Matchup of the Day: Rogue One VS Suicide Squad

Chad Hoolihan

Having no affiliation with any spiritual or philosophical movements, Chad instead attempts to find meaning through watching movies.  He also enjoys  watching birds fight over food in supermarket parking lots.

You may also like...

6 Responses

  1. Age of Empire says:

    They’re both kinda bad but Rogue One is slightly better

  2. I really enjoyed Rogue One and was incredibly disappointed with SS. Yes, Rogue One suffered from a lack of character development but other than that, its still a ton of fun. Not to mention finally seeing what made Darth Vader such a badass in the first place. SS just benefited from Will Smith. As great Margo was as Harley Quinn, i had a hard time believing her purpose for the team considering she didnt have any superpower or any real battle skills other than swinging a bat. So yeah, sex appeal. I’ll choose Rogue One.

  3. Rogue One – I liked it alot.

  4. Suicide Squad starts out with promise, energetically paced, formulaic but stylish. But then it starts to sag in the middle, and lags into dullness by the end. I think possibly the mistake was to set up an ensemble, that DC was to trying to match the success of Guardians of the Galaxy, i.e., the use of a lesser known property for an “off-beat” and comedic adventure. But Guardians only had to worry about four main characters, and that is about all this film can sustain primary interest in either: The Joker, Harley Quinn, Deadshot, and then everyone else in a revolving door. They should have made a film about Joker and Harley Quinn instead using these these actor’s interpretations.

    Rogue One had a similar problem, the lack of a compelling ensemble, arbitrary characters put together to fit a template and requirements for multiculturalism and foreign markets. And despite its realism, there is still the clash of the modern and the classic. For example, Leia’s hairbun hairdo is still in sight in one scene, but it feels like that is from a whole different era than the natural looking hair sported by Jen Eryso. That could be a class difference, or projected as such, but I see it as the gap between a film made in the 70’s inspired by the 40’s and a film made in the teens of the new century inspired by the original trilogy of the last century, and it is a glaring gap. I didn’t like Gareth Edward’s Godzilla, and I’m not too fond of this film of his either. He uses modern language for the film, replete with handheld camerawork, for which I could slap him, a slapdash use of widescreen composition, low-energy editing. Felicity Jones doesn’t have enough presence for the role to carry the film. She needn’t have been more plucky (as that would have been lame) she just needed to be different. They cast a Dane as her father, they couldn’t have cast an actress of partially Danish descent to match – maybe a blonde for once in a Star Wars film? They could have cast, say, Blake Lively, Emile de Ravin, or Imogen Poots. Even if Blake Lively was pregnant. I can’t think of a more horrible and properly transgressive ending to a “bold, new” Star Wars film than having Vader kill the blonde pregnant heroine. And there is still too much CGI. Some kind of multiple limbed creature that can read minds early in the film – CGI crap. Some of the explosions looked fake too. And then there is a digital Peter Cushing there, looking dropped in from Zemeckis’ Christmas Carol. They couldn’t have recast with a real person, maybe Terence Stamp?