Suicide Squad script

There have been a lot of comments about why I didn't choose a superhero movie as my example of a well-structured screenplay to contrast with Suicide Squad. It's simple. When I write my script, I take into account arguments against what I am saying. If I chose an earlier DC Comics film like Superman (1978), someone would inevitably cry "You have nostalgia glasses on!" and use it as an excuse to dismiss my arguments rather than engage and debate. If I chose a Marvel Comics movie someone would say "You're a Marvel zombie! Bias!" and use it as an excuse in the same way.

Choosing a completely unrelated example was the best way to keep everyone interested. Anyway, here is the script:

 [MUSIC CUE: Organic Textures 2]
 AUDIO 1
 Suicide Squad is structurally unsound, a film held together by a broken skeleton. [5:02] Intelligence Agent Amanda Waller has put together team of criminals. Her plan is to activate them should a Superman-level threat arise – [1:40:30] which is strange because nearly all of them do not possess extraordinary powers. They have guns and baseball bats. [1:45:34] The only two criminals with powers are Enchantress, who is completely out of Waller's control, [15:35] and Diablo, who often refuses to use said powers. [1:50:13] Also, considering Diablo even at his strongest could only go toe to toe with a super-monster for about a minute, there is really nobody on the team that even comes close to meeting [20:55] the criteria Waller laid out for why Task Force X needs to exist.   
 [22:47] That being said, I can believe that a government has woefully overestimated their own strength in the face of a foreign enemy. Frankly, that seems historically accurate, even if that was absolutely not the intention of the film. [23:27] Narrative contrivances happen or else the movie would not. So, fine, whatever. [21:50] The premise is built on shaky ground, but that is actually not what I mean when I say that Suicide Squad is structurally unsound. No, plot nitpicking aside, Suicide Squad does not work because its very bones are not strong enough. [54:28] The editing, the pacing, the tone, everything that makes an engaging action film work does not exist in this film.    
 [clip of 48:49]
 AUDIO 2
 [15:00] The Three Act Structure is a screenwriting model for dividing the narrative into three distinct parts. It has its roots in theater – even ancient theater – [30:00] but its use in film has evolved the concept only slightly.  [45:00] Suicide Squad actually does utilize this structure, albeit poorly, but as an example, I'll use a completely unrelated film that adheres to the structure and used it well: [title] Raiders of the Lost Ark. Easiest example due to strict adherence to the three act structure and the fact that EVERYBODY knows how this movie goes even if one has never seen it due to cultural osmosis. Now, is it fair to compare a timeless action-adventure classic [9:15] to a poorly edited critical disaster with 26% on Rotten Tomatoes? I don't know, but it's best to explain how something can go right if you want to explain how something can go so terribly, terribly wrong.   
 [Raiders 3:16 text] Act I is the setup, [Raiders 4:00] a series of expository scenes that reveal information about our protagonist and his or her relationships with other characters. [Raiders 7:44] In Raiders, Indiana Jones is revealed, and the scenes in the cave of the idol [Raiders 13:04] and the classroom explain who he is, what he does and why he does it. [Raiders 10:05] His relationship with Belloch, the principle antagonist, is also established. [Raiders 19:45] In the first act, an inciting incident occurs – the protagonist learns something important or something happens either to the protagonist or someone in his or her life. [Raiders 19:35] This inciting incident or catalyst either forces the protagonist or gives the protagonist a choice to pursue something. In Raiders, government agents inform Jones that [Raiders 20:18] German forces are searching for Abner Ravenwood. Jones deduces that if the Nazis are in need of Ravenwood's expertise, they must be searching for the Ark of the Covenant.   
 AUDIO 3   
 [Raiders 33:54] The pursuit of something is Act II – the confrontation. A variety of different things can happen here, and for obvious reasons, this is usually – but not always – the longest act. [Raiders 35:10] In Raiders, Jones meeting up with Sallah in Egypt, [Raiders 54:02] everything related to the Staff of Ra and digging for the Well of Souls in in Act II. [Raiders 1:12:08] During this act in a screenplay, something awful happens, and the protagonist is at his or her lowest. but then resolves to defeat the villain or capture the item or fix the problem or something. [1:13:41] In Raiders, the bad thing that happens is that Jones and Marion Ravenwood are trapped and must escape to stop the Nazis from using the power of the Ark.
 [Raiders 1:23:22] The third act in the film has the climax and epilogue. [Raiders 1:45:00] In Raiders, the climax is the revelation of what is inside the Ark [Raiders 1:49:30] and the epilogue or falling action is the government agents informing Jones that the Ark has been recovered and will be studied by top men. [31:49] It's significantly more complicated than that and can have so many variables, but those are the basics. [44:33] Now, before someone flips over a table and says “Fight the Hollywood system! I want a FIVE ACT movie!” just...*sighs*....I know. [51:30] Not every movie needs to strictly adhere to such a structure to the letter to be good, but two things about that: [53:51] One, even movies with unorthodox structure have some basis in this ancient storytelling method even if the screenwriter did not even realize it. [57:00] And two, yeah, not every movie does or even should follow the formula exactly, but when creating a polished, Hollywood product – in this case a big budget action film – [1:05:23] it is wise to stand on the shoulders of giants and craft a film at least loosely based on how a good story classically has worked.
 
 AUDIO 4
 [41:15] David Ayer wrote and directed Suicide Squad. [blur][Ayer overlay] He has written eleven movies, directed six and ALL OF THEM are about police officers or soldiers. All of them. [43:24] Even Suicide Squad, albeit to a smaller degree. He is not an avant garde David Lynch or Nicholas Winding Refn style filmmaker, and even they sometimes follow said structure. [48:41] Movies like these require some version of this model – this formula – and it is completely botched in Suicide Squad.    
 [49:43] I've seen the theatrical version and own the extended edition, but for the purposes of all of this, I'll use the time indexes of the latter. First, an overview. [0:25] Act I, obviously, begins immediately. [37:38] The inciting incident, a disaster in Midway City, occurs thirty-seven minutes in. [50:03] Act II arguably begins 50 minutes into the film when Task Force X flies to Midway City. [1:40:18] Act III begins at 1 hour and 40 minutes when – after our team has reached its lowest point – decides to confront the antagonist. [1:53:32] It's a 2 hour and 14 minute film, counting the credits. You could make the argument that Act III begins earlier, and that's fine, but the structure is more art than science. More guideline than law.   
 AUDIO 5
 [0:33] Act I has a lot of problems, most of which are pacing. That's where the structure of a film helps. Pacing. For the first three minutes of the film, we are introduced to the two characters on Task Force X [1:15] who get the most screentime and backstory: Deadshot and [2:53] Harley Quinn. OK, that's enough, right? The rest of the plot and exposition will unspool naturally over the course of the film, right? [5:12] WRONG. Because THEN, we spend another SEVENTEEN MINUTES introducing supporting characters – INCLUDING Deadshot and Harley, two characters who we already met. [9:08] These introductions are terrible, by the way, I'll save the details of that for later. This is just about pacing.
 [19:22] Then, a full twenty minutes into the film – after a scene with Amanda Waller trying to sell her colleagues and the audience on who Task Force X will be and why it exists, [20:52] she introduces said characters and mission AGAIN to the Pentagon. [20:27] She also introduces Enchantress to the military officers, even though we – the audience – already know who she is, her conflict, her relationship with Colonel Flagg and her role in the team. [23:23] This may be the most redundant scene not just in this film but in motion pictures this year. That is, until the next scene.   
 AUDIO 6
 [25:41] Because then, Waller, Flagg and Enchantress visit the prison we are introduced to these characters AGAIN. [1:15] Each of these sections of the first act, the initial three minutes, [5:12] then the overly long dossier montage scenes, [20:25] then the Pentagon scene, [24:13] then the following prison scene, all convey the same thing over and over again rather than providing new information. [25:25] See, a scene is meant to convey information to the audience. Who are these people? What can they do? We already knew that. Exposition should be over by now, [26:48] but it JUST. KEEPS. GOING. [Raiders 7:46] Going back to the good example of structure and pacing, the cave of the idol scene teaches us who Indiana Jones is – an archaeologist adventurer. The idol is unrelated to the main point.   
 [Raiders 8:15] It exists to be entertaining, sure, but also explain who he is and what he values. [Raiders 13:00] The immediate scene afterwards expounds on that very briefly to tell us he is educated, and then everything after that is about the central conflict of the film. [Raiders 7:30] If Raiders of the Lost Ark went by Suicide Squad logic and editing, after the cave of the idol, [Raiders 33:52] Indiana Jones went on ANOTHER mission to, say, Iraq – to find ANOTHER identical idol. [Raiders 13:00] And THEN come back to the school to teach a class, [Raiders 13:00 inverted] and THEN teach ANOTHER class, and only then have the inciting action. [2:00] So, when critics say “Suicide Squad has pacing issues.” this is what is meant by that. It is structurally unsound, inefficient in its editing and redundant. [3:00] Bear in mind, I don't have a problem with length of the first act in and of itself. [The Lion King] The Lion King has a long first act before its inciting action even occurs. [Full Metal Jacket] Ditto for Full Metal Jacket and tons more. The length itself is not the issue, it's what is DONE within that length.
 [clip of 30:20]
 AUDIO 7   
 [21:40 blur] [overlay] Hollywood Reporter broke the news that Warner Bros. had dismissed the initial cut of the film and [blur] created an entirely different cut with Trailer Park, [58:32] the company that compiled Suicide Squad’s popular trailer. Two versions of the film— [1:37:55] director David Ayer’s more somber cut and the [15:00] studio’s version that looks like a music video were tested as late as May. [16:51] There may have some compromises, but the studio largely won, and that required “millions of dollars' worth of additional photography.” [23:13] In case anyone is wondering, the home release Extended Cut is NOT some unseen original version before Trailer Park got its hands on the film.
 [25:00] The Extended Cut only adds only a few minutes to the film, and virtually all of it is superfluous. It does not change the tone or quality of the film in any noticeable way. So, some of the [26:00] blame as it relates to the editing of the first act may go to Trailer Park, but it seems like what they really added was alterations to the tone. We may never know exactly how much for sure. But [27:00] David Ayer filmed all these superfluous scenes and reintroductions. He was still both the director and sole writer of the film.   
 AUDIO 8
 [52:03] The second act is arguably better paced in the sense that it FEELS like a second act, but we still flash back multiple times for multiple characters. [1:05:32] It's even worse in the Extended Edition because we a completely unnecessary flashback about Harley Quinn and the Joker deciding whether or not they should be together – [1:06:07] that's the purpose of the scene – [1:15:27] and then we get another separate flashback about the same thing. I think it was cut for the theatrical version for good reason.   
 [1:44:32] The third act has the least structural problems, but it's also the shortest part of the film. The biggest problem with the second and third acts is that we are introduced to multiple ticking clocks. [1:47:59] From a three act model screenplay perspective, a ticking clock is exactly what it sounds like: motivation for the protagonist to hurry up and stop the antagonist before something terrible happens or [1:48:30] before the bomb goes off or before the kidnapper kills the hostage, etc. [Raiders 1:12:08] In Raiders, the ticking clock begins when the Nazis capture the Ark of the Covenant and intend on opening it somewhere. Jones needs to escape and stop them before all hell breaks loose. [Raiders 1:46:42] It focuses the audience's attention on a singular goal and creates suspense.
 AUDIO 9
 [19:42] In Suicide Squad, there are multiple ticking clocks, which is not always a problem except that they overlap with one another and create a confusing, scattershot mess. [1:18:50] One ticking clock is the goal of Task Force X to rescue someone from Midway City before the monsters get her. This individual turns out to be Amanda Waller herself. [50:11] While this is happening, at the same time, the other ticking clock is the Joker closing in on Harley Quinn and the rest of the team. [1:11:00] We get constant updates through text messages about his location in relation to Quinn.   
 [39:52] Side note: A corrupt guard gives Quinn a smartphone in front of many witnesses and explicitly tells her it's from “Mr. J” – HOW DID NOBODY SEE THIS? Everyone is staring directly at them and listening to them while this happens. [50:13] This does not happen on the down low, all secret, OK? How did...*sighs*...sorry, moving on. This movie is just so stupid. [1:01:59] Alright, so, a lot is happening all at once. Anyway, you may have noticed I keep referring to a singular protagonist when explaining character motivation and plot points.
 AUDIO 10
 [Raiders 3:16] Most movies have a main character: one protagonist. [47:07] In Suicide Squad, there is no one protagonist. There is no character to which to audience can attach themselves. [48:33] A viewpoint character, an audience avatar -- the character who learns about the world of the film at the same time that the audience does so that we can both [49:33] sympathize with this protagonist AND have exposition revealed naturally. [1:40:24] Ensemble movies can certainly work if everything around the multiple characters is compelling enough, but I don't think “compelling” is a word often attributed to Suicide Squad. [5:18] Deadshot, [9:12] Harley Quinn, [19:37] Colonel Flagg and [15:55] Diablo get more screen time, backstory and motivation than, say, [15:00] Captain Boomerang, but that only narrows the field to four. [20:17] Maybe five if one counts Amanda Waller.   
 [The Avengers] The Avengers solved this problem by introducing all its principle characters in separate movies prior to the big team-up. [X-Men] X-Men solved this problem by having Wolverine be the audience avatar. It's an ensemble film, but Wolverine learns about the team, its motivations and its central conflict as the audience does. [18:37] Suicide Squad clumsily uncovers backstory through a deluge of flashbacks and introduces far too many characters for the audience to care about them.   
 [clip of 4:37]
 
 AUDIO 11
 [9:34] Let's define “tone” – The tone of a film. Tone is the mood of a film, both visually and in terms of narrative atmosphere. The tone can be serious, comical or anything in between. [10:00] The tone does not necessarily have to be completely consistent throughout, but it should be even enough that the audience can be enveloped in its world. [Sunshine] There is an infamous tonal shift in the film Sunshine. The first two acts are a space adventure, and the third act is more akin to a slasher film. This is not just a shift in the tone of the film but maybe even the genre. That being said, Sunshine is still well-liked to this day because the material is otherwise strong enough to survive such a jarring shift in tone. Plus, at least the shift happens in the third act when things are generally supposed to pick up and feel a little different.
 [10:34] Suicide Squad is not a good enough film to survive its tonal shifts, and unlike Sunshine, said shifts are not confined to one act – neatly divided in the screenplay so that it almost feels like a natural progression. [3:10] Suicide Squad alters course from scene to scene, switching from incredibly brutal and ugly to comical. [1:30] The members of Task Force X are frequently tortured, beaten and humiliated by the guards and soldiers. [38:53] It is a disgusting attempt by the filmmaker or studio to be edgy but comes across a revolting and phony.
 AUDIO 12   
 [39:54] Some of the tone problems come from the aforementioned reshoots and re-edit of the film – absolutely – [44:11] but some of it is embedded in the very DNA of the film and cannot be entirely explained away by studio meddling. [44:59] Example: Slipknot. Remember him? If you don't, that's understandable because he's the only member of Task Force X who does not get a flashback or an [5:07] explanation of who he is through Waller's files. [44:51] After the entire team is assembled, another character, Slipknot, just shows up. Someone says “There's Slipknot. The man who can climb anything.” [53:36] Great. Alright. That's oddly placed and tonally jarring considering everyone else got an obnoxious music video to introduce themselves and Slipknot gets a description so short that it could [52:59] fit within the character limit of a tweet, but fine. Whatever moves the plot along at a faster pace.
 [44:59] Slipknot is basically a red shirt – a character who exists purely to inform the audiences of the stakes and consequences. [53:22] That's why the movie didn't bother telling us about him. He dies almost immediately after being persuaded to make a run for it. [53:33] Colonel Flagg brutally murders him with a remote control head explosion, and he swings from his bionic commando grappling hook. [1:40:17] Harley remarks “Now that's a killer app!” in what I am guessing is a applause line. [54:22] Everyone's theater experience is different, but I groaned audibly when this happened, so did the person who was with me and so did virtually everyone in the audience. [55:11] It's a Dad joke immediately after a senseless killing. This is what I mean by tone problems.
 AUDIO 13
 [11:09] There is a lot of cringey stuff in the film. Everything from the romanticization of the abusive relationship between Joker and Harley to scenes [10:22] of sexualized violence against Harley and just violence and threats against women in general. [9:45] Context is everything – but these are not dramatic scenes meant to establish a threat or a villain. The violence and threats against women are usually played for laughs.
 [clip of 44:55]   [clip of 1:12:35]    
 AUDIO 14
 [10:56] Ha. Ha. Abusing women! Oh, you're so funny, you tone-deaf dumpster fire movie. [27:37] The grimy, filthy grease of the movie is somehow punctuated with an over-abundance of recognizable popular songs. On their own, they're not bad, [46:34] but the way they are used – one after another – rarely breaking, rarely giving us any necessary silence – is awful. Just a cacophony of Eminem and songs that are so on-the-nose that they become laughable. [0:35] Thirty seconds into the film, House of the Rising Sun starts playing because...we are seeing...a place. A setting. A setting that is bad. I get it. [1:45] A full ONE MINUTE LATER, “You Don't Own Me” plays over Harley Quinn's introduction. Get it? Because she's a strong woman...[1:09:45] who literally wears a jacket that says she is property of the Joker on the back. Alright. Clearly this song was chosen long after production ended.   
 [3:40] Then less than TWO MINUTES LATER, “Sympathy for the Devil” plays as we are introduced to Amanda Waller. Because...she's like the Devil, get it? Harley calls her the Devil later. [4:35] And we're supposed to be sympathize with the bad guys in this movie. Yeah. [5:55] TWO MINUTES LATER, we get a rap song called “Standing in the Rain” plays because Will Smith [9:07] and then SUPERFREAK because, oh that Harley Quinn. She is superfreaky. Yow. [14:59] Then “Dirty Deeds” plays as Captain Boomerang, in fact, performs dirty deeds. [1:40:34] The WHOLE. MOVIE. IS. LIKE. THIS.
 AUDIO 15
 [42:39] Suicide Squad features the giant death ray of light that shoots into the sky that we have seen over and over again in blockbuster Hollywood movies this decade. [50:51]  Here is an incomplete list of said movies. It is absolutely insane that the same visually identical climax has been recycled this many times in so many movies over such a short period of time. [1:29:00] By the time Suicide Squad was in production, someone should have said “Hey, let's not do this!” [1:57:27] With a few notable exceptions, a giant death ray of light in a movie is a big red flag that the movie is hacky and forgettable.   
 [clip of 1:29:48]
 AUDIO 16
 The aesthetic, the tone, the mood – it's the living, tangible embodiment of the attitude a teenage rebellion, and at the same time, a soulless, heartless corporation that pretends to be edgy-cool while exploiting said teenager. It's gross and mean-spirited and happily whiplashes between hateful and snarky because it mistakenly believes those two should go together because they are both...dismissive. Dismissive of the mainstream – but there is nothing more mainstream than this faux edge-lord film, this PG-13 sarcastic t-shirt of a movie, this radio edit of an already bad song.     
 Suicide Squad was edited in a broken blender, but I have a feeling that some “holy grail” version of this film does not even exist, at least not the way fans think it does. Trailer Park probably damaged the overall quality of the film – I acknowledge that – but this is an UGLY film in every sense of that word, and excising a few of its post-production maladies would have been like removing tissue long after the disease had spread. Many of the inherent problems with this film are deeply structural, not merely subjectively displeasing – and they go right down to its bones.