The Official Suicide Squad Rotten Tomatoes Thread - Part 1

[The Joker]

Who is bucko?

Its just a generic phrase people use to call people they don't know the real names of - like pal, or buddy, or mate etc. But with a more aggressive kind of vibe. Like next time, bucko, don't make a mess of the house.

 

[BlZARRO]

Its just a generic phrase people use to call people they don't know the real names of - like pal, or buddy, or mate etc.

Hummm...thought you were insulting my mother.

 

[The Joker]

Hummm...thought you were insulting my mother.

Please. Mother insults are so 1990's

 

[BlZARRO]

Please. Mother insults are so 1990's

So, what do you think your thread's percentage is going to be?

 

[The Joker]

So, what do you think your thread's percentage is going to be?

Too early to tell. The thread's not even a day old. But I'm sure you've given it plenty of thought and discussion

 

[BlZARRO]

Too early to tell. The thread's not even a day old. But I'm sure you've given it plenty of thought and discussion

I think in order for you to win this savage battle the percentage as to be really low.

 

[The Joker]

I think in order for you to win this savage battle the percentage as to be really low.

I don't know which I find funnier; that you called this a savage battle, or you think this is about winning something. And I thought you were being hyperbolic with how upset this was making you lol.

 

[BlZARRO]

I don't know which I find funnier; that you called this a savage battle, or you think this is about winning something. And I thought you were being hyperbolic with how upset this was making you lol.

Just kidding.

I'm not upset. I just think you're strongly underestimating the amount of people who care about what ciritcs say. I don't think it's a huge percentage, but it is significant enough. That's why you won't have an hard time finding users in this forum who admit to listen to critics.

It's a common theme among people who hate the movie. It's not enough for them to simply not liking it. They wanna propagate the idea that the vast majority also didn't like it, that's why it underperformed. They just don't wanna accept that there are other factors that might have played a role too.

 

[The Joker]

Just kidding.

Glad to hear. Seen too many fanatical posters over the years who go to extremes to try and "win". When you started digging through ancient threads in the archives I thought maybe you were going to be one of those.

I'm not upset. I just think you're strongly underestimating the amount of people who care about what ciritcs say. I don't think it's a huge percentage, but it is significant enough. That's why you won't have an hard time finding users in this forum who admit to listen to critics.

It's a common theme among people who hate the movie. It's not enough for them to simply not liking it. They wanna propagate the idea that the vast majority also didn't like it, that's why it underperformed. They just don't wanna accept that there are other factors that might have played a role too.

Well I think you're over estimating it just because you can find examples of it online. Like I don't have a hard time finding people who don't like superhero movies online either, but they're still insanely popular and able to make as much money with the best of any movie genre. Conversely numbers can mislead something that is grossly unpopular being well liked. For example that woeful Catwoman movie with Halle Berry has over a hundred sixty thousand likes on Facebook; https://www.facebook.com/pages/Catwoman/107623375927221?rf=191794114192121 You'd think it was mega popular.

That's why no matter how many examples I could find, same as with the chocolate haters, it doesn't prove a thing other than some minority doesn't like something that's incredibly popular.

 

[BlZARRO]

Glad to hear. Seen too many fanatical posters over the years who go to extremes to try and "win". When you started digging through ancient threads in the archives I thought maybe you were going to be one of those.



Well I think you're over estimating it just because you can find examples of it online. Like I don't have a hard time finding people who don't like superhero movies online either, but they're still insanely popular and able to make as much money with the best of any movie genre. Conversely numbers can mislead something that is grossly unpopular being well liked. For example that woeful Catwoman movie with Halle Berry has over a hundred sixty thousand likes on Facebook; https://www.facebook.com/pages/Catwoman/107623375927221?rf=191794114192121 You'd think it was mega popular.

That's why no matter how many examples I could find, same as with the chocolate haters, it doesn't prove a thing other than some minority doesn't like something that's incredibly popular.

You're making comparisons that don't make any sense.

All i'm saying there's a pretty decent percentage of people that care about critics. The difference is that if 15% of the people enjoyed Catwoman, that's not nearly enough to make it successful in any way. If 15% of people get dissuaded by movie critics, that's enough to make a difference at the BO, since that would still translate into millions of people.

The fact that i have no problem finding people who care about critics, either off or online, just comes to show me that the percentage of people who do is not that small. And maybe that's why over your little thread you already have 7 people that have admitted to follow the critics reviews to a certain extent. I guess that makes it around 50/50, which, btw, is a much bigger number than i was expecting, and even a MUCH bigger number than you were expecting. Even if it closes at 10%, it's still a significant number. It's not the majority, but i also never claimed it was the majority. I simply claimed it was significant enough to make a difference, and believe me, 10% is significant enough. We both know that.

And believe me, to me all this is fun, but at the same time worthless. I don't need polls or data studies to come to this conclusion. To me it's just common sense. It's the kind of knowledge i can absorb just by dealing with people and paying attention to the world.

 

[The Joker]

You're making comparisons that don't make any sense.

All i'm saying there's a pretty decent percentage of people that care about critics. The difference is that if 15% of the people enjoyed Catwoman, that's not nearly enough to make it successful in any way. If 15% of people get dissuaded by movie critics, that's enough to make a difference at the BO, since that would still translate into millions of people.

The fact that i have no problem finding people who care about critics, either off or online, just comes to show me that the percentage of people who do is not that small. And maybe that's why over your little thread you already have 7 people that have admitted to follow the critics reviews to a certain extent. I guess that makes it around 50/50, which, btw, is a much bigger number than i was expecting, and even a MUCH bigger number than you were expecting. Even if it closes at 10%, it's still a significant number. It's not the majority, but i also never claimed it was the majority. I simply claimed it was significant enough to make a difference, and believe me, 10% is significant enough. We both know that.

And believe me, to me all this is fun, but at the same time worthless. I don't need polls or data studies to come to this conclusion. To me it's just common sense. It's the kind of knowledge i can absorb just by dealing with people and paying attention to the world.

The comparisons make perfect sense. You're saying your point is valid because you can find many examples of something online. Even if we discount the fact that you have not found many at all, the fact you can find many examples of something doesn't make it a significant number. That's why the comparisons like the aforementioned ones show how finding numerous examples of something online doesn't make a significant difference. We both know that.

I know you never claimed it was a majority, that would be even sillier to claim, but you are arguing that it has some kind of impact, and there's no evidence that shows it does. Not even in my little thread you keep citing in its infancy. It only has 11 votes and 7 of them are saying no to reviews affecting their movie viewing. You need to stop clinging onto my thread like a life preserver. Its not garnered any hefty number of votes yet. No need to keep getting excited by such small numbers.

If you're finding all this worthless, then I cannot fathom why you are spending so much time and effort trying to prove something you think this worthless. You have literally spent hours on a worthless task. I am assuming at this stage the 'savage battle' has just gotten to a point where you're afraid to lose face or something. Because I can't imagine anyone putting all this time and effort into a worthless task. It would be a rather stupid thing to do.

 

[idiot09]

This Joker guy is in serious denial or he is just plain stubborn.I dont know how anyone can deny reviews sway people.THATS WHAT REVIEWS ARE FOR.Ive seen countless people on the net and real life being swayed by people to go watch a movie/or not watch it.I am sure this "Joker" guy knows a lot of people like that too.But he will hide behind things like "but where is the official proof" or "thats not huge number of people".That just reeks of desperation and denial.

Its very simple.When the agenda is "I need something to put this movie down" then suddenly critical reviews become very important.But when the agenda is to imply that critical battering didnt impact its BO run,its just because its a TERRIBLE movie,then suddenly "critic reviews never mattered to people".If the reviews didnt really matter to people,then people wouldnt have been so bothered about it to discuss and argue over it for nearly 65 pages.

 

[The Joker]

This Joker guy is not denying reviews sway people. I am denying reviews sway a significant number of people to the point that it has any detrimental effect on the movies. There's not a lick of proof of that. If you'd read back over the "65 pages" I'm sure this "idiot" would have seen that.

When people use bad critical reviews to put a movie down, they don't use it in the context of saying they drove everyone away. Its just one facet of the movie that got a negative critical reception. The response to it usually is "I don't care what critics say. I love the movie". When a movie does well in spite of bad critical consensus the fans say critics don't matter and this proves it. You yourself claimed earlier in the week when you were blind sided by the good weekday numbers that there was, and I quote; a major disconnect between audiences and critics over this movie; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34103367&postcount=86

Now here you are trying to claim the opposite. And you think I'm trying to hide behind things. The irony. Opinions change like the weather to suit the current argument.

 

[BlZARRO]

This Joker guy is in serious denial or he is just plain stubborn.I dont know how anyone can deny reviews sway people.THATS WHAT REVIEWS ARE FOR.Ive seen countless people on the net and real life being swayed by people to go watch a movie/or not watch it.I am sure this "Joker" guy knows a lot of people like that too.But he will hide behind things like "but where is the official proof" or "thats not huge number of people".That just reeks of desperation and denial.

Its very simple.When the agenda is "I need something to put this movie down" then suddenly critical reviews become very important.But when the agenda is to imply that critical battering didnt impact its BO run,its just because its a TERRIBLE movie,then suddenly "critic reviews never mattered to people".If the reviews didnt really matter to people,then people wouldnt have been so bothered about it to discuss and argue over it for nearly 65 pages.

He is not used to losing arguments. From what i've seen, most people don't even bother arguing too much with him because he is like the Terminator. He doesn't stop and will twist every little detail so he can have it his way. I'm like that too, but damn...i don't think in this situation i would still be insisting.

Now he created a thread where 4 people voted yes and three people in the comment section confirmed that in certain situations they do pay attention to critics, which makes it 50/50. 7 yes and 7 no. But he still believes the percentage of people who gives a crap about critics is insignificant. There's nothing you could possibly tell to convince him of otherwise.

A few days from now he will say that you can't gather enough opinions from this forum to come to a conclusion. He will say that it's only in this forum that people pay attention to critics. Outside of it nobody cares. And he will ask you for proof and evidence, but he will provide you none.

It's a sad state of affairs, but at the end of the day, it's all harmless.

 

[The Joker]

 

[Roose Bolton]

You know what would have swayed the reviewers? The Penguin.

 

[Greens]

 

[idiot09]

This Joker guy is not denying reviews sway people. I am denying reviews sway a significant number of people to the point that it has any detrimental effect on the movies. There's not a lick of proof of that. If you'd read back over the "65 pages" I'm sure this "idiot" would have seen that.

When people use bad critical reviews to put a movie down, they don't use it in the context of saying they drove everyone away. Its just one facet of the movie that got a negative critical reception. The response to it usually is "I don't care what critics say. I love the movie". When a movie does well in spite of bad critical consensus the fans say critics don't matter and this proves it. You yourself claimed earlier in the week when you were blind sided by the good weekday numbers that there was, and I quote; a major disconnect between audiences and critics over this movie; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34103367&postcount=86

Now here you are trying to claim the opposite. And you think I'm trying to hide behind things. The irony. Opinions change like the weather to suit the current argument.

Listen,there is no "lick of proof" on your side either.Its all things based on your experiences...Nobody is saying bad reviews sways everyone away.Us,comicbook fans,people who were already interested in seeing it,will go see it,and judge it themselves,as they should.But many people will be there,who would have seen them if the reviews were good,but didnt because they werent.

I claimed earlier week,based on the evidence,that there is a major disconnect between audience and the critics.I still stand by that.I still think the critics have been a bit too harsh on the DCEU movies.I am not claiming the opposite at all.But do I think if the critics were singing its praises loudly,if it had 90%+ ratings on RT or Metacritics,would more people be encourage to see it(now how many more people is something that cannot be debated,as frankly neither of us know),yes.

And yes,I think people shouldnt judge a movie by its reviews.I dont.But people do anyway.I wouldnt have seen movies like 2001 or The seven samurai (movies way before my time) if they didnt have great reviews.I wont go see Fantastic Beasts if it doesnt get great reviews.Because my exams will be going on,and my budget is tight.Its just the way it is man,rightly or wrongly,not just for me,but for many people.

 

[The Joker]

Listen,there is no "lick of proof" on your side either.Its all things based on your experiences...Nobody is saying bad reviews sways everyone away.Us,comicbook fans,people who were already interested in seeing it,will go see it,and judge it themselves,as they should.But many people will be there,who would have seen them if the reviews were good,but didnt because they werent.

I claimed earlier week,based on the evidence,that there is a major disconnect between audience and the critics.I still stand by that.I still think the critics have been a bit too harsh on the DCEU movies.I am not claiming the opposite at all.But do I think if the critics were singing its praises loudly,if it had 90%+ ratings on RT or Metacritics,would more people be encourage to see it(now how many more people is something that cannot be debated,as frankly neither of us know),yes.

And yes,I think people shouldnt judge a movie by its reviews.I dont.But people do anyway.I wouldnt have seen movies like 2001 or The seven samurai (movies way before my time) if they didnt have great reviews.I wont go see Fantastic Beasts if it doesnt get great reviews.Because my exams will be going on,and my budget is tight.Its just the way it is man,rightly or wrongly,not just for me,but for many people.

Its got nothing to do with my own experiences, I'd never use a strawman like that for proof. The proof is there on the previous pages. Studies have been done that show there is no definitive correlation between box office and reviews. The proof is in multiple movies that have made insanely good money in the billion range or close to it, despite being panned by critics. All documented facts, not my own experiences.

You think there is a major disconnect between audiences and critics, well there is some middle ground at least. If the critical consensus had been good you're right the second week drop wouldn't be as bad as that is one definitely correlation those studies found with highly rated movies. The second week is always the clincher, that drop to see if the movie has the staying power to keep audiences coming back. But the first week is a huge hit, breaking records, even of movies that got good critical response, because people don't give a toss what the critics says. They'll go see the movie.

If they like the movie, they'll keep seeing it, that's why brainless critically panned schlock like Transformers can keeping making billions.

 

[Marvin]

Studios seem to care a good deal about reviews, especially given the games they play with time released embargos.
The real question is why. They are more privy to data than anyone really. If only they were truly believed reviews were of no consequence seems their lives would be alot easier. Given their bottom line is surely box office, unless they are hoping for some kinda oscar run.

They clearly care, So as a general question, why.

 

[idiot09]

If the critical consensus had been good you're right the second week drop wouldn't be as bad as that is one definitely correlation those studies found with highly rated movies.

Thats all I'm saying.

People like to use the Transformers as a example,but that is the exception,rather than the rule.

Like I said,us the fans,people who are interested to see the movie are going to see the movies regardless.These are the people who go see it in the first week.General audiences who are not so much into it,wait for the ticket prices to drop/check out the reviews before deciding which movie to see.Hence why critically panned movies like this drop often(this is not the only reason,they also drop because of the bad quality).

 

[idiot09]

Studios seem to care a good deal about reviews, especially given the games they play with time released embargos.
The real question is why. They are more privy to data than anyone really. If only they were truly believed reviews were of no consequence seems their lives would be alot easier. Given their bottom line is surely box office, unless they are hoping for some kinda oscar run.

They clearly care, So as a general question, why.

Exactly.As much as I dont want it to be,the reviews did play a factor in why BvS(a movie I liked a lot) was shunned by lot of people.Do I think its wrong?Yes.Does it happen?Yes.Do i do it with other movies?Yes.

Are reviews the only factor that decides the BO run?HELL NO.But it certainly plays a part.As does competition,time of year,wom etc.

 

[The Joker]

Thats all I'm saying.

New respect for you then.

People like to use the Transformers as a example,but that is the exception,rather than the rule.

No, there's Burton's Alice in Wonderland, the Pirates of the Caribbean movies etc.

We're living in an age where critically hammered movies can make huge money.

Like I said,us the fans,people who are interested to see the movie are going to see the movies regardless.These are the people who go see it in the first week.General audiences who are not so much into it,wait for the ticket prices to drop/check out the reviews before deciding which movie to see.Hence why critically panned movies like this drop often(this is not the only reason,they also drop because of the bad quality).

General audiences anticipate these movies just as much as we do. BvS for example was the most anticipated movie of 2016;

http://dailysuperheroes.com/batman-v-superman-the-most-anticipated-of-2016/7147/

http://www.movieinsider.com/movies/anticipated/2016

More anticipated than the likes of Civil War, the one which actually made the billion this year. Comic book fans don't mainly make up the incredible first week numbers BvS and SS made. These are blockbuster movies that are catering for everyone not just us fans.

 

[Erzengel]

I'm surprised that the other side of the Transformers, BvS, Pirates, Alice discussion has not been brung up.

Movies that were critically received that bombed at the box office. Fight Club, Hugo, Pete's Dragon, Children of Men, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, Shawshank Redemption, the Iron Giant.

 

[idiot09]

New respect for you then.



No, there's Burton's Alice in Wonderland, the Pirates of the Caribbean movies etc.

We're living in an age where critically hammered movies can make huge money.



General audiences anticipate these movies just as much as we do. BvS for example was the most anticipated movie of 2016;

http://dailysuperheroes.com/batman-v-superman-the-most-anticipated-of-2016/7147/

http://www.movieinsider.com/movies/anticipated/2016

More anticipated than the likes of Civil War, the one which actually made the billion this year. Comic book fans don't make up the incredible first week numbers BvS and SS made. These are blockbuster movies that are catering for everyone not just us fans.

Dude I understand what you're saying,and that is all fine and dandy in theory,(although the links you gave didnt really prove anything.But I agree that these movies are highly anticipated so I wont argue about that) and sure lots of people anticipate this movie its produces a lot of hype,and people follow these pages on facebook or like something on Instagram.That doesnt necessarily mean the will go watch the movie though.

I am just saying again and again,and this is the last time,since this convo is going around in circles :

Critical response amongst other things like WOM,competition,date of release, and marketing are the things that influence people and make them decide whether they will watch a movie.I dont have a scientific formula that dictates how much for what.I speak from my own experience and from the people to I have talked in my life.

As you probably know I am a big fan of BvS.So I tried to tell all my friends(I live in a dorm) to go watch BvS.You wont believe the number of guys who were hyped AF to watch the movie,suddenly told me "nah man I heard the reviews were bad,and you know exams are coming so I wont watch it.I'll just torrent it later".And as much as I detested that,I understood that happens.I am a big Harry Potter fan.Ive watched all 8 movies and read all the books.Regardless of the reviews I would go watch the movies.But Fantastic Beasts I have no connection to.So if its reviews are bad,I'll just go see Doctor Strange instead.Its just the way it is,for me and many people I know.I know this is anecdotal evidence,but to me common sense dictates this.Are there movies which are critic proof?Sure.But maybe they would make even more money if they were critically backed.Who knows man.All I'm saying that it is a factor that you have to consider.