Suicide Squad vs. Dial M for Murder

0 comments

1 comments

Dial M obviously wins but I want to use this discussion to talk about something that has been on my mind for a while now; exposition and how it should be used in film! Exposition, at its worst, seems like a lazy way to set up future events or to bring up previous events. At its best, it can work really well in the narrative. The right way to use exposition; Dial M For Murder!. The exposition works because you have to pay attention to what is going on and the plot is continuously moving. Since it takes place in one location and feels like it's done in real time, the exposition feels necessary. The wrong way; Suicide Squad. Before I continue, I loath Suicide Squad (all my friends love it and tell me "I'm too harsh on it" but if a movie is poorly made, horribly written and horribly structured then of course I'm going to think it's terrible). Why doesn't the exposition work? Because it spends a third of the film developing the "characters" (if you can call them characters) without any plot progression and guess what? I still don't care about them! The writers treated the audience like idiots so they had to explain every single detail! It doesn't respect its audience enough to let them figure things out on their own! And yet, it still has a lot of plot holes! Show me the action, don't tell about me it! If it isn't made as if it's done in real time then you can set up the characters without having a group of people eating dinner while talking about them! Every character has a backstory and a character arc which erases the idea of a main character. It's incredibly hard to follow and breaks every rule of screenwriting! Dial M For Murder works a lot better as a film and in its use of exposition!