• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Suicide Squad Review Thread: As Fresh As Green Lantern!

Status
Not open for further replies.

TyrantII

Member
Haven't been impressed with a WB DC movie since TDK. I didn't think the "epic trailer" with queen everyone was hyped over was that good. Sounds like this one will be a rental, just like BvS.

Call me wierd, but WW is really the only trailers that peaked my interest lately.
 

Rooster12

Member
I think they know they're being called out on it tho

At places like Gaf yeah....but on Rotten Tomato they're worshipped...and the general public doesn't care about "weak" villains...they just wanna see Tony Stark and Cap and Groot and all the hoopla.
 
This is simply not true.

This a Marvel thread now brehs
dame2.png


and the general public doesn't care about "weak" villains...they just wanna see Tony Stark and Cap and Groot and all the hoopla.

Maybe that's the problem.
 

Salsa

Member
I dunno, Lord of the Rings? There isn't a more unlikeable protagonist as Frodo, and still, the story is so well executed you can't help bu fall in love with the world. The Hobbit has a better MC, but a far worse story.

dude is this real life

The Lord of The Rings is miles better than The Hobbit precisely because they spend a lot more time on the characters, who they are, establishing them, their relationships, making them different, making you care

you gave like the worst example possible. I dont know the name of one of those fucking dwarves who are literally ALL THE SAME character with slight variations for all I care
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Because Marvel does it well.

Sometimes, yes.

Be honest though, there are plenty of forgettable clunkers in the MCU. If everything was as complete a success as GOTG, I'd say fine, but to be truthful, the way I see it their hit-to-miss ratio isn't entirely dissimilar to, say, the Star Trek movies.
 

EdisonTrent

Neo Member
The MCU does not have bad cinematography either, at least not compared to most blockbusters.

Fuckin' aye, I went through Guardians two days ago for the screenshot thread and that movie is better looking than either MoS or BvS or, at the very least, on even footing.

Okay, going to call you out on that one. Synder is a cinematography fetishist. He chased amazing shots and stills (with admittedly hamfisted symbolism) to the detriment of the rest of the movie. It's debatable what the definition of 'better' in this case is, whether it's impact on the overall product should be the judge of it's quality or the cinematography itself in isolation, but looking at it with screenshots? It's clear there are a crap ton more in the Superman films.
 
I dunno, Lord of the Rings? There isn't a more unlikeable protagonist as Frodo, and still, the story is so well executed you can't help bu fall in love with the world. The Hobbit has a better MC, but a far worse story.

I don't know man, this is subjective but I think the Lord of the Rings have some of the best, most likeable, well acted protagonists in any blockbuster.

The story is certainly excellent to but it's as much about the characters journey, it not more.
 

Ahasverus

Member
Certainly not for all films, but I'd argue that in superhero films about people in underwear fighting over magic portals and gems or whatever, yeah, story really isn't as important as some think.
This is true, but it shouldn't be that out there, I mean, yeah you could probably just do a verbatim one hour and a half cartoon episode in Live Action, but what's the point then? I always like it when studios try to reach more with their apparently bland properties (a case to show, Captain America).
dude is this real life
And you noticed it because the story was so bad when it fell down to you just not liking the characters, it didn't do it either. There are many films with absolutely unlikeable characters which are still good. Both things are VERY important, one cannot function properly if the other is.. damaged.
 

Litan

Member
I dunno, Lord of the Rings? There isn't a more unlikeable protagonist as Frodo, and still, the story is so well executed you can't help bu fall in love with the world. The Hobbit has a better MC, but a far worse story.
Since when has Frodo been considered unlikeable?
 

Rooster12

Member
Thank you for this post. I enjoy the MCU, but people talk up literally every film to be the next best thing. I get it if you're a huge comic person, but let's not act like the films aren't cookie-cutter at this point.

Come on...most people who love those movies never read a comic book in their life.
 

Salsa

Member
top rated films of 2016:

Everybody Wants Some
The Nice Guys
Deadpool
Zootopia

all these films are about characters first and foremost, by a wiiiiiide margin.

shit. The Nice Guys is ONLY about characters. The plot resolves itself and nothing happens, nothing gets changed. It's entirely about knowing those characters and going through the journey with them

plot is something to put characters you spent time making the audience care IN
 

Salsa

Member
And you noticed it because the story was so bad when it fell down to you just not liking the characters, it didn't do it either. There are many films with absolutely unlikeable characters which are still good. Both things are VERY important, one cannot function properly if the other is.. damaged.

like I said in the post above, plot is the context and setting

you can have great characters in a lacking barebones story and still make a great film

the opposite aint true.

im not saying you can function with just one, im saying one is FAR more important

consequently almost all Marvel movies operated with this in mind, hence why audiences get more attached to em
 

EdisonTrent

Neo Member
What studios are attempting to ape Marvel's creative vision to a tee?
I'll wait.

Also, I never said it was easy. I am saying it is pedestrian and not particularly daring. A distinct lack of grinta.
None. There are a 100 different ways to making an entertaining movie, I'm not saying what Marvel is doing is special in that way I'm saying the fact that they do it often is nice.

I guess your last comment says it all. We just have a different definition for what is 'praiseworthy'. Maybe my standards are too low. It's just a subjective thing.
 

Ahasverus

Member
like I said in the post above, plot is the context and setting

you can have great characters in a lacking barebones story and still make a great film

the opposite aint true.

im not saying you can function with just one, im saying one is FAR more important

consequently almost all Marvel movies operated with this in mind, hence why audiences get more attached to em
This is true. But now that you put it that way it sounds different than what you said first.
 
Eh, we went through this with BVS and I really enjoy that movie, and the extended cut is a great watch.

I'll watch it and trust my own judgement. Wonder if they're planning an extended cut for this as well
 
top rated films of 2016:

Everybody Wants Some
The Nice Guys
Deadpool
Zootopia

all these films are about characters first and foremost, by a wiiiiiide margin.

shit. The Nice Guys is ONLY about characters. The plot resolves itself and nothing happens, nothing gets changed. It's entirely about knowing those characters and going through the journey with them

plot is something to put characters you spent time making the audience care IN

What?! No not at all. The way you describe it almost sounds like you didn't even watch the nice guys lol. Shane Black movies are mostly plot oriented. it spends a majority of the time dealing with and progressing that porn murder mystery. Only movies on that list that you can make a case for are everybody wants some and maaaaaybe Deadpool.
 

Salsa

Member
This is true. But now that you put it that way it sounds different than what you said first.

I just think it's something very common and I dont know how people dont discern it when talking about film

heck, any fiction writing

character is EVERYTHING

99 percent of story structure in your usual film is all the same. character has issue character overcomes it

when you talk about classic films opposed to garbage that both featured the same 3 act structure the thing that sticks like a sore thumb is that the classic film ussually nails and spends time with the characters in it to create an emotional attachment
 

guek

Banned
Okay, going to call you out on that one. Synder is a cinematography fetishist. He chased amazing shots and stills (with admittedly hamfisted symbolism) to the detriment of the rest of the movie. It's debatable what the definition of 'better' in this case is, whether it's impact on the overall product should be the judge of it's quality or the cinematography itself in isolation, but looking at it with screenshots? It's clear there are a crap ton more in the Superman films.

Guardians is an exceptionally pretty movie. The difference between him and Snyder though is that's not the only thing he can really do, and as such, the pretty visuals work to supplement the rest of the movie rather than be the bulk of what's appealing.

Oh, and the putz I was referring to in the screenshot thread is indeed
Ahasverus
:p
 
Making characters likable is not new to Ayer. He's done it before with Fury. He managed to make Shia the most likable sympathetic character in the movie. Maybe WB is asking a lot out of their talent.
 
Eh, we went through this with BVS and I really enjoy that movie, and the extended cut is a great watch.

I'll watch it and trust my own judgement. Wonder if they're planning an extended cut for this as well

I think they might. Seems like editing was an issue again, so they probably took out some scenes.
 

Salsa

Member
Shane Black movies are mostly plot oriented

this is the most bananas shit i've ever read

Shane Black has a formula which relies entirely in having 2 likeable characters and the relationship between them

you can put Riggs and Murtaugh in ANY fuckin zany situation and it would work because those characters are so developed and you CARE about them so much, and have so much fuckin fun with them, always

he solidified those characters and their relationship to a fuckin diamond

plot is COMPLETELY secondary. It's a murder mistery thing that goes A, B C

then another movie A, B, C

but it's with those guys, and you love em, so it's fuckin great



you're not getting it. sure Nice Guys spends time "advancing the porn mistery", it's a movie, the plot goes forward

but all you get while advancing that shit is character moments. tons and tons of character moments

it's all he does

I feel like im taking crazy pills


shit Nice Guys was originally pitched as a series because it's a fuckin golden formula that works on any situation you put them in
 

EdisonTrent

Neo Member
I dunno, Lord of the Rings? There isn't a more unlikeable protagonist as Frodo, and still, the story is so well executed you can't help bu fall in love with the world. The Hobbit has a better MC, but a far worse story.

Woah. Story? Or events that shape the character arcs of the Fellowship? Because the story itself..... The trials and battles in LOTR would mean nothing without the characters. Characters provide stakes and context. LOTR would be just a bunch of traveling, fighting, and set pieces without the characters and that would be shit. Oh wait, I just described the Hobbit trilogy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom