Birds of Prey is the #1 Movie in the World

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

It's pretty easy to look up the Birds of Prey was the most successful movie of the weekend and is currently doing better at the boxoffice than any competitors

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/box-office/

so why is the message being thrown around that it's flopping and doing badly?

is it just that people want to see it flop so badly they'll ignore that it was a bad weekend for all movies and that Birds of Prey was the one people most went to see?

thoughts?

Avatar image for hyiena
hyiena

5500

Forum Posts

66

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Because it is under performing and for being a cbm not making 200 mil is pretty terrible.

Avatar image for emmafrostxmen
EmmaFrostXmen

6750

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By EmmaFrostXmen

The weekend was dry for movies overall tbh

The only way to tell if the movie will officially flop is by looking at Valentine’s Day ticket sales

Avatar image for socajunkie
SocaJunkie

10407

Forum Posts

1158

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

People aren’t saying it’s a flop, just underperforming, what with it making 20 million shy of its projected target so far. Additionally marketing/advertising budgets can often cost twice the production budget so taking both costs into account, it isn’t doing that well.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Let’s see, For a movie that needs over 200 million (generally around 250 million) to break even, Getting a 33 million NA and around 48 million INT take for a total of around 80 million WW is absolutely terrible. First, it’s the lowest opening for a DC movie since Jonah Hex. Second, between DCEU, FoXmen, and the MCU, it’s only above Dark Phoenix (domestically, and heck, it ain’t even larger than a majority of either DCEU or MCU movie’s second weekends) hell, comic book movies from the early 2000s like Daredevil had a better week, and that’s without even accounting for inflation. Third, movie could have a 2.5x multiplier from its opening, and it could still miss even 200 million.

So, you tell me, why people are saying it’s doing badly

Avatar image for im_late
im_late

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

And what's the competition? Dolittle? The movie is underperforming and unlike Shazam! it doesn't benefit from low expectations and good word of mouth.

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@im_late: bad boys 3 and 1917(the one that won an oscar) are it's competition, and it's still beating them

Avatar image for magian
Magian

154386

Forum Posts

925

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 11

It might not be a flop, yet anyway but it is definitely underperforming and to think that it isn't really any facing any particularly strong opposition by the other movies. At least Shazam was released between Captain Marvel and Endgame.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrnoital:

Uh, one movie is in its 3rd-4th week, and grossed more than BoP did for its first weekend, the other is a historical war film that got an expansion in early January, that ain’t much competition by this point for it

Avatar image for rdskns4eva
rdskns4eva

472

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

1. Whats its competetion? Jumanji? Sonic the Hedgehog?

2. It cost 100 mil to make. has it even made its money back yet?

3. Black Panther was released roughly around the same time and it made 1.2 billion or something crazy...IN JAN AND FEB

4. Deadpool was released in Feb and it made 700+ mil as an R rated movie

So basically people are calling a flop and/or under performing because it has no real blockbuster to compete against, its still got a ways to go just to break even, and two other comic book movies that were released in the Jan/Feb time frame absolutely crushed it at the box office.

Avatar image for purpledeadragon
PurpleDeaDragon

2386

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Wait until Sonic takes its place this week.

Avatar image for Penguin-Dust
Penguin-Dust

10891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

I wouldn’t underestimate Sonic this weekend. Kids love those cartoons on Netflix and Hulu. I don’t know how many actually play any of the games, but I am not convinced that’s important. I believe Detective Pikachu opened with $54 million domestic two weeks after Endgame. I am not saying Sonic will do those numbers, but it’s currently tracking similar to the live-action debut of our favorite electric mouse.

Avatar image for nathanthecynic
nathanthecynic

244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's a flop. Ghostbusters 2016 opened higher than Birds of Prey.

Avatar image for beatboks1
beatboks1

10325

Forum Posts

12952

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

Wow I love the miss information

Let’s see, For a movie that needs over 200 million (generally around 250 million) to break even, Getting a 33 million NA and around 48 million INT take for a total of around 80 million WW is absolutely terrible. First, it’s the lowest opening for a DC movie since Jonah Hex. Second, between DCEU, FoXmen, and the MCU, it’s only above Dark Phoenix (domestically, and heck, it ain’t even larger than a majority of either DCEU or MCU movie’s second weekends) hell, comic book movies from the early 2000s like Daredevil had a better week, and that’s without even accounting for inflation. Third, movie could have a 2.5x multiplier from its opening, and it could still miss even 200 million.

So, you tell me, why people are saying it’s doing badly

90% of movies only take 1/3 of their production costs domestically in the opening weekend. The final box office for all movies is nornally 4 or 5 times what the opening weekend is. The 33.5m that BoP took domesrically is on target to net a good profit.

The spent 91m making it which with tax credits came back to 75m and apparently only spent 20m marketing (which is a rediculously low marketing spend).

To break even they will only need a final box office office of 160m (given that they take about 60% of total box office, on opening weekend its 80%)

They should break even this weekend and have a few more weeks in theatres to profit 4b leaves.

John wick cost 30m had an opening weekend of 14.5m iy finished with 76m and they made 2 sequels

Aquaman cost 150m and only got an opening of 67m but finished with 1b+

@hyiena said:

Because it is under performing and for being a cbm not making 200 mil is pretty terrible.

Aquaman and Shazam had opening weekends under 100m and were box office successes. Aquaman was 67m (against its cost of 150m)and Shazam was 53m (cost 100m). Wonder woman only had a 103m opening (cost 160m). A lot of Marvel films had similar figures to her. Captain America 65 m Thor 65m Ant-Man 57 m all well under 100m (not 200m) opening weekend and all profitable. And all cost nearly twice what Birds of prey did to make CA cost 140m thir cost 150m Ant man cost 130m not the 76m final cost of BoP.

Then theres the fact that the box office isnt the final revenue. The Phantom (1996) cost 45m to make. Had an opening box office of 5m and made 17m (domestic and the same int)at the box office. It did so well on DVD that they considered making a cheaper sequel or a series to go direct to DVD in the 2008

People aren’t saying it’s a flop, just underperforming, what with it making 20 million shy of its projected target so far. Additionally marketing/advertising budgets can often cost twice the production budget so taking both costs into account, it isn’t doing that well.

WB when interviewed by Forbes a week prior to release projected 45m. So its not 20m shy of their projection, its 11.5m shy.

Avatar image for beatboks1
beatboks1

10325

Forum Posts

12952

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

1. Whats its competetion? Jumanji? Sonic the Hedgehog?

2. It cost 100 mil to make. has it even made its money back yet?

3. Black Panther was released roughly around the same time and it made 1.2 billion or something crazy...IN JAN AND FEB

4. Deadpool was released in Feb and it made 700+ mil as an R rated movie

So basically people are calling a flop and/or under performing because it has no real blockbuster to compete against, its still got a ways to go just to break even, and two other comic book movies that were released in the Jan/Feb time frame absolutely crushed it at the box office.

1. DOLITTLE (which has a much larger draw lead actor), Bad Boys for life, and those you mentioned.

2. It never cost 100m. It cost 76m after tax credits and they didnt even spend 20m on marketing so even with marketing it was below 100m. Usually they spend between half to equal the production costs on marketing a film, they didnt spend much at all on BOP. Shazam cost 85m to make and they soent almost 50m on marketing. Added to which NO MOVIE MAKES BACK ITS MONEY OPENING WEEKEND.

3. BP cost almost 3 times the anount to oroduce had 5 times the marketing budget and wasnt rated R removing a large part of the target audience. You are aware that the 33.5m opening domestic weekend makes it 14th highest R rated earner of February in all time right?

4. Thats is final world box office at the end of its run. Final box office is always at least 4 times the opening weekend more often than not 5 or 6 times. Aquaman ooened with a domestic 67m and finishedbwith over 1 billion. Its world wide opening was 81m so it should finish with around 320 to 400m

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By Mrnoital

@rdskns4eva: @mike_fowler: is funny how you kids didn't realize people don't often see movies the week before valentine's, cause they're about to spend a bunch of money on that date night

Acting like the best performing movie one week, will be suddenly making nothing on valentine's day is silly children

Avatar image for wolfrazer
Wolfrazer

17089

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Penguin-Dust: I expect Sonic to do well. Hell even I might go see it and I haven’t been to a movie theater in years. Looks like it’ll be fun, not just for kids but for everyone fans and non fans of the games/comics.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Mike_Fowler

@beatboks1: Ironic how you talk about misinformation yet you’re spreading it.

A) No. With tax credit, it came down to 82-84 million, and I don’t know where the hell you’re getting them having spent 20 million on marketing from. Reason that’s a “ridiculously low” marketing spend because it’s absurd. Even Shazam had a marketing budget of around 90-100 million. General rule of thumb to determine break even point is 2.5x the production budget, since the marketing budget is more often than not the same cost of the production budget

B) Where are you getting your sources? The production budget has been reported several times to be 82-84 million, with a recent variety article stating that executives of rival studios put that number closer to 100 million due to the elaborate sets and cgi utilised.

B) Aquaman had the advantage of also appealing greatly to foreign countries, in particular China. BOP has neither of those advantages. It can’t release in China, and it’s been the lowest opening weekend for numerous foreign countries in regards to the dceu

D) John Wick 1 ended with a total of 88.7 million, not 76 million, and even then, it made 14.5 million its opening weekend when it was projected to open around 7-8 million. Long story short, it surprised the individuals tag tracked it for good reason. BOP surprised, for the wrong reasons. Here’s a way of looking at it. From its opening to yesterday (6 days) BOP still hasn’t made the domestic earning that WB estimated it to earn (45 million) over its opening weekend.

Long story short, I don’t know where you’re getting your sources, but the break even point is reported to be closer to 250 million. And with there being no indicator of truly great legs (and Sonic being likely to take number one spot this weekend), whether or not it makes its break even point is unlikely at this point. You are talking as if this movie is about to make as much in its second weekend as it did in its first, and with all due respect, that’s absurd. As the reason I say that is obvious y’know, movies drop after its opening weekend

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By Mike_Fowler

@mrnoital:

First, don’t call me a kid, mate. It’s stupid as shit, condescending as hell, and frankly, tiring. Be better than that. You’re so focused on the “oh it’s number one” and not on the “lowest opening for a dc movie since Jonah hex, which came out around 10 years ago” and again, comic book movies from the early 2000s, such as daredevil, did better.

Second, let’s look at BOP’s numbers through this week, and look at where it’s likely gonna be at going into its second weekend. Let’s see, for its domestic (since that’s gonna be the most important aspect to it, considering it ain’t grossing that well in foreign countries) from yesterday, it grossed only 1.82 million for a total of 40.37 million. Day before, it grossed around 3.38 million. So looking at the best case scenario that it’ll earn at least 1 million from tonight, it’ll sit around 41-42 million going into its second weekend. Now put this into perspective, Warner Bros estimated this movie to make 45 million, as a conservative estimate, for its opening weekend. Domestic wise, it’s even been tracking lower than Dark Phoenix did domestically, hopefully though it won’t be that bad.

And answer, where, is there any indicator, that Birds of Prey is gonna be this film that all couples are looking to see for date night tomorrow when Sonic is the movie that’s looking to actually break out?

Avatar image for ashrym
Ashrym

586

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Box Office Mojo is reporting a production budget of $84.5M.

Based on what it's doing now it does look like it will going into Friday with a $42-43M domenstic and ~98M worldwide for the first week. The movie should make a profit with that opening on that budget.

Rotten Tomatoes has a fresh 79% critic rating and 80% audience rating.

Not meeting initial forecasting is not the same thing as flopping or failing. Forecasting is not an exact science in the first place and underperforming does not mean the project will not turn a profit. It's disappointing that the movie did not make $50M opening but it does look like people want to call the movie a fail before it's failed. Waiting for the weekly drops over the next two weeks will give a better idea.

Based on the scores any issues with turn out don't seem related to the quality of the movie anyway.

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@mike_fowler: lol yeah kid, that's the point, it was a slow weekend for every movie and that's not changing with sonic, you sounding like one of those people that said aquaman would flop cause it was competing against Mary Poppins, adult couples are not going to see a kids movie on their date night, maybe when you get an adult relationship you'll learn this

Again, the several days directly before valentine's are not the big days, it's going to be valentine's weekend that people actually go out

The fact that you can't see that tells me something

Avatar image for payneintheass
PayneInTheAss

14028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

so why is the message being thrown around that it's flopping and doing badly?

Cuz it it, pretty much.

Movie is ded

Avatar image for mickey-mouse
MICKEY-MOUSE

37062

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/11/media/birds-of-prey-title-change/index.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/harley-quinn-birds-of-prey-box-office-review-critics-margot-robbie-a9333916.html

Avatar image for mickey-mouse
MICKEY-MOUSE

37062

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

The trades and mass media largely decide to label something a flop or not...and movie math in general is very suspect...

Avatar image for beatboks1
beatboks1

10325

Forum Posts

12952

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

@mike_fowler:

The 84-86m was pre tax credit production.

https://m.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/DC-Extended-Universe

The numbers site doesnt includes tax credits or marketing spend

They got a tax credit of 12.6m

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thewrap.com/margot-robbies-birds-of-prey-receives-12-6-million-in-tax-credits/amp/

Bringing it down to just under 74-75m.

This is confirmed by the number of sites that report the production cost as 74 or 75m for example

https://www.google.com/amp/s/screenrant.com/birds-prey-movie-budget-dceu-comparison/amp/

That figure went up to 91m pre release with Marketing and is now reported as 97m (0n some sites 103m) with marketing for second week and nane changes (it will keep rising while it is in cinemas as its marketed each week os spent). A 6 to 12mm rise in marketing on a week where all marketing material has to be completely replaced world wide (because of a change of freakin name on it) should indicate just how little WB are spending on marketing this film.

Hell Forbes reported that if BoP did 300m domestic (150m less than WW) it would equal WW as an earner (which took 821m worldwide and were basing that on the projected openong of 55m even though they themselves in the same report said DC were projecting 45m

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/travisbean/2020/02/07/box-office-birds-of-prey-1-billion-dc/amp/

This movie Has not been advertised or an Anyway merchandised or marketed within my Marketplace. There has been no ads there wasn't even any coming soon posters in cinemas up until a few days prior. No mention on radio. No giveaways on radio, nothing.

Last Wednesday my kids asked me when birds of prey was supposed to hit cinemas. So I googled it, that was the only reason we even knew about it for the opening weekend in Australia. Considering I go to the cinemas with my kids on at least a fortnightly basis (weekly 30% of the time) and We hadn't even seen a preview at the movies, its marketing was pathetic.

Since the weekend I've spoken to 6 friends who are comic book fans to ask what they thought of the movie (all of whom have seen every CBM in its opening weekend), four of them Still didn't know it was even on in cinemas. The other two only knew because of the reports of its poor opening weekend so hadnt been to it because were only aware after its opening.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By Mike_Fowler

@mrnoital:

Again mate, lose the condescending attitude, either act like an actual adult, or don’t bother responding. Seriously, it’s childish as hell,

No, I was one of the people believing Aquaman would gross around 700-800 million near the time it released and was pleasantly surprised when it exceeded expectations and truly broke out. Felt Mary Poppins wouldn’t gross much when it’s a sequel to a movie, which, while popular, also came out in the 60s

And Valentine day is gonna be where couples would likely go out. The majority of the weekend, y’know, the subsequent two days (or three since this is a 3 day weekend), is gonna be primarily families going to the movies. And you wanna guess which family friendly movie that would’ve just came out they’d be going to see? It’s gonna be the movie bout the blue hedgehog. That leaves the awkward teens that aren’t actually “old enough” to see Birds of Prey due to its R rating unless their parents are with em (and if the parents are with em, likelihood is that they’re going to see a family friendly movie)

The likelihood of what BoP is gonna make (in regards to NA) this weekend (in regards to regular 2 day) is gonna likely be around 17-18 million, including the Monday, that’ll add hopefully another 7-million for a total of around 23-25 million. Me? I’m hoping the movie bounces back, cause I hate to see DC be so inconsistent box office wise being stuck between either 1 billion dollar films or sub 400 million films/a potential flop (in this case referring to a Justice League). Feels even worse when it feels like it’s been like this since late 2017

You’re making the claim that BoP is gonna be the “date movie” that people are gonna see and I ask, what actual indicator is there for that? At least a movie like Deadpool back in 2016 had some romance elements to it bout the guy trying to get the girl.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@beatboks1:

I suggest using figures reported from reliable sites in regards to production costs and things of the like from a more recent date. Deadline, Variety, TheHollywoodReporter, BusinessInsider, BoxOfficeMojo, all of them have the confirmed number/range at which the production budget for Birds of Prey turned out to be. And they all came out to 84 million. That tax credit they were given was all the way back in 2018, why would numbers not have updated it to reflect that when it’s been almost two full years? Same with Deadline, Variety, and all the other reliable insider sites

Then being completely terrible at marketing the film to your marketplace doesn’t mean they didn’t spend money on it, it Just means that they marketed it terribly in spite of the money they put in for it. For me? I always tended to see ads for it, whether that be on YouTube, on the radio while driving or the base I used to be at preparing to show it. It got more marketing than Shazam did, and that movie’s marketing budget was reported to be around 90-100 million.

Avatar image for im_late
im_late

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrnoital: 1917 has been screening since what? 24th January? Beating Bad Boys is literally nothing to be proud of. Look at the money has brought so far. It's really bad, given how much they will need to break even. And it doesn't have the excuse Shazam! could use, which is being squeezed in between Captain Marvel and another huge CBM.

Avatar image for socajunkie
SocaJunkie

10407

Forum Posts

1158

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By Mrnoital

@mike_fowler: you really think people are gonna be taking their kids on their valentine's date?

You do realize the reason it's a long weekend is cause Monday is FAMILY DAY, that's the day people will spend with their kids, valentine's weekend they ditch the kids with a babysitter and watch a movie with a swear

There fact that you think people want children with them on their valentine's dates tells me you are actually a child

Avatar image for the_stegman
the_stegman

40702

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#31 the_stegman  Moderator

@mrnoital: Hey man, no problems discussing this, put please chill on calling him a child or attacking him personally.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrnoital: honestly there’s no point in discussing this with you when you’re gonna constantly resort to personal attacks and insults mate. I don’t care how old you are, teens, 20s, 30s, no excuse to be as immature as you’re being

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By Mike_Fowler

@the_stegman: I appreciate it, but honestly, let him, the immaturity is there for people to see at the end of the day, and if he can’t discuss something without insulting somebody they’re doing it, that’s on him

Gone through worse crap in life than someone on the internet throwing out petty and immature insults

Avatar image for beatboks1
beatboks1

10325

Forum Posts

12952

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

@mike_fowler:

In may last year screenrant was reporting the same numbers as everyone else (87m).

On 6th June same week as the california tax credit announcement those number were amended to account for the tax credit (75m is 87-12, as per the links I gave you)

A few weeks prior to debut they were the only one reporting a figure of now being 91m (which now included the marketing till then)

On the 7th Feb they reporting the cost as 97m (after additional marketing)

Yesterday their site was listing the cost as 103m

Theirs is one of the only sites that the numbers seem to change to accomodate changes in expenditure while most other sites are still listing the figures feom pre tax credit announcement and marketing spend. Thats why I'm using their figures because you can see then align to iutside changes in information

Forbes latest report (with a second weekend domestic projection of 15m) is projecting it to have a similar return to that of Constsntine which had a final box office of 221m an opening of 29m and a cost of 76m. Presumably this means a final box office of 230m (ish). If they continue to spend on marketing at their current apparent rate (16m up to three weeks out, 6m thebtwo weeks priorbto debut and 6m the week of a major change to all marketing material with a name change we can expect 3-4m more a week. Lets be generous and say 5m that will finish them at about 128m total cost. Should end up with a final cinematic profit of around 12 to 15m. They then have additionalbrevenue from DVD, streaming and licencing.

So all these people saying they have to have a 200m opening to make a profit are wrong. I'm not saying its a huge success (its not that is plain) but it wont be unprofitable.

FTR when I posted a few days ago that theybshould makeba profit after this weekend that was expecting the usuall 15 to 29% drop on the ooening weekend which would mean ww box office of 140 to 150m. Projections now (mid way thru that weekend) are projectingnthat more like a 39-40m weekend ww than the 55 -65m one I would have expected

Avatar image for beatboks1
beatboks1

10325

Forum Posts

12952

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

@socajunkie: I'm not saying it isnt underperformimg, it most certainly is. I'm just saying thatbpeople who have said it didnt open with 200m as a superhero film are wrong. Lots of superhoro movies dont even have a 100m opening

Captain America, ant man, ant man and wasp, thor, thor dark world, doctor strange, aquaman, shazam all had opening under 100m.

Its very obvious that the R rating has hurt it a lot. Its not R rated here in Australia, its MA which is 15+ and is a rating that children under 15 can go to with a supervising adult. When I saw it on the weekend (with my 3 under 15 yr old kids) 50% (at least) of those in the theatre were teenage girls. I would say around a third of the other half were families like mine (young kids with an adult). If the same rating applied here most of the audience of that film wouldnt have been able to attend. I would imagine that a lot of those parants (like myself) wouldnt have gone if their kids couldnt because it woukd have upset the kids.

I thinknwhoever made that decission has a lot to answer for. Yes they are basing it on how Joker and Deadpool performed but those licenses dont appeal to the same demographic as Harley or birds of prey and an R rating simply excludes most of the demographic that they do.

Avatar image for mike_fowler
Mike_Fowler

5550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@beatboks1:

Thing is, Deadline DID make mention of the tax credit when reporting the production cost. An article posted on the 9th of this month specifically makes note that the production cost of the picture comes out to around 82 million after taking into account the tax credit. And between a site such as screenrant vs sites like deadline, boxofficepro, and variety, the latter 3 are generally more reliable. Especially when it DOES take into account the tax credit (and I don’t see why it wouldn’t). It’s funny that you mention Forbes though, their most recent article posted today about Birds of Prey states that its production cost was also 82 million. Even that screenrant article you mentioned that was posted on the 7 makes no mention of that total being from additional marketing costs, if it was, it would say total budget (including production and marketing costs) rather than just production budget (and yes, there is a difference between the two, it’s why the other 3 sites I mentioned always makes sure to separate them and why it’s generally 2.5x as a rule of thumb now)

Nobody said they had to make a 200m opening to make a profit. People are saying that opening with the numbers they did are bad when it’s goal/break even point is gonna be around that 250 million mark. Again, you’re underestimating the amount of money they put into the marketing. They put 120 million into marketing for Joker, around the same type of money for Godzilla KOTM, point being, WB put a lot of money into marketing their films, around the 100-125 million area. They’re not gonna skimp out on the P&A for the movie that’s a spinoff to a successful film of theirs that was focused on said film’s commonly noted bright spot.

Projections are like that now though primarily due to the fact that the movie hasn’t been making bangers in regards to the international scene heck, from what I remember it only got 44 million to the domestic’s 33 million over its opening weekend.

Avatar image for ninetoadclown
ninetoadclown

443

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The movie has multiple issues:

1. What few previews there were of the movie did not mention anyone but Harley, the rest of the crew were just around in the background.

2. Suicide Squad sucked and most people are going to assume this is the same.

3. They did not mention a single thing about the plot of the movie or who the villain was.

I know many people who are huge comic movie fans and only like 1 person even knew that Black Mask was in it at all, and nobody knew what the plot was about.

4. It is an r rated movie for no reason. It could have easily been PG-13. Most Harley fans that I know are either late 30s or older fans who knew her as a kid and followed her but won’t watch the movie because they know better, or mid teens angsty kids who can’t see it anyway.

5. They went for a director who has never done an action movie, never done a high budget film, and other than some Sundance movie that almost nobody has heard of was only hired because they went shopping for a female director they could get cheap.

6. Some people have only ever heard of the Birds Of Prey because of the horrible TV show that tanked.

7. Harley is not nearly the solo draw that the execs at DC think she is.

8. Without seeing their names, I would not even be able to tell you who the characters were except maybe Huntress.

9. Many of them were out of character.

10. The movie just all around sucked and people know it.

Avatar image for purpledeadragon
PurpleDeaDragon

2386

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

So...I guess Sonic is really taking the spot now.

Avatar image for warlockmage
Warlockmage

9701

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 3

So...I guess Sonic is really taking the spot now.

it is... in fact its about to decimate it

Avatar image for ashrym
Ashrym

586

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I enjoyed and the girl who went with me said she could not wait for the bluray to come out.

Haters used to point at low critic scores to prove "bad movie" ignoring audience scores when it came to DCEU. Can't even do that in this case. If you say it was bad your opinion is the minority, not the fact.

I did my own quick spreadsheet the other day and ~$220 seems about right barring strong legs but it's still too early to tell. How much money WB spent on marketting would influence the profit but has no relevance to the quality of the film.

When sales are high on a DC movie people try to claim low critic scores demonstrate fans will see a bad movie regardless of the audience score and now that's suddenly no longer true AND the critic score is decent to go with the audience score. Now lower sales indicates a bad movie despite both scores?

It seems far more likely a segment of the posters will insist it's bad because it's DC no matter what evidence to the contrary demonstrates.

Avatar image for mrnoital
Mrnoital

8860

Forum Posts

3547

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#41  Edited By Mrnoital

@beatboks1: that's an interesting point about the rating for you as 15 and up

here in Canada is 14A which is 14 and up

the American R rating is probably seen by teens all over the world

Avatar image for socajunkie
SocaJunkie

10407

Forum Posts

1158

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@beatboks1: I mean, I’m one of the few who didn’t say it was a flop so that rant should have been targeted at somebody else tbh