Here's my prediction about Suicide Squad's success (prior to reviews).
4:49pm Central
Thus far Metacritic is registering 26 reviews and the average score out of 100 is sitting at 47. Thus far it is looking like a solidly average critical reception, with 7 positive reviews to 5 negative reviews, but a lot (14 out of 26) sitting in the middle and favoring 40 or 50 out of 100 instead of 50 to 60.
Bear in mind that there will probably be close to 50 total reviews when all is said and done, so we're only a little over halfway to a final average... but chances are very high that the average will end up somewhere between 40 and 55. In other words, we can be very confident already that it will be a middle to low reviewed film and it is NOT very likely that it will be in the red (below 40) or in the green (above 60).
I'm going to take a look at a few fairly reputable critics now...
5:01pm Central
Peter Travers from Rolling Stone seems to key on the fact that the "worst of the worst" are too redeemable and too likeable. This may be a matter of taste -- how bad does each audience member want the bad guys to be? In his review, he positions this as the filmmakers taking the safe way out rather than being truly daring with the movie. He loses respect from me quite a bit by the end, though, when he lobs needless insults at Ayer ("limp-dick") and says that Suicide Squad is worse than Fantastic Four. Now, I haven't seen the movie yet, but that still seems like hyperbole to me. He awarded a 25/100.
Brian Truitt from USA Today had a much more positive spin (88/100). He views the characters as rich and as having souls, even if they're villains -- and he views this as a good thing. This seems to confirm to me that the sympathetic take on the members of the Squad may really be a matter of taste. The main drawback that Truitt mentioned was simply wanting to see more of certain characters (e.g., Katana, the Joker), though he specifically praised Will Smith's performance, calling it his best in years.
5:37pm Central
No new reviews have been added to Metacritic in the last half hour, so the average is still 47/100.
Let's look at Richard Roeper, who is right around the average, giving a 50/100. He criticizes the movie for actions scenes that are non-innovative, some overly sentimental backstories, and he was not a fan of Robbie's performance as Harley Quinn. He also didn't seem to connect with Enchantress's character, but he gave some nods at the end of his review about some of the visual moments and some of the dynamics between characters (e.g., Deadshot and Flag). But overall, the review made it seem like he was going to give a worse score than 2 out of 4 stars.
Jamie Graham gave a 60/100 and called out the movies marketing as promising a more daring and unhinged movie than it delivered. Some of the character arcs are predictable, even if there are some good interactions between characters.
5:44pm Central
As usual, the reviews really seem to depend on what expectations the reviewer brought into the movie. If the expectations are met, then a film is reviewed more highly (and this is related to, but somewhat independent of the straight-up "quality" of the film). A pattern that I'm detecting in the reviews that I've read thus far is that people were expecting Suicide Squad to push the envelope farther than it actually did. They are dinging it for playing it relatively safe. Now, safe can still be well executed and good, but it may not be what some people were hoping for from this movie.
9:04pm Central
Only two more reviews have been added to Metacritic over the last 3 hours. There are 28 reviews in our of probably around 50 eventually, and the average is now 46 out of 100. One main thing I'm noticing is that a narrative is forming where Suicide Squad is being perceived by fans and opponents as being blasted by critics, or taking in overwhelmingly negative reviews. But it is not correct to talk about this as a negative reception --- thus far, it is a decidedly MIXED reception from critics. More than half of the reviews (15 out of 28) have given a mixed review, and there are more positive reviews (7) than negative (6). This, together with the average, paint a very clear picture of mixed reception.
A negative reception would have a plurality of reviews in the negative category, whereas SS has the least number of reviews in the negative category. A negative reception would lead to an average below 40, if not below 30. Instead, SS is mixed, which means rather than being a poorly made movie, it is very likely that it will be a matter of taste -- some people might connect with the tone, characters, and plot, whereas others might not connect with it at all. That means, for me at least, I am going to want to see it to find out for myself.
So let me get this straight...people were criticizing MoS and BvS for not playing safe and taking too many risks, yet SS is being criticized for the exact opposite reason!?
ReplyDeleteI definitely saw that in a few of the reviews. Must be frustrating for WB.
DeleteIt's fine if the movie takes risks but those risks have to pay off which they clearly didn't. Also what risks did MoS steel take? It was just Batman Begins but with Superman.
DeleteI think making Batman Begins but with Superman is itself a risk because many people expect Superman to be more upbeat and milquetoast. It was risky to depower him, to have Lois learn his identity, to have the tornado scene, and to have him kill Zod exhibiting the free will that he'd been endowed with through natural birth. I happen to appreciate all of those risks, but it did make the movie very divisive. Almost as divisive as BvS.
Delete@TheStarskye other than superman going out on his own as a drifter to find himself the similarities end there
DeleteOkay. Now, I'm a believer. Lots of critics hate on the DCEU just to hate and are clearly biased towards Marvel...
ReplyDeleteI think you're right. It's not that they're paid off by Marvel and many aren't even doing it consciously, but Marvel has set the standard for the genre (kudos to them) and the critics keep judging WB superhero movies against that Marvel template. They also write their reviews as part of a larger contextual narrative, and the narrative that's been going for awhile is that WB is desperate to catch up to Marvel, so they spin reviews through that lens (I saw one like, "This is not going to get WB on track to catch Marvel").
DeleteWhich in itself is a flawed perspective Most complaints about BVS being overstuffed comes from people looking at it as a rushed attempt to reach justice league to play catch up. This is flawed. People say they put in batman because they didn't care about Superman. It should've been MOS 2 then batman and finally BVS. All the people saying this aren't looking at it from a storytelling standpoint.
ReplyDeleteIf you do MOS 2 with the same basic struggle the world's reaction to Superman and have Superman win the world's trust at the end, what purpose does Bruce's motive have anymore it would be repetitive and metropolis is the only logical reason he would go after him. You can't have both it's either MOS 2 or BVS. If you're going to do the world reaction to Superman why not have batman's view be a part of it, it makes sense to use this event to introduce and motivate Bruce. If you're going to show how Superman effects the world why not have his appearance reveal other metahumans like WW. Why not have Superman's intro to the world be a massive event to not just the superman world but the entire DC universe.
It makes sense superman is introduced and it reveals a whole world we didn't know existed. It's not a rush job it's the logical next step. It's not playing catch up it's telling the story it wants. None of the critics think of this they don't consider why any of this was chosen just assume it's rush job they don't bother to understand the vision. Same is happening with SS look at their perception and assuming it's just a desperate attempt to replicate guardians. Critics and even a lot of audiences don't seem to bother understanding a filmmakers vision and why they do what they do anymore.
Amen to that.
Delete@Trent -- yes, yes, yes. I completely agree that, storywise, it made sense to have Bruce and Lex both grappling with Superman's presence right along with the rest of the world. I also agree that BvS made more sense than MOS2. Honestly, I think keeping Superman limited to an MOS2 would've been artificially restrictive.
DeleteAs for SS, the constant comparison to Guardians may be why critics are not very forgiving for SS... they think WB is copycating as so they want to ding them for it.
The comparison to GotG is silly the only similarities they share is rag tag bunch misfits and even that's a stretch. GotG isn't the first or particularly good use of the Rag tag bunch of misfits trope (let's be honest it's just the Rocket Racoon show).
DeleteSam,
ReplyDeleteAs always I appreciate your perspective. I agree with you on the bias issue being unconscious but it is there and really frustrating to DCEU fans. I would not be surprised to see the same thing happen to Wonder Woman. I will see Suicide Squad tomorrow and judge for myself.
Me too. I am already surprised that this has gone beyond Snyder and to a new director, but if it also hits Wonder Woman this way, that will be even more frustrating. (But again, like you, I haven't seen it yet... so there's a chance that I also will think it's bad, but based on the reviews I've read, I'm still pretty optimistic because the negative reviews don't really speak to me.)
DeleteAre you saying that critics have no right to make a negative review?
ReplyDeleteNot when it's over the top and almost predatory. Roger Ebert can tear a Movie apart and still be respectful and professional
Delete@ChrisMan Come on now. That's silly. From what passage in the article did you get the idea that I'm disallowing negative reviews?
DeleteThe main points in my post are that the reviews were decidedly mixed on the whole, not overly negative. And then I argued that some of the negative ones seemed to be based on a misalignment of expectations (what the movie could've been) and what the movie was. That's just my attempt to process WHY the negative ones were negative, and then I also pointed out that many were mixed or positive. I would never say that a critic HAS to post only positive reviews. Seriously.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete