Originally Posted by BigBeauford:
Don't get me wrong, it's still easily a top 3 DC film. I think I raised my expectations way too high knowing Gunn was attached when it was simply good.
Something else I found issue with this film, was that most of the characters were way too...good? I thought this was supposed to be a movie about terrible criminals, when really only Peacemaker fit the bill. Everyone else was just too nice.
I knew right after I finished watching it was going to divide audiences.
It’s extremely well made, but IMO it’s slightly too campy/hokey. I liked the darker/more serious tone of the first film more. And your right, everyone was fairly nice for being ‘bad guys’. I guess the gore turned some people off too? But it’s pure James Gunn unleashed. This is a guy who started his Career with Troma films. I also was confused at the beginning. I thought that Elba was playing the same character as Will Smith did. I had to go look that up. They are different but very similar characters. Not sure why Will Smith didn’t return? His comedic style would have worked perfectly for this. [Reply]
According to Samba, 2.8 million people watched #TheSuicideSquad on HBO Max this weekend. If every single one of them paid $10 to see it in theaters the weekend gross would have been $54.5 million.
The first movie made $64.8 million in a single day.
Perhaps the Hollywood Elites could fill me in. While I LOVE HBO MAX and the ability to watch this shit at home, I can't see how this is good for the bottom line at studios and for actors. ScarJo sure didn't like it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jamie:
I'm perplexed by the negative reaction to this movie here. It's like we saw a different movie. Also I'd like to mention, most of those characters from the beginning were Z-list, shit-tier characters. It's kind of a testament to Gunn that he made people care enough to be upset about them.
Although I have noticed, there is something about putting a character on screen that elevates it. In comics it might just be nonsense that some writer pooped out in 1973 because he was on a deadline and didn't have another idea, but when you cast an actor and put him in the costume it inherently adds a weight to it.
To be clear, I don't blame Gunn. I think he did a good job with what he had to work with. I mean, for the love of god these were the characters:
-Giant Starfish that shits out other starfish
-A chick who can control rats -- which ends up being the most important thing in the film (the actress did do a good job on the character though)
-A life sized weasel
-A talking shark
-A dude that literally shoots polkadots at people (the worst, I mean worst character I've ever seen)
I could go on and on. The ending was pretty cringe. I tried to explain what happened in this movie to someone that didn't watch it, and he was literally like that sounds like the worst movie that can ever be made. And you know, it would have been if anybody but James Gunn made it. He needs to be careful, he doesn't want to Nic Cage himself. Be more selective with what he makes. If Harley Quinn isn't in that movie, it ****ing bombs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
To be clear, I don't blame Gunn. I think he did a good job with what he had to work with. I mean, for the love of god these were the characters:
-Giant Starfish that shits out other starfish
-A chick who can control rats -- which ends up being the most important thing in the film (the actress did do a good job on the character though)
-A life sized weasel
-A talking shark
-A dude that literally shoots polkadots at people (the worst, I mean worst character I've ever seen)
I could go on and on. The ending was pretty cringe. I tried to explain what happened in this movie to someone that didn't watch it, and he was literally like that sounds like the worst movie that can ever be made. And you know, it would have been if anybody but James Gunn made it. He needs to be careful, he doesn't want to Nic Cage himself. Be more selective with what he makes. If Harley Quinn isn't in that movie, it ****ing bombs.
If you didn’t like something then you can blame Gunn. He wrote the screenplay. And it sounds like he had free reign to do whatever he wanted.
Originally Posted by BWillie:
To be clear, I don't blame Gunn. I think he did a good job with what he had to work with. I mean, for the love of god these were the characters:
-Giant Starfish that shits out other starfish
-A chick who can control rats -- which ends up being the most important thing in the film (the actress did do a good job on the character though)
-A life sized weasel
-A talking shark
-A dude that literally shoots polkadots at people (the worst, I mean worst character I've ever seen)
I could go on and on. The ending was pretty cringe. I tried to explain what happened in this movie to someone that didn't watch it, and he was literally like that sounds like the worst movie that can ever be made. And you know, it would have been if anybody but James Gunn made it. He needs to be careful, he doesn't want to Nic Cage himself. Be more selective with what he makes. If Harley Quinn isn't in that movie, it ****ing bombs.
Hey, Polka Dot Man is the shit BECAUSE he shoots polka dots at people. I love the absurdly ridiculous comic villains like that. He's right up there with Crazy Quilt, Kite Man, Eraser, Condiment King. They're the guys Batman doesn't even bother to go capture. He just sends Robin. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
Yea, all the media chatter was how it tanked. At least that’s the perception right now.
Probably a lot of different things combined why it underperformed.
It will be interesting to see how ‘Shaing Chi’ does in a few weeks. That’s basically a C level superhero.
I would say it is because it wasn't really advertised all that much. Nobody had even posted a trailer in this thread until a day or two before the release. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRichard:
I would say it is because it wasn't really advertised all that much. Nobody had even posted a trailer in this thread until a day or two before the release.
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
I knew right after I finished watching it was going to divide audiences.
It’s extremely well made, but IMO it’s slightly too campy/hokey. I liked the darker/more serious tone of the first film more. And your right, everyone was fairly nice for being ‘bad guys’. I guess the gore turned some people off too? But it’s pure James Gunn unleashed. This is a guy who started his Career with Troma films. I also was confused at the beginning. I thought that Elba was playing the same character as Will Smith did. I had to go look that up. They are different but very similar characters. Not sure why Will Smith didn’t return? His comedic style would have worked perfectly for this.
Will Smith is what ruined the first one for me. He has checked out since his wife has been cucking him.
As for Shiang chi, I bet it also flops here then puts up amazing international. That is their moneymaker now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Valiant:
Will Smith is what ruined the first one for me. He has checked out since his wife has been outstanding citizening him.
As for Shiang chi, I bet it also flops here then puts up amazing international. That is their moneymaker now.
Isn't Marvel planning something for the Eternals? I don't see that doing well. It's not a very exciting mix of characters, villains+heroes etc... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
I knew right after I finished watching it was going to divide audiences.
It’s extremely well made, but IMO it’s slightly too campy/hokey. I liked the darker/more serious tone of the first film more. And your right, everyone was fairly nice for being ‘bad guys’. I guess the gore turned some people off too? But it’s pure James Gunn unleashed. This is a guy who started his Career with Troma films. I also was confused at the beginning. I thought that Elba was playing the same character as Will Smith did. I had to go look that up. They are different but very similar characters. Not sure why Will Smith didn’t return? His comedic style would have worked perfectly for this.
Offically it was a scheduling conflict with another movie he was making.
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Perhaps the Hollywood Elites could fill me in. While I LOVE HBO MAX and the ability to watch this shit at home, I can't see how this is good for the bottom line at studios and for actors. ScarJo sure didn't like it.
The Rock is suing Disney+ for the release on their streaming platform. They all get % of gross movie receipts but none of the streaming money. They are getting cheated. [Reply]
I enjoyed the thing. I wasn't going into it with high expectations. I just wanted it to be better than the first one (and the Birds Of Prey crapfest). It was. There were some things that annoyed me about it, but I think those things were right in line with how comic books annoy me as well, so my thought is that it was probably true to the source material in style and I can't really complain about that. I was entertained. I had fun watching it. I'm not interested in seeing it more than once but it did its job. [Reply]
Saw it in the theater last night. Overall I'd give it a 7/10 (which, mind you, is higher than I'd give basically everything else DC since the first Wonder Woman). I do enjoy Gunn's sense of humor and got a lot of laughs out of it, but there's no question he went a bit overboard with it at times.
Spoiler!
The constant misdirection (oops! he's dead!) got a little old after a while, and I didn't find a giant starfish with no backstory to be all that compelling of a bad guy.
So I guess props to them for trying something different. It was an improvement, albeit not a slam dunk.
Originally Posted by Simply Red:
Isn't Marvel planning something for the Eternals? I don't see that doing well. It's not a very exciting mix of characters, villains+heroes etc...