Anything Goes : Suicide Squade -- ok I'm late to the dance... by Jeff Lyons

Okay, just explain why it is bad. It is the first instalment of a story that will span several movies in a massive universe. I liked it. Yes I am a sucker for a comic book flick. I hear this all the time. A movie does well and everyone decides it's crap. But when the average person sees 2 movies a year in the cinema I think it did well. I don't think anyone here had a film that out sold it. I am suggesting that every film when examined forensically has holes. But if I am not out selling it, I try to learn from it.

David Ayers briefly talked about the movie. He said he ran out of time writing the script, the movie changed once Will Smith was cast. Plus he had to write in The Joker, add Batman, springboard Harley Quinn into a solo pic, reshoot the movie to make it "fun" .

Plan to watch it again today. Everyone says how bad it is and never gives examples. We talk about these great films, but I guarantee none of us own them. But if we are honest we all own DVDs of trashy popcorn fodder. My New Years resolution is to remove all snobbery from my film assessment and look at them with the eyes of the average ticket buyer. I am bringing myself joy in film.

Explain why it was bad? Ugh. Lots of people have already done that online ... credible reviewers. I know it's easy to monday-morning-quarterback, but that's what writers do, no? figure out what works and doesn't... we learn from other people's flops and successes. But, stuff that just hit me right off: pacing sucks, development sucks, too many competing story lines, last third is just one big superhero monster-superhero-cluster-f#$k ending that makes little sense, etc. etc. Basically this was too many cooks in the kitchen and bad studio interference. Did all that matter at the BO? No. So much for my opinion. :)

I actually enjoyed it. Thoroughly. I was laughing almost every second. In my opinion, I think people were expecting too much from it. Even I thought it was a serious film when I saw the original trailer. Successive trailers made me realize it was more of an action comedy than a companion to The Dark Knight. This is not The Dark Knight (Rises). It's doesn't have Gotham's noir ambiance that we saw in TDK or read in the comics (Unresolved Targets, The Killing Joke, Year One, etc.). It is a fun movie. I've seen reviews where people are comparing Jared Leto's Joker with Heath Ledger's....And uh, well, imo, you can't compare the acting in a serious action/drama with that in an action/comedy. For this genre I think everyone played their roles well; though some shined more than others (coughs Margot Robbie coughs). It's not an Oscar worthy film. But then, they didn't set out to make an Oscar worthy film.

A movie doesn't have to be good to make money. People will go see it because their favorite celebrity is in it. They will go because they liked the trailer. They will go because they like the director. They will go because they like who did the soundtrack. They will go because of the genre and/or franchise. They will go because they want to see if it's really as bad as everyone says. I haven't seen the film yet, but from what I've been told, the worst part is the lack of cohesive story. But considering the number of rewrites and reshoots that were done, plus the relatively quick turnaround after they finally wrapped, coupled with all the politics of setting up a new franchise with several big name actors, it's unsurprising it was a mess. But they had enough things going for it that it didn't really matter. They knew people would go see it anyway. And they did. It didn't do nearly as well as the Marvel movies or even most other DC films, but they made more than they spent and it was the highest grossing film for all of its stars to date, not accounting for inflation. But then there's the question of whether or not tolerable filmmaking is good enough. For the masses, probably. But I aspire to do better with the things I make and expect better from the things I spend my money on. But then again, I'm not yet working with a studio and a slew of producers and investors who all want a say in how things get made.

I really must see this film now, you have all kindled my interest. There are so many duff films out there, I'm wondering why this "Suicide Squad" is so bad it's worthy of a bad mark inclusion in a thread. It sounds like a case of everything at disposal, yet churning out a bore, but I will study the film and reply later. @Nadia I agree Gotham has a Noir ambience, just said the same thing to all my Christmas dinner guests, whilst making the dessert and brandy, I kept ducking through the serving hatch to bead at Penguin and Fish. Normally fantasies taken from comic characters do not catch my attention but this series drew me in, and the actors suspended my disbelief......bizarre and eccentric though they are. Happy Boxing Day @All.

Jeff which was worse? Suicide Squad or Fantastic 4 (Josh Trank) ?

Dan---OMG... you really stumped me there ? Maybe that's my best answer. :)

This is a great question. That script wouldn't have placed in any screenwriting contests. Wouldn't even come close. I cut off SS at the 41 minute mark.

I'd like to just say something here ... because posts like mine can just look like complaining-monday-morning-quarterbacking. Sandrene is right, a movie doesn't have to be good go be successful... "good" is so relative. The fact is, most movies are not good as stories. They are just not. Doesn't mean audiences don't respond with dollars at the BO. The filmmakers are amazing artists and technicians, so they make a great visual experience and entertain. Bravo. But, as screenwriters we can benefit from learning from the flops as well as the successes. There is benefit in dissecting these things. I might come off as snarky with some of my comments, but the fact is anyone who gets a movie made in today's environment is a superstar in my book. To pull off a movie is a miracle... to actually do a good one is having your miracle get hit by your winning lottery ticket as it is struck by lightening on your birthday in a leap year. So... trust me... Im not a total asshole. :)

My biggest reason it was a bad movie is the Everest size gap between what it could have been and what it actually was. And what it was was a confusing tale of characters that are wooden and difficult to like.

The preview didn't grab me. Jared Leto's Joker was the biggest turn off (for me), just as much as Jesse Eisenburg playing Lex Luthor in Batman vs. Superman.

@Leonard I like Jared Leto as an actor, but there will never be another Joker like Heath Ledger. Jesse Eisenburg was the worst Lex Luthor ever! Lex Luthor was a madman, but very controlled and precise, not the loose cannon portrayed by Eisenburg.

I like Jared Leto's work, but he didn't fit the Joker mold for me. A tragedy we lost Ledger. He indeed captured that part.

I still haven't managed to see Suicide Squad but reading between the lines it sounds like a version of an obviously famous comic strip/urban legend fantasy. Im not a fan of such, but recently became glued to the set on the spur of the moment, as the Penguin and Fish did their double act. What do others think of Gotham? Is it particular characters that flip the switch? Or the whole plot/story/legend?

Re my above post....off course i mean the individual actors/actresses portrayal of the characters, not the characters per se. The Penguin and Fish draw me in, as does the would be Cat Woman who is currently a friend of Master Bruce. There have been hundreds of different versions and productions, re writes, changes of scenes & props, etc etc of this urban fantasy, yet Penguin and Batman never captivated me before, as they do in Gotham. Be interesting to know other peoples take?

Studio interference is sadly a thing that hurts a decent number of films.

Hey Jeff

David Ayer apologizes to fan.

http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1615500/the-major-change-suicide-squads-...