I've met people who thought this was "meh", but I've not met anyone who thought this movie outright sucked. Just a few people not enthusiastic to watch it in the first place because of the bad reviews.
But funnily enough that seems to have helped it's word of mouth, because I've heard a few people saying "it was a lot better than I was expecting" Lol
Originally posted by Newjak
But they did have brand names... the Joker and Harley Quinn. Why do you think they showed Leto so much in the trailers. To cash in on Batman's brand.It doesn't have the best word of mouth. Even people I see defendit simply defend it as okay while still understanding it is a flawed movie. After all even it's general audience score on RT is 67% while the first Thor is 76%. The first Captain America is 74%. So even Marvel's earlier not IM movies still had an overall better reception then SS.
And I can admit those movies were not complete masterpieces. Most of them had amazing acts predated or followed by subpar ones. They were a mixed bunch.
I just hate to see an incredibly flawed movie like SS make such good money because it encourages WB to continue on this route. I hope I'm wrong but SS and BvS were less stellar kick offs to the DCEU. They were films with massive quality issues in plot, writing, being overcrowded. I would rather SS do bad and force WB to actually focus on quality throughout instead of forcing it.
Hardly anyone knew Harley Quinn before this movie tbh. She was a fan favorite much like Deadpool, but the wider audience definitely had no clue as to who she was before this film.
Did Joker help the marketing? Sure. But most people are still hung up on Ledger's version, and really who is Joker without Batman? I don't remember any Joker solo movie making a Billion dollars or anything.
I don't believe in audience scores. You get haters voting 0/10, and fanboys voting 10/10. Audiences truly speak through their dollars. First at the box office, and later again on Home Entertainment sales. But still I get your point. I do think Marvel was way more effective in their Phase I than DC have been. But it again comes to comparing it to Marvel. As if either DC has to match Marvel quality or it's a failure.
I personally prefer the DCEU so far to say the first X-Men trilogy. Also prefer BvS and SS to other blockbusters this year like X-Men Apoc and Star Trek Beyond, both of which I found underwhelming to say the least. But people don't make those kind of comparisons, they only compare it to Marvel.
In terms of DC making money for bad products, which will encourage more bad stuff... Look they know very well BvS under performed. And as a result the've made a lot of changes, and it seems Zack Snyder is gone after JL1. Even though he was initially signed on for JL1 and JL2.
So like I said, audiences speak through their dollars.
I like how it's "You have to accept this was a bad movie. Because I said so and do did the critics. Who cares about a million people who saw it, I have two hundred, totally non biased critics backing me up. And if you say otherwise, you kick puppies in your real life."
😂
There is only one response for this.
I saw this while I was in Boston. I really looked forward to this movie but I felt like Michael Douglas in "Falling Down" when he orders a burger. The picture advertising the burger is juicy and plump but when he gets his burger it's all messy and squashed. I felt a bit let down. There was definitely a really good movie in there but something happened that messed it up.
I find it hard to believe there are people that really liked it but if you're one of those people that really liked it than that's great and good for you. I really wish I was one of those people. But I can't deny how I really felt while watching it. The list of things I think that ruined this movie are very long.
BAD
-Sloppy story structure
-Pop song choices and overload
-Mishandling of large ensemble
-Run-of-the-mill swirling vortex end-of-days scenario
-Enchantress's CGI brother looked pretty bad
-Slipknot used just to show the "neck bombs" worked
-Don't remember what Katana or Cpt. Boomerang did
-Joker has less screen time than advertised
-Rick Flagg's character sucked and was miscast
-Felt like a rip off of "Escape from New York"
-Cara Delavigne was hard to watch
-Poor attempts at humor
-Why is Harley Quinn part of this team?
There were some redeeming qualities...
GOOD
-Great costume/character/set design
-Will Smith as Deadshot as Will Smith was actually great
-Action sequences were filmed very well for the most part
-Harley Quinn was really hot
-Leto's Joker was actually very entertaining
-Waller was done right
Originally posted by abhilegendexcept even the general audience ratings are subpart for this movie especially for a comic book movie. Which tends to have a higher audience rating curve due to built in fandoms.
I like how it's "You have to accept this was a bad movie. Because I said so and do did the critics. Who cares about a million people who saw it, I have two hundred, totally non biased critics backing me up. And if you say otherwise, you kick puppies in your real life."😂
There is only one response for this.
And this movie objectively has bad qualities. Like bad editing and transitions. Sloppy filming and over crowded story telling.
Originally posted by Zack M
Funny? Nah, that's just how it is. Some people loved it, some people hated it. However, I think the GA liked it. Like PR mentioned, most people don't read the comics, so they're not as picky on the characters as the die hard fans are.
You say that like it's a good thing. A comic book movie should please both fans and casuals, shouldn't it?
Two guys I work with went to see SS over the weekend and they both liked it. One guy said and I quote " I f#cking loved it!" and the other one says "It was good, I really liked the comedy". Those are exact words. So weather you liked it or not I do believe a lot of casual fans did like the film. This is backed up by the box office results.
Originally posted by abhilegend
I like how it's "You have to accept this was a bad movie. Because I said so and do did the critics. Who cares about a million people who saw it, I have two hundred, totally non biased critics backing me up. And if you say otherwise, you kick puppies in your real life."
Originally posted by juggernaut74
Two guys I work with went to see SS over the weekend and they both liked it. One guy said and I quote " I f#cking loved it!" and the other one says "It was good, I really liked the comedy". Those are exact words. So weather you liked it or not I do believe a lot of casual fans did like the film. This is backed up by the box office results.
👆
Originally posted by Zack M
I think it did please the fans, in general. Hell, it pleased the creator of the actual team, John Ostrander.
I disagree, as evident by how many people disliked it, which includes a large number of fans.
Ostrander, like Paul Dini, isn't going to come out and shit all over the movie even if he didn't like it. So I'd take that with a pinch of salt, tbh.
Originally posted by -Pr-
I disagree, as evident by how many people disliked it, which includes a large number of fans.Ostrander, like Paul Dini, isn't going to come out and shit all over the movie even if he didn't like it. So I'd take that with a pinch of salt, tbh.
He did say he was biased, but he said several of the characters are spot on with what he wrote.
And you don't know all of the fans opinions, so it's hard to say a larger number.
The legs speak for themselves and it had pretty good legs.
Originally posted by Zack M
He did say he was biased, but he said several of the characters are spot on with what he wrote.And you don't know all of the fans opinions, so it's hard to say a larger number.
The legs speak for themselves and it had pretty good legs.
Doesn't really contradict what I said, though. I've read his review.
No, I don't, but I can gauge the same as anyone else can. To say it's a divisive film is no overstatement.
How is that relevant?