Birds of Prey BoP Box Office Thread

[Anonymous1213]

Look at John Wick 2, it was released in Feb 2017 and had a budget of $40M, and it was R rated.

John Wick 2 has a opening of $30 M.

And, having merch actually goes in favor of BoP as many people buy Harley Quinn merch, which would help get some revenue and soften the impact of less than stellar Box Office.

John Wick 2 was coming off a film that made $14M in its OW at the box office. So it’s a sequel that more than doubled its predecessor’s opening. It also cost half of Birds of Prey.

I don’t think there is a movie that we can compare BOP to at the moment. Usually when a comic book movie opens, we just compare it to other comic book movies that opened recently but there isn’t really one to compare BOP to. All the other rated R comic book movies out opened it by a ton so those comps are out the window. We can’t really compare it to Shazam either because that was PG-13 and again out opened it. It did open similar to Dark Phoenix but again that’s PG-13 and that movie was horrendous so not a good comp either.

I think this is going to be a wait and see type of deal tbh This movie could get really good legs and end up doing over $250M world wide or it can be forgotten about and miss $200M. It all depends on whether there was really any interest in this film to begin with. Having good WOM isn’t enough to sway people who have no interest in the movie to begin with. But if interest is there and people were just on the fence then I think it’ll end up closer to that $250M than sub $200M. We’ll see.

 

[NHawk19]

I found this to be MUCH less blah and average than plenty of Marvel Studios movies. Sorry to go there, but most of the MCU are given are free pass just because, even when they're the very epitome of mediocre and bland.

I'm sure you did but, the MCU sank the hook in the nerds, dorks, geeks, general population, and reviewers leading up to End Game which gave them room for error. WB/DC can't seem to do that which is their biggest problem.

Remember the entirety of the MCU essentially became just one big body of work. WB/DC is still dis-jointed and hasn't become more than the sum of it's parts. It's also why they're not seeing the huge results at the box office. No one is really invested in the huge arc.

 

[Invader Joker]

Gotham City Sirens and Batgirl are not happening.

 

[MadVillainy]

I don't see why Batgirl is in danger

 

[Iceman]

If GCS still happens WB will no doubt mandate a PG rating. No way they entertain the idea of an R rating again

I would prefer that as this would be a film that teen girls could really get into.

 

[TheGuy]

I think TSS is safe, since it follows Batman. The publicity of Batman will help TSS from its predecessor's stink and BoP's dismal box office. GCS or Batgirl are still a question mark at this point. How can anyone say for certain that neither of the two will at least happen when Hamada, through Kroll, elaborated that DC is willing to do more villain-based movies?

 

[Marvel united]

All female centric films too. Something tells me the current climate is causing "message movies" to get knocked down a peg. And I don't think this film is even that blatantly feminist like McGregor said, but he put it out there and I think it might have hurt it.

I highly doubt enough people saw that McGregor interview in order for it to have an affect on the millions of dollars at stake in the box-office. And even if they did, we are going to have to define the type of person who would have a problem with a "message film", McGregor's comments, whether they did not see the movie because of it, and whether they are overrepresented in the target demographic for this movie (doubt it) in order for it to make a difference.

It has nothing to do with it's female lead or social message (which if there was one, was excellently crafted into the fabric of Quinn's arc, because it was not in your face). There are other reasons for this movie underperforming which I'd guess are tied to marketing.

I hope it picks up because this movie deserves to make money

 

[Legendver2]

You now what the true result of Harley leaving the Joker would be? Her returning to being her old self. I’ve long maintained Harley is one of the few Batman villains that with the right mental treatment could live a relatively normal life. Her being Harleen again is the natural conclusion. The problem is you can’t sell Dr Quinzell merch, so what do they do? Keep the craziness, turn her into essentially Deadpool, make her this weird anti-hero which as you say doesn’t really work.

So you really think it's possible to un-crazy yourself after a breakup with the guy who turned you crazy more or less? Yea....I don't think that's how that works. Even if medical and mental treatment can help, there needs to be a point where she allows herself to get those in the first place. Most crazy people aren't sane enough to realize they need help to begin with, and she doesn't really have a close knit "support" group to do any sort of proper intervention to get her help. You can't really un-crazy yourself by yourself.

 

[Iceman]

If it can find its legs, I can see a modest box office. Future Harley movies may depend on Gunn's Suicide Squad movie, sadly. Though, as damaging as it could be to the character, I don't see it being quite as bad as the original Suicide Squad, which I think this movie is definitely paying for.

If I was Gunn I would be watching both SS and BoP and noticing how much better Harley is in BoP. He doesn't even need to do the work. Let Harley be the same as she is in BoP - let Margot contribute to the process at least for her character.

 

[writer0327]

Man I really don't think so look at all the heat Brie Larson was getting for her "woke" comments and in the end the audience saw through that.

CM also had the entirety of the MCU and came out right before Endgame going for it. I also wouldn't necessarily call CM female centric, it just had a female lead. Most of the side characters were men. These other films are majorly female casts.

 

[Invader Joker]

I think TSS is safe, since it follows Batman. The publicity of Batman will help TSS from its predecessor's stink and BoP's dismal box office. GCS or Batgirl are still a question mark at this point. How can anyone say for certain that neither of the two will at least happen when Hamada, through Kroll, elaborated that DC is willing to do more villain-based movies?

Sigh.

There is only a limited amount of release dates movies can occupy in a given year.

Why would they waste 2 release dates on spin-offs to a movie that didn't succeed, spin-offs that'll possibly create conflict and confusion with The Batman universe, when they occupy it with more "DC Black" movies like Joker or huge blockbusters like Aquaman?

At most they could do a limited series about Black Canary or Huntress for HBO Max. But I really doubt they'll force Reeves to put his Catwoman in the DCEU or allow Robbie to cast her own Catwoman.

Batgirl could happen, but only if its connected to Matt Reeves Batman if The Batman is a success.

 

[Invader Joker]

On top of that, the only thing the Batgirl movie has is a script by Christina Hodson.
The same Christina Hodson that just made 2 films that underperformed at the box office (Bumblebee and this film)
There's not really any good reason to move forward with it.

 

[Legendver2]

I mean I'll be for real, if I was a teenage boy and there was an r-rated movie starring all women I probably expect some nudity at the least. Today's teenage dudes or 20 something dudes are not as woke as we think.

It's hard to be woke when your hormones are raging right around that age.

Harley was trained gymnast and she can make effective use of Mallet and baseball bat, plus as she was with Joker for a while, she has learned how to use some firearms (pistols), that's all she can do. She's dangerous as she is mentally unstable and can become unhinged.

Harley Quinn is not an expert in martial arts (like Black Canary in comics) or trained ninja (like Katana) or a assassin (like Deadshot). So you equating her to a "highly trained mercenary killer" is bit exaggeration.

In no (real) world do I find it believable that a trained gymnast (male or female) can take out highly trained men of any armed profession.

I think TSS is safe, since it follows Batman. The publicity of Batman will help TSS from its predecessor's stink and BoP's dismal box office. GCS or Batgirl are still a question mark at this point. How can anyone say for certain that neither of the two will at least happen when Hamada, through Kroll, elaborated that DC is willing to do more villain-based movies?

Does that really matter though, since in all likelihood Batman isn't even going to be in the same universe as TSS and the rest of the DCEU last I checked, or is TSS going to be in the Reeves Batverse now, and not the DCEU? This is all quite confusing tbh.

 

[writer0327]

I highly doubt enough people saw that McGregor interview in order for it to have an affect on the millions of dollars at stake in the box-office. And even if they did, we are going to have to define the type of person who would have a problem with a "message film", McGregor's comments, whether they did not see the movie because of it, and whether they are overrepresented in the target demographic for this movie (doubt it) in order for it to make a difference.

It has nothing to do with it's female lead or social message (which if there was one, was excellently crafted into the fabric of Quinn's arc, because it was not in your face). There are other reasons for this movie underperforming which I'd guess are tied to marketing.

I hope it picks up because this movie deserves to make money

I hope it finds its legs too because I am a huge DC honk. But we'd be remiss to think that this current climate has some moviegoers avoiding message films, whatever they might be. And I agree, this film didn't really have any overly pushy message, any feminism slant, not even a girl power message, but the optics of it in light of those other three films makes me wonder if that's what is going on. And if so, how will Hollywood respond?

 

[Invader Joker]

The Batman will probably not be affected at all.

Harley and Batman haven't interacted that much in movies to fully associate them both (I mean sure they kissed in SS but whatever) in the eyes of the general audience.

Plus it's a new Batman, and I kinda expect that film to be more reminiscent of Joker and the TDK trilogy than this film.

 

[Iceman]

I highly doubt enough people saw that McGregor interview in order for it to have an affect on the millions of dollars at stake in the box-office. And even if they did, we are going to have to define the type of person who would have a problem with a "message film", McGregor's comments, whether they did not see the movie because of it, and whether they are overrepresented in the target demographic for this movie (doubt it) in order for it to make a difference.

It has nothing to do with it's female lead or social message (which if there was one, was excellently crafted into the fabric of Quinn's arc, because it was not in your face). There are other reasons for this movie underperforming which I'd guess are tied to marketing.

I hope it picks up because this movie deserves to make money

I didn't know about it so I can imagine many other genre fans also not being aware, nevermind the GA. The marketing was terrible though. The trailer just absolutely undersold what we were getting in the film.

 

[Legendver2]

I think that R rating hurt it pretty badly. I mean, it caused me to be unable to take my 11 year old to see it, which would have caused me to drag my wife and son there, too...so there's 4 tickets lost.

I told my daughter it didn't make a lot, and she said, "Good! Maybe next time they will get Harley right!"

I told her that they probably got Harley right, they just didn't make it for kids...and this means the studio will just assume that no one wants a Birds of Prey or Harley Quinn movie...because that's how Holly wood thinks.

Besides, there's still a chance it'll make that money on the back end. It just won't be crazy Joker money.

I can't shake the feeling that they forced an R on this thinking they can somehow replicate Joker's R-hype.

But again, both Deadpool and Logan have had kid friendly appearances, as well.

And teenagers can and do watch R-rated movies in theaters, by going with their parents or whatever.

I really don't think the rating is the point. They probably just should have communicated with the audience more and have the cast have more high profile TV appearances.

The main problem I got from this is that many people genuinely don't know this is out. Because the majority of the people who actually did watch It in theaters enjoyed it, so no, this shouldn't have been another movie, while the rest either have no clue or thinks its going to be yet another "woke movie" such as Charlie's Angels which has NOTHING going for it other than "we women cool, now we fight you puny asses."

I always find it intriguing that people have no problem with the blood and gore and violence in Deadpool and Logan, but draw the line at

Spoiler

a forced strip scene in BoP,

to take their kids to.

 

[Micromind]

In no (real) world do I find it believable that a trained gymnast (male or female) can take out highly trained men of any armed profession.

While I agree, I was just pointing out what's established so far in comics/ animated series for Harley. It's all fictional hyper reality.

Batman would get killed within weeks in a city like Gotham, if it existed in real world.

 

[TheGuy]

Sigh.

There is only a limited amount of release dates movies can occupy in a given year.

Why would they waste 2 release dates on spin-offs to a movie that didn't succeed, spin-offs that'll possibly create conflict and confusion with The Batman universe, when they occupy it with more "DC Black" movies like Joker or huge blockbusters like Aquaman?

At most they could do a limited series about Black Canary or Huntress for HBO Max. But I really doubt they'll force Reeves to put his Catwoman in the DCEU or allow Robbie to cast her own Catwoman.

DC is perfectly capable releasing 4 films per year. 2021 and 2022 each have 3 films alone. We don't know plans from 2023 onward. Any Batman-based character could fill any one spot with the right script and director. Doesn't mean DC will necessary proceed with said spin-offs. Just based on the fact that Hamada took the time to elaborate his plans, through Kroll, that there is a possibility of either GCS or Batgirl to proceed. BoP's low opening weekend doesn't render final judgment on those 2 possible movies because it could still leg out. And Shazam is getting a sequel despite its low BO total.

With regards to conflicting universe, I think Batgirl will be spun-off from Batman, hence why she isn't here in BoP. Margot's HQ will eventually be connected to Batman, I think, and Poison Ivy will be introduced through him. When you name a movie BoP despite being Harley-centric and said movie is without Batgirl, you best bet that Batgirl will be introduced through Batman... which is the proper way.

And I don't think DC will allow two versions of any character conflicting in different takes. Simple as that. That's more stupid and brain dead than BoP's marketing.

 

[writer0327]

If I was Gunn I would be watching both SS and BoP and noticing how much better Harley is in BoP. He doesn't even need to do the work. Let Harley be the same as she is in BoP - let Margot contribute to the process at least for her character.

I think she's got her part down and hopefully Gun agrees. Out of all the stuff wrong with both of those films, Margot wasn't it.

 

[Invader Joker]

DC is perfectly capable releasing 4 films per year. 2021 and 2022 each have 3 films alone. We don't know plans from 2023 onward. Any Batman-based character could fill any one spot with the right script and director. Doesn't mean DC will necessary proceed with said spin-offs. Just based on the fact that Hamada took the time to elaborate his plans, through Kroll, that there is a possibility of either GCS or Batgirl to proceed. BoP's low opening weekend doesn't render final judgment on those 2 possible movies because it could still leg out. And Shazam is getting a sequel despite its low BO total.

With regards to conflicting universe, I think Batgirl will be spun-off from Batman, hence why she isn't here in BoP. Margot's HQ will eventually be connected to Batman, I think, and Poison Ivy will be introduced through him. When you name a movie BoP despite being Harley-centric and said movie is without Batgirl, you best bet that Batgirl will be introduced through Batman... which is the proper way.

And I don't think DC will allow two versions of any character conflicting in different takes. Simple as that. That's more stupid and brain dead than BoP's marketing.

The only way that'll happen is if they allow Matt Reeves to completely reboot the character. From what we know of Reeves Batman, Margot's Harley as she currently is doesn't seem to fit that world at all.
And while they're technically capable of releasing 4 films per year... it's a stupid idea to do so when Marvel is also gonna be releasing 4 per year, so I like to believe they won't make such a decision.

 

[TheGuy]

Does that really matter though, since in all likelihood Batman isn't even going to be in the same universe as TSS and the rest of the DCEU last I checked, or is TSS going to be in the Reeves Batverse now, and not the DCEU? This is all quite confusing tbh.

Who knows.

 

[Legendver2]

DC is perfectly capable releasing 4 films per year. 2021 and 2022 each have 3 films alone. We don't know plans from 2023 onward. Any Batman-based character could fill any one spot with the right script and director. Doesn't mean DC will necessary proceed with said spin-offs. Just based on the fact that Hamada took the time to elaborate his plans, through trades, that there is a possibility of either GCS or Batgirl to proceed. BoP's low opening weekend doesn't render final judgment on those 2 possible movies because it could still leg out. And Shazam is getting a sequel despite its low BO total.

With regards to conflicting universe, I think Batgirl will be spun-off from Batman, hence why she isn't here in BoP. Margot's HQ will eventually be connected to Batman, I think, and Poison Ivy will be introduced through him. When you name a movie BoP despite being Harley-centric and said movie is without Batgirl, you best bet that Batgirl will be introduced through Batman... which is the proper way.

And I don't think DC will allow two versions of any character conflicting in different takes. Simple as that. That's more stupid and brain dead than BoP's marketing.

It is, but WB hasn't shown it can do otherwise yet. I hate to compare to Marvel, but the Marvel films being in one universe helps each movie build up on each other, since people know that they're all related and will lead to something in the end, so they better catch all the lead up episodes. Even with the Fox X-verse happening at the same thing, the releases for those were so far in between every 2-3 MCU films, it didn't really break the hype in between, and they were different enough that people understood it's not related at all.

DC right now, have no idea what universe to stick with, or if they're doing 2 or 3 parallel movie universes. You got the DCEU, with WW and AM leading the box office. Then you got Batman coming up, and so far that seems to be it's own thing. Then you got stuff like BoP and SS that I'm still not sure which world they belong on, or if they're in their own corner. I don't even know how Margot's HQ, that's been established to be in the DCEU, will somehow jump universes to an unrelated (so far) Reeves Bat-verse. Then you got stuff like Joker that's just there. There's nothing building on each other, doesn't lead to any big thing at the end, so people won't feel like it's a necessity to watch every one in fear of missing any details that leads to some big showdown. Because that showdown isn't happening. This coming from a studio that owns all it's character to start with, just seems like a big wasted opportunity.

 

[-JKR-]

I'm sure you did but, the MCU sank the hook in the nerds, dorks, geeks, general population, and reviewers leading up to End Game which gave them room for error. WB/DC can't seem to do that which is their biggest problem.

Remember the entirety of the MCU essentially became just one big body of work. WB/DC is still dis-jointed and hasn't become more than the sum of it's parts. It's also why they're not seeing the huge results at the box office. No one is really invested in the huge arc.

I don't want the DC movies to become one big body of work, though. I like the movies' independence to explore the stories as they wish and with the director's idiosyncrasies setting the tone and style for the movies.

I don't want the movies to suddenly turn into one mush. As much as it works for Marvel Studios, I don't think emulating them would be the right way to handle things.

In my opinion they need to go ahead with full steam and more conviction and confidence.

Birds of Prey had an uphill battle anyways, for many different reasons, and eventually people will catch up with it thinking "****, this is actually pretty good."

The only thing needed is some patience. If Wonder Woman 1984, The Batman and The Suicide Squad all underperform... THEN you have a reason to worry.

And what people forget is that some of the early Marvel Studios films didn't set the world on fire, either, and with bigger budgets. So when people talk about Shazam they should remember that the first Captain America made basically the same money, and cost much more.

But in that case no one was talking about it underperforming, in the case of Shazam they do...........

 

[Micromind]

Does that really matter though, since in all likelihood Batman isn't even going to be in the same universe as TSS and the rest of the DCEU last I checked, or is TSS going to be in the Reeves Batverse now, and not the DCEU? This is all quite confusing tbh.

Gunn's TSS is set in DCEU, I doubt Reeves even wants to know what is the story of Gunn's movie, while Margot has discussed the story of BoP with Gunn.