Birds of Prey Reactions

[GozertheGozarian]

There's no china release. Its rated R and actually I don't think WB cares about releasing certain films in china because of the low percentage take. They didn't care about TDK, joker, or Wonder Woman. I could be wrong though. Although imo opinion releasing in china isn't worth it especially if it's a film with a low or modest budget because of the low 25% take as well as the costs associated with editing a second film cut because of China's strict censorship rules.

Once you understand how box office revenue takes work, it comes off as if studios only use China as a marketing gimmick to inflate their numbers so consumers in other countries think the movies are worth seeing so they can make more money. That's my personal opinion about it though.

I do know how it works, thank you.

[Midvillian1322]

There's no china release. Its rated R and actually I don't think WB cares about releasing certain films in china because of the low percentage take. They didn't care about TDK, joker, or Wonder Woman. I could be wrong though. Although imo opinion releasing in china isn't worth it especially if it's a film with a low or modest budget because of the low 25% take as well as the costs associated with editing a second film cut because of China's strict censorship rules.

Once you understand how box office revenue takes work, it comes off as if studios only use China as a marketing gimmick to inflate their numbers so consumers in other countries think the movies are worth seeing so they can make more money. That's my personal opinion about it though.

I agree about low to mid budget movies not bothering with China. But alot of MCU movies and movies like Venom or Aquaman are making a killing in China. And Venom didnt use China as a marketing gimmick. It came out in China a month after the U.S. yes they only get 25% but that a quarter of 250+m for a movie like Venom. They only get 40% from alot of other international territories where they make way less money. China isnt a Gimmick, it's an important part of the market for Mega budget films. But yea BOP did fine internationally without china. Its here in America where it really disappointed. JW3,Shazam all did 50m+ opening weekend. Sonic is looking at 55m+. If BOP would have made the 50m it was projected to make at one point, none of this flop talk would be happening. But again I'm fine with people saying disappointment or underperforming. But this movie isnt a flop. Dolittle was a flop.

[beatboks]

Shazam and JW3 exceeded expectations. BOP did the opposite, theres no grand conspiracy. If you think expectations are too high, well the movie seriously underperformed to Studio projections. So that's not the media's fault. All the talk of being a flop is weird, since I guarentee this movie turns a profit..... but not a good one. Also BOP is looked at by alot as a sequel to a movie that made over 700m. And I think people think Harley Quinn has more mass appeal then she does.

Yes its underperforming but re the underlined your not correct. It didn't SERIOUSLY underperform the projections of the studio. Their projections were always below those of media press. They had projected a 40-45m domestic opening. Not the 55m that others in the market had. I wouldnt call 16.25 -25% below expectation a "serious" shortfall. The almost 40% off the overal projection of the press which was based on the Joker opening is a serious shortfall yes.

[Midvillian1322]

Yes its underperforming but re the underlined your not correct. It didn't SERIOUSLY underperform the projections of the studio. Their projections were always below those of media press. They had projected a 40-45m domestic opening. Not the 55m that others in the market had. I wouldnt call 16.25 -25% below expectation a "serious" shortfall. The almost 40% off the overal projection of the press which was based on the Joker opening is a serious shortfall yes.

The movie was projected at 45 by the studios conservative estimates. Which are almost always under the actual opening weekend for most movies in the genre the studios predict low so they claim even more sucess when it overperforms. Anyway It only made 33(I'm rounding things off).Take another 10m off that we would be flirting with Flop territory. Also not alot of Comicbook movies underperform. Anyway enough with the semantics.

I suspect that time hasn't been kind to Suicide Squad and people held that against this movie.

Wonder if James Gunn SS is a big hit acorss the board and then they released BOP after that how much better it would have done.

[ComicJunkie21]

I do know how it works, thank you.

Wasn't taking a jab at you. I was using "you" as in "a person" not specifically saying you didn't know how it worked.

[ComicJunkie21]

The movie was projected at 45 by the studios conservative estimates. Which are almost always under the actual opening weekend for most movies in the genre the studios predict low so they claim even more sucess when it overperforms. Anyway It only made 33(I'm rounding things off).Take another 10m off that we would be flirting with Flop territory. Also not alot of Comicbook movies underperform. Anyway enough with the semantics.

I suspect that time hasn't been kind to Suicide Squad and people held that against this movie.

Wonder if James Gunn SS is a big hit acorss the board and then they released BOP after that how much better it would have done.

If that's the case then the Suicide Squad looks to be at risk of doing bad. Although comic book movie fans know what caused the movie quality to be bad and the fact that they have hopefully fixed the problems, the general audience member doesn't and may just see a sequel to a bad movie and assume that its similar to the first.

[kjn]

If that's the case then the Suicide Squad looks to be at risk of doing bad. Although comic book movie fans know what caused the movie quality to be bad and the fact that they have hopefully fixed the problems, the general audience member doesn't and may just see a sequel to a bad movie and assume that its similar to the first.

I doubt that will happen. For all that BoPatEoOHQ has been underperforming, it hasn't been badly received. People who have gone to see it have generally liked it. And WB will have other movies in between this one and Gunn's The Suicide Squad.

What is changing however is that there is a really active group of misogynist people who have made it into their thing to be anti-fans and push back against everything they dislike. That's something that movie studios (and other marketing people) haven't had to deal much with before. Having a bunch of poorly-received movies (BvS, SS, JL) they can deal with. Marvel can ignore them since Captain Marvel was a clear success, despite all the complaints from misogynists. But WB will need a way to deal with them.

In this situation, I think the right move might be to simply ignore them, and push more creative and marketing of WW84 and TSS. I'd also look at doing a teamup between Black Canary and Wonder Woman in Wonder Woman 3, as a clear finger to the misogynists.

I think the title was the core problem here. If it had been called Harley Quinn: #MeToo then it'd have been a declaration of war against the misogynists, but they'd froth anyway. But WB would have had allies to get their initial marketing going, and would have claimed their ground from day one.

[trooper_thorn]

No it uses the 2x method. It states that a film needs to make at least double its budget to turn break even

They did it incorrectly and didn't take into account the fact that studios don't get 100% of the BO.

The article had the production budget at $97.1M meaning that $194.2M would be the break even point if you assume that marketing is equivalent to production, however that $194.2M refers to the amount they need after the various theaters get their cut (which as I said varies across markets).

Here, let me illustrate what I'm talking about: If the production budget of film X is $50M and we assume an equivalent level of marketing then film X would have to make $100M to break even. However if the studio only gets a 50% cut of the worldwide box office then you are looking at having to earn $200M to break even.

[ComicJunkie21]

They did it incorrectly and didn't take into account the fact that studios don't get 100% of the BO.

The article had the production budget at $97.1M meaning that $194.2M would be the break even point if you assume that marketing is equivalent to production, however that $194.2M refers to the amount they need after the various theaters get their cut (which as I said varies across markets).

Here, let me illustrate what I'm talking about: If the production budget of film X is $50M and we assume an equivalent level of marketing then film X would have to make $100M to break even. However if the studio only gets a 50% cut of the worldwide box office then you are looking at having to earn $200M to break even.

They did do the calculation correctly but what isn't in the article is the marketing budget. Without the marketing budget the calculation is only taking into account 50% of BO revenue. The marketing budget for this film may not be very significant as its assumed to not be a lot based on what we've seen. You are correct that normally the marketing budget equals or even exceedes the production budget therefore doubling the costs and requiring a film to earn 2.5x to 3x its budget to break even. Most cbm films are like this, however I think we are seeing studios experiment with lower overall budgets to see what happens to reduce risk by requiring a film to earn 2x its budget instead and providing a bigger return.

BoP original budget was stated to be 75 million but it jumped to 97.1 and with tax breaks is expected to come down between 82 and 84. Marketing for the film is estimated to be low I would estimate around 20 million (if that) based on Jokers marketing budget.

[trooper_thorn]

They did do the calculation correctly but what isn't in the article is the marketing budget. Without the marketing budget the calculation is only taking into account 50% of BO revenue. The marketing budget for this film may not be very significant as its assumed to not be a lot based on what we've seen. You are correct that normally the marketing budget equals or even exceedes the production budget therefore doubling the costs and requiring a film to earn 2.5x to 3x its budget to break even. Most cbm films are like this, however I think we are seeing studios experiment with lower overall budgets to see what happens to reduce risk by requiring a film to earn 2x its budget instead.

Oh I'm willing to accept the theory that they skimped on marketing, I've mentioned that possibility a few times in my prior posts (I saw almost no advertising myself). That's why I prefer to give estimated ranges rather than exact amounts. Frankly the best way to tell how a film did is to watch the actions of the studio once the film is out of theaters (assuming it's not a massive bomb).

Anyhow, I don't expect this movie to flop but we are probably looking at break even.

[ComicJunkie21]

Oh I'm willing to accept the theory that they skimped on marketing, I've mentioned that possibility a few times in my prior posts (I saw almost no advertising myself). That's why I prefer to give estimated ranges rather than exact amounts. Frankly the best way to tell how a film did is to watch the actions of the studio once the film is out of theaters (assuming it's not a massive bomb).

Anyhow, I don't expect this movie to flop but we are probably looking at break even.

Agree, the actions of the studio will tell us a lot. Right now wb doesn't seem worried. At first with the name change it seems like they were panicking but reports are coming out that it was actually the theaters who did the change. I think many of us forget how much a film's success or failure impacts the theaters. With February being considered the kiss of death for new releases, its probably a tough month for theater chains as well so they do their best to try to get people in the seats.

Frankly I think wb is more worried about quality over quantity right now, which they should be. If BoP had big numbers but was universally hated like SS they would be panicking but with the film leaving a good impression on those who saw it, they seem content with the outcome.

[Dangerous]

I think YoungRippa and Mr H Reviews (youtubers) have the best breakdowns of why this film failed.

I personally did not like the film, thought it was one of the worst CBMs ever made, thought it looked terrible in the trailers and believed it was destined to fail. I do wonder why WB could not see this.... (that they had a flop on their hands)... The film seems to think Margot Robbie's HQ is much more compelling than she actually is, feels like the studio's attempt at something akin to Deadpool except every element falls flat- story (incoherent) fight scenes- (unrealistic and meh) character development- (non existent) protagonist- (unlikable immature a-hole). The biggest problem for me was the political agenda behind the film- all men bad / Ewan's comments about misogamy in the promo campaign... Kinda gave it the kiss of death. What do you get if you make a woke man hating CBM? As Joker would say- You get what you f****ng deserve!

[daBronzeBomma]

Planning on seeing this movie by myself this Monday (Presidents' Day) for the earliest local matinee showing.

Will let y'all know what I think after paying money to watch it.

Is there an after-credits stinger?

[Caivu]

I think YoungRippa and Mr H Reviews (youtubers) have the best breakdowns of why this film failed.

1. It's hardly "failed." It's been in theaters for just over a week and has already made back its budget.
2. Given that Mr. H is a known hate-grifter and both of the people you mentioned unironically use "SJW" as a pejorative... yeah, those are hardly good sources for unbiased info.

[kjn]

Is there an after-credits stinger?

Sort of. Harley's making fun of the audience for staying, and tells a joke that she never gets to finish.