• 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

36 minutes ago, drotto said:

I think an audience for this movie and this type of movie does exist, it is just proving to be small.  It is all and good to make a smaller budget movie (although reported 90 million is somewhat more middle budget), but even at that price you are still looking at being 200 to 250 till you really start to make a profit.

 

There has also been some back and forth here stating you can't compair this film to WW or CM, as those were always targeted to be larger budget more mass market films, and maybe that is fair. Unfortunately, for this film it is seen as part of the DCEU, Harely is supposed to be a mass market DC character, and it is looking to be the weakest performer. The media seems to be struggling to find a comparable film, maybe there is not one.

 

So if the trend continues where does the fault lie?  

Honestly?

The marketers.

It seems like the most of the 200 people who've seen this film actually enjoyed it, including the critics.

But to me, the trailers made this look horrific.

- Too much focus on Harley at the expense of the others (so it's not a true BoP movie)

- Too much gratuitous violence and trying too hard to be "edgy"

- Editing looks like it was done by an epileptic film student.

It's early yet - and it may still become a future cult hit - but it looks like the trailers turned tons of folks off, not just me.

Plus, if the reviews are to be believed, the things that make this "Tarantino-esque" boil down to 1) the excessive cursing, and 2) non-linear storytelling. If those are your main takeaways for "Tarantino-esque" I don't know what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, drotto said:

I think an audience for this movie and this type of movie does exist, it is just proving to be small.  It is all and good to make a smaller budget movie (although reported 90 million is somewhat more middle budget), but even at that price you are still looking at being 200 to 250 till you really start to make a profit.

 

There has also been some back and forth here stating you can't compair this film to WW or CM, as those were always targeted to be larger budget more mass market films, and maybe that is fair. Unfortunately, for this film it is seen as part of the DCEU, Harely is supposed to be a mass market DC character, and it is looking to be the weakest performer. The media seems to be struggling to find a comparable film, maybe there is not one.

 

So if the trend continues where does the fault lie?  

I think what you may not realize is all you are doing is repeating the same message in a different way. Not that I am giving you a hard time over your thoughts. :foryou:

What you are restating is superhero films should stay focused on the mass-appeal approach. Because then they reach a larger market. Right?

55 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Honestly?

The marketers.

It seems like the most of the 200 people who've seen this film actually enjoyed it, including the critics.

But to me, the trailers made this look horrific.

- Too much focus on Harley at the expense of the others (so it's not a true BoP movie)

- Too much gratuitous violence and trying too hard to be "edgy"

- Editing looks like it was done by an epileptic film student.

It's early yet - and it may still become a future cult hit - but it looks like the trailers turned tons of folks off, not just me.

Plus, if the reviews are to be believed, the things that make this "Tarantino-esque" boil down to 1) the excessive cursing, and 2) non-linear storytelling. If those are your main takeaways for "Tarantino-esque" I don't know what to tell you.

Although the numbers are low right now (and may stay that way), a passive-aggressive statement like that doesn't help get to the details what is going on. Because there are a lot of people actively posting on Youtube, Twitter and Facebook about what they liked and didn't like about Birds of Prey. Maybe if we dig into the target market, there are some details there to consider.

  • The age group and focus was 18-39 year olds
  • Extensive heavy on female audience members
  • Deliver a hard R-rated action film circling around a female team (Charlie's Angels, Ocean's Eight)

Without digging deep into all three bullets the positives and the negatives with this approach, one characteristic jumps out with a younger audience - torrent site use.

When you read the many, many social media posts from a large representation of the users describing details from the film, it is clear they saw this film. And even noting they are going back to watch it again. Then where's the $$??

Now this is where @drotto has a point. By limiting the target audience to a specific age range, you also tie yourself to good and bad behavior from that audience target. Sure, they will show up to a FREE marketing event to celebrate characters and productions they are excited over. Mexico and the UK events were swamped with people. And then there was a massive Hollywood premiere event. Unless these were all paid actors.

But where are they now once the theater register starts looking to clock in payments? hm

emotion04.gif.44b211c20b8bd8edd50b3f0211d5e6bd.gif

I bet they are seeing it. And more than once. This could be one contributor.  (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

Umm...my dude's forgetting about Fantasy Island next week.

Even if Sonic bombs as hard as Birds of Prey did this week (fairly likely, actually), what's the best-case scenario here?

A crazy low 29% drop to a $25 million second weekend and a third-place finish? 

When the headlines are reading "Worst DC Opening Since Jonah Hex," you're pretty much screwed.

I completely forgot about the Jonah Hex movie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I think what you may not realize is all you are doing is repeating the same message in a different way. Not that I am giving you a hard time over your thoughts. :foryou:

What you are restating is superhero films should stay focused on the mass-appeal approach. Because then they reach a larger market. Right?

Although the numbers are low right now (and may stay that way), a passive-aggressive statement like that doesn't help get to the details what is going on. Because there are a lot of people actively posting on Youtube, Twitter and Facebook about what they liked and didn't like about Birds of Prey. Maybe if we dig into the target market, there are some details there to consider.

  • The age group and focus was 18-39 year olds
  • Extensive heavy on female audience members
  • Deliver a hard R-rated action film circling around a female team (Charlie's Angels, Ocean's Eight)

Without digging deep into all three bullets the positives and the negatives with this approach, one characteristic jumps out with a younger audience - torrent site use.

When you read the many, many social media posts from a large representation of the users describing details from the film, it is clear they saw this film. And even noting they are going back to watch it again. Then where's the $$??

Now this is where @drotto has a point. By limiting the target audience to a specific age range, you also tie yourself to good and bad behavior from that audience target. Sure, they will show up to a FREE marketing event to celebrate characters and productions they are excited over. Mexico and the UK events were swamped with people. And then there was a massive Hollywood premiere event. Unless these were all paid actors.

But where are they now once the theater register starts looking to clock in payments? hm

emotion04.gif.44b211c20b8bd8edd50b3f0211d5e6bd.gif

I bet they are seeing it. And more than once. This could be one contributor.  (shrug)

Just feel they may have limited the audience too much.  I would argue Harley's biggest fan base (besides males from about 25 to 50 who grew up on BTAS) is girls/women from about 8 to 35. By targeting this hard R a very large number of those fans are being cut out.  I hate to say go safe, but going safe and getting a PG13 would have helped this film.

 

The other marketing item I question is why the almost competing DC streaming cartoon at the same time.  They likely viewed this as complimentary,  but is it hard R, and likely giving many of the same fans their Harley fix, and may diminish the need to see the film. It cover many of the same themes.  And frankly it is very funny and really well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, drotto said:

Just feel they may have limited the audience too much.  I would argue Harley's biggest fan base (besides males from about 25 to 50 who grew up on BTAS) is girls/women from about 8 to 35. By targeting this hard R a very large number of those fans are being cut out.  I hate to say go safe, but going safe and getting a PG13 would have helped this film.

The other marketing item I question is why the almost competing DC streaming cartoon at the same time.  They likely viewed this as complimentary,  but is it hard R, and likely giving many of the same fans their Harley fix, and may diminish the need to see the film. It cover many of the same themes.  And frankly it is very funny and really well done.

That doesn't factor in as a distractor. If anything, it enhances the interest of a target audience.

If you go back read the marketing approach used to educate the general audience about Tony Stark/Iron Man, part of the approach to get them over the hump he wasn't a robot was releasing the Lionsgate DTV film and the Blur Studios Avengers spots. This way it makes the general audience that much more interested in seeing the film. The Harley Quinn TAS series on DCU is wildly popular due to the relationship between Harley and Ivy, the racy language and the nutty comedy. It reinforces what to expect from this part of the Worlds of DC.

Again, if you go research the folks posting videos and commentary on social media, they saw Birds of Prey. They go into great detail about the story and characters. Where's the $$ from those supposed 'theater visits'?

Edited by Bosco685
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

That doesn't factor in as a distractor. If anything, it enhances the interest of a target audience.

If you go back read the marketing approach used to educate the general audience about Tony Stark/Iron Man, part of the approach to get them over the hump he wasn't a robot was releasing the Lionsgate DTV film and the Blur Studios Avengers spots. This way it makes the general audience that much more interested in seeing the film. The Harley Quinn TAS series on DCU is wildly popular due to the relationship between Harley and Ivy, the racy language and the nutty comedy. It reinforces what to expect from this part of the Worlds of DC.

Again, if you go research the folks posting videos and commentary on social media, they saw Birds of Prey. They go into great detail about the story and characters. Where's the $$ from those supposed 'theater visits'?

If their are lots of people praising the film, why are they not spending more money on it? Either they do not care that much, they are not a group that spends money on this stuff, it is just such a small audience, or from a larger perspective WB missed the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, drotto said:

If their are lots of people praising the film, why are they not spending more money on it? Either they do not care that much, they are not a group that spends money on this stuff, it is just such a small audience, or from a larger perspective WB missed the target.

We are only three days into the movie's release. Too easy to parachute in rapidly and over-analyze failure rather quickly. I guess we will see

Chris Stuckmann gave it just above what he gave Captain Marvel (C) and assigned a C+ because he felt it was a rehashed plot. Though he said the film was fun.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, drotto said:

If their are lots of people praising the film, why are they not spending more money on it? Either they do not care that much, they are not a group that spends money on this stuff, it is just such a small audience, or from a larger perspective WB missed the target.

This.

The simplest explanation is people just didn't want to see the film -- and/or the trailers turned folks off.

Also, social media =/= actual moviegoers.

Studios learned this more than a decade ago with Snakes on a Plane, which *dominated* social media for more than six months, and even led to specific re-shoots in response to social media demand.

When it came out, no one went to see it. $13 million opening and ended up with just $62 million worldwide vs. its $33 million budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people felt it was gonna be some super woke lecture-film and that probably turned a lot of people off. By all accounts I’ve heard it didn’t get overly burdened by that and it was just a fun sorta silly violent swearfest. But the marketing and the social media presence did it no favors in that regard.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, zhamlau said:

I think a lot of people felt it was gonna be some super woke lecture-film and that probably turned a lot of people off. By all accounts I’ve heard it didn’t get overly burdened by that and it was just a fun sorta silly violent swearfest. But the marketing and the social media presence did it no favors in that regard.

Exactly what Deadline is now stating, along with the R-rating cutting out the young teenage girl fanatical over Harley Quinn.

Quote

While spinoffs in their grosses have traditionally shown to be down in their grosses from the core franchise (i.e., Hobbs & Shaw‘s $60M opening was off 39% from Fate of the Furious’ first weekend, and Fantastic Beasts was off 56% from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2‘s first weekend), for Birds of Prey to be off 76% from Suicide Squad‘s record August debut of $133.6M raises many questions on whether the movie should have been greenlit in the first place. What’s baffling here is that Margot Robbie made Suicide Squad fun with Harley Quinn, and arguably a commercial success. It stands to reason that a spinoff would be greenlit, and she was a force behind getting this movie off the ground.

 

Some in distribution circles question, though, whether the DC bad girl has a big enough following to warrant her own movie. Others in the field say in the spree of bad- chick films that have struggled at the box office or didn’t fully pop out (Atomic Blonde, The Rhythm Section, Alita: Battle Angel), Harley Quinn is a bad-, and then what? Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel exude heroism in their sell. What does Harley Quinn sell? Captain Marvel beat any deeper universe stigma first in her brand name, and second, the film was a bridge between the highest-grossing Avengers movies all time. And Harley isn’t a female Deadpool. The film, nor she, isn’t very funny, or riveting in their action.

 

As I mentioned below, Birds of Prey and Harley Quinn didn’t earn the immediate right to an R-rating like Logan spinoff X-Men, and Joker off Batman. Harley Quinn is beloved by young females off the animated TV show and the movie, and that entire audience is being sidelined this weekend because of Birds of Prey‘s R-rating (13-17-year-olds,despite enjoying the movie at 86%, couldn’t show up at 9%; on CinemaScore the under-18 crowd attended at 18% giving it an A-). Who came out to watch Birds or Prey? Why men over 25 at 33%, with guys overall repping 53% of all ticket buyers. Birds of Prey gets its R rating in F-bombs, not the ultra-violence or taboo that Deadpool and Joker exuded.

 

I hear the first cut tested really poorly, and that DC film boss Walter Hamada got Birds of Prey into shape of being the critically praised film that it is. As has been widely reported, there were re-shoots, common for those on a big event film like this.

 

However, what that did was throw a monkey wrench into marketing’s machine. I understand they should not be blamed here. They only had so much to work with, and materials weren’t ready for the studio to take down to San Diego Comic-Con in July. Despite such stunts as the in-theater trailer drop on It: Chapter Two, and taking Robbie and the film down to Brazil Comic-Con in Sao Paulo, the overall campaign lacked a sense of eventizing (hello, remember, when Hall H fans were posting the illegally taped version of the first Suicide Squad trailer more than a year before its release? That’s eventizing!) and that’s because marketing didn’t have a lot to work with off the movie like they did with Joker, Meg, etc. Remember all the clever marketing tricks and self-parodies that Fox pulled off on Deadpool? That wasn’t possible here.

 

Continues RelishMix, “Looking closer at primary social media metrics, Birds of Prey is challenged. Sure, the viral rate of 48:1 looks strong, particularly against seven total clips shared by Warner Bros. But, as we saw with Terminator: Dark Fate a couple months ago, many of these clips could be contributing to a larger social discussion, rather than genuine excitement to see the film. Also, the movie is behind, with 500 new Facebook Fans daily added to its official page, compared to the usual genre average closer to 4K. Finally, the film is earning about 70K view daily on YouTube across its top clips. But many of the earned clips are very low indeed compared to the four or five owned pacing in the hundreds of thousands.”

 

Last night, Birds of Prey over-indexed in the West and Southwest, as expected. Unfortunately, I’m told by distribution sources that these female-charged event pics are challenged in the divisive, conservative-leaning flyover stats where Birds of Prey under-indexed. Imax and PLF delivered 34% of the gross to date.

  • Audience ended up being 53% men (no wonder B+ CinemaScore)
  • Under 18 crowd gave it A- but they are the excluded crowd (R-rating)
  • Delayed ticket sales killed momentum
  • Social media presence is primarily Margot Robbie (21.3M followers)
  • Birds of Prey brand distracts from primary - Harley Quinn

Again, I'm not going to be shocked if it comes out many posting they saw the film and loved it so much are torrenting the film. Especially those restricted due to their age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was going to see this last night but instead decided to go get drunk on margaritas with friends - sounds like I made a good choice.

Edited by 1Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 1Cool said:

Was going to see this last night but instead decided to go get drunk on margaritas with friends - sounds like I made a good choice.

Watch the number of folks that will gravitate to this post. Guaranteed - it will not be shocking.

:insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Exactly what Deadline is now stating, along with the R-rating cutting out the young teenage girl fanatical over Harley Quinn.

  • Audience ended up being 53% men (no wonder B+ CinemaScore)
  • Under 18 crowd gave it A- but they are the excluded crowd (R-rating)
  • Delayed ticket sales killed momentum
  • Social media presence is primarily Margot Robbie (21.3M followers)
  • Birds of Prey brand distracts from primary - Harley Quinn

Again, I'm not going to be shocked if it comes out many posting they saw the film and loved it so much are torrenting the film. Especially those restricted due to their age.

The 53% being men is more telling then any other statistic.   It shows that despite being targeted to women, it is not attracting women.  The comic audience is majority men, regardless of branding, marketing, messaging etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, drotto said:

The 53% being men is more telling then any other statistic.   It shows that despite being targeted to women, it is not attracting women.  The comic audience is majority men, regardless of branding, marketing, messaging etc. 

And with certain films, even stronger.

MPAA04.PNG.e1d32101e8808af0ac576266ed634077.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The missed opportunity in assuming these comic book films are mainly for male audiences is using male-led CBM's as a baseline (even with Avengers: Endgame, Tony and Steve are key focus).

MPAA00.thumb.PNG.6c9ec005028bf6af817cb377d673eb28.PNG

51% of potential movie-goers are female based on combined industry ticket sales. Yet for comic book films the common demographic is 40%-45% female, 55%-60% male. A film like The Incredibles with strong and inspiring female characters seemed to break the mold on that trend.

And with Wonder Woman, a strong female lead with very positive characteristics, the results were very telling (48% male, 52% female).

MPAA06.PNG.126b15e6a17d13a4074f721616622453.PNG

Edited by Bosco685
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