Birds of Prey (2020)

[MattJ1991]

[SpiderBaby]

At least it's better than her SS outfit.

[CelluloidPal]

I saw it earlier and to make a description of it, it would be as follows:
Imagine a circus clown without make-up in the Hammertime parachute pants.

It's kinda funny when you picture it.

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

I saw it earlier and to make a description of it, it would be as follows:
Imagine a circus clown without make-up in the Hammertime parachute pants.

It's kinda funny when you picture it.

Not to be controversial, but you are leaving out two very important points, or, rather, they left them out.... Two additional pieces of costuming from the first film.... Oh, how to describe this as a woman. Were I a man, I bet I could write this easily....

So, there are two identical pieces of costuming, which fit inside a piece of her costume, from the first film, to help fill it out, making it stand out, away from her actual body, a bit more, in these two places, high up on her body, on the front of her body. In the new bright, gold, Hammer-pants/overalls she was wearing in the picture, these two objects were missing and, consequently, her upper body did not look like it usually looks, because they usually use those with her in every film she makes.

Today is the only day I will ever say, "That would have been a lot easier if I were a man". You all have it so good when it comes to talking about body parts. As a woman, buying a car, "Oh, my husband put a firm price limit. This is the most I can spend, the absolute most. If that isn't enough, I'll have to go to the ... dealer in ... because what he says goes." Deal struck. Car bought. Perfect price and being a lady rocks.... But when it comes to a body, "You know, those things, those things on a woman, you know, those... things... THOSE... things.... Missing."

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by miribeau

Not to be controversial, but you are leaving out two very important points, or, rather, they left them out.... Two additional pieces of costuming from the first film.... Oh, how to describe this as a woman. Were I a man, I bet I could write this easily....

So, there are two identical pieces of costuming, which fit inside a piece of her costume, from the first film, to help fill it out, making it stand out, away from her actual body, a bit more, in these two places, high up on her body, on the front of her body. In the new bright, gold, Hammer-pants/overalls she was wearing in the picture, these two objects were missing and, consequently, her upper body did not look like it usually looks, because they usually use those with her in every film she makes.

Today is the only day I will ever say, "That would have been a lot easier if I were a man". You all have it so good when it comes to talking about body parts. As a woman, buying a car, "Oh, my husband put a firm price limit. This is the most I can spend, the absolute most. If that isn't enough, I'll have to go to the ... dealer in ... because what he says goes." Deal struck. Car bought. Perfect price and being a lady rocks.... But when it comes to a body, "You know, those things, those things on a woman, you know, those... things... THOSE... things.... Missing."

Seriously, let's not start this crap...again.
This thread was locked because of stuff like this. I guess a humorous comment on a movie costume is frowned upon here.
Besides, it was left out because it doesn't matter and should not matter.

EDIT: Misinterpreted this post. I figured out what the poster was trying to say and was trying to be cautious in the wording and didn't realize what was being "left out" meant something totally different. So the crap isn't crap after all. My bad.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Imagine a circus clown without make-up in the Hammertime parachute pants.

please Harley don't hurt 'em

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Seriously, let's not start this crap...again.
This thread was locked because of stuff like this. I guess a humorous comment on a movie costume is frowned upon here.
Besides, it was left out because it doesn't matter and should not matter.

Golly, you and I are different. I think self-deprecating humour is awesome. Also, I can't imagine how you could see it as crap to admit I can't bring myself to type out a word and then to acknowledge that I don't like that about myself. Again, I think being honest about my failings is a personal asset, since I have so very many.

As to this thread's former status, the offending posts were thankfully removed but did not involve self-deprecating humour or comments on the costumes and were not made by me. I actually admit to reporting several of them, as they had no place on any message board, let alone a DC message board. They were exceptionally rude and very political comments, some extremely hateful things about men and directed toward them, that had nothing to do with this film. As you may have noted, I happen to love men but, even if I only just liked them, I would still say those kinds of horrible comments don't have a place here and I still ask that anyone posting on this forum remember that it is fine to joke around, as we all do, but please don't use this as a place to be hateful, to anyone, for any reason.

As to what's missing from the costume, it wasn't left out because it doesn't matter, and I really can't spell out what it was. I just can't type any variation of that particular label, unless talking about cancer. It's my peculiarity. To the film, that costume enhancement was left out of initial photos and then altered for the film, achieving a sort of medium-level effect, if that makes sense, because the director found them offensive and didn't want to objectify MR. To be clear, MR did not object to making herself as attractive as possible and is a smart woman who is on board with being beautiful in order to bring in more viewers, sell more tickets, sell more blu-rays and benefit the DC universe of films with greater profits. Most actors understand that their beauty is a big draw for people.

This issue falls on the director, the changes they've made, and there was push-back over the issue initially. This initial promo shot was taken with no enhancements, the picture that was removed earlier, and that was noted and commented on (not here, I'm talking about when it was taken). They did agree on a modified costume with, oh goodness.... My overly Christian nature wins again and I just can't type it out so try not to be offended at my use of Grandma language.... Partial enhancement, middle-ground enhancement, less than before, but more than in the photo that was removed earlier, level enhancement of that region of the body, was used after that photo was taken.... Does that make sense? I know, I'm such an old lady.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by miribeau

Golly, you and I are different. I think self-deprecating humour is awesome. Also, I can't imagine how you could see it as crap to admit I can't bring myself to type out a word and then to acknowledge that I don't like that about myself. Again, I think being honest about my failings is a personal asset, since I have so very many.

As to this thread's former status, the offending posts were thankfully removed but did not involve self-deprecating humour or comments on the costumes and were not made by me. I actually admit to reporting several of them, as they had no place on any message board, let alone a DC message board. They were exceptionally rude and very political comments, some extremely hateful things about men and directed toward them, that had nothing to do with this film. As you may have noted, I happen to love men but, even if I only just liked them, I would still say those kinds of horrible comments don't have a place here and I still ask that anyone posting on this forum remember that it is fine to joke around, as we all do, but please don't use this as a place to be hateful, to anyone, for any reason.

As to what's missing from the costume, it wasn't left out because it doesn't matter, and I really can't spell out what it was. I just can't type any variation of that particular label, unless talking about cancer. It's my peculiarity. To the film, that costume enhancement was left out of initial photos and then altered for the film, achieving a sort of medium-level effect, if that makes sense, because the director found them offensive and didn't want to objectify MR. To be clear, MR did not object to making herself as attractive as possible and is a smart woman who is on board with being beautiful in order to bring in more viewers, sell more tickets, sell more blu-rays and benefit the DC universe of films with greater profits. Most actors understand that their beauty is a big draw for people.

This issue falls on the director, the changes they've made, and there was push-back over the issue initially. This initial promo shot was taken with no enhancements, the picture that was removed earlier, and that was noted and commented on (not here, I'm talking about when it was taken). They did agree on a modified costume with, oh goodness.... My overly Christian nature wins again and I just can't type it out so try not to be offended at my use of Grandma language.... Partial enhancement, middle-ground enhancement, less than before, but more than in the photo that was removed earlier, level enhancement of that region of the body, was used after that photo was taken.... Does that make sense? I know, I'm such an old lady.

Ah! I figured out. It appears that I misinterpreted your initial post and I mentioned crap, I thought you were referring to something different. My bad.
I thought you were referring to something else and jumped to conclusions there. (Got home from a very long day.)
To comment on said portion you were in fact referring to, I honestly too distracted by those golden parachute pants to notice.

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Ah! I figured out. It appears that I misinterpreted your initial post and I mentioned crap, I thought you were referring to something different. My bad.
I thought you were referring to something else and jumped to conclusions there. (Got home from a very long day.)
To comment on said portion you were in fact referring to, I honestly too distracted by those golden parachute pants to notice.

Ah. That makes sense. I had a long day, a few days back, went to my favourite quick-stop restaurant, excellent Romaine-only Mexican Chicken Salad with Fajita Veggies, and stood there for almost two minutes trying to figure out my order. The girl, who is always very sweet and patient, said, "Would you like your salads, the regular way, he gets pork, you get chicken?" I said, "It's a good thing I live over there" (pointing). She said, "I'll get it for you. Don't worry." I sat down and waited and very easily could have fallen asleep. In other words, I completely understand.

The gold parachute overalls were a bit shocking. I can't imagine anyone thinking, given the options presented in Batman Animated all the way up to the first Suicide Squad, "I think I'll go with an awkward spoiled-princess-farming-ensemble, like you might see in a Hallmark film, in that scene where the spoiled New Yorker daughter, of a guy who owns half of Manhattan, steps out of the cabin and falls in a mud puddle." If that was what they were going for, they nailed it.

[CreasyBear]

Love the outfit!

[CyberpunkCentral]

Birds of Prey villain Black Mask is gay

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/...lack-mask-gay/

[levcore]

Isn't that a bit homophobic...

[SteelbookCat]

jurnee should of got her brother jussie the part of black mask he could of made a big comeback.

[imsounoriginal]

It's from We Got This Covered so it's useless info. And even if it's true, so what? Just make a good movie.

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by levcore

Isn't that a bit homophobic...

Why CAN'T a villain be gay, or black, or trans, or whatever? It's just as problematic to make characters of a certain race/gender/sexual identity completely blameless and perfect and innocent for the sake of not rocking the boat. When the original Candyman came out, it was attacked by some as being "racist" for having a black villain, and yet that film's star, Tony Todd, countered with, "Well, why can't a black man play Hannibal Lecter, or Freddy Kreuger?"

[CyberpunkCentral]

Hannibal Lecter is from Lithuania.

[Monterey Jack]

That was Todd's quote, not mine. And he was played by Welshman Anthony Hopkins in the movie.

The point is, it shouldn't be viewed as inherently racist or sexist to have a villain who isn't a middle-aged, straight white male. There are bad apples in every barrel, no matter what your race, gender or sexual orientation may be, and to pretend otherwise is just sheepishly burying one's head in the sand to avoid the slightest whiff of controversy.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

It's from We Got This Covered so it's useless info. And even if it's true, so what? Just make a good movie.

It seems as making a good movie in this instance is not that high of a priority for them.
Based on all of the stories or alleged stories, it's more about PR than anything else.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

It seems as making a good movie in this instance is not that high of a priority for them.
Based on all of the stories or alleged stories, it's more about PR than anything else.

It's a movie about Harley Quinn, so making a "good movie" was a stretch from the start.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

That was Todd's quote, not mine. And he was played by Welshman Anthony Hopkins in the movie.

The point is, it shouldn't be viewed as inherently racist or sexist to have a villain who isn't a middle-aged, straight white male. There are bad apples in every barrel, no matter what your race, gender or sexual orientation may be, and to pretend otherwise is just sheepishly burying one's head in the sand to avoid the slightest whiff of controversy.

Agreed. However I do remember the controversy in regards to Basic Instinct, which lead to protests.