I just realized I wasn't able to post a review of the controversial Joker Movie. I haven't missed out posting reviews and comments on latest releases of DCEU movies and somehow Joker slipped out of my mind. Or was it because the movie was too jarring to me and left me speechless? This is not a late attempt of a review of that movie though. The last two Warner/DC movies released in the big screen were headlined by two of DC's more popular villains. And the audacity of Warner/DC to do that in the age of super HERO movies seemed like a big middle finger to the superhero movie genre. After the failure of Justice League, and the "marvelized"(general audience friendly) attempt of Aquaman and Shazam, Warner/DC turned the world of comic book movies upside down by releasing a very controversial movie about Batman's prime nemesis JOKER. And despite the director, Todd Philips, insistence that this isn't a comic book movie, JOKER was in every bit a comic book movie as evidenced by a litany of references to Batman's comic book lore. Joker was critically acclaimed and even romped off to 11 Oscar Awards nomination, a clear cut evidence that critics and audiences can take comic book movies seriously too. When I saw Aquaman and Shazam, I though that Warner/DC would be going soft on their stand in releasing "Dark" and "Serious" superhero movies after the failure of Snyder's "Dark" and "Serious" DCEU, but JOKER is clearly not a double down on "Dark" and "Serious". And like what I have said before and clearly what Warner/DC should have done in the first place, their superhero movies should have been based on the characteristics of the character more than what the general audience would want. And if JOKER has proved anything to Warner/DC, it is that "marvelized" is not always the ONLY WAY to make a successful/profitable comic book movie. Heck JOKER raked in BILLIONS of DOLLARS with little budget allotted ($62.5M), making it the MOST PROFITABLE comic book movie ever made! Picture this, CONTROVERSIAL, VIOLENT, CRITICALLY ACCLAIMED, and most of all HIGHLY PROFITABLE! And all of that despite getting an R-18 tag and not released in big market China, lessening their chances of raking in more money. I don't know if anyone would have thought in a million years that you could line up all those adjectives on a movie inspired by the funny books/comic books.
But enough about Joker, because one gal is about to have her emancipation from Joker. While the Suicide Squad movie was a critical failure (because Warner meddled with the director's original vision mind you), Margot Robbie's take on Harley Quinn was such a bright spot that she was awarded two quasi-sequel to her adventures with the Suicide Squad. She'll be returning in Suicide Squad 2 and she was just featured via the recently released Birds of Prey movie. And Birds of Prey (and the fantabulous emancipation of one Harley Quinn) is one Warner/DC movie that exactly goes the opposite direction from the Joker movie. And I can't help but smile about the clever parallelism of both movies' tone, direction, and theme to each other with regards to the word emancipation. To elaborate, while Joker is everything a comic book movie should not be, Birds of Prey goes the exact opposite direction by embracing all what a comic book movie should be. It is like, Birds of Prey does a complete emancipation from the last Warner/DC movie and a hard swerve to the opposite direction seemed to knock my head off from this new found film viewing experience of watching Warner/DC movies. Joker and Harley Quinn, inseparable, both tightly connected from the beginning of Harley Quinn's birth. But this emancipation has given Harley a new found freedom and a new lease on her comic book and movie life. Though no connection with the aforementioned Joker movie, Birds of Prey also gave us a glimpse of Joker (the version that Jared Leto played in Suicide Squad). In a symbolic way, the Birds of Prey movie is an emancipation of the tone of the Joker movie in the same way Harley Quinn has finally emancipated from her lovely puddin, Joker.
Birds of Prey is a perfect example of how Warner/DC should be approaching their movies. While the Joker movie was unnerving and too dark and violent, Birds of Prey (BOP) is the exact opposite. In all honesty I found BOP dull, brainless, and too simplistic for my own taste but it was very very FUN to watch! In fact you don't need to bring your brain along with you to enjoy the movie. The plot is too simplistic but you don't need it to appreciate this movie. BOP still had its violent content (as evidenced by the R-16 rating) and the movie seems to be one of the examples of glamorized violence that the Joker director sought to de-glamorize by showing us a very disturbing face of what real violence is via the Joker movie. In fact, BOP is everything that acclaimed director and Joker producer Martin Scorsese despised in comic book movies, one he labels as not real cinema but Popcorn theme parks entertainment. And BOP is not ashamed of that, in fact, it embraces everything about it. And this proves to be the reason why it is a hit with the general audiences. The bombastic cinematography and eye catching colors is everything the Joker movie is not. And Warner/DC is not afraid or conscious enough with regards to audience's acceptance to approve this audacious movie. And this is great! Because after all the failures and missteps in their quest to rival Marvel's cinematic success, Warner/DC has finally found the right formula in making their movies more successful to critics and audiences. And I laud Warner/DC for always pushing the envelope despite the risks (calculated risks at that because again BOP is a low budget comic book movie that could "potentially" rake in huge profits). Honestly, without Warner/DC gambling on Wonder Woman as a female led comic book movie, Marvel wouldn't have pulled the trigger on Captain Marvel and the solo Black Widow movie. This time, Warner/DC has even more empowered the Women audiences by giving them the first all-female comic book movie team up via BOP. And this gamble is already paying off when you look at the critics and audiences' response to the movie. Move over Power Puff Girls, this is what real Girl Power is like!
I've heard qualms from comic book fans that BOP strayed away from the source material too much, especially when it comes to the character of Cassandra Cain. In the comic books, Cassandra was a mute assassin that possessed highly dangerous fighting skills who eventually donned the Batgirl costume. In the movie, she was every bit the opposite. There are also those who are complaining why Barbara Gordon (Batgirl/Oracle) wasn't a part of the movie when in fact she was an instrumental part of the Birds of Prey comic books. But it didn't bother me that much because I have learned to separate the movie universes from the comic book universe. Though I do understand the need to do fan service, but if I want to enjoy the characters that I've read, then there's no other way to enjoy them but from the books that I read. This is another example of Warner/DC emancipating themselves from traditional comic book movie that needs to do the required fan service. Harley Quinn after all wasn't birthed from the comic books, but from the Batman animated series. But yes, as comic book fans, we do enjoy the fan service and seeing our heroes on the big screen exactly do feats and stories lifted directly from the comic books. But Warner/DC has fully emancipated themselves from the idea that there is only the "Marvel" way when it comes to comic book movies. Marvel's offerings is always conscious and leaned more to a General Patronage rating, the same cannot be said for Warner/DC's last two films. Even the light hearted Shazam and Aquaman had little sprinkles of "Darkness" within them. And I like it that way, because it gives Warner/DC their own identity. That said, I can't wait for WW84, the Wonder Woman sequel. From the looks of the trailer, this feels like a Marvel movie more than a Warner/DC movie. And for the first time, I could confidently say IT IS OKAY! Because I know for every Wonder Woman, there's a Joker movie that Warner/DC is ready to unleash!
UPDATE!
Box Office numbers has already been released for the first weekend of showing and the movie has not met expectations. A lot of people are saying that this could mean big trouble for the movie. In fact, theaters across the United States are renaming the film in their marketing collateral to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. Is this a case of bad marketing on the part of WB/DC by not making Harley Quinn's name front and center in the title? Or is this because of the Coronavirus that some people are staying away from the theaters and crowded areas? Or is this a case of the R rating that Parents could not bring their kids along to see the movie and are not willing to spend on an R Rated film that is lacking in form and substance when compared to JOKER. Whatever the case, it is too bad that a WB/DC movie that is well loved by critics would be missed out by the audience. Then again the modest budget might save this film from being a complete disaster. I'd probably post another article after the theater run to tackle on the possible issues why the film felt like a downer to some audiences.
