Birds of Prey Reactions

[babyblob]

At this point in time it might be in Warner Bros.'s best interest to pull the movie from theaters, re-edit it to a PG-13, and re-release it as Harley Quinn and the Birds of Prey. Didn't they re-release a PG-13 version of Deadpool?

Thy did I dont know how it did at the box office but it really lost a lot of its edge and I didnt enjoy it that much. Deadpool needs to be rated R.

[Dangerous]

I wonder WHEN Hollywood will finally understand nobody wants feminist comicbook / action movies...

[KabutoRyder]

I wonder WHEN Hollywood will finally understand nobody wants feminist comicbook / action movies...

Tempting but just not worth the infractions.

[Dangerous]

Tempting but just not worth the infractions.

I’m on the verge of being banned here, but what’s wrong with a respectful honest discussion about this films commercial failure?

Nobody wants a misandrist hardcore feminist comicbook movie and this film is proof of that. Also the other element that screwed this films appeal, was the de-sexualization of Harley. Here in Leeds England, I must have seen about 20 girls dressed in the SS Harley outfit back in Halloween 2016. No one wants a tomboy Harley either.

[titanfan]

Nobody wants a misandrist hardcore feminist comicbook movie and this film is proof of that

Because this really wasn't a misandrist hardcore feminist movie at all. If women are rallying around this movie as a symbol of feminist values, women are in trouble.

was the de-sexualization of Harley.

Define de-sexualization. There were no long, lingering shots of Harley's boobs, but there were several standard superhero "kick and pose scenes" or of Harley looking unrealistically stylish while on rollerskates fighting bad dudes. She keeps the booty shorts in several scenes in the movie. Black Canary had a sexy scene where she sings in the lounge.

[Midvillian1322]

I’m on the verge of being banned here, but what’s wrong with a respectful honest discussion about this films commercial failure?

Nobody wants a misandrist hardcore feminist comicbook movie and this film is proof of that. Also the other element that screwed this films appeal, was the de-sexualization of Harley. Here in Leeds England, I must have seen about 20 girls dressed in the SS Harley outfit back in Halloween 2016. No one wants a tomboy Harley either.

Captain marvel and Wonder Woman did gangbusters. So that ain't true and those movies had an actual feminist message. BOP is a female team, fighting some bad guys but other then that.... I didn't see any feminist message when I watched it. Nothing as overt as The dude telling Carol she should smile more(Which was a big middle finger to all the men attacking the movie) and Wonder Woman walking out into no mans land. Which those are just small scenes, I'm not even talking about the story of the film.

[phonogram12]

Because this really wasn't a misandrist hardcore feminist movie at all.

As a feminist, I have to agree. They really didn't say or do anything that espoused ideas that feminists value (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, btw). The movie was just about a group of people kicking ass and taking names. Just because they're all women that makes this a feminist movie promoting misandry? Fer real?

Define de-sexualization. There were no long, lingering shots of Harley's boobs, but there were several standard superhero "kick and pose scenes" or of Harley looking unrealistically stylish while on rollerskates fighting bad dudes. She keeps the booty shorts in several scenes in the movie. Black Canary had a sexy scene where she sings in the lounge.

Yeah, this argument almost always means "they weren't white enough/there boobs weren't big enough."

[Killerbee911]

1.jpg

So this is an interesting graphic. Suicide Squad and BoP have nearly exactly the same demographic breakdown the big difference is the audience under 18. Literally this is what it means to leave money on the table.


Graphic is from Fandom entertainment youtube which does a pretty good breakdown of what happened wrong with Birds of Prey.

[KabutoRyder]

As a feminist, I have to agree. They really didn't say or do anything that espoused ideas that feminists value (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, btw). The movie was just about a group of people kicking ass and taking names. Just because they're all women that makes this a feminist movie promoting misandry? Fer real?



Yeah, this argument almost always means "they weren't white enough/there boobs weren't big enough."

Can ya feel that? It's me high fiving you from Texas.

[kjn]

As a feminist, I have to agree. They really didn't say or do anything that espoused ideas that feminists value (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, btw). The movie was just about a group of people kicking ass and taking names. Just because they're all women that makes this a feminist movie promoting misandry? Fer real?

I'd say Birds of Prey was a feminist movie in that it pointed at several things that are important to feminist analysis.

One is the way that the main villain literally is set up as an example of toxic misogyny: unable to see women, unsure of himself, obsessed with "respect" for him (really fear of him). He is, as Black Canary sings in the nightclub scene, "lost in the wilderness, lost in the loneliness, lost in the bitterness".

Another is the way that women's accomplishments are brushed aside, forgotten, or unseen, as happens with Renee Montoya.

A third is the way that this is can be called an anti-misogynist revenge fantasy. Harley gets the "offer" to get Bruce the Hyena for "free", and feeds the sleazy animal store owner to Bruce. She breaks the leg of the driver who makes an unwanted pass at her. Black Canary beats the **** out of a couple of men who tries to drug and abduct Harley.

In fact, between Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, and Birds of Prey, I think this was the most overtly feminist movie. All three have some feminist themes that they explore, but neither WW nor CM have as much of it as text and as central to the movie's narrative as Birds of Prey.

[phonogram12]

I'd say Birds of Prey was a feminist movie in that it pointed at several things that are important to feminist analysis.

One is the way that the main villain literally is set up as an example of toxic misogyny: unable to see women, unsure of himself, obsessed with "respect" for him (really fear of him). He is, as Black Canary sings in the nightclub scene, "lost in the wilderness, lost in the loneliness, lost in the bitterness".

That's true, but I was mostly referring to the female leads.

Another is the way that women's accomplishments are brushed aside, forgotten, or unseen, as happens with Renee Montoya.

A third is the way that this is can be called an anti-misogynist revenge fantasy. Harley gets the "offer" to get Bruce the Hyena for "free", and feeds the sleazy animal store owner to Bruce. She breaks the leg of the driver who makes an unwanted pass at her. Black Canary beats the **** out of a couple of men who tries to drug and abduct Harley.

This I can see, but in the latter case, I would hope any central heroic protagonist regardless of gender would've helped out Harley in this way.

In fact, between Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, and Birds of Prey, I think this was the most overtly feminist movie. All three have some feminist themes that they explore, but neither WW nor CM have as much of it as text and as central to the movie's narrative as Birds of Prey.

Not sure I agree with this, but I think we've found enough common ground between us here.

[kjn]

This I can see, but in the latter case, I would hope any central heroic protagonist regardless of gender would've helped out Harley in this way.

Indeed. But in this case it's a woman, and the scene is really set up as a spiked drink followed by a date or gang rape.

We also have the scene where Erika is forced to stand on the table and be stripped of her clothes due to Roman's fragile ego (one review I read pointed to that scene as a great illustration of Margaret Atwood's observation that women are afraid to be killed by men, men are afraid to be laughed at by women). Black Canary has literally made it into her life to keep her head down: to not react to injustices made around her. And it's not due to her lacking morals: it's a partly a way to keep herself alive, and partly trauma after her mom died.

[Immortal Weapon]

Dude the total spend including marketing for this film was $91m. With tax credits it came down to a total cost of $76m they ONLY spent just under $20m on marketing (this far which is a rediculously low anount)

A world wide box office openning weekend of $81m means this film is already $5m into the black.

Both Aquaman and WW were still a loss after their opening weekend having not covered even the cost of production let alone marketing (which your correct nornally doubles the price, JL for example while costing OVER $300m to nake cost over $$650M after marketing)

The cost of marketing and production of this film thus far is $25m below the cost of production only on the cheapest WB hero film so far (the spent $100m to make Shazam)

Compare that to the Other DC films

Shazam open weekend $53m (domestic) finished with $363m (world wide). Spent $100m making and $75m marketing for a profit of $188m. Acclaimed as a success despite really only making a little over 100%

Aquaman opened $67m (83m below production cost of $$150m) finished $1,146m with a profit of $863m

Justice League opened $93m (less than a third of productiom cost of $300m) finished $655m with a profit of $50m afyer spending $300m on marketing.

Wonder Woman opened $103m (50 mil below production costs) finished with $821m

Suicide Squad $opened $133m (42m below production cost) finished $$746m but they spent a bucket load on marketing after its poor opening

Batman v Superman opened $116m ($109m below production costs) and finished $873m

Traditionally the second weekend takes between 85-90% of the first anf it finishes between 4 to 5 times the takings of the opening weekend. Suicide squad was an exception because of the money thrown into marketing after its poor opening

Warner have the option to repeat what they did with SS and increase the marketing budget to boost the box office but honestly if they stay as is the movie should give them a decent return on investment. They honestly can't have expected a huge box office considering they debuted it and February which is traditionally a slow month. It's opening box office is actually the 14th highest of all time in February for a film of its ratings.

So it's not making any records and it's not going to be a massive success, but it's certainly not going to be unprofitable. Unless they make some really stupid moves

That's not how it works. This movie is not in the black at all. It will need to make double the amount spend on it for the movie to be profitable.

[beatboks]

I'll be honest the internet has destroyed my ability to determine who is honest and who is sarcastic but I'll assume you're the former.

Anyhow, there are very few things I can guarantee in life but one of the few is that that they have not made a profit off of this movie at this time. Your claim requires that the studio gets 100% of the worldwide box office take which is just straight up BS. Domestically, they make at a max 70% while internationally they get only about 33% to 40%.

If you want to argue that the marketing budget was highly limited feel free, but assuming a normal budget/marketing ration this film will lose money.

You're correct. I didn't factor in what the cinemas and distribution gets out of a movie take because that's not normally what is discussed on most forums or on sites like numbers that give a movie success based purely on box office total V cost.

I would point out that whilst your numbers are correct for the overall total box office. It's not the way they break down for the opening weekend. As I understand at the opening weekend about 10% goes to the cinemas and probably about 10% of distribution (domestic, I think the international distribution cut is nore like 15%) , which in Warners case is Warner since the distribution company is Warner entertainment.

That number jumps up to about 30% to the cinemas in the second week, and I believe 40 to 50 in the third fourth and can get up to 60 or 70% if the movie stays in cinemas for any length of time. Sometimes even kickbacks to keep the movie going to get the box office numbers up are paid.

The point I was making however, is that comparatively it's in the same position financially as aquaman and not far behind Shazam At the end of its opening weekend. Aquaman cost $150m to make (excluding tax credits)And had an opening weekend of 67m domestic. With BoP it was 81m (excluding tax credits) and 33.5m. BoP's opening weekend is only 20m below half its production cost, just like Aquaman was. Shazams production cost was a little higher at 85 million so closer to BoP. But had an opening weekend domestically or 53 million. Both movies were profitable.

Let's use an example outside of a DC film say the movie something about Mary had an opening weekend of 9.2 million against a budget production of 23 million. It was a good earning film.

By all accounts what they spent on marketing on BoP Is about 1/3 that of shazam and 1/5 that of Aquaman cutting costs even further. The marketing was so bad that to be honest if I didn't Google last Wednesday when BoP eas to air(because my kids had asked) I wouldn't have known that it was hitting Cinemas last week and would have missed the opening weekend. I've spoken to 6 friends who are comic book fans since the weekend to ask if they liked birds of prey 4 of them didn't even know it was in cinemas yet, and the other two only knew because they'd seen the stories about how bad it's opening box office was. That is how little marketing the movie is getting in my market. I still haven't seen a single ad promoting the movie on TV and despite the fact that I go to the cinemas at least fortnightly more often weekly. I haven't seen a single preview on the cinema screens, i ddint even see coming soon posters. This morning 3 days after the opening weekend was the first time I heard any mention of birds of prey on the radio, and that was only because her Margo Robbie) grandfather had passed away. This was on the same radio station that normally in morning and afternoon drive time gives away tickets to any number of movies that are in cinemas.

As I said in my first post, it's not a hugely successful film, but it's not going to be an unprofitable one. It's certainly going to make a decent profit before it leaves the box office. Less than a week prior to it's opening Forbes reported that Warner brother's prediction was to only be a 45 million opening weekend and if they weren't expecting to make a decent amount of money based on that you can bet they would have put more into marketing. They only fell 12 million short 11 1/2 not enough to now make it not profitable but enough to change the name to push ticket sales up.

We have 2 DC movies that I've already mentioned that had a similar opening weekend comparison to cost of production that were profitable enough to now have sequels in the making. That may not end up being the case for BoP, If the numbers go down instead of remain as they normally would, who knows. Presumably this change of labelling now calling it Harliquin: birds of prey is aimed at making numbers go the other way Without actually throwing more money into marketingas they did with SS.

[Jim Kelly]

I wonder if everyone is evaluating this movie with the wrong expectations. Sure, a big super-hero PG-13 movie that ties into an existing franchise is expected to make above 50 million domestic on its opening weekend. But this isn't really that--there's almost no super-hero powers (except one spoiler bit), not much in the way of costumes and the action is on the level of a Jackie Chan movie. The first John Wick movie made 15 million domestic on its opening weekend. You could argue that BOPATFEOOHQ is a sequel to SUICIDE SQUAD and it's in the larger DC movies continuity--but continuity is hardly a thing anymore in the DC movies, not like it is in the Marvel movies. And the John Wick movies have Keanu Reeves. If we were talking about another action movie with females in the forefront, the 33 million opening would seem really good--THE RHYTHM SECTION would kill for those numbers. If THE KITCHEN had that opening, it would have been counted a success.