Connect with us

Entertainment

‘Birds of Prey’ Renamed After Disappointing Box Office Opening

Published

on

  • After a less than stellar opening weekend, Birds of Prey will be renamed in order to boost its SEO quality. 
  • Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) will now be called Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey so that audiences can clearly tell it’s a Harley Quinn film when searching for it online. 
  • The new title is intended to only be used for its theatrical run.
  • Compared to other DC films, it had a poor opening weekend, with some blaming the name, R-rating, and release date as potential reasons as to why.
  • The film also received criticism from some for not featuring its cast in “sexy” enough attire.

Birds of Prey’s Name Change

After bringing in a disappointing opening box office haul on its opening weekend, Birds of Prey will be getting a search-friendly name change. 

The Harley Quinn-centered film originally touted the lengthy title of Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn). Now, movie theaters will list it simply as Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. 

This comes after the Margot Robbie-led picture brought in $33 million domestically during its opening weekend, much lower than Warner Brothers’ projections of $45 million. A representative for Warner Bros. told The Verge that the name change is to specifically enhance “search expansion for ticket sites.”

The move is essentially aimed at making the name of the film more user and SEO-friendly for moviegoers looking to see the new Harley Quinn project by making it clear that the film is about the famous character. Now, rather than having her name buried at the end of a parenthetical, it’s the first thing potential audiences will see. 

The change will likely not be permanent, though. Once the movie makes its way to DVD and streaming, it could still be called Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn). As least for now, Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey is intended to last only as long as its theater run.

DC Box Office Hauls

In terms of Birds of Prey’s box office numbers, DC and Warner Bros. have reason to be disappointed. Even though it topped the weekend box office and brought in under $80 million worldwide, which is just five million shy of its budget, the bar is set high for films of this nature. Some pictures might be pleased with a $33 million domestic debut, however, superhero– or in this case, supervillain films– typically do better. 

DC’s recent film Joker became the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time, making it past the billion-dollar benchmark by the end of its run. The Oscar-winning Joaquin Phoenix project also had a smaller budget than Birds of Prey and pulled in three times the money in the United States on its opening weekend. Other big movies like Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman ended up raking in over $100 million on their opening weekends. 

Potential Factors for Low Box Office

This all leads to the larger question at hand: Why is Birds of Prey not getting the attention that DC and Warner Bros. were hoping for? From the critics’ side, the movie is getting a good amount of praise. On Rotten Tomatoes, it boasts an 80% rating with an audience score of 81%.

The issue of the name is one that Warner Bros. is already addressing. Box office analyst Jeff Book told Variety that “not naming [the film] ‘Harley Quinn’ was a huge misfire.”

“It was a niche comic-book movie,” Bock later added. “Warner Bros. keeps having to learn these lessons.”

Birds of Prey would not be the first comic book movie to deal with titling issues potentially impacting its box office haul. In its early marketing, Dark Phoenix rarely attached the X-Men brand to it in its title. Matched by poor reviews, the movie also brought in a lackluster amount of cash

It is unlikely that this is the only factor standing in Harley Quinn’s way. The films R-rating does it no favors, as this isolates it from young girls who might be a fan of the anti-heroine. Still, Joker broke records with an R-rating, meaning DC likely still had high hopes.

What Birds of Prey did have to face was a February opening, which can be a dry month as far as box office earnings. Comic book movies, however, do have a good record of breaking that mold. Black Panther broke financial records with a February release. Logan and Deadpool, both of which also had the burden of an R-rating, were massive successes in the month.

Female-Led Comic Book Movies

Some have pointed to the general backlash female-led comic book movies usually face upon their release. This trend extends back to Wonder Woman in 2017 when mainly male fans were upset the film was, for certain showtimes, being screened to all-female audiences. When Captain Marvel came out in 2019, again mainly male fans were upset by feminist messaging used by Brie Larson leading to its release. Some even said they would boycott the movie because of it. 

Both those movies did well, so to say their earnings were impacted would be hard. It is worth noting, though, because Birds of Prey is following suit and has gender-based criticism of its own. Some users believed the movie was not sexy enough for a Harley Quinn standalone film.

“They’ve removed any sex appeal these characters had to appeal to a female ‘girl power audience instead of the core male comic book audience,” one Twitter user wrote in a now-viral tweet before the film’s release. “They literally don’t know who they’re making this movie for.”

The idea that the film is for a “core male comic book audience” is only partially true. According to Variety, in its opening weekend, 54% of viewers were male. So while the theaters were filled slightly more by men, it was too close to a 50/50 split to state that the audience was “core” male. 

This comment received a lot of backlash online. Some argued that it degrades women to being worth nothing more than their looks, while others argued that the characters in the film did have appeal and were attractive. 

One of Birds of Prey’s producers, Sue Kroll ended up responding to this. 

“I read that and I thought, ‘Oh my God. That’s so asinine’” she said.

“When you look at the comics, you see these women in there, it’s always very tight clothing, short shorts, boobs pushed up. It’s always very graphic in that way. And we were having none of that,” she added. “But I think they all look beautiful and sexy, and if you look at [Black Canary, played by Jurnee Smollett-Bell] and her costumes, she’s wearing a bustier [bust-ear] but of a different kind. That’s not sexy? She’s not sexy in the club? You bet she is. She’s gorgeous. That’s nuts.”

As was the case with Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman, it’s hard to tell if this kind of backlash affected Birds of Prey in terms of revenue. Still, it does show that female-led comic films usually do have a battle to fight every time they come out.

Because of these narratives around it, many are praising Birds of Prey online in hopes that people will see it and save it from its current box office situation. 

As the movie enters the weekend under the Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey title, it will face new competition. The weekend encompasses both President’s Day and Valentine’s Day, which could help fill theaters. But movies like Sonic the Hedgehog, The Photograph, Downhill, and Blumhouse’s Fantasy Island will also be opening, meaning more new films could knock it from the top box office spot. 

See what others are saying: (Variety) (The Verge) (Entertainment Weekly)

Entertainment

Britney Spears Asks For Privacy After Fans Called Cops to Conduct a Wellness Check on Her

Published

on

Fans said they were concerned after the singer deleted her Instagram account.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was updated to include a statement from Britney Spears


Fans Call 911

Britney Spears said her fans “went a little too far” after some called the police to conduct a wellness check on her. 

The fans, many fueled by online conspiracy theories, were concerned about Spears because she deleted her Instagram account. While this is something the singer has done multiple times in the past, her fans thought she had left secret signals in her last post suggesting she needed help.

Some even posted videos of them calling emergency services on TikTok, a platform that is full of conspiracy videos about Spears. 

“I love and adore my fans but this time things went a little too far and my privacy was invaded,” Spears wrote in a statement on Thursday, citing “prank phone calls” that were made to police.

According to Spears, officers did not enter her home because once they got to her gate, they “quickly realized there was no issue and left immediately.”

“This felt like I was being gaslit and bullied once the incident made it to the news and being portrayed once again in a poor and unfair light by the media,” Spears continued. “During this time in my life, I truly hope the public and my fans who I care so much about can respect my privacy moving forward.”

On Wednesday, a spokesperson for Ventura County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to Page Six that the department “did get calls into our dispatch” but added there was no reason to believe that Spears was “in any kind of harm or any kind of danger.”

That spokesperson declined to say if officials contacted Spears or conducted a wellness check, citing privacy and public trust issues.

The Prominence of Britney Spears Conspiracies 

Just over a year has passed since Spears was freed from a highly restrictive conservatorship that controlled her life and finances for 13 years. Throughout the conservatorship, fans tried to use the pop icon’s social media to pick up clues that she was secretly struggling. She did not publicly speak about the conservatorship until the summer of 2021. 

Now that she has her freedom, fans are still reading heavily into her posts. Some believe there are hidden messages in her captions and in the gestures she does while dancing. Others think she is dead, missing, or hiding and that a body double is being used in her posts. Some are so concerned that they are coordinating a mass effort to pressure the Los Angeles Times into investigating Spears’ whereabouts and safety. 

In the last several years, many have reflected on Spears’ early days in the spotlight and the cruel ways she was harassed and targeted by paparazzi, news outlets, and culture at large. Often the punchline to a joke throughout the 2000s, many now sympathize with Spears, who was forced to endure heavy public scrutiny at a young age. Documentaries like “Framing Britney Spears” prompted many to see Spears as a victim of abusive media tactics, not the “crazy” woman tabloids painted her to be. 

Many are now concerned that fans are only going to subject Spears to a new onslaught of harassment by calling the police to her house. Even if the conspiracy theories are technically well-intentioned and often come from a place of concern, some believe they will jumpstart a media frenzy that could harm Spears’ mental well-being.

See what others are saying: (Page Six) (Jezebel) (TMZ)

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Razzies Apologize For Nominating 12-Year-Old, Adopt Age Rules For Future Nominations

Published

on

The group’s founder said the Razzies regret “any hurt” the young actress may have “experienced as a result of our choices.”


Razzies Face Backlash

The Razzie Awards revoked its “insensitive” nomination of 12-year-old Ryan Kiera Armstrong and added new guidelines banning child performers from being nominated in the future. 

The Razzies, which award the year’s worst movies, included Armstrong in its “Worst Actress” lineup for her role in “Firestarter.” Bryce Dallas Howard, Diane Keaton, Kaya Scodelario, and Alicia Silverstone were also nominated in the category.

Armstrong starred alongside Zac Efron in “Firestarter,” an adaptation of Stephen King’s novel of the same name. The picture received a 10% rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes. 

While the film was broadly panned, many thought it was a bridge too far to nominate a child for a bad acting award.

“The Razzies are already mean-spirited & classless, but to nominate a kid is just repulsive & wrong,” child star Julian Hilliard, best known for his work in “WandaVision,” tweeted. “Why put a kid at risk of increased bullying or worse? Be better.”

Actor and podcast host Brandon Hardesty said the nomination was “completely ignorant and cynical.”

“They have no clue what this can do to a child actress who probably considered her starring role in FIRESTARTER as a high point in her life,” he wrote. 

“That girl was the best part of that mess of a movie,” film critic Shannon McGrew tweeted. “And on top of that, no kid should ever be nominated for an award that punches down on them.”

Nomination Revoked

Razzies founder John Wilson addressed the backlash in a statement to the press on Wednesday, calling the criticism “valid.”

“Sometimes, you do things without thinking, Then you are called out for it. Then you get it,” Wilson said. “It’s why the Razzies were created in the first place.”

“We have removed Armstrong’s name from the Final Ballot that our members will cast next month,” he continued. “We also believe a public apology is owed Ms. Armstrong, and wish to say we regret any hurt she experienced as a result of our choices.”

In addition to removing Armstrong’s nomination, The Razzies is now adopting “a Voting Guideline precluding any performer or film-maker under 18 years of age from being considered” for awards. 

“Since our motto is ‘Own Your Bad,’ we realize that we ourselves must also live up to it,” the statement closed.

While Armstrong will be the last child to nab a Razzie nomination, she was far from the first. Jake Lloyd made the list for his turn as young Anakin Skywalker in “Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace.” Gary Coleman and Macaulay Culkin also got nominations as teenagers.

See what others are saying: (Deadline) (The Hollywood Reporter) (People)

Continue Reading

Entertainment

SeatGeek CEO Calls to Break up Ticketmaster and Live Nation in Senate Hearing Following Taylor Swift Debacle

Published

on

“A lack of robust competition in our industry meaningfully stunts innovation, and consumers are who suffer,” Jack Groetzinger said.


Monopoly Concerns

Two months after technical difficulties blocked countless Taylor Swift fans from snagging seats to her tour, a bipartisan group of Senators held a hearing to re-examine the merger between Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

The two entertainment giants merged in 2010. Jack Groetzinger, the CEO of the rival ticket-selling platform SeatGeek, said during Tuesday’s hearing that the two need to be broken up to benefit consumers. 

“One, a lack of robust competition in our industry meaningfully stunts innovation, and consumers are who suffer,” he said. “Two, venues fear losing Live Nation concerts if they don’t use Ticketmaster, and three, the only way to restore competition in this industry is to break up Ticketmaster and Live Nation.” 

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) echoed concerns about the lack of competition, arguing that Live Nation is the “definition of monopoly.”

“Live Nation is so powerful that it doesn’t even need to exert pressure, it doesn’t need to threaten, because people just fall in line,” she said. 

The Eras Tour Debacle

Ticketmaster has long been accused of price-gouging and complicating the ticket-buying process. Those issues made international headlines in November during the presale for Swift’s highly anticipated Era’s Tour. 

Millions of fans who attempted to enter Ticketmaster’s virtual queue walked away empty-handed after experiencing crashes, price inflation, and a myriad of other issues. 

According to Ticketmaster, the incredibly high demand, coupled with an onslaught of bot attacks, forced the platform to slow sales down. After the company delayed sales in certain cities and canceled the general sale altogether, Swift called the ordeal “excruciating.”

“We asked them, multiple times, if they could handle this kind of demand and we were assured they could,” she wrote on Instagram in November. 

The controversy prompted many to accuse Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation, of holding a monopoly over the concert and live events industry. The U.S. Justice Department has opened an antitrust investigation into the entertainment giant. 

Ticketmaster Takes Heat

Ticketmaster has repeatedly tried to blame a number of factors for the failed Swift presale, even at one point suggesting the sale was too popular because the “Anti-Hero” singer waited so long to tour. 

“May I suggest, respectfully, that Ticketmaster ought to look in the mirror and say, ‘I’m the problem, it’s me,’” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said during the hearing. 

Still, the company continued to point the finger at record-breaking bot attacks. 

“We knew bots would attack at onsale and planned accordingly. We were then hit with three times the amount of bot traffic that we’d ever experienced,” Live Nation CFO Joe Berchtold said on Capitol Hill. 

“The attack requires [us] to slow down and even pause our sales. This is what led to a terrible consumer experience we deeply regret. We apologize to the fans, we apologize to Miss Swift, we need to do better and we will do better,” he continued. 

Others present at the hearing were not happy with Live Nation’s bot defense. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) said that she has worked with companies in a variety of industries that deal with bots without these issues. 

“You know what, they get bot attacks every single day by the thousands. By the thousands,” she said. “And they have figured it out, but you guys haven’t? This is unbelievable.” 

“You can’t blame bots for what happened to Taylor Swift,” JAM Productions CEO Jerry Mickelson added. “There’s more to that story that you’re not hearing.”

According to Mickelson, Ticketmaster can actually stand to benefit from glitchy sales on its platform. 

“The process, when it’s slowed down, increases the money that Ticketmaster makes because they make money on fees and as the ticket prices go up due to dynamically priced tickets, Ticketmaster makes more off that,” he claimed. “So it’s to their advantage to slow the process down.”

Outrage against Ticketmaster has become so widespread that Sen. Blumenthal said the company was responsible for “an absolutely stunning achievement.” 

“You have brought together Republicans and Democrats in an absolutely unified cause.”

See what others are saying: (Axios) (USA Today) (New York Times)

Continue Reading