OldBoy

Obviously with the strong opening of Suicide Squad, the horrid reviews simply didn't detract movie-goers from seeing it. Now, of course, subsequent weeks will determine longevity and most likely will suffer greatly. But, this seemed to be review proof. Along with DC's other bastion of bad reviews in Batman vs Superman, which again made a boat load.

So why do some of these movies seem critic proof while others flail? Is it the fandom, the property that bolsters staggering sums of money or something else? Of course, it could be that the general movie going public just doesn't care, but then why do other critically drubbed movies fall in line and bomb?

Brack

Suicide Squad was very well marketed. I think it's success echoes Deadpool, except that one was critically praised for the most part. If you can make a movie's opening weekend an event, then you can have a monster weekend. Easier said than done.

Eric F

Early ticket sales. Should change now that the movie is out.

TomOpus

A lot of movies are critically acclaimed but do nothing at the box office. Things happen for different reasons.

stingermck

Some people just don't care about reviews.

islandclaws

Massive build-up and hype, excellent marketing, and not caring about what the pro critics have to say.

Now, since everyone flocked to it this weekend the "real" reviews - i.e. people you know - will spread and that's where the money either keeps on rolling in or it dies in the second weekend.

Dr. DVD

Any well hyped movie can be critic proof for one weekend. Afterward is more of a test as to whether or not the critics were right or wrong.

RichC2

WOM matters more than critical approval.

But big budget with appealing subject matter (especially based on a popular property) will get asses in seats regardless of what critics say.

Count Dooku

Making ‘Suicide Squad’ a Smash, Despite Withering ReviewsMaking ‘Suicide Squad’ a Smash, Despite Withering Reviews

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/mo...dayspaper&_r=1

Article discusses five aspects of the marketing, here are two:

Spoiler:

Warner is known for its leave-no-billboard-unplastered marketing campaigns, and the long push behind “Suicide Squad” was no exception.

The first footage was released in July 2015 — just a few weeks after filming began — at Comic-Con International, the annual fan convention in San Diego. Ten different posters debuted in January, along with a white-hot trailer with Queen’s “Bohemian Rhapsody” as the soundtrack. (It went on to generate an astounding 180 million views online.)

Television ads started running in early June on networks like ABC and ESPN. Ms. Kroll’s team produced 11 more character ads, another 11 special designs for last month’s Comic-Con and 11 character videos. (Pains were taken to introduce the movie’s lesser-known characters, like Killer Croc and Diablo, to mainstream consumers.)

And, of course, there was extensive digital marketing, including at least five efforts with Snapchat.

RichC2

Meh, Robbie was a rising star in 2014. Well known or not.

d2cheer

I would say most people don't. Teenagers for sure...

Jay G.

T-Mobile Tuesday gave me a "free ticket" to Suicide Squad ($13 off). I figured I'd go see it for (nearly) free. Now I wonder how many people got that offer.

DJariya

Summer blockbusters like big budget science fiction, action or comic book adaptations are always critic proof. If I see a trailer for a summer blockbuster that looks interesting to me, I'll see it regardless of the reviews or the overall RT score.

I don't think any Millennial wants to hear what some 50 or 60-something film critic from a newspaper thinks about Marvel/DC movies or the newest Transformers movie.

MScottM

I think the answer to the question is pretty evident.

When I go to see a movie I do it for one reason and one reason only, to be entertained. Alot of times I base the likelyhood of my being entertained on the history of whether the director or lead actors or screen writers or type of story has entertained me in the past or not but still, my one and only paramount goal is entertainment.

Critics measure the movies using diffent criteria than I do. There was a long period of time ( we are talking about years here) when if i would have listened to what the critics said, I wouldnt have seen one movie that entertained me. I saw some that I could agree with the critics that they were horrible but others that the critics panned, I really enjoyed. The result of this, for me, was that I stopped listening to critics altogether. I will be the judge of what entertains me and the critics will have no say in it.

I havent seen the Suicide Squad yet. The trailers look very entertaining but from what I am hearing and not just from the critics is that the trailers are deceptive as to the real movies' story. I will still see the movie at some point. If three quaters of the nation hates this movie, I would still go to see it to make that judgement for myself but my expectaions at this point are lower than they were two weeks ago.

All of that being said, movies arent critic proof, but critics arent taken at their word like they want to be because the critics looks for the flaws in movies and I and many like me are only looking to them for entertainment.

Jay G.

That's misrepresenting the vast majority of critics, who like big budget action films if they're done well.

For example, of movies recently released, The Jungle Book and Captain America: Civil War scored 90% and higher. Star Trek Beyond has 84% score right now, and even Ghostbusters is considered "fresh."
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/in-theaters/

Also, there's a difference between whether a critic was entertained by a film, and whether they'll recommend it. Based on the written review and accompanying video discussion, it's clear that AV Club reviewer Ignatiy Vishnevetsky got some enjoyment out of Suicide Squad. Yet his score of C+ is registered on Rotten Tomatoes as "rotten."
http://www.avclub.com/review/suicide...t-clums-240480
http://www.avclub.com/video/there-an...e-squad-240704
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/criti...-vishnevetsky/

Critics tend to be more "critical" of film, unsurprisingly, but they're not joyless fuddyduddies.

Finally, aggregate scores should always be taken with a grain of salt; they're only an indicator of whether most people (reviewers or audience) liked the film. They can't accurately predict whether you'll like it. But instead of ignoring critics entirely, you can make the aggregate scores a factor, or try and find an individual reviewer whose tastes seem fairly in line with yours.