.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Aug 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> http://heroichollywood.com/speculation-rumored-deleted-suicide-squad-scenes/
> 
> 
> 
> So, uhh, maybe Ayer is just giving the studio line, and this will be another which has a massively improves extended version down the line (it seems like already no one ever recommends watching the theatrical version of BvS unless you really want to see it in 3D). Director's Cut Extended Universe is apparently the new term getting thrown around derisively. Sounds like this one might actually be a box office success, which unfortunately may have the side-effect of meaning the long version might be delayed more. 140 million this weekend in the US alone, if it can do another 660 million worldwide it will be good.



Jesus H... This sounds like it would've fixed a lot of things in the movie. *facepalm* WB needs to figure their sh*t out.

Also, can we seriously stop releasing 3+ trailers before movies come out that feature all the best parts of the movie? I think almost every joke in this movie was featured in one of the trailers so nothing was new for me. And I actively try to avoid watching trailers before watching a movie I want to see.


----------



## Ralyks (Aug 10, 2016)

Saw it last night. Not a bad movie, enjoyed myself. I'm particularly surprised how much I enjoyed Will Smih as Deadshot. On the flip side, Pimp Joker was disappointing, although I'm sure at this point, since a lot of his footage got cut, he was mainly used to set up the Batfleck movie.

And agreed, Fuller terrified me way more than Joker.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Aug 18, 2016)

Ibanezsam4 said:


> one can only hope the interference happened prior to the shakeup following BvS.... if not.... well WB is screwed



I remember various sources stating that the reshoots were done because of the BVS backlash. It's the biggest reason I've been hesitating to see this with the notion of already thinking it's gonna suck... 

I wasn't really convinced from the trailers that this was the movie redemption the DCEU needed after the soulless dreary slugs of Man Of Steel and Batman V Superman. But I did secretly wish it was, as it's premise was strong and works as a new take on the overexposed superhero genre. Warner Bros are making it hard for me to like their DCEU series but I really wanted to like them, and hopefully it'll start here. 

Finally saw the movie last night. Now, I'm still waiting for movie that'll make me like the DCEU, because Suicide Squad wasn't it. 

Maybe going in knowing about the reshoots and post production interference was to my own detriment, but it didn't matter because most of the movie felt like a collage of hacked scenes forcefully put together leaving loose threads everywhere, all complete with insert popular songs du jour in a contrived sense of 'fun'. The result is like a Robert Rodriguez effect but without the very fun and charm that WB has tried to force into this movie. 

This is most obvious when it comes to the Joker. The only reason he's in this movie is because you can't have Harley Quinn without the Joker not too far around. Otherwise, there really wasn't much point in him being there unless all those extended cut scenes are supposedly good, then it goes back to the whole waiting for the extended cut to somewhat redeem this movie argument again. 

Now the new Joker... this time around he takes the page off the Golden Age Joker, classic gangster mode complete with entourage with a Bronze/Modern Age psychotic icing. Basically a modern mix of Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger. It's a neat spin on the iconic villain. Sadly, Jared Leto doesn't do well selling the character for me. Save for one short moment where he was laughing with a Gatling gun, Leto tries to aim high with all the Joker traits I mentioned, but falls short with all of them. This may be the second worse portrayal of the character... the UN Ambassador for Iran stint is still the nadir. 

Once again, the WB fascination with the 90s comics era linger here. The DC film aesthetic of putting a dark instagram filter on everything is ever present, but at least the characters are colorful this time around. 

Not all is bad though. First off, I liked it better than BVS.  Second, 3 particular characters carry the film, and as all the comments prior, it's Harley Quinn, Amanda Waller and Deadshot. One couldn't help but feel that Will Smith is vicariously showing his regret for turning down Django Unchained to do After Earth instead here though.  All three characters are well acted show stealers leaving everyone else in the sidelines. 

So with all the alarm bells ringing on how this movie will add more DC disappointment for me, I still wanted some kind of hope. Looks like I'll have to wait for Wonder Woman and Aquaman instead.


----------



## bostjan (Aug 19, 2016)

I saw it a while ago now. Had to let things sink in.

First off, Will Smith was great. The most glaring thing to me about the movie was that there existed several lapses in the storytelling that I label as just plain lazy. I think the cast did about the best they could with what they were given, but pretty much every part with the Joker, to my eyes, seemed contrived, as if, they added him as an afterthought, and didn't really bother explaining him at all. The Harley Quinn backstory seemed poorly executed to me, but it could have been worse, I guess, to me.

I think they went maybe a little too thick with Waller, taking away some of the dimension that they could have had, but I wouldn't complain about it too much.

The other characters just seemed too much like a book of bad stereotypes to me. As supporting characters, I could excuse this to the extent that they did it, except the title of the movie led me to believe the movie would be more about the characters of the entire group.

At times, I felt like they were slipping in bits of the upcoming Batman vs Joker movie trailer into the film that was supposed to be about the evil Avengers, oops, I mean the Suicide Squad.

Whatever the case, I do think people are being too hard on it. I wouldn't give it a perfect 5/7,  , but I think it's a lot of wasted potential, if they had taken a more consistent approach and written a general frame around the plot that wasn't a Mad Libs version of every super hero team movie.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Aug 19, 2016)

bostjan said:


> I wouldn't give it a perfect 5/7


 I love that meme


----------

