Thursday, December 13, 2018 • Morning Edition • "Putting the yellow back into journalism."

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!

Advertisement

'Birds of Prey' Movie Line-Up Revealed!!

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

User avatar

Draco x

Not a Kardashian

Postby Draco x » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:31 pm

achilles wrote:
Image

There's quite a bit of straw there. I am talking about Robbie's being the star of a movie her character clearly doesn't belong in. I'm also talking about giving her such control over the movie based on....nothing really. They have no idea how popular her character was, as she was part of an enemble cast with at least two more famous actors in the bunch, one of whom was a more likely draw to put butts in seats on opening night.

I'm also not talking about movies in general as you claim, but rather THIS movie in particular, and WB's overall strategy with respect to the DCEU movies. Robbie, from what I've seen of her is a decent actress, not stunningly good, but not bad either, probably better than Gal Gadot. She has some charisma, but she's far from the RDJ or Chris Reeve level. And WB is CLEARY trying to both recover from earlier missteps in the DCEU, and launch Harley as a franchise....that last again based on about the same level of nothingness as their pathetic attempts to launch Cyborg as a franchise.

And in doing so, they're likely to kill what actually might have been a franchise for them, BoP.

If they were so set on Harley, they should have launched her with a solo film first, to better judge viewer interest and see if there was any there there. And if tea leaves, unicorn farts or whatever convinced them that Harley was the breakout star of SS and thus deserved another movie, again they should have gone with the solo movie rather than possibly kill off another potential franchise pic.

There are really two issues. The first is does Robbie's Harley merit a second look given the response to SS? The second is does anything at all merit giving Robbie such control over BoP, and does that character belong in a first BoP movie? I don't think the data exists to answer the first question. As for the second, why use an actor ever to cast a movie rather than a professional casting director, who after all might be better acquainted with a wider range of possibles than another actor. And Harley's presence, especially as the star of the movie, would disrupt the focus of the movie, which, after all, should be on the classic members of the BoP, Canary, Hunts, Oracle, and a BG. We've seen what happens when actors get that kind of control, (recall the Cruise-leg reboot of the Mummy....it became the Tom Cruise show with a mummy and some other people).

Now if you have any hard data on how hugely popular Robbie's Harley is, and how much people want to see her lead a BoP movie, feel free to share it, and I will rethink, but I suspect you, and WB don't.


I will go one better and say they could have done a one-shot of Harley as a short-film to test the waters.
User avatar

IvCNuB4

Staff Writer

Postby IvCNuB4 » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:34 pm

achilles wrote:
Now if you have any hard data on how hugely popular Robbie's Harley is, and how much people want to see her lead a BoP movie, feel free to share it, and I will rethink, but I suspect you, and WB don't.


And that right there is the bottom line in all this. What is all this "Prove it to me" shit? Who named you Judge and Jury? :lol: You have yet to show any "hard data" that Robbie can't open a picture other than your own obsessive compulsion against her. Of course you have already set (or you think you have) the "precedent" that no data for your point exists thereby relieving you of any responsibility in this one-sided dispute. I dated someone like you before. There is no point in continuing these discussions because you will find or manufacture anything to refute what the other person is saying because ...

Image
User avatar

achilles

Rain Partier

Postby achilles » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:57 pm

IvCNuB4 wrote:
And that right there is the bottom line in all this. What is all this "Prove it to me" shit? Who named you Judge and Jury? :lol: You have yet to show any "hard data" that Robbie can't open a picture other than your own obsessive compulsion against her. Of course you have already set (or you think you have) the "precedent" that no data for your point exists thereby relieving you of any responsibility in this one-sided dispute. I dated someone like you before. There is no point in continuing these discussions because you will find or manufacture anything to refute what the other person is saying because ...

Image


Well, sheesh, if you feel that entitled, why didn't you just say? :P I'll still respect you! :P

As for proving things like "Can Robbie actually open a movie?", that's not my concern, true, but it IS the concern of those who actually own Time/Warner stock, if nothing else to see it WB officers are making decisions based on anything more than throwing darts at a board. Which is something most stockholders might be concerned by.

It's the difference between professional management who use hard figures and those who really don't know what they're doing.
User avatar

IvCNuB4

Staff Writer

Postby IvCNuB4 » Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:04 pm

Here's an idea. Why don't you contact Warner Bros Studios and ask them these questions and request whatever data they can supply? I'm sure we would all be interested in hearing their reply.

leave a comment with facebook


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests

cron