Amount

Birds of Prey Review

21 Feb 2020 16:21 #66880 by TwiceOnThursdays
Replied by TwiceOnThursdays on topic Birds of Prey Review

kikass2014 wrote:

I do believe that some of the "Woke" comments from the actors and film critics turned people off, especially male comic book fans.


I think this is one of those rare occasions where we totally agree JD :)  The stars must have aligned :P 

You are right, and that was my main contention in my original post. 

 It's kind of funny that "Woke twitter" loved this movie and it underperformed (I won't use the term "flopped" because the budget was so low that it will turn a profit) at the box office but hated Joker and it became the most profitable CBM of all time.


Just like "comic-book fans" alone are not enough to single-handedly support these comic-book movies, the same is true for "woke" or SJWs.  There is simply no where near enough of them (less then comic-book fans for sure).  Again you are correct in saying Hollywood needs to learn a lesson.  That lesson being, the audience you have been trying to pander to, doesn't exist.

Make good films and people will go watch them (Joker being a good example you highlighted).

Peace.

/K


This is pretty spot on.  Neither demographic can make a $200M movie work.

"Make good films and people will go watch them."

Now the arguments is always over HOW to do that, but in the end, if you focus on what you want (or rather for most artists NEED) to make and why, then that's the path to making good things. Sometimes that also makes money.  But I don't think you can try to make money and end up making great art, and conversely, you probably also won't make that much money either.  It's the shortest path to creative failure. ;-)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 Feb 2020 20:44 - 21 Feb 2020 20:48 #66882 by kikass2014
Replied by kikass2014 on topic Birds of Prey Review

Charlie's Angels -- that never connected with anyone for any reason. And most of the Charlies Angel's "woke" comments seemed to happen *after* it flopped.

I know i'm disconnected but here is pretty much the only place I've heard of the interview comments of Robbie and McGregor -- aside from echo chambers that pre-hated the movie and were digging up any reason to attack it.


Charlie's  Angels:  (Prior to release)

variety.com/2018/film/news/kristen-stewa...angels-2-1202916462/

www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a2323...angels-woke-version/

Two large magazines that I imagine fair number of people read.

Terminator: Dark Fate: (Prior to release)

variety.com/2019/film/features/director-...omic-con-1203262797/

www.indiewire.com/2019/07/tim-miller-ter...t-trolls-1202156922/


Birds of Prey (Prior to release):

www.indiewire.com/2019/10/birds-of-prey-...ey-quinn-1202180655/
metro.co.uk/2020/01/30/bird-preys-ewan-m...d-misogyny-12151309/
www.cinemablend.com/news/2481979/ewan-mc...prey-a-feminist-film
www.slashfilm.com/birds-of-prey-feminist-ewan-mcgregor/

These are all fairly well know sites.  Metro is a newspaper in the UK.   Mcgregor was even saying this on that talk show with Jimmy Fallon (i don't live in the US so not sure of the exact name).

These comments weren't just in "passing" as you seem to think.  I concede the fact that you may not have come across them, but that doesn't mean a lot (or shall we agree, a significant number) of people didn't read or hear them.  As such, my position stands that the "woke" marketing was more of a factor then the bad trailers.  We will just have to agree to disagree on this :)

Also, I just love how  a movie can be in a top 20 of all time box office earner and be a "flop". I get it, it made $400M less than it feels like it should .... and that feels like a flop.  But TOP 20 GROSSING MOVIE OF ALL TIME.  Movie execs will KILL for a flop like that 

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.


That's not what Disney would think at all.  Why?  Because firstly, that $1 billion is total gross.  You need to minus at least 30% (cinemas share) off that to get the profit margin.  Secondly, its not just box office that was affected.  With SW, there is (or at least use to be) a large fan base that bought, not only tickets to the film but - Merchandise.

- books, figures, pez dispensers, you name it, if it had a SW sticker on it fans bought it.

Merchandise sales for this new trilogy are down.  And proceeded to get lower with each installment.  Thats another couple billion lost there.  Also, Galaxy's Edge.  The new ride at Disneyland that Disney probably spent a fair buck on.  Got hardly any attention at launch.  More millions lost there.

When dealing with the largest franchise in the world, you need to look at the whole picture when determining if something is a hit or a flop.  Just because its in the "top 20 films of all time", don't mean squat. In the world of business, Rise of Skywalker was a flop.  Especially with the budget it had, which must have been close to $400 million, including marketing.

CYA = Cover Your Ass. It's execs making up bullshit reasons why they aren't idiots and really someone else is to blame.  Look somewhere else for the reasons for failure. BTW, can I still have my huge bonus?


Fair enough :)  Now I know what CYA means :)  And I do agree with you, its a smoke screen for sure.  No argument there :)

Peace.

/K
Last edit: 21 Feb 2020 20:48 by kikass2014.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 Feb 2020 22:44 #66883 by TwiceOnThursdays
Replied by TwiceOnThursdays on topic Birds of Prey Review

kikass2014 wrote:

Charlie's Angels -- that never connected with anyone for any reason. And most of the Charlies Angel's "woke" comments seemed to happen *after* it flopped.

I know i'm disconnected but here is pretty much the only place I've heard of the interview comments of Robbie and McGregor -- aside from echo chambers that pre-hated the movie and were digging up any reason to attack it

Terminator: Dark Fate: (Prior to release)

variety.com/2019/film/features/director-...omic-con-1203262797/

www.indiewire.com/2019/07/tim-miller-ter...t-trolls-1202156922/


I'm going to single these out.

One, they are the same comment.  Two, it's a comment in reaction to people losing shit over initial images of the film and him commenting on them.  Some people lost their shit, and he responded.  If this is what you think it's all about, I'm going to double down on  "you have to be a snowflake to get upset over these comments" (and therefore were probably already upset by the movie) -- as some were just by seeing three powerful women in a photo (* context from both articles).

If that statement really made people not see the movie, I'd be REALLY Surprised.



kikass2014 wrote: Birds of Prey (Prior to release):

www.indiewire.com/2019/10/birds-of-prey-...ey-quinn-1202180655/


So I read that.  Were you offended?  Was any man actually offended?  It didn't move me one way or another. I mean, he's playing the bad guy, and he's a bad guy, and guess what, he's a bad guy.  He says the movie is "really smart" and he likes how it brings up those topics w/o beating them to death.

I mean, here's the quote:

 McGregor went on to say, “Misogynists in movies are often extreme: They rape, they beat women… and it is legitimate to represent people like that, because they exist and they are obviously the worst. But in the ‘Birds of Prey’ dialogues, there is always a hint of everyday misogyny, of those things you say as a man you do not even realize.”


More directly, McGregor said that the film takes on “mansplaining… and it’s in the script in a very subtle way. I found that brilliant.”

He says "it's not extreme like other movies" .. .. and 'it's in the script in a subtle way. I found that brilliant".     As in, I take this as "this is a movie that while it addresses the topic, isn't going to beat me in the face with it."  It doesn't make me think the movie is designed to be horrible to men and drive me away ... but it's probably going to make fun of some men (maybe even me).   Meh. I'm not bothered by that.  I mean, I saw 9-5 which makes BoP look tame on that front, and it's hilarious. 

Again, I'm going to go "who was so upset at this that they'd be angry?"  Or even "who is so upset about this that it would be the real reason they didn't see the movie"?

metro.co.uk/2020/01/30/bird-preys-ewan-m...d-misogyny-12151309/

This one is more hard core, and I could see how you'd start to make some people go "he doesn't sound like he's talking about a movie I want to see".  But again, meh. One actor, I think most people toss that into the hopper.  When they see the trailer they might connect the two, "oh that's the movie that McGregor guy was talking about that I wasn't sure i wanted to see ...." WHILE WATCHING THE TRAILER which if it did it's job right gets the chance to win you over.  It might be now working at a minus ... but it's still speaking to you in a louder voice.

www.cinemablend.com/news/2481979/ewan-mc...prey-a-feminist-film
www.slashfilm.com/birds-of-prey-feminist-ewan-mcgregor/

Same quotes as the first one.  

kikass2014 wrote:
These are all fairly well know sites.  Metro is a newspaper in the UK.   Mcgregor was even saying this on that talk show with Jimmy Fallon (i don't live in the US so not sure of the exact name).





Well known sites that aren't read by 100% of movie goers...OTH the only movie goers who don't watch trailers IMHO are the ones who don't watch trailers for movies they are already going to to see.   i.e. most everyone who might have gone to see BoP probably saw the trailer, not everyone read those comments/watched an interview.  Sure those sources are not NOTHING, but ... you want me to believe it's the PRIMARY method.

Fallon is the tonight show. I don't know of anyone who pays any attention to it. But, I haven't looked at the ratings. I just know that clips are rarely passed around about it compared to Conan, Kimmel, Colbert and the rest.  So, yeah, people see it, but if the comments are in line with those above, I still don't see what the hell you're talking about. (As an aside: As an American, American talk shows are shit compared to Graham Norton.  Booze + other stars on the couch == a better talk show.)

And I'll be blunt: Are conservative men really such Snowflakes?   I mean I must admit, I don't really fit into the political landscape anywhere and I do go around looking and pretty much the edge of both sides is a giant dumpster fire, but this is just embarrassing if men really didn't go see the movie due to what MacGregor said.



kikass2014 wrote: These comments weren't just in "passing" as you seem to think.  I concede the fact that you may not have come across them, but that doesn't mean a lot (or shall we agree, a significant number) of people didn't read or hear them.  As such, my position stands that the "woke" marketing was more of a factor then the bad trailers.  We will just have to agree to disagree on this :)
 


Almost Everyone who thought about seeing/not seeing this movie saw the trailer/commercial ad about the movie.

Everyone who thought about seeing the movie didn't see mild "woke" comments made by one actor in the film.  (I'm sure Robbie and the others made their fair share too, but even summing that up the point still stands)

I mean, find me one person who ONLY read those comments (and cared and remembered them) and did not see the trailer.   OTH, the trailer is going to be seen by people considering to go see movies (as well as the movie poster which is really just a reminder "I exist" and "hey, maybe you should go watch the trailer later because, I exist!").  Commercials are a mix, just blips enough to _hopefully_ get you to see the movie or go watch the trailer.

If you think "woke comments" > "advertising" then, you might be right but you're saying that Advertising is totally worthless.  But, since if that's true no one would be paying attention to those media sources either....

For instance, if you wanted Fallon, you probably saw a commercial for the movie in addition to seeing the McGregor interview (and the interview probably included a clip) -- and even if you regularly watch Fallon, you might have missed that... and the commercial probably played multiple times....

So... I can accept it's a bigger factor to people than I admit.  Trying to claim this is greater than the trailers/normal advertising?  Nope.  Not even close. In fact, your statement is borderline delusional to me.

My point is: just because you feel it to be true doesn't make it so.

I feel things, but if you noticed when I claimed "comic book geeks don't make a movie a success" -- I went out and posted sales of comic books to prove why I thought that way, and ran an estimate on how that affected box office results (probably $20-$50M if you are being generous).  So, that $1 Billion from Marvel movies and Joker: that gives me pretty good faith that "comic book geeks did not cause that" (not the same group as "people who like MCU movies").  Also-- this is pretty much counter to what you hear in most places, and AFIK i've not even READ someone saying that before, but I don't take what i'm told and I happen to know how much comic book sales are.  Geeks want to be important and powerful. And I don't mean to discount the World of Mouth and geek excitement and power (etc) -- but opening night for Marvel movies opening  > comic book geeks could possibly do (even w/ friends) ... so even the word of mouth for those movies is not only due to comic geeks.  Sure, their effect is not nothing....and it's probably even "significant" -- but it's only a factor.   I didn't try to make you believe that without my reasoning and evidence, and i'm absolutely open to someone going "but you are forgetting X and Y and therefore the "comic book geek #'s could be $300M and that counts for opening night and therefore they're most of Word of Mouth and .."    (As I'm sure that's at  true to some extent.  But also, since part of the idea was "people who know who Cassandra Cain were not why this movie failed" pretty much lines up to "someone who reads comics", and it'll fit into my analysis fairly well.)

My entire argument here is "People not connecting with the trailer/commercials adequately explains why they don't go see a movie".   This is hardly trying to move the world or claim the moon is falling.  If you want me to change my mind, you're the one saying some other factor ("Woke Marketing") is greater ... and you need to provide SOMETHING (other than it exists) to make me think the obvious simple explanation isn't true.

And my point (from above) is that often "obvious simple explanations" are often WRONG, but to support that claim you need to back it up.

And the gimme is "woke marketing" is appleid to movies that were "Woke Produced" and those movies don't connect with people .... but that's actually not what you're saying ... if you mean to say that, SAY THAT, and THAT I can easily accept.  Because it's a pretty shitty way to make art.  You're exact quote is "As such, my position stands that the "woke" marketing was more of a factor then the bad trailers."

And my position is that's a big ask to make me believe that w/o supporting evidence.  And "It exists" isn't going to do it.

A list of bad movies didn't do well at the box office.  Film at 11!  Let's make up a reason about woke marketing to pin this on, instead of the simple reason of "bad movies don't make money".

I think it's just that simple: and you are right, we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

I'm also pretty sure that we are now at the limit of beating the dead horse and I should probably shut up. ;-)

 

kikass2014 wrote: Peace.

/K


Indeed.
The following user(s) said Thank You: kikass2014

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 Feb 2020 23:48 #66885 by kikass2014
Replied by kikass2014 on topic Birds of Prey Review

I think it's just that simple: and you are right, we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

I'm also pretty sure that we are now at the limit of beating the dead horse and I should probably shut up

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.


You and me as well :P 

We'll agree to disagree on this :)

Peace.

/K

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
23 Feb 2020 18:03 #66911 by TwiceOnThursdays
Replied by TwiceOnThursdays on topic Birds of Prey Review

kikass2014 wrote:

I think it's just that simple: and you are right, we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

I'm also pretty sure that we are now at the limit of beating the dead horse and I should probably shut up

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.

You and me as well :P 

We'll agree to disagree on this :)

Peace.

/K


Agreed.   :-)

Good conversation though, thanks.
The following user(s) said Thank You: kikass2014

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Time to create page: 0.054 seconds