|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 15, 2019 15:52:19 GMT -5
I think there are sexist people that don't like movies like this but a lot of times if you just don't like the movie you get lumped in with that crowd. Like for example the all female Ghostbusters, that was somehow turned into people didn't like it because it was sexist, really? I didn't like it because it sucked, had nothing to do with anything else. That doesn't make someone sexist. People were literally bashing it because it was all women and making racist remarks towards Leslie Jones. I stand by my belief that if the film had an all male cast or the original cast critics and fans would've been praising it. Any cast with that script would have failed. The blame lies entirely with Paul Feig and Amy Pascal, who then exaggerated the anti-woman thing in an effort to cover for their shitty film.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Nov 15, 2019 16:01:21 GMT -5
I think there are sexist people that don't like movies like this but a lot of times if you just don't like the movie you get lumped in with that crowd. Like for example the all female Ghostbusters, that was somehow turned into people didn't like it because it was sexist, really? I didn't like it because it sucked, had nothing to do with anything else. That doesn't make someone sexist. People were literally bashing it because it was all women and making racist remarks towards Leslie Jones. I stand by my belief that if the film had an all male cast or the original cast critics and fans would've been praising it. No. It was a bad movie. It is okay for you to like things that the majority don't like. You don't need to set up defenses to justify liking things most don't.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Nov 15, 2019 16:04:14 GMT -5
Feig fanned the flames, but he definitely didn't light the matches.
|
|
|
Post by brackus on Nov 15, 2019 16:26:56 GMT -5
Slightly aside from movies - I loved Sarah Connor Chronicles. I also loved Teri Hatcher's Lois Lane. She was superior to Clark in every way if you took away the Superman. They were organic, well acted empowered roles. I hate pandering to the crowd/let's hit demographics/corporate image type female empowerment in my entertainment (including WWE) This!!! There is a difference between Sarah Connor, Ellen Ripley, Laurie Strode and other "final girls" from horror movies to "Mary Sues" like Rey from Star Wars, Alice from Resident Evil or Dani from Terminator: Dark Fate. Ripley & co. were developed by/through the story. They had weaknesses and were realistic. Rey, Alice etc. are "marketing ploys", "developded " by lazy writing. They have no weaknesses and can do everything better. How am I, the viewer, supposed to connect to such a character?
|
|
riseofsetian1981
King Koopa
"I met him fifteen years ago. I was told there was nothing left."
Posts: 10,323
|
Post by riseofsetian1981 on Nov 15, 2019 16:42:08 GMT -5
People were literally bashing it because it was all women and making racist remarks towards Leslie Jones. I stand by my belief that if the film had an all male cast or the original cast critics and fans would've been praising it. No. It was a bad movie. It is okay for you to like things that the majority don't like. You don't need to set up defenses to justify liking things most don't. People were immediately against it because as I said it didn't have the original cast, two it was all women, and like I said I can almost guarantee if it was the same script with an all male cast it'd be praised. The film wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination nor was it deep cinema. But the insults that were hurled towards McCarthy, Wig, McKinnon, and Jones were blatantly sexist and racist. I like what I like and if people don't like it that's fine too. But to deny that there sexism and racism wasn't used is naïve in my opinion. Feig didn't help matters I agree with you on that. Fans had no right to hurl the filthy venom towards the actresses in the film either. Two wrongs don't make a right.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 15, 2019 16:51:00 GMT -5
People were literally bashing it because it was all women and making racist remarks towards Leslie Jones. I stand by my belief that if the film had an all male cast or the original cast critics and fans would've been praising it. Any cast with that script would have failed. The blame lies entirely with Paul Feig and Amy Pascal, who then exaggerated the anti-woman thing in an effort to cover for their shitty film. A lot of people do this. It ruins the movement of gender equlity. Women are as capable of f***ing up as men. Ghostbusters sucked and there was nothing there. This new one is looking better everything that comes out. Plus it will involve girls. I really am hoping for a ghostbusters extreme take
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,235
|
Post by agent817 on Nov 17, 2019 17:39:02 GMT -5
Okay, I want to know something. What in the hell does "woke" mean? It seems that everywhere I go, whether it's talking about the new Charlie's Angels movie or Terminator: Dark Fate, everyone is using the term "woke." What does it mean?
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Nov 17, 2019 18:54:18 GMT -5
Okay, I want to know something. What in the hell does "woke" mean? It seems that everywhere I go, whether it's talking about the new Charlie's Angels movie or Terminator: Dark Fate, everyone is using the term "woke." What does it mean? To be woke is to be conscious of and willing to do something about social issues.
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Nov 18, 2019 13:13:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on Nov 18, 2019 13:23:15 GMT -5
So why doesn't the new Press Your Luck have any Tammy Whammette skits?!!? (And, um, she was taken out of one Whammy animation even!) ;-) ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Nov 18, 2019 13:47:31 GMT -5
Elizabeth Banks going all Paul Feig hasn't proved to be a winning strategy, though I think a pathetic marketing campaign is the biggest contributor to the poor opening. Until two days ago I was completely unaware the movie existed, and judging from social media it seems I'm not the only one.
|
|
|
Post by crowley1986 on Nov 18, 2019 15:02:19 GMT -5
agreed with the spiderman remark...how many do we need...but im not going to see a movie out of sympathy, im going to see movies that i might be interested in watching not doing a charity watch...and here's a novel idea for you Hollywood, stop with the gender swap reboots...create and write new/interesting characters And why blame the male movie going public, why arent women going to see it...its such a lame excuse to use
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on Nov 18, 2019 15:04:28 GMT -5
Okay, I want to know something. What in the hell does "woke" mean? It seems that everywhere I go, whether it's talking about the new Charlie's Angels movie or Terminator: Dark Fate, everyone is using the term "woke." What does it mean? To be woke is to be conscious of and willing to do something about social issues. That or it's when Anthem sues you and you can't be Broken.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on Nov 18, 2019 15:29:41 GMT -5
No. It was a bad movie. It is okay for you to like things that the majority don't like. You don't need to set up defenses to justify liking things most don't. People were immediately against it because as I said it didn't have the original cast, two it was all women, and like I said I can almost guarantee if it was the same script with an all male cast it'd be praised. The film wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination nor was it deep cinema. But the insults that were hurled towards McCarthy, Wig, McKinnon, and Jones were blatantly sexist and racist. I like what I like and if people don't like it that's fine too. But to deny that there sexism and racism wasn't used is naïve in my opinion. Feig didn't help matters I agree with you on that. Fans had no right to hurl the filthy venom towards the actresses in the film either. Two wrongs don't make a right. I still respectfully disagree. An all male GB 2016 would still be strongly and venomously hated for being an unnecessary remake, and of an iconic film at that. "Raping my childhood" and all that. Bullying is never the answer though, I agree about that. See also: the actress who was Rose in TLJ. I have equal praise and knocks for the GB16 actresses, but to be hurtful to people is a whole other thing. And on the, ahem, male end, Michael Bay got death threats from Transformer fans apparently.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,112
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Nov 18, 2019 15:45:56 GMT -5
agreed with the spiderman remark...how many do we need...but im not going to see a movie out of sympathy, im going to see movies that i might be interested in watching not doing a charity watch...and here's a novel idea for you Hollywood, stop with the gender swap reboots...create and write new/interesting characters And why blame the male movie going public, why arent women going to see it...its such a lame excuse to use This'll get me in trouble, but my issue with the "sympathy" remake is that it comes off as entitled. As if Banks is saying "You Owe Me!", and kind of assuming that everyone is lapping up everyone else's bad movies, just not her bad movie.
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,962
|
Post by H-Virus on Nov 18, 2019 16:18:01 GMT -5
The reason why there’s so many Spider-Man movies is because there’s a demand for Spider-Man movies, and whenever a new one comes out it’s almost guaranteed to make money. Same reason why there’s so many Batman movies.
I can’t be certain since I don’t use social media, but I’m going to assume that there probably hasn’t been a whole lot of people asking for a new Charlie’s Angels movie in the last decade.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 18, 2019 16:20:26 GMT -5
Um so like the angels made money 20 years ago. Maybe kristen stuart just is not the draw drew, lucy, or cameron were.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 18, 2019 16:25:43 GMT -5
Banks got everything wrong with selling this Charlie's Angels movie. The 2000 and 2003 movies got the tone right. They were generally light and colourful but were decent action movies that also took their villains pretty seriously. Plus they had three very likeable and charismatic actresses in the roles, who despite some silliness, were never depicted as anything short of capable women who could outhink and outfight their enemies.
In Banks' version, two of the actresses are relatively unknown and Kristen Stewart, who I otherwise do like as an actress, is way out of her comfort zone. She's best as playing sullen, moody characters, not a wisecracking detective who can kick people's asses. The Twilight fanbase has not stuck with her, probably after she alienated many of them by cheating on Edward Cullen for real. I think hunky guys were the draw for the Twilight series, not the boring female lead.
Hyping the movie as woke was the death blow. Even if the intentions are good, the final product, as was seen with Ghostbusters, tends to be heavy handed, insulting to many people, and audiences just reject it.
|
|
|
Post by ogreknee on Nov 18, 2019 16:30:01 GMT -5
I mean banks was in an ultimate girl power series with Hunger Games. Though that movie ended with katniss being in an empty marriage with a "make it work" baby looking like she regrets it all.
But still hunger games made money.
Pitch Perfect made money.
I think elizabeth banks is mad she is losing money and trying to guilt people to watch it is so wrong
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Nov 18, 2019 16:46:49 GMT -5
Banks, last I heard maybe a year or two ago, was one of the most successful women in Hollywood financially. I think producing-wise plus her acting credits. Doing a quick search, from 2018 to 2019, her net worth dropped from $50 million to $30 million.
|
|