|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 27, 2018 6:48:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Apr 27, 2018 15:17:59 GMT
True, next time it could be Catherine Hardwicke.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 27, 2018 15:49:27 GMT
Their number one concern should be telling a story that appeals to audiences, not SJW virtue signalling.
I guess merit is just too old-fashioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Apr 27, 2018 18:41:01 GMT
What a joke. So I guess all that Tarantino talk was just nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 28, 2018 7:32:11 GMT
What a joke. So I guess all that Tarantino talk was just nonsense. completely separate project, the current plan is to do both |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2018 22:33:43 GMT
I'm wiling to keep an open mind & give her a chance ( loved her Jessica Jones episodes & some of the other shit she directed) . Don't get it twisted though, Jar Jar Abrams is a BITCH ass human being lol just thought I'd state that .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 1:28:58 GMT
Their number one concern should be telling a story that appeals to audiences, not SJW virtue signalling. I guess merit is just too old-fashioned. The one doesn't rule out the other. It's entirely possible to hire a female director that has merit and will tell a story that appeals to the audience. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 29, 2018 1:34:33 GMT
The one doesn't rule out the other. It's entirely possible to hire a female director that has merit and will tell a story that appeals to the audience. If they are more concerned about quotas then quality that is a problem. Frankenstein was written by a woman because there was merit to the situation. In this case, you have a tired, worn out franchise, and they think the diversity issue is the most important . Counter-intuitive. They shouldnt even need to advertise it-the fact that they do, suggests that is their marketing angle. It's pathetic. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 1:42:43 GMT
The one doesn't rule out the other. It's entirely possible to hire a female director that has merit and will tell a story that appeals to the audience. If they are more concerned about quotas then quality that is a problem. But who says the are more concerned about quotas? They haven't said that. You've just assumed it. No, again this is something that you've simply made up and decided must be true. You have no idea how they actually rate the importance of anything. |
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Apr 29, 2018 1:43:01 GMT
How about Katheryn Bigelow a good example of a female director
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 29, 2018 1:43:49 GMT
But who says the are more concerned about quotas? They haven't said that. You've just assumed it. The headline says it. The director must be a woman. That's a quota. ?? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 2:06:07 GMT
But who says the are more concerned about quotas? They haven't said that. You've just assumed it. The headline says it. The director must be a woman. That's a quota. ?? So? That doesn't mean that having a woman is the first or only thing they're concerned about. I mean, do you really think they're just going to go out and grab some random woman off the street and go "Here's a hundred and twenty million dollars, go make a Star Trek movie? You're perfect, because our one and only criteria is that the director must have a vagina!" |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 29, 2018 2:27:07 GMT
So? That doesn't mean that having a woman is the first or only thing they're concerned about. They aren't saying: we insist that this talented director (who happens to be a woman) be hired for this. They are saying we insist that the director be a woman. It's a significant difference. Merit is not the measure, gender is. So its a quota and they are using it in their marketing. |
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Apr 29, 2018 4:50:52 GMT
I don't know about the Director but I definitely think that the Main Villain in "STAR TREK 14" (it is really the 14th movie) should be a Woman.
Out of All 13 "STAR TREK" Movies, only 1 of them ("FIRST CONTACT") has had a Woman as the Main Villain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 11:57:59 GMT
So? That doesn't mean that having a woman is the first or only thing they're concerned about. They aren't saying: we insist that this talented director (who happens to be a woman) be hired for this. They are saying we insist that the director be a woman. It's a significant difference. Nor are they saying "We are going to hire a woman and we don't care if she's incompetent or not", which is what you seem to be assuming. No studio ever announces that they want to find a good director for their movie, because it goes without saying that they all do. Again, you do not know this. You are assuming it because it fits a narrative you want to believe. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 29, 2018 14:45:48 GMT
Nor are they saying "We are going to hire a woman and we don't care if she's incompetent or not", which is what you seem to be assuming. No studio ever announces that they want to find a good director for their movie, because it goes without saying that they all do. That they put gender before merit is the issue. Am no, it doesnt go without saying that they seek quality. If that were so, there would be no bad movies. If I met someone who was more concerned with identity politics than story I would walk away from them, fast. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 15:13:18 GMT
Nor are they saying "We are going to hire a woman and we don't care if she's incompetent or not", which is what you seem to be assuming. No studio ever announces that they want to find a good director for their movie, because it goes without saying that they all do. That they put gender before merit is the issue. And, once again, that they put gender before merit is something you have invented. You have absolutely nothing to indicate that this is true. It's merely what you want to be true. Utterly stupid. Bad movies get made because a studio tries and fails, not because they don't bother trying. Then how lucky that this has not happened here. You're just determined to believe that it has because it's what you want to believe. |
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Apr 29, 2018 15:28:03 GMT
If they are more concerned about quotas then quality that is a problem. I agree. This doesn't sound promising, if there is only ONE woman who is willing to direct a Star Trek film, and she has no talent. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Apr 29, 2018 17:30:24 GMT
And, once again, that they put gender before merit is something you have invented. You have absolutely nothing to indicate that this is true. It's merely what you want to be true. That's what the article says. They insisted on a woman directing it. Its a quota. If there was no talented woman available they would chose an untalented woman. This is the implication. They did the same virtue signalling with the last one about Sulu being gay. Just shows they are caught up in identity politics, not storytelling merit. |
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Apr 29, 2018 17:44:16 GMT
That's what the article says. They insisted on a woman directing it. Its a quota. If there was no talented woman available they would chose an untalented woman. This is the implication. a Steven Spielberg type? NO! Jane Doe? YES! Why? MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! MUST! It must be a woman! |
|
