People Ask to Ban Rotten Tomatoes for Giving Negative Reviews for Suicide Squad. What Is Your Opinion?

Not sure if this is appropriate to post a movie discussion here but wanted to know opinions of ozbargainers on this…

I personally liked the movie, but if you go to a movie based on reviews people will not go to this movie. What do you think.

Related Stores

rottentomatoes.com
rottentomatoes.com

Comments

  • +28

    Suicide Squad? Is that something ISIS does?

    • -11

      No that's something the CIA created to cause chaos and then blame it on another country, thereby using fear and anger to create votes for a bill that let's the country be invaded, exploited and hundreds of thousands killed.

      • -3

        Bullshit. We have a an extremist here, see above. Take him down.

        • +3

          Calm down Bertha, it's just a joke. I am a Atheist, don't be so quick to label people.

        • -4

          @alikazi:
          Bullshit. Take him down.

        • +3

          @alikazi: "an". I don't label people. I correct grammar, and for that, I get labeled.

        • +1

          @flaminglemon: Nazi! …thread full of terrorists and nazis where is this world going??? Repent, the end is nigh! ;-)

        • @alikazi: +1, I pitty the people who do not speak sarcasm

      • -7

        Exploitation of what ? Syria has little of value, and Iraq has some oil, but in case you haven't noticed oil is very cheap,now and any cost of occupying Iraq is many times the cost of the oil if it were free.

        • +6

          not arguing about why they screwed up Iraq or Syria, but Iraq has an estimated $20 trillion dollars in oil reserves, that pays for occupying Iraq many times over.

        • +3

          NinetyNinceCents, that's precicely how much i'd give you as an hourly rate based on your iQ.

          The statement above is the trashiest shit I've read since some of Lindsay Lohan's comments on life.

          Syria, little value?

          You need to open up your eyes and read between the lines:

          http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-secret-stupid-saudi-us-deal...

          Natural gas has become the favored “clean energy” source for the 21st Century and the EU is the world’s largest growth market for gas. Syria happens to sit smack bang in the middle of a pipe run that Russia is keen on as is the US.

        • Syria has little value?
          I'm surprised you have internet in your Amish enclave!

        • -5

          @h0mbre:

          Maybe instead of lame ad hominem attacks you could share some of your superior knowledge about the value of Syria.

          Syria was a nothing before the current civil war. Go check your house if you don't believe me or you local community and tell me what do you have or see that comes or is made possible by Syria.

          Absolutely nothing…

        • -1

          @frostman:

          nobody is going to spend trillions to control a gas pipeline from the gulf states to Europe when ships work just fine at a fraction of the cost.

          Russia sells its own gas to Europe, it has no interest in helping any gas line remain functional in Syria. If anything it's better for Russia to have that gas or oil line destroyed so it can sell its own resources.

          That article is utter bullshit, and makes no sense as America has plenty of gas and oil and that's the main reason oil has come down today. The Saudis are trying to bankrupt the local in America and Canada sand oil operations. The low price also helps the west because it means Russia gets less money. There is no benefit for the west to help oil or gas flow thru Syria.

          In case you hadn't noticed the Saudis can also run those same pipes thru other countries, Syria is t the only option.

          Next time u reply cut out the childish bullshit and check before you reply with nonsense that makes no sense.

        • -1

          @gromit:

          Iraq doesn't have 20 trillion in oil and gas, it barely has 150 b barrels at 30 ish a barrel that's 450b. Oil would have to sell at hundreds of dollars a barrel for your number to become remotely close.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

        • -1

          @ninetyNineCents:

          Russia sells its own gas to Europe, it has no interest in helping any gas line remain functional in Syria

          So what you're telling me, is Russia is merely there, spending millions of dollars in warfare in Syria to simply aid the world in its fight against the bad gang? ROFL

          EDIT, if that previous post was nonsense, read something authorised by news.com.au

          http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/is-the-fight-over-a...

        • @ninetyNineCents: That is great maths ability you have there, hint 30 x 150b is NOT 450b, it is 4.5 trillion. Average price is generally between 40 and 60 US a barrel (50-80 AUD). This puts it in the range of $6 trillion - $9 trillion US$ using your 150b barrels (which is also a low sided estimate).

        • @frostman:

          So what you're telling me, is Russia is merely there, spending millions of dollars in warfare in Syria to simply aid the world in its fight against the bad gang? ROFL

          Russia wants a base in the med, it doesnt trust or like the fact a nato country like turkey can easily block the bospherus.

          http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/is-the-fight-over-a...

          I said something very similar just 2 posts up.

        • @ninetyNineCents:

          Russia wants a base in the med, it doesnt trust or like the fact a nato country like turkey can easily block the bospherus.

          Umm Russia has had a Naval Base in Tartous, Syria since Donkeys were born. Syria has always provided 'open door' policy to Russia to do whatever they want from their air bases and so forth. Syria is Russia's only ME ally, hence why Russia doesn't want Syria to be overtaken so it's trying it's best to conserve Syria to stay on its legs else Russia's only ME prospect will be blown away.

          The long and short of it is, the entire war in the ME is a struggle for power, money & control by the bigger players. People are used as collateral damage for the sole purpose of greed.

          This 2 min clip from the Movie Long Kiss Goodnight sums up motives.:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp3ZmCEOmeA

        • @frostman:

          Umm Russia has had a Naval Base in Tartous, Syria since Donkeys were born.

          Yes i know that, and the reason R is helping Bashir to regain his lost lands and keep power is because he gives them that base. I have said this all along, that this is the primary driver for R involvement in S.

          The long and short of it is, the entire war in the ME is a struggle for power, money & control by the bigger players.

          Thats so generic it can be applied to all wars for all time.

          This all started with the question why R is in S, my bit about the naval base pretty much is the best answer.

      • somehow agree

    • +6

      The original Suicide Squad is the best!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUHk2RSMCS8

      • +2

        Before I clicked the link I new where I was going:) +++

  • +50

    I don't see what the problem is, its a review site why would you ban reviews?

    • +13

      seems like a fanboyism reaction to me..

  • +10

    Mob mentality, seen it lots of times on OzB. I think there is change.org petition already to ban Rotten Tomatoes because it had negative reviews of Batman v Superman by the same people. I think I will still see the movie at some point because it is so overhyped. I will go and see it just to see how bad it is. And besides, I only listen to reviews from people I know, I find most reviewers are too "intellectual" and "cultured" to like the movies I like. :)

    • +11

      and have you seen BvS? cause man those reviews are 100% correct……

      • +5

        Yes I have and yes I agree. I was disappointed, it was not as good as I expected. But Civil War wasnt that great either but that got 90% on RT. My point is that RT is not very relevant to me.

        • +2

          I actually thought BvS was good. Watched the extended version. Now what I would consider a crap movie is Lucy. Was excited to see that movie due to the trailer but then in the cinema I was like why am I here. that got a higher rotten tomatoe review.. pretty crap.

        • +2

          @darkage: I liked Lucy, but I thought Limitless was executed way cooler.

        • +1

          @ceebee: sure u didnt just like morgan freemans voice :) Havent watched Limitless yet, I should make sometime to watch it.

        • @darkage: heh.. it wasnt terrible but with the hype built up, I had higher expectations. I liked how they connected both Batman and Supermans mothers are called Martha. I wish they had packed in more fight scenes though. In the beginning they wasted a lot of time on melodramatic scenes of how Batmans parents died. I mean I believe the core audience is there to watch superheroes fight. I guess that is why Marvel movies had a higher rating. Fight scenes and humour always go down well in superhero movies.

        • @geek001: I think Marvel is more about being action packed like typical Super Hero movies. I find Dc is more about symbolism & emotion. I actually didn't like Man of Steel until I watch this

      • I'm first to defend batman or superman movies but seriously BVS was terrible

    • +3

      I saw Batman v Superman, holy carp that was bad.

      • +1

        I enjoyed BvS. Trolls spread this bvs is crap over all forums and im sick of seeing it.. Yes movie not perfect but it was far from crap.
        Imdb score average score is 6.9 so it far from crap like these trolls suggest.

      • I really wanted to like Suicide Squad.

        But it was truly awful viewing. And I quite enjoyed Batman vs Superman.

        I really wanted DC to succeed with this one, but it was sad to watch.

  • +25

    change.org is a joke
    /thread

    • +3

      Wontchange.org

    • +2

      Yes, with the issue here being the calibre of petitions allowed on change.org.

      Everyone who signed that petition is pathetic, basically. If you must, spend your time signing a petition that holds some form of value, that might actually make genuine change in someone's life, instead of something so 100% vapid, and not to mention pointless.

  • +8

    It's an average movie that could've been done better…

    • +10

      I think these movies deserve very low scores because:

      1 - They have huge budgets, I mean seriously, US$175 Mill ?
      2 - The director is paid massive amounts, but the direction is lame and low-quality
      3 - The script…come on, its Comic Books. There's heaps of content. And there's heaps of Do's and Don'ts from decades of movie scripts.
      4 - Actors, just plain bad. Or not suited for such roles.

      …and guess what, good movies become more successful than not.

      Case in point: Deadpool.
      (Decent budget, great directing, great script, perfect actor = smashing success)

      • +5

        its like the studios saw Nolans Batman trilogy and got complacent, thought anyone could do this shit especially after Marvel followed up with a mostly decent line up of heaps of well connected films.
        Im a DC guy if I had to choose but holy crap are they screwing up the DC characters since Man of Steel. get Snyder out of there! the dude said he would have improved Nolans "Batman Begins" by having Bruce raped in prison then we get Jimmy Olsen immediately shot in the head in BvS as a slick secret agent instead of a nerdy photographer friend of clarks..

        EDGY award for Zack! special medal quick!

        • +5

          Agreed 100%.

          Although there was some aspects of Man of Steel that I did like, such as:
          1 - They didn't re-do the whole "baby in the field" and waste movie minutes
          2 - They fixed the costume. No more urine-yellow underwear.
          3 - The actor they used looks more masculine than previous Superman actors (no offence)
          4 - The character/actress for Lois Lane was also more human/realistic rather than a 60's cliche or annoying.
          5 - I did like them trying to show Krypton, and Clark as a travelling vagabond.
          6 - I did like the "relationship" aspect between Clarke and his adoptive father

          But even some of those scenes or aspects were tarnished by the producers, directors, and writers.
          Overall I think DC mostly makes bad movies, some okay movies, and few great ones.
          …the Dark Knight that was the pinnacle of DC Movies right there (imho)

          Compared to Marvel… let's be honest, even they have made crap ones such as:
          Old Cap America, Punisher 2, Original Hulk, Second Hulk, Thor 2, Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Avengers Ultron.

          A few decent ones: Ant-Man, Blade Trinity.

          But they also have the good likes of:
          Avengers, Iron Man, Cap America 2, Thor, Punisher, Blade, Blade 2, Civil War…

          There's also Deadpool movie, which is funded by FOX, but not really made by them to be honest.
          They used outside producers/directors for the base of the movie… I mean Ryan Reynolds did most of it himself.
          It's more like a Marvel Movie, rather than a FOX Movie… and I'd be excited to see Avengers Infinity with some DP.

          And SONY is all over the place with crap: Ghost Rider 2 and Spiderman 3…
          And decent ones such as: Ghost Rider, Amaz-Spiderman 2, Spiderman
          And good flix like: Spiderman 2, Amazing Spiderman

          And FOX has made a few good ones: X2, First Class, Days Future Past
          A few decent ones: X-Men, Origins Wolverine, Daredevil, Fantastic Four,
          And a lot of crap ones: Last Stand, The Wolverine, Apocalypse, Electra, Silver Surfer, F4,

          Maybe DC should hire some of the producers, writers, and directors from other camp; ie Pickout the best from SONY, FOX, and Marvel.

        • +2

          @Kangal: To be fair, the first Cap America movie was pretty good. Actually focused on a story line rather than big name actors and special effects.

        • +2

          @dogboy:

          Depends, are we talking about the one with Chris Evans and MCU ?
          That's pretty good.

          Because I was talking about the other one that I wish I can forget:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuCs8xXVsxE

        • @Kangal: Ah, that makes sense then. Yes, was talking about the Chris Evans one.

        • @Kangal: FYI some of those Marvel movies aren't Marvel movies. Marvel Studios didn't start until Iron Man. Before that they were all farmed out, eg Old Captain America (Cannon), Blade (New Line), Punisher (1988 - Cannon (filmed in Sydney) and 2004 Lions Gate) and Original Hulk (Universal).

  • +102

    Definitely ban it. The internet is no place for opinions, especially one different to mine.

    • +1

      I disagree. You're banned, mate.

      What Is Your Opinion?

      That a lot of hardcore fans are juvenile and too closely link their fandom with personal self-worth. When someone doesn't agree with them they view it as some sort of personal attack and need to retaliate. DC vs Marvel. Xbox vs. PlayStation. Nvidia vs. AMD. You get the idea.

      The worst part is, as others have pointed out, is that RT doesn't even do the reviews, they aggregate them. If you are going to go into a infantile nerd rage then at least take aim at the right group who you feel have slighted you.

      • too closely link their fandom with personal self-worth

        Good insight, never thought about it that way before. Definitely agree.

        Also true about RT being an aggregator. What a silly thing to get worked up about.

        P.S. I just watched Blue Ruin after having seen Green Room by the same director. RT showed it had good reviews, and it turned out to be phenomenal, best movie I've seen this year.

  • +7

    was not a great movie, story was terrible , characters where underdeveloped ( expect for Harley Quinn )

    • +3

      The OP wasn't asking for opinions on the movie.

      • +3

        But it shows support for Rotten Tomatoes.

      • True, but does show that maybe rottentomatoes isn't wrong, but maybe right ;)

  • +1

    so it is good or not? im planning to watch on IMAX.

    • I liked it very much.

      • +2

        I generally find that too.. Sometimes reviewers are trying to find deep and meaningful concepts in a simple, fun (but brainless) action flick. I think I'd like it.

        That said, I was very disappointed in Batman vs Superman, and I wasn't expecting very much at all.

        • BM vs SM was not upto the mark i was also disappointed by the movie.

        • +2

          Yeah that batman superman movie wasn't good I don't believe batman has a chance against superman. Ever.

        • +1

          @itisalwaysright: So you agree with the reviews on that movie, but you can't stand that they didn't like this movie? Hmmmmm ok

        • @Level380: i didnt have any opinion about rotten tomatoes issue raised by OP, i was here asking if the SS movie is good or not and i didnt like S vs B movie. thats all.

    • +1

      It was ok I did enjoy it BUT it is simplistic. Basically they where trying to introduce TOO many characters at the same time IMHO. They could have done a better job with 6 characters it would have been more focused, faster and not so all over the place.

    • IMHO, if you didn't like Batman vs Superman, then you probably won't like Suicide Squad as I thought the two movies are about on par with each other. I was a bit disappointed with SS, they could have done so much better. It was ok at best, mainly thanks to the quirkiness of Harley Quinn; without her I think the SS movie would have been an absolute flop (if it isn't already).

    • +1

      I saw it on imax, I enjoyed it.

    • +1

      Overall it was hyped. I went in there with a medium expectation and the whole story was missing something. It wasn't 'real' enough, the villians were glorified but didn't really do much especially at the end… some moments were like, ehm.. how the f?

      SvB is so much better, so much better graphics, i like the CGIs and story made sense.

  • +4

    Neckbeard rage.

  • +4

    Rotten Tomatoes is merely an aggregate site, it only collates ratings and reviews, it doesn't review the movies itself.

    The Tomatometer rating – based on the published opinions of hundreds of film and television critics – is a trusted measurement of movie and TV programming quality for millions of moviegoers. It represents the percentage of professional critic reviews that are positive for a given film or television show.

    Critics watch lots of movies, so when movies are critically acclaimed, they've enjoyed it pretty much, cause its new, different or done very well.
    Depending on the type of film, this doesn't mean you will enjoy it to the same extent.

    So if you want to see a movie, go and do it, but remember if you read the reviews, there will be expectations.

  • +8

    Can We Ban Unnecessary Capitalisation Of Word Initial Letters In Sentences???

    • +10

      It's a title…

    • +1

      Ozbargain suggestively formats it that way, but ok.

  • +6

    People who want to ban websites which is basically saying my free speech is more important than their free speech are too stupid to have an opinion.

    • -1

      Like the gummints does?

      • +4

        No like those who keep saying gummints

  • +4

    Aren't Rotten tomatoes always giving harsh reviews? to me it doesn't really matter, i'll just watch the movie when my friend has a copy of it :D

    • +1

      Pretty sure it just aggregates reviews anyway.

  • +4

    Why? The movie is bad.

    • Cause it's free

      • Is it?

  • Batman v's Superman (extended version that you didt see in the cinema) was just ok, the cinema version would have sucked and deserved its bad reviews. SS movie has had lots of trouble with loads of fingers in the pie, reshoots and script rewries and changes ~ this does not bode well for any movie. I might wait for a extended version if it too, life's too short to be wasting money on crap. As for RT, I use them to get the gist but to be honest, some slammed movies Ive loved, so its a guide not a bible!

  • +1

    I try not to pay too much attention to movie review sites. Use them for a guide only as its just someone else's opinion… always found RT to be reasonably good resource though. Banning it sounds pretty extreme.. hey here's a novel idea for all those anti RT advocates… don't use that site??

  • +1

    It was entertaining and enjoyable. Some things could have been developed better like the witch/brother/bad guys and the lead up to the loyalty of the group to each other but it would have meant a much longer movie. Some of the Marvel movies lately have bored me a tad so was happy for a much more humorous upbeat flick.

  • -1

    I agree. Star Trek Beyond is rated 84% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I thought it was terrible. All I can deduce from the 84% is that trekies love reviewing trekie movies.

  • +1

    No, don't ban Rotten Tomatoes. Not every service gets everything 100% right.

  • +4

    Rotten Tomatoes looks at various reviews around the internet, and categorises them into two groups:

    • Reviews that thought the movie was okay or better (3/5 onwards)
    • Reviews that thought the movie was bad (2/5 or less -ish)

    Then it just gives you the ratio. So that means that a movie that got 95% on Rotten Tomatoes could have just gotten 95 3/5 reviews and 5 2/5 reviews.

    I'd take the Tomatometer with a grain of salt if I were you, and look at the individual reviews instead.

    • Yeah, a movie that's considered universally OK would receive the same or a similar RT percentage as a movie that's universally considered amazing.

      And cult movies that some people love and others hate might get a 20%. The Thing (1982), for example, would have gotten an incredibly low RT. It was pretty universally panned back then and is now considered a cult classic.

  • +4

    People seem to think that if they get enough people to agree with them, the are objectively in-the-right and everything will be done according to their wishes.

  • I tend to agree with rotten tomatoe. Movie was bland.

  • +5

    Censor it please. Free speech is only good when it aligns with my world view.

    • Wait is that you right-wing shockjock - bill o'reilly/andrew bolt?

  • +2

    Movie was bound to be boring its rated PG

  • +1

    I watched it last night, and I think it was pretty sh*t.. not near as good as it was hyped. I usually follow IMDB rating.. but this time seems it is overrated by the fans. Sorry, but fan or not, you shouldn't judge a movie based on emotions and personal attachments.

  • Too Lol, Will Smith is in it.

    Anything he is in is already doomed from the beginning. He thinks his shit doesn't stink and has too much creative input where actually, he's just a rich idiot who can't act and wouldn't know creative if it fell on his head in the form of a piano.

    • Lies….If only Jaden Smith was in it, I know it would've been a hit!

      • Start a petition!

  • +4

    I find Rotten Tomatoes a lot more reliable than say IMDB. And they are not averse to superhero movies by default. They praised Watchmen and The Dark Knight to name a few. The fact that they tear apart blockbusters like SS means they are truly independent from the movie industry. I can't see how is that bad and why should they be silenced.

  • +2

    Saw it today. And it definitely isn't great. It's just meh. Jared Leto as the Joker was just boring.

    • +2

      Oh and not a drop of blood or swearing to be seen. Just PG rubbish.

Login or Join to leave a comment