Jump to content
TMP

Weekend Thread | Birds of Prey $33.25M Weekend

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, FunkMiller said:

Anyone wanting to see how Harley should be done should watch the new cartoon. It’s brilliant.


The new cartoon is great. A bit too many forced f-bombs but it’s worth the watch.

 

I’d also add that Harley in BOP is actually pretty great. A tad bit more sympathetic than the cartoon but she’s a fun character.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DAJK said:

99.9% of people don't know who Gotham City Sirens are. I don't think this movie would be doing much better if it was a "GCS" movie instead of a "BoP" movie to be honest. 

Difference is that Catwoman & Poison Ivy are way bigger names than Black Canary & Huntress. Also Harley actually belongs to that group where the BOP are usually the ones chasing Harley down.

Edited by BeastByTheBay
Link to post
Share on other sites

ouch , i though harley had huge popularity , it seems that she hasnt , anyway , i dont think that we should be suprised by this, i am not to be honest, trailer views are not 100% correct, but the bop trailer had very low buz and views, lower  than even shazam , so ..

Edited by john2000
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, John Marston said:

Audiences have spoken! These movies should be more serious and dramatic like Joker rather than tongue in cheek parodies like Shazam and Birds of Prey 

I wouldn't mind if DC went back to dark and serious tbh. I much prefer that

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alli said:

One flop down, two to go! way to go, imdb!

FUN FACT: Zoolander 2 was no. 9 on Fandango's most anticipated list of 2016. With Deadpool nowhere to be found.

h3Lyf6X.jpg

And I'm pretty sure we all know what happened after. 

  • Haha 1
  • Astonished 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Arendelle Legion said:

People keep talking about Harley Quinn’s popularity being overestimated. I don’t think the problem with Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of one Harley Quinn) was Harley Quinn. 

The studio did overestimate her popularity by making her the only hook of the movie. I didn't recognize any of the girls and even the soundtrack is full of trendy new artists that aren't a draw yet (except Halsey perhaps) 

 

For a movie whose only selling point is "Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn" I'd even say these are good numbers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AJG said:


The new cartoon is great. A bit too many forced f-bombs but it’s worth the watch.

 

I’d also add that Harley in BOP is actually pretty great. A tad bit more sympathetic than the cartoon but she’s a fun character.

You could argue they just didn’t take Harley far enough in this film. They wanted her to be the ‘hero’. She’s not a hero though. She works best as a villain. BoP movie would have worked better with Babs in the team, coming up against Harley... but then the whole things was one big vehicle for Margot Robbie, so that was never going to happen.

Just now, BeastByTheBay said:

Difference is that Catwoman & Poison Ivy are way bigger names than Black Canary & Huntress. 

This.

 

A GCS movie would be doing better, I think. I do not understand why they dropped that to make a BoP movie with Harley and no Batgirl. Smh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FunkMiller said:

The film would have greatly benefited from a strong female villain, with competent, good supporting male characters.

 

In other words... exactly what WW84 is doing, and that’s likely to be a smash hit because of it.

 

You don’t draw a male demographic by making all men look like irredeemable b*****ds. 

I think WW84 will be a hit because people care about the character rather than the villain.

 

It's a shame BoP is not taking off as well as I would like (and thought after the reviews), but I guess if good reviews meant good box office Paddington would have done $3bn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a well done GCS would do more than 2x the numbers this will pull if released this weekend. When it was announced, I was baffled by the decision to make the first Robbie-as-Quinn Suicide Squad followup/character soft reboot jammed into a Barbara-less version of the Birds of Prey, of all things. I remain baffled by it.

Edited by Arendelle Legion
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alli said:

Joker was aimed at adults. BOP's target audience is teenage girls. The movie looks colourful, edgy

But the film is rated r so they messed up if that was their target audience. I dont think this was marketed well enough to women. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 2 teenage sisters and two little ones and graphic violence is not the top of their priority list. or even on the list period. They find it gross. I also find some type of graphic violence unwatchable. any injury to eyes, show of brain, brotruding broken bones are a no-go for me. 

Edited by Valonqar
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, AJG said:


Sticking to Source Material, especially in the nonsense fanboy manner we see on this site, doesn’t matter.

 

Fanboys were upset about the original Spider-Man films. The original xmen films. The Dark Knight films. Guardians of the Galaxy. Thor Ragnarok. The list goes on.

 

Fanboy consensus is that these movies were good.

 

Nitpicking aside, the source material is a helpful guide to figure out why these characters are worth adapting.

 

You guys say sticking to the source material is a waste of time. I say making every Iron Man movie where he wears a pink tutu and a steals pumpkins all day is a wasted opportunity. The comics found the best artist and writers to explore the soul of the character and you ignore it just to follow the hunches of some studio exec or uninterested director.

 

Here's an idea.

 

Don't like the source material? Don't adapt it. Save it for someone who understands and explores the well established appeal.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

Fanboy consensus is that these movies were good.

 

Nitpicking aside, the source material is a helpful guide to figure out why these characters are worth adapting.

 

You guys say sticking to the source material is a waste of time. I say making every Iron Man movie where he wears a pink tutu and a steals pumpkins all day is a wasted opportunity. The comics found the best artist and writers to explore the soul of the character and you ignore it just to follow the hunches of some studio exec or uninterested director.

 

Here's an idea.

 

Don't like the source material? Don't adapt it. Save it for someone who understands and explores the well established appeal.

Also, if people don’t think The Dark Knight sticks close to the comics in terms of characterisation (which is the only thing that really matters) they’ve never read a Batman comic.

 

I’d argue every single good comic book movie absolutely respects and sticks to the characterisations from the comics, and every bad one doesn’t. Costume accuracy and backstory don’t really matter. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading the last 10 pages I just want to say $250m woudn't be a succes.

People were saying Shazam wasn't a succes and that made $360m with $15m more in budget.

 

Taking 100m DOM / 150m OS => $112m in revenue. 

So it covers the buget, streaming release + dvd/blue ray, tv rights and merch will make sure this will make a profit, but calling it a succes? It's a worse Shazam a worse ant man and the wasp etc.

 

BOP: $112m rev vs $85m (1.32 times)

AMATW: $258m rev vs $162m (1.59 times)

Shazam: $157m rev vs 100m budget (1.57 times)

 

And Shazam and AMATW weren't that succesfull as well (they are seen as the low low end, making a small profit). If you see succes as making money then yep in the end it will end up making a profit but not a I cover all my costs with the boxoffice revenue succes.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

Fanboy consensus is that these movies were good.

 

Nitpicking aside, the source material is a helpful guide to figure out why these characters are worth adapting.


nitpicking? I remember these films being released and seeing fanboys act as if anything different from the comic book was an attack on their life.


They couldn’t have made the original Xmen and Spider-Man films today with the way nerds cry about the source material. You can’t take risks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Arendelle Legion said:

I think a well done GCS would do more than 2x the numbers this will pull if released this weekend. When it was announced, I was baffled by the decision to make the first Robbie-as-Quinn Suicide Squad followup/character soft reboot jammed into a Barbara-less version of the Birds of Prey, of all things. I remain baffled by it.

Why do people assume that Barbara is a draw ? Outside of the core fan base, a lot of the GA don’t tell the difference between catwoman and batgirl. And Selina is way bigger bc of Nolan 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Menor said:

It was like this for Joker as well, and Frozen 2 had the opposite trend. I think the big markets tend to come out more for adult fare while other areas are more skewed toward family audiences. 

Which ultimately makes sense when you think about how the demographics skew one way or the other on many other things as well. 

I had forgotten about the Joker / Frozen aspect as well so thanks for the reminder 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.