• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

BIRDS OF PREY starring Margot Robbie (2020?)
1 1

1,068 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, Mephisto said:

I had no idea this was Rated-R. I get kind of pissy about some movies they don't make R that really need to be rated R. I have to ask those that saw the film, did this NEED to be rated R?

I liked Harley in Suicide Squad, I double checked and that was PG-13. This movie kind of snuck up on me. I didn't realize it was being released until it was almost out and saw a commercial. Can't say it made me want to watch it. Honestly the more I see of the film the less interested I am in seeing it. (shrug)

In it's current story format, yes. But especially because of one scene.

Spoiler

Victor Zsasz cuts off the faces of a family that did not want to support Roman Sionis's power plans. To the point as he slices them off, he takes one face and just throws it on the floor.

And yes, there is excessive use of the F-word with songs and lines.

Did it need to be R-rated? Heck no! They could have easily dropped that one scene and hid it from view like films do with murder where you hear a gun or a fight - but no blood shown or the actual murder taking place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article from the Herbalife guy.

Quote

Warner Bros.’ DC superhero film Birds of Prey continues to lag well behind early expectations, now hoping for enough strength to limp to break-even territory. But despite the undeniably disappointing results and 20/20 hindsight critiques (including from yours truly), stepping back to look at the bigger picture of DC Comic adaptations over the past year provides a clearer view of what adds up to a successful strategy.

 

Before any of the “cynic-chic” crowd start rolling their eyes and choking on their drinks when they see my headline, let’s be very clear — recognizing and talking about the points I’m about to make is in no way an “apology” or “excuse-making” for Birds of Prey. This is about a larger investment strategy within the precise context of where DC movies are at the moment and what they need — or don’t need — to stay on course and get to a more consistent successful output.

 

Which is why the decision to pursue not only bigger-budget branded projects — Aquaman sequels, Wonder Woman sequels, Batman reboots, and such — but also lower-budget risky projects to fill release schedules between those big branded films.

 

This was a specific choice of investment and release dates, and it allowed each film to perform differently under an umbrella assumption that spreading money across multiple projects with different seasonal release dates — appealing to a wider variety of audiences than might be typical for a superhero film — creates more potential room for one of the three films to break out. If that happens, then the breakout picture can be profitable enough to make up for the other two films, regardless of how they perform (or at least in conjunction with their added revenue streams).

 

It’s not brain surgery, and is in fact a fairly straightforward and obviously simple plan. And it was carried out successfully — all three films were good or great; all three films got mostly positive reviews and good audience reactions; all three films combined for a big return on the investment overall; and all three films represented unique approaches to tone, style, narrative, audience appeal, and place within established or new continuities.

 

There were mistakes, for sure, not least of which was keeping marketing costs a bit too low for Shazam! and Birds of Prey. The rating was also a bigger issue than anyone expected for the latter film, while the release date was a significant mistake for the former (it should’ve been a Thanksgiving/Christmas release). But whatever money was left on the table, a whole heckuva lot more was put into Warner’s pockets.

 

The importance of this strategy and outcome is even more obvious when viewed in the broader context of the past three years of DC movies and where the DC properties are headed in the next few years, so let’s take a look at that.

 

The story of Warner’s DC output in the aftermath of 2018’s billion dollar blockbuster Aquaman is a bit of a roller coaster ride. First came the 2019 summer family-friendly superhero comedy Shazam!, followed in 2019 fall release of the R-rated psychological thriller Joker (which went on to win Academy Awards for Best Actor and Best Original Score), and finishing with the 2020 winter release of R-rated supervillain/superhero all-women team-up Birds of Prey.

 

Of course, Wonder Woman 1984 is coming on June 5th and is expected to be a huge summer blockbuster. This set up a situation in which the bigger properties — Aquaman and a Wonder Woman sequel — bookend the three lower-budgeted, riskier productions — Shazam!, Joker, and Birds of Prey. And the results speak for themselves.

 

Shazam! grossed $366 million worldwide, Joker took more than $1 billion in global receipts, and Birds of Prey is headed toward a likely $230-250 million finish, for a combined $1.67+ billion in box office. The releases had respective budgets of about $90 million, $60 million, and $85 million, for a combined total of somewhere around $235 million, with another $150+ million in shared marketing expenses, or $385+/- million in costs. The studios’ share of that combined worldwide box office is roughly $675+/- million, which after costs leaves something in the neighborhood of $300 million in “profits.” I put that in quotation marks, however, because there are all sorts of additional expenses that wind up coming out of this number, including backend points for performers and others involved in the project. Additionally, Warner didn’t cover the entirety of budget and marketing costs alone.

 

What this means is, Warner spread the risk across multiple low-budget films, got other investors to share some of the costs, and as a result they got three movies with average budget/marketing cost of $128 million per project, grossing an average of $558+ million per project, “netting” an average of about $100 million per project.

 

Lower-budgeted projects, lower-budgeted marketing, shared risks, and strong average profit margins. Had they instead just invested $235 million in a one single summer tentpole Justice League movie, and had that hypothetical film grossed $1.67+ billion, then that would be heralded as a pretty successful result. If such a film wound up with $300 million after expenses, we’d be talking about it as a big payoff for a high-stakes gamble on a big make-or-break project.

 

Instead, the costs were spread across three very different modest films with specific different target demographics; which were released in summer, fall, and winter; and which shared some of their expenses with other studios to decrease risks. They delivered one modest success, one blockbuster Oscar-winning hit, and one underperforming/break-even release — which wound up slightly better than the more likely “one hit, one break even, one flop” outcome.

 

There is endless potential, if Warner plays this right and learns the best lessons. So next time you’re discussing Birds of Prey, amid all of the valid points about how and why it’s under-performing and should’ve done better, take a moment to remember how this all looks rather different in the rearview mirror and with an increasingly broader perspective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Ahem...

They probably wouldn't have flops if they gave their directors artistic freedom.

Well, it just depends on the vision. In this case, they took a risk but definitely stepped on it with the rating, limited marketing and then the excitement of having a Batman or Joker actually appear. But with that...

DC_MCU_BO200219d.thumb.PNG.aabd7081db2c0a255efaaf4a951972bb.PNG

6.6X production budget with a low-budget film experiment is not a bad result for any studio. Though this could have been much stronger with a holiday Shazam release.

10 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

#ReleaseTheSnyderCut

I miss his involvement. :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Interesting article from the Herbalife guy.

 

And *I* remember when this unapologetic DC hack claimed that Venom, similarly budgeted as Birds of Prey and Shazam, needed to make $400MM to be "'worth it". 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2018/10/05/review-venom-is-the-bane-of-sonys-superhero-plans/amp/

Now extolling two money losing DC flops BoP and Shazam, neither of which sniffed 400MM are now "success stories". Bwahahahahahahaha!  The dead Herbalife guy has more credibility than this rambling nimrod.

Warner is still playing with unexpected found money from Joker.  But as of now they are 1-2.  The sad performance of Birds of Prey (and Shazam) is why I'm still raising my eyebrow that Warner would be so dense as to actually triple and quadruple down on failure by still actually following through on a pointless shazam sequel and even more pointless Black Adam movie.  hm

-J.

Edited by Jaydogrules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

And *I* remember when this unapologetic DC hack claimed that Venom, similarly budgeted as Birds of Prey and Shazam, needed to make $400MM to be "'worth it". 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2018/10/05/review-venom-is-the-bane-of-sonys-superhero-plans/amp/

Now extolling two money losing DC flops BoP and Shazam, neither of which sniffed 400MM are now "success stories". Bwahahahahahahaha!  The dead Herbalife guy has more credibility than this rambling nimrod.

Warner is still playing with unexpected found money from Joker.  But as of now they are 1-2.  The sad performance of Birds of Prey (and Shazam) is why I'm still raising my eyebrow that Warner would be so dense as to actually triple and quadruple down on failure by still actually following through on a pointless shazam sequel and even more pointless Black Adam movie.  hm

-J.

Hey, the guy that followed up with papergrumbles when he made the false claim about Mark Hughes and you stated 'Oh yeah. I forgot about that!'

:roflmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1