Birds of Prey Birds of Prey General Discussion and Speculation

[Black Narcissus]

Got mines!

 

[TheVileOne]

Jeez...they really do that?

It was part of the character's actual backstory from the people who created the character. As in the two men responsible for creating this beloved character.

It's a fictional character in a fictional story. Why is it wrong for fictional characters to do bad or regrettable things?

 

[Iceman]

The fact they totally ruined Cass Cain kinda killed this film for me

The kid was ok but they should have just made her a different character.

 

[Sithborg]

It was part of the character's actual backstory from the people who created the character. As in the two men responsible for creating this beloved character.

It's a fictional character in a fictional story. Why is it wrong for fictional characters to do bad or regrettable things?

Just because they created the character, doesn't mean they were perfect with the character.

Besides, I think it has become clear that Bruce Timm has... issues...

 

[Web-Head]

I had no interest in this movie leading to release, but hearing decent things and the fact that a friend of mine wanted to go I ended up checking this out. Am I glad I did? Not really. It's more or less what I expected and while I liked the climax/third act, I didn't really care for the rest of the film. Some of the action was pretty well done and entertaining enough, but none of the humor in it worked for me, the characters weren't anything special and Harley just got grading after a while. Huntress doesn't do much of anything either and I didn't like what they did with Black Canary at all, but I will admit that it made sense in the context of the movie.

I wouldn't mind seeing Margot's Harley again (We will, I know) but if we never saw Huntress, Canary or Montoya again I wouldn't care.

 

[fan4stic]

Jeez...they really do that?

There's also the fact too many creators still want to slip in that she slept her way to her degree, rather than earn it. Glad that they are more than willing to ignore that character assassination.

Just because they created the character, doesn't mean they were perfect with the character.

Besides, I think it has become clear that Bruce Timm has... issues...

What's character assassinating about it? She's not a heroic character or a symbol to be looked up to. Why does that really change that?

As far as I've read Paul Dini worked on it too.

I hate how everything is attacked for being "woke" now. I don't think of things in terms of whether it's woke or not woke but rather if I liked it or not. I don't even see people blaming dudes for this failing and yet that's a narrative that's already out there. Jesus. It's not like female lead films with male villains never existed before woke culture....I hate people sometimes .

I think for some it may depend on how it's done and/or advertised. I think some may assume maybe potentially based on some climate bases that it may mean it was done as rejection of one side over the other, whether it was done for that or not. Maybe potentially not necessarily based just on it having female lead(s) and/or male villain(s).

I think WB will force TSS to be pg13 and it will make way more possibly GOTG numbers with Margot, Idris, various cameos and Gunn’s name on it and then the loud battle between hardcore feminists and male idiots are gonna commence again in Twitter, lol.pretty tiresome. It will prob start as soon as Margot’s outfit is revealed

Why blanket those who'd argue against hardcore feminists, that you call idiots, as male? Can't women argue against hardcore feminists?

The rating isn't the issue. It is more that Gunn isn't good with female characters.

I don't think I've particularly seen that on display in Guardians.

 

[emc5466]

I really miss Jon Schnepp. Would’ve loved to hear his take on this movie.

 

[terry78]

Her actually earning her doctorate as opposed to her just ****ing herself out for it makes her transformation more tragic if she was a legitimate doctor trying to do good.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Ditto. Before I knew that backstory I just assumed she'd earned her qualifications legitimately. I don't have a problem with her having slept her way to it, but I agree it makes for a more tragic story if she didn't.

 

[fan4stic]

Her actually earning her doctorate as opposed to her just ****ing herself out for it makes her transformation more tragic if she was a legitimate doctor trying to do good.

While I haven't read the comic directly fully, in the Animated Series episode I think she wasn't depicted as a doctor trying to do good. I think she was depicted as a doctor attracted to the glamour of super criminals. I don't see her actions before that really being a contradiction or character assassination.

 

[Marvolo]

Birds of Prey Changes Title After Box Office Struggles

As if the marketing and original ridiculous title didnt already beat everyone over the head with the fact that this is a Harley Quinn film.

WB should just accept that Harely Quinn isnt a big draw like Joker. It didn't help that the marketing was obnoxious.

 

[Greenlite]

Birds of Prey Changes Title After Box Office Struggles

 

[Greenlite]

https://www.eventcinemas.co.nz/Movi...n-Of-Harley-Quinn#cinemas=508&date=2020-02-12

Still the same title down here

 

[MadVillainy]

It was part of the character's actual backstory from the people who created the character. As in the two men responsible for creating this beloved character.

It's a fictional character in a fictional story. Why is it wrong for fictional characters to do bad or regrettable things?

Look through my post you quoted and tell me where I said or even implied that it is wrong for fictional characters to do bad or regrettable things. Or find any post where I said or implied that

 

[TheVileOne]

OK but Screenrant is saying WB requested the change.

 

[Prettyricky]

I would imagine the studios would have to sign off or give the direction to change a movie title they own instead of the theaters doing it themselves.

 

[-JKR-]

I loved this movie.

but is anyone wanting a more villainous Harley? Anti hero Harley is not peak Harley. This is Joker’s (ex) girlfriend after all.

To be fair even in her original version Harley was more of a demented, disturbed anti-hero nutjob rather than a full blown villain.

P.S.: I see no problem with Harleen sleeping her way up in college. It's not like she's exactly a shining example of morality. Being upset about such thing kind of misses the point of the character.

 

[Iceman]

To be fair even in her original version Harley was more of a demented, disturbed anti-hero nutjob rather than a full blown villain.

P.S.: I see no problem with Harleen sleeping her way up in college. It's not like she's exactly a shining example of morality. Being upset about such thing kind of misses the point of the character.

“Demented, disturbed anti-hero nutjob” sums up how I’ve always seen Harley Quinn.

 

[MurkeNyou]

I really am kind of happy this failed (looked horrid since the first trailer), but honestly, WB set this film up for failure. But I think they are greenlighting things to bankrupt the studio to butcher/ sell off the IP they own. Too many scumbags in producers chairs.

 

[terry78]

They really need somebody to just retool the whole DC stable. They have hundreds of characters and franchises to work from yet they can't get out of the Batman trough. I'd be prepping **** like The Creeper, Metal Men, etc.

 

[-JKR-]

They don't.
And they are probably prepping different stuff and taking their time with it by finding the right creative team and specific vision first, instead of just announcing different titles and going through them industrially and with no real personality.

 

[-JKR-]

I really am kind of happy this failed (looked horrid since the first trailer), but honestly, WB set this film up for failure. But I think they are greenlighting things to bankrupt the studio to butcher/ sell off the IP they own. Too many scumbags in producers chairs.

You're happy to see something you haven't even seen fail? And you automatically assume that it's all part of a scheme to sell off the IP?

Good lord, (gratitiously petty, paranoid and unrealistic) statements and assumptions such as this are part of why I have a problem with the Internet.

 

[Gothamsknight]

Got mines!

My theater had none of these

 

[terry78]

They don't.
And they are probably prepping different stuff and taking their time with it by finding the right creative team and specific vision first, instead of just announcing different titles and going through them industrially and with no real personality.

We'll see.

 

[MurkeNyou]

You're happy to see something you haven't even seen fail? And you automatically assume that it's all part of a scheme to sell off the IP?

Good lord, (gratitiously petty, paranoid and unrealistic) statements and assumptions such as this are part of why I have a problem with the Internet.

Yeah, the film that looked very bad and not very "Birds of Prey" to me, I didn't bother to watch.

As did millions of other people as well, apparently, given it's resounding flop.

And yes, given Warner Brothers has Vulture Capitalists involved as their producers for the past 10 years, it isn't that crazy a theory given that is their MO for most businesses.

The retitle thing just elaborates they don't get where they messed up.