Harley Quinn in Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey feat. Harley Quinn

Since the release of Wonder Woman, DC’s most critically successful film to date, two things have become abundantly clear:

1. DC are getting better at making movies
2. DC are very confused

It’s commonly accepted that DC’s film universe moved too quickly. They wanted to catch up to Marvel, and as such they didn’t take the time to invest us in their characters before we got to the big crossover event films. We had barely met Batman before he was off battling Superman, and by the time we made it to Justice League we had spent time with less than half of its principal characters. Sure, we all loved Wonder Woman by that point, but we knew nothing about Flash and Aquaman besides the fact that they could run fast and breathe underwater respectively. And Cyborg? Who even was he? Why should I care? I still don’t! You probably know the story about as well as I do: Batman v Superman got a critical drubbing and made a lot of fanboys angry because it was too long and too dark and, oh no, Batman killed people! Which he also did in those Tim Burton movies that everybody loves so much by the way. Personally I love Batman v Superman and think it’s an underrated gem, albeit one with a script that could charitably be described as messy, but that’s a review for another time.

DC over-corrected with Justice League with tons of re-shoots, rewrites and massive edits. They even brought in Joss Whedon, the guy who’d written and directed The Avengers, to get rid of all of that pesky darkness. The result was a decent but inconsequential Frankenstein’s monster of a film. The writing was on the wall: if they kept going this way DC would never catch up to Marvel in terms of quality, critical reaction or fan appreciation. A major change was needed.

Since then DC has made an admirable decision: the films come first. They’re not focused on building a cohesive universe or teasing more team-ups as much as they are on making enjoyable pieces of standalone entertainment. So far the results have been strong, a notable improvement over their previous track record. However, DC has made the odd decision of basically rebooting their film series while still maintaining aspects of their previous continuity. Wonder Woman 1984 comes out later this year, with Aquaman 2 arriving in 2022, and these are still the same characters we knew from Batman v Superman and Justice League. And that’s great, I wouldn’t want to lose those actors in those roles, except that we have lost Ben Affleck as Batman and, in all likelihood, Henry Cavill as Superman.

What does it mean that we’re going to have the same Wonder Woman and a different Batman in a universe where these two characters already know each other? Are they simply never going to cross paths again? If they do, are they going to act like strangers? Is Wonder Woman part of an alternate reality where Affleck is still Batman, even if we never see him? Are those events simply not a part of her backstory anymore? These are interesting questions to ask in light of Birds of Prey because it’s principal character, Harley Quinn, also knows Affleck’s Batman. This means that DC is continuing to build a continuity that they have half-abandoned, and I don’t know how to feel about that. First world problems I guess…

Suicide Squad was an interesting moment for DC. It was poorly received from a critical perspective, and a huge portion of their fanbase seemed to despise it, but it was a massive financial success and sold a tremendous amount of merchandise. Most seemed to agree that the film’s highlight was Margot Robbie’s depiction of Harley Quinn, and I’d concur. I also liked El Diablo, and Captain Boomerang was fun. Oh, and you can’t forget about everybody’s favorite, Slipknot. Where’s his standalone film? Let’s start a petition.

A sequel was inevitable considering the box office returns, and yet DC knew the fans were out for blood. They wouldn’t settle for a derivative experience. As such, DC pulled a Marvel yet again and chose writer/director/smart person James Gunn to helm their follow-up, releasing in 2021. Most of the previous members of the squad are out, except for Harley and Boomerang and everybody’s actual favorite, the not at all incredibly boring Rick Flagg. It looks and smells like a reboot, and I’d be surprised if it has many tonal or stylistic similarities to its predecessor. That’s why it surprised me to see so many of Suicide Squad’s elements continued in Birds of Prey: its disgusting color scheme, its overbearing music, its over-stylized editing and its inconsistent attempts a humor to name just a few. That being said, this film is far more successful, even if it doesn’t reach the lofty heights of Shazam! or Wonder Woman. Or Slipknot, coming summer 2023. We gotta fight for this thing. We’re gonna get Adam Beach his Oscar.

One element of Suicide Squad missing from Birds of Prey is the former film’s take on Joker. This makes sense, as DC’s top priority is clearly to make Jared Leto as depressed as possible. His version of the Clown Prince of Crime was one of the least-celebrated aspects of Suicide Squad, and since then it’s been unclear as to whether or not he’ll ever return. However, signs are pointing to “no.” Originally Joker and Harley were going to appear in at least two more films together: Gotham City Sirens (a team-up between Harley, Catwoman and Poison Ivy from Suicide Squad director David Ayer) and a film devoted entirely to their relationship from the writers of Bad Santa. Joker was also supposed to get his own standalone film, one which Leto would have also produced and presumably had a great deal of creative control over. Of course DC did make a Joker film last year, with Joaquin Phoenix winning an Oscar for his bravura take on what was once Leto’s role.

Birds of Prey twists the knife in deeper. Leto’s Joker plays a huge role in the plot, and yet he makes no appearance in the film (minus one reused shot from Suicide Squad where we see the back of his head). In fact, the entire film is about how Harley doesn’t need Joker, much as DC doesn’t seem to need Leto. Regardless, it seems they still need Margot Robbie, and I understand why.

Harley is not one of my favorite Batman characters. I enjoyed her depiction in Batman: The Animated Series, with writer Paul Dini giving her relationship with Joker some adult baggage and emotional heft. Since then no other take on the character has felt as fresh, and that’s also true of her depiction here. She’s written thinly, she’s not especially sympathetic and much of her humor doesn’t land. The only reason this character works in Birds of Prey (or Suicide Squad for that matter) is Margot Robbie. She is simply the ideal Harley Quinn, and she elevates the character with her dedication, her bravery and her inherent likability. The film would not work without her.

The other members of the Birds of Prey team range from solid to memorable, with the highlight being Mary Elizabeth Winstead’s Huntress, but Harley remains the highlight (and only partially because she gets far more screen time). One character who did make a major impression on me was the film’s antagonist, Black Mask. Portrayed as a narcissistic, childish, manic buffoon, the villain is the film’s single most entertaining element, and Ewan McGregor has a blast obliterating the scenery. He’s aided in this pursuit by Chris Messina as Victor Zasasz, a far more unique and fleshed out version of the character than the one who appeared in Batman Begins. Robbie, McGregor, Winstead and Messina are great enough in this film that they alone make it worth a watch. But beyond that, what are its merits?

As previously stated, Birds of Prey continues the unappealing aesthetic of Suicide Squad, including its nauseous color palate. For this reason I was surprised to see Matthew Libatique’s name in the credits. He’s a fantastic cinematographer, one of the best around, and yet even he couldn’t save the look of this film. The editing is decent for the most part, but whenever they try to implement some stylistic flair the film becomes unbearable. The worst sequence involves Harley getting slapped in the face so hard that she has a hallucination where she’s Marilyn Monroe? Trust me, it doesn’t make more sense in context. The fight choreography is quite strong, with John Wick’s Chad Stahelski brought on to consult. Overall, the filmmaking holds up.

Birds of Prey was written and directed by women (Christina Hodgson and Cathy Yan respectively), and it was nice to see a feminist vision presented by actual females. When male filmmakers try to prove their feminist cred it often leads to pandering. With this film and Wonder Woman (directed by Patty Jenkins), the feminist elements are so baked in that they feel inevitable. It’s less “wow, see, women can do things too!” and more “of course she can beat that guy up, now let’s move on.” In Suicide Squad we saw Harley through a male gaze, and she felt unnecessarily sexualized at times. Here she spends much of the film wearing even less, and yet the camera feels far less predatory towards her. It’s refreshing. As much as I’d love to praise the work of this writer and director I didn’t think their efforts were exceptional. Functional certainly, and occasionally invigorating, but nothing to write home about. That being said, the energy that they managed to bring to Harley and her compatriots was appreciated, and their perspective made the film feel unique enough to stand out from the pack.

Ultimately, Birds of Prey is mediocre. It had elements I thoroughly enjoyed (Harley, Huntress, Black Mask, Zasasz, the action sequences…) but much of it felt shallow and/or annoying. A few good fight scenes and a couple of chuckles does not a great action comedy make. The film is worth watching for its cast (how long has it been since we’ve seen Rosie Perez in a major production like this?) but other than that it’s unexceptional. That’s not to say that I didn’t enjoy it.

If nothing else, Birds of Prey is a solid piece of entertainment. They keep it light, arguably too light, and there’s plenty of fun violence and moderately charming banter to keep you awake. That’s why it’s odd that the film is not excelling at the box office. DC seems to think that the issue was with their original title: Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn). While I agree that this title is a blight that deserves to be scrubbed from the annals of history, I also don’t think that changing the name to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey is going to put any more meat in the seats. If you don’t know that Harley Quinn is in this movie at this point then you haven’t seen a single trailer or poster or promotional image, because she’s the focal point of literally every single piece of advertising surrounding it.

No, I think the issue here is that the movie looks, and often feels, like Suicide Squad, a film which was reviled by a huge portion of DC’s audience. If the company wants to move forward with subsequent films about these characters they need to abandon this aesthetic. Why would you cut ties with David Ayer for his stylistic shortcomings and then keep his production and costume design? Does continuity matter or not? Is this still one universe, or is it a bunch of unrelated stories that are meant to stand on their own? The most frustrating thing about Birds of Prey is that it’s hypocritical. DC claimed that they were going to put stories first, that they weren’t going to put the cart before the horse and try to rush some grand universe. Yet, in this film, the story does not come first. It is limited by the look, feel and storyline of another film, a film that thousands (if not tens of thousands) of people hated.

And sure, plenty of people liked it too. I personally feel like Suicide Squad did have some merit, besides its choppy editing, awful soundtrack, unpleasant color palate (I know I keep mentioning the color palate, but it’s literally my least favorite thing about the movie), butchering of Killer Croc, boring villains and, of course, Jared Leto’s astoundingly awful portrayal of the Joker. It had a few strong characters, a great antagonist in Viola Davis’ Amanda Waller, Adam Beach’s star-making turn as Slipknot and, of course, the best version of Harley Quinn we’re likely to see on screen. Now it’s up to DC to take Margot Robbie’s exceptional take on Harley and let her define her own context.

This company cannot afford to be burdened by ghosts of their infamous past. Hiring James Gunn to reinvent their franchise was a fantastic choice, and I hope he throws everything that Ayer brought to the first film into the trash, where it belongs. As usual, Kylo Ren put it best: “Let the past die. Kill it if you have to. It is the only way to become what you were meant to be.” So, DC, no matter what you’re making, a little less Ayer and a little more Gunn, okay? Do that, and I think your box office returns will significantly improve.