Let’s not mince words: the film formerly known as Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) and now known as Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey was highly anticipated, but not necessarily in a good way. It was a nervous, skeptical, I-hope-this-won’t-be-as-bad-as-Suicide-Squad kind of way. Though the trailer for DC’s Birds of Prey looked great, many (including myself) were wary, since this was precisely the mistake we made when trusting the epic-ness that was Suicide Squad‘s trailer. What resulted of the 2016 flop was a messy, disjointed, and frankly weak narrative, which was a huge disappointment considering it followed a trailer that utilized Queen’s “Bohemian Rhapsody”. So, it was natural to be curious as to whether Birds of Prey, advertised as a Harley Quinn spin-off of Suicide Squad, could not only stand on its own but significantly transcend its predecessor. Though I can understand why this film may elicit mixed opinions, here’s why I think Birds of Prey is worth watching.
The Film Style
The trailer showed Birds of Prey as having a Tarantino-esque film style: brilliant action shots, bright colours, and an almost comically portrayed usage of heavy violence. Though I admit I was worried that this seemingly copycat style wouldn’t be executed nearly as well as a real Tarantino film, after watching Birds of Prey I can confidently say that my worries were put to rest.
The narration done by the eccentric Harley, the highly stylized format of animation and character captions, and the oscillation of fast-paced/slow-motion action scenes were reminiscent of a few different films: Kill Bill, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Kickass, and Kingsman: Secret Service are the top four that come to mind. While it’s definitely a style of film that we’ve seen before, Birds of Prey utilized it advantageously.
The script was surprisingly solid, utilizing a tasteful amount of dark humour and coupling it with emotional drama and action (the scene with Harley’s breakfast sandwich is a prime example of this combination). Presenting itself as a “breakup film” was perhaps the best thing the film could have done: the many quips it makes at Suicide Squad coupled with its own unique tone worked to disengage itself entirely from the previous film. In fact, the only tangible ties it has to it is Harley’s references to the Joker (whom she calls “Mr. J”), which is only a present factor because the breakup we saw in Suicide Squad is essential to Birds of Prey‘s narrative and Harley’s cited”emancipation”.
The Tone
What I enjoyed most about the film was that I could tell it was a film about women that was written by women (it was directed by Cathy Yan, written by Christina Hodson). The female characters were always at the forefront and felt authentic and fleshed out, and were never objectified or overtly-sexualized (if you want to further understand what I mean by this, refer to this incredible meme that explains the subtle-yet-monumental differences between the male and female gaze in Suicide Squad vs Birds of Prey).
From the soundtrack that included mainly female artists to the lack of an unnecessary romantic storyline, it was refreshing to see a bunch of females (with a solid number of WoC actors to boot) kick some ass.
The Queerness
I’m certainly not the first to discuss the queer undertones (or, overtones?) of the film, particularly that between characters Roman Sionis–aka. the Black Mask– and his sidekick Victor Zsasz. But nevertheless, it needs to be acknowledged.
First, let me applaud both Ewan McGregor for his portrayal of Roman and Chris Messina for his portrayal of Zsasz. McGregor’s ability to play the bizarre, uncomfortably sleazy, perversely evil villain is by all counts amazing. McGregor is known for his brilliant acting but is historically placed in protagonist roles, so to see him thrive as the main villain only shows how adept his range as an actor is. And Messina, who is lesser known but is also historically either a side character or charming love interest, did an excellent job as the incredibly creepy and equally (if not more) perverse right-hand man.
Likely stemming from a shared, borderline fetish-y fascination with morbid violence, these two villains consistently shared sexual tension. Whether it was the body language or the unspoken ability to calm each other down, there was an undeniable intimacy present in their interactions. It seemed to be implied on many occasions that these two were either in some kind of relationship, or at the very least had some form of romantic or sexual bond.
And listen, I’m all for it: I was straight up rooting for it. I always want to see more queerness in media, particularly in the mainstream. However, what bothered me was precisely that it was always obviously implied but never confirmed that these two characters were queer in some capacity.
There are multiple articles that discuss the problematic nature of queer-baiting characters, or beyond that, the history of queer-coding villainous characters. Ultimately, all of those arguments stem from the same concern: that no matter the implications, queerness in these characters is never actually confirmed. Speculation is often met with a wishy-washy “could be this way or that way” answer, as was the case for these two characters in Birds of Prey, and frankly, that’s not representation. It’s beyond frustrating and even has the ability to be harmful for the queer community. Unfortunately, even while the tiny nod to Harley’s bisexuality in the beginning was a nice recognition of her comic book counterpart, and Renee Montoya is also openly gay with Ali Wong’s character as her ex-girlfriend, I could have blinked and missed these two factors.
So yes, I’m torn. While I enjoyed watching the undeniable chemistry between Roman Sionis and Victor Zsasz, who were both utterly insufferable characters in their own right and yet shared this compelling bond, I am simultaneously upset that heterosexuality is always fleshed out fully while queerness still continues to be hinted at rather than be given the same courtesy. Ultimately, if mainstream media wants to utilize queerness in its content, it needs to do a way better job at committing to it.
The Final Consensus
Someone said to me that Birds of Prey was “how Deadpool 2 should have been”, and I couldn’t agree more. The storyline involving the relationship between the kid, Cassandra, and Harley felt very natural. I like that Harley’s soft side was explored, and yet we were constantly reminded of the legitimately bad things she’s done.
The action scenes were well-choreographed, and the storyline was altogether solid. However, as The Verge notes, the plot was a little weaker when it came to focusing on the other “Birds” of the Birds of Prey aside from Harley. I would have liked to see more time spent on characters like Black Canary, Huntress and Renee.
Aside from the few critiques I have, I really did enjoy myself while watching this film. Birds of Prey doesn’t try to be more grandiose than it actually is, setting us up with low expectations only to leave the theatre pleasantly surprised. It certainly tried hard to emancipate itself from Suicide Squad, and you know what? I think it succeeded.
~ Z ~
