|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Nov 18, 2019 18:57:16 GMT
Elizabeth Banks Says ‘Captain Marvel,’ ‘Wonder Woman’ Were Hits Because They Belong to ‘Male Genre’
The well-reviewed “Charlie’s Angels” reboot is the latest studio box office bomb of the fall movie season, following in the footsteps of such disasters as “The Goldfinch,” “Gemini Man,” “Motherless Brooklyn,” and “Terminator: Dark Fate.” The Elizabeth Banks-directed action comedy failed to crack $9 million at the box office over its opening weekend. Box office tracking had “Charlie’s Angels” opening at an already-disappointing $10 million, but the final total came in well below that low mark. IndieWire’s box office expert Tom Brueggemann says the film “will be a significant loss” for Sony this season. Prior to the movie’s disastrous opening weekend, Banks gave an interview to the Herald Sun that is now proving to be somewhat controversial. The filmmaker, who also wrote and produced “Charlie’s Angels” and stars in the movie as Bosley, called out a potential box office bomb as being sexist. “Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money,” she said. “If this movie doesn’t make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t go see women do action movies.” As some moviegoers were quick to point out on social media, “Charlie’s Angels” bombing doesn’t exactly prove men will not go pay to see an action movie driven by women. Earlier this year, the Brie Larson-starring “Captain Marvel” grossed $426 million in the U.S. and over $1.1 billion at the worldwide box office. “Wonder Women” ended its summer 2017 run with $821 million worldwide. But Banks says these female-fronted comic book films are still tied to a large male genre. “They’ll go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre,” Banks told the Sun. “So even though those are movies about women, they put them in the context of feeding the larger comic book world, so it’s all about, yes, you’re watching a Wonder Woman movie but we’re setting up three other characters or we’re setting up ‘Justice League.’” “By the way, I’m happy for those characters to have box office success,” Banks adds, “but we need more women’s voices supported with money because that’s the power. The power is in the money.” In a second interview before the film’s opening weekend with the Wall Street Journal, Banks defended her decision to make another “Charlie’s Angels” movie. The last “Charlie’s Angels” films starred Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore, and Lucy Liu and were released in 2000 and 2003. Banks’ “Angels” stars Kristen Stewart, Naomi Scott, and Ella Balinska. “You’ve had 37 Spider-Man movies and you’re not complaining!” Banks said. “I think women are allowed to have one or two action franchises every 17 years — I feel totally fine with that.” Banks added she was interested in launching a big franchise driven by women characters because that’s often not the case in Hollywood. “Being in a big franchise allows you to have it all,” she said. “I recognize the same thing, it’s almost unfair for women. The best roles are usually in small movies, but then you don’t make any money. It’s okay to want to make money.” When IndieWire recently asked Banks if she was concerned about if she was concerned about the reaction of trolls who might balk at her feminist-leaning action movie, she was succinct. “‘Charlie’s Angels’ has always been about women, and the DNA of it is about women working together on this team,” she said. “We are not treading in a male space. I think that’s one of the big differences between these two things. I don’t know, I’m less concerned about that. Of course, those trolls are horrifying, but you know, I challenge them to get up and make a fucking movie action movie. I welcome any of them into my realm.” With its $8.6 million opening, it’s unlikely “Charlie’s Angels” is the franchise-starter Banks envisioned. The film is now playing nationwide. www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elizabeth-banks-says-captain-marvel-144652640.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJTeEr6G6DFGuvGbwwC2czsuTDBNhHR0YBZj1-n_8QkDkhaqyGhzaS4Gb-As5FW4eUqO0nK6tYv9n0wm28t0PAIfYVwVao_XMAJcrg0symQxYbz4VI767sIXWJBAKvmb4en-jP2-Vkuqiwp_BunN61XGIiYQ4sIOPRblN4zML0JeSo do you agree with Elizabeth Banks ?
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Nov 18, 2019 18:58:30 GMT
Or she’s just mad that she made a bad movie that not even women wanted to see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Nov 18, 2019 18:59:51 GMT
Or she’s just mad that she made a bad movie that not even women wanted to see. 
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:06:11 GMT
Elizabeth Banks is also the person who accused Spielberg of never having directed a movie with a female lead. To which a person in the audience pointed out The Color Purple. This followed by someone else in the audience saying he didn't direct that and Elizabeth Banks saying "see, he didn't even direct The Color Purple." 
|
|
|
|
Post by johnspartan on Nov 18, 2019 19:09:16 GMT
Elizabeth Banks has begun phase 14 of a standard SJW Takeover. We've seen this play out over and over ever since Ghostbusters 2016.
14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Nov 18, 2019 19:10:41 GMT
Elizabeth Banks is also the person who accused Spielberg of never having directed a movie with a female lead. To which a person in the audience pointed out The Color Purple. This followed by someone else in the audience saying he didn't direct that and Elizabeth Banks saying "see, he didn't even direct The Color Purple."  That really happened? If so, someone should have been asked who directed the movie if not him.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:12:17 GMT
Elizabeth Banks is also the person who accused Spielberg of never having directed a movie with a female lead. To which a person in the audience pointed out The Color Purple. This followed by someone else in the audience saying he didn't direct that and Elizabeth Banks saying "see, he didn't even direct The Color Purple."  That really happened? If so, someone should have been asked who directed the movie if not him. yes. I can't find the actual video, but here is a video of someone commenting on the same video I watched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Nov 18, 2019 19:16:32 GMT
That really happened? If so, someone should have been asked who directed the movie if not him. yes. I'll try to find the video. His first theatrical movie -
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:18:45 GMT
yes. I'll try to find the video. His first theatrical movie -
The BFG too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Nov 18, 2019 19:22:10 GMT
Maybe she meant Spielberg never directed a movie with a white woman lead? But her comment that men won't see a film with a woman in an action lead--ALIEN films?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:24:57 GMT
Maybe she meant Spielberg never directed a movie with a white woman lead? But her comment that men won't see a film with a woman in an action lead--ALIEN films? He has directed a movie with a white female lead, which makes her comments even more ridiculous. Maybe she meant a movie with a white female lead that doesn't have a male co-lead?

|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:25:49 GMT
Maybe she meant Spielberg never directed a movie with a white woman lead? But her comment that men won't see a film with a woman in an action lead--ALIEN films?
Kill Bill Alita: Battle Angel the list goes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Nov 18, 2019 19:30:58 GMT
Maybe she meant a movie with a white female lead that doesn't have a male co-lead? I assume that is what she meant. She got caught with her racial bias--she was thinking "someone like me as the lead" and that is what tripped her up.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:35:51 GMT
Maybe she meant a movie with a white female lead that doesn't have a male co-lead? I assume that is what she meant. She got caught with her racial bias--she was thinking "someone like me as the lead" and that is what tripped her up.
Except that ISN'T what she meant because she didn't even know Spielberg directed The Color Purple. Why are you defending her? Someone can only say so much dumb shit before people start seeing a pattern. She makes excuses is what she does. Let's conveniently ignore all the other female led action movies that were successful that aren't comic book movies. She'd find an excuse for every one of them if she wasn't ignoring them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Nov 18, 2019 19:40:36 GMT
Elizabeth Banks has begun phase 14 of a standard SJW Takeover. We've seen this play out over and over ever since Ghostbsters 2016. 14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it. 
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:43:03 GMT
Elizabeth Banks has begun phase 14 of a standard SJW Takeover. We've seen this play out over and over ever since Ghostbsters 2016. 14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it.  He's not entirely wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnspartan on Nov 18, 2019 19:47:07 GMT
Elizabeth Banks has begun phase 14 of a standard SJW Takeover. We've seen this play out over and over ever since Ghostbsters 2016. 14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it. "Phases of an SJW Takeover" 1. SJW CRITICISM – A popular Intellectual Property is criticized by SJWs for being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and a smattering of other things. This will often manifest in media articles and academic papers which push this false narrative. This phase can take place over the course of years, or even decades. 2. IP IS ABOUT TO UNDERGO REBOOT – or sequel, or reimagining, or remake, or whatever term is fashionable at the time. The rebooted production will tout “firsts,” first female, first person of color, first LGBTQ+, etc., even if the IP has already had them before. They do this to contrast their new version as far more virtuous and progressive than the previous version, which they spent years or decades labeling as racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, etc. 3. THE BARNACLING – SJWs barnacle themselves to the IP within the production, and start transforming the IP from its original form. SJWs sometimes refer to this strategy as entryism. Production staff make claims that long time customers will stay with the IP no matter what the changes are. SJWs outside of the production barnacle themselves to the customer base, and start lecturing long time customers. Shill media SJWs write articles pontificating about how diversity is good business and touting diversity “firsts,” without regard to the fact that the IP may have already been diverse for years or decades. 4. CUSTOMER CRITICISM – Long time customers of the IP voice legitimate criticism of the new direction. 5. SJW RESPONSE TO CUSTOMER CRITICISM – A large customer backlash is created when SJWs both inside of the production, and outside of it in the customer base and shill media, falsely accuse critics of being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, etc., usually to protect a criticized political message being pushed by the newly transformed IP that the customer base is criticizing. SJWs will also attempt to stigmatize use of the term “SJW” as a pejorative, so that you’re unable to identify the problem and articulate points. SJWs will completely ignore female, people of color, and LGBTQ+ critics, and/or marginalize their voices. 6. DISMISSING AND IGNORING THE BACKLASH – Shill media publishes pieces declaring that the backlash doesn’t exist. Shill media also publishes pieces instructing others to ignore the “tiny vocal minority,” some of whom used to be the old “gatekeepers” of the community. 7. SUPPRESSING THE BACKLASH – Blogs, internet forums, social media, and other websites delete or otherwise “redact” critical comments and posts in discussion forums under the aegis of “hate speech,” and may even engage in the complete banning of accounts. Some websites remove their comments sections altogether. 8. BACKLASH INTENSIFIES – As an inevitable side effect of suppression the Streisand Effect takes hold, as customers seek out other venues to express their criticism, and some publish their own, growing the backlash exponentially. 9. HATE HOAXES, FALSE FLAGS & CLONED ACCOUNTS – The rank and file SJW activists in the customer base get heavily involved in shouting down critics, and creating hate hoaxes and false flags in an effort to discredit those critics. Such efforts are also intended to be picked up by shill media outlets, which will then report on them to further mischaracterize the critical customers. SJWs will create cloned social media and discussion forum accounts that mimic known critical voices, in an attempt to discredit them and/or divert payments/donations for products or causes away from the critical customer. SJWs will often operate hidden forums where these tactics are organized. 10. ESCALATION OF ATTACKS – SJWs will report posts as spam or a violation of rules, and attempt to get social media accounts suspended, and posts deleted. SJWs will start to send out false press releases to rival websites in an effort to discredit their critical competitors. SJWs will begin to search through public records such as child support or foreclosures in an effort to embarrass loud voices, a practice known as doxing. SJWs will send out phishing attempts in an effort to gain personal information. SJWs may attempt to contact the workplaces of loud voices, in an attempt to punish critical customers financially for speaking out. SJWs may attack normal people with physical violence. 11. IP FAILURES – The IP starts to falter as customers start to drift away and sales begin to plummet. This is either due to a drop in quality of the IP, or the poor treatment of the customers, or a combination of both. 12. THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS – A female member of the production (it could also be a member of the LGBTQ+ community) is granted victim status over a fishy event in order to deflect from the failures of the IP, and shame critical customers into silence. The damsel in distress is used as a political pawn both by the SJWs inside the IP, and the SJWs outside of the IP in the customer base and shill media. If the first Damsel In Distress doesn’t quite work, another one will come. 13. DESPERATE PLEAS FOR COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT – “White Knights” in the shill media call for creative authorities to smack down the backlash, and restore control of the narrative in response to The Damsel In Distress event. Shill media publishes multiple articles with the same talking points and catchphrases such as “toxic fan base” or “bad faith” in an effort to mischaracterize the customer base. Major news outlets report on the story, and quote those “think” pieces as authoritative. 14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it. 15. THE FINAL PUSH – Shill media entities, and rank and file SJWs tell long time customers to go find something else if they don’t like it anymore, in a last ditch effort to push critics out of the “community” once and for all. “Don’t like it, don’t buy it.” They will also engage in Gaslighting, a method of psychologically manipulating an adversary into thinking that they’re crazy. This will oftentimes come in the form of the SJW saying that their brand of politics has always been in the IP from the very beginning. 16. IP BLEEDING – The IP starts to hemorrhage money, as long time customers begin to abandon the IP in droves. 17. CUSTOMER BASE OBLITERATION – The customer base is utterly destroyed, leaving behind only the small handful of SJWs who don’t make any purchases. 18. THE END – The new incarnation of the IP comes to an end. Since the majority of the customer base has abandoned it, there’s no more controversy or discussion about it. It’s over. The best case scenario is that the original IP is largely forgotten with the exception of a few die-hards who still carry the torch. The worst case scenario is that the new incarnation of the IP overwrites the original, and the original IP is forgotten altogether and overshadowed by the new incarnation in all future shill media mentions. 19. MIGRATION – The SJW is primarily interested in popular IPs that have a large audience, which can serve as a vehicle to spread their political message as widely as possible. Therefore, the remaining SJWs jump ship from the decimated IP, to devour a new IP that is popular and undergoing a transitional phase that they can barnacle themselves to through entryism. 20. REBIRTH – The process begins again, in the newly targeted IP. If normal creators have jumped ship from the targeted IP and start fresh in their own endeavors, SJWs will chase them down on the internet and in real life, to endlessly harass them in an effort to destroy their ability to make that new effort a success. The new effort will be maligned with the help of the SJW legacy media.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Nov 18, 2019 19:50:04 GMT
"Phases of an SJW Takeover" 1. SJW CRITICISM – A popular Intellectual Property is criticized by SJWs for being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and a smattering of other things. This will often manifest in media articles and academic papers which push this false narrative. This phase can take place over the course of years, or even decades. 2. IP IS ABOUT TO UNDERGO REBOOT – or sequel, or reimagining, or remake, or whatever term is fashionable at the time. The rebooted production will tout “firsts,” first female, first person of color, first LGBTQ+, etc., even if the IP has already had them before. They do this to contrast their new version as far more virtuous and progressive than the previous version, which they spent years or decades labeling as racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, etc. 3. THE BARNACLING – SJWs barnacle themselves to the IP within the production, and start transforming the IP from its original form. SJWs sometimes refer to this strategy as entryism. Production staff make claims that long time customers will stay with the IP no matter what the changes are. SJWs outside of the production barnacle themselves to the customer base, and start lecturing long time customers. Shill media SJWs write articles pontificating about how diversity is good business and touting diversity “firsts,” without regard to the fact that the IP may have already been diverse for years or decades. 4. CUSTOMER CRITICISM – Long time customers of the IP voice legitimate criticism of the new direction. 5. SJW RESPONSE TO CUSTOMER CRITICISM – A large customer backlash is created when SJWs both inside of the production, and outside of it in the customer base and shill media, falsely accuse critics of being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, etc., usually to protect a criticized political message being pushed by the newly transformed IP that the customer base is criticizing. SJWs will also attempt to stigmatize use of the term “SJW” as a pejorative, so that you’re unable to identify the problem and articulate points. SJWs will completely ignore female, people of color, and LGBTQ+ critics, and/or marginalize their voices. 6. DISMISSING AND IGNORING THE BACKLASH – Shill media publishes pieces declaring that the backlash doesn’t exist. Shill media also publishes pieces instructing others to ignore the “tiny vocal minority,” some of whom used to be the old “gatekeepers” of the community. 7. SUPPRESSING THE BACKLASH – Blogs, internet forums, social media, and other websites delete or otherwise “redact” critical comments and posts in discussion forums under the aegis of “hate speech,” and may even engage in the complete banning of accounts. Some websites remove their comments sections altogether. 8. BACKLASH INTENSIFIES – As an inevitable side effect of suppression the Streisand Effect takes hold, as customers seek out other venues to express their criticism, and some publish their own, growing the backlash exponentially. 9. HATE HOAXES, FALSE FLAGS & CLONED ACCOUNTS – The rank and file SJW activists in the customer base get heavily involved in shouting down critics, and creating hate hoaxes and false flags in an effort to discredit those critics. Such efforts are also intended to be picked up by shill media outlets, which will then report on them to further mischaracterize the critical customers. SJWs will create cloned social media and discussion forum accounts that mimic known critical voices, in an attempt to discredit them and/or divert payments/donations for products or causes away from the critical customer. SJWs will often operate hidden forums where these tactics are organized. 10. ESCALATION OF ATTACKS – SJWs will report posts as spam or a violation of rules, and attempt to get social media accounts suspended, and posts deleted. SJWs will start to send out false press releases to rival websites in an effort to discredit their critical competitors. SJWs will begin to search through public records such as child support or foreclosures in an effort to embarrass loud voices, a practice known as doxing. SJWs will send out phishing attempts in an effort to gain personal information. SJWs may attempt to contact the workplaces of loud voices, in an attempt to punish critical customers financially for speaking out. SJWs may attack normal people with physical violence. 11. IP FAILURES – The IP starts to falter as customers start to drift away and sales begin to plummet. This is either due to a drop in quality of the IP, or the poor treatment of the customers, or a combination of both. 12. THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS – A female member of the production (it could also be a member of the LGBTQ+ community) is granted victim status over a fishy event in order to deflect from the failures of the IP, and shame critical customers into silence. The damsel in distress is used as a political pawn both by the SJWs inside the IP, and the SJWs outside of the IP in the customer base and shill media. If the first Damsel In Distress doesn’t quite work, another one will come. 13. DESPERATE PLEAS FOR COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT – “White Knights” in the shill media call for creative authorities to smack down the backlash, and restore control of the narrative in response to The Damsel In Distress event. Shill media publishes multiple articles with the same talking points and catchphrases such as “toxic fan base” or “bad faith” in an effort to mischaracterize the customer base. Major news outlets report on the story, and quote those “think” pieces as authoritative. 14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrity and creative cast & crew SJWs inside of the IP answer the shill media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical customers, typically over false accusations. Critical customers will respond to the admonishments, and SJWs will call that response “abuse” and/or “harassment,” sometimes alluding to the notion that “creatives” deserve special consideration. Remember, what SJWs call “abuse” and/or “harassment” when customers do it, they call “activism” when they do it. 15. THE FINAL PUSH – Shill media entities, and rank and file SJWs tell long time customers to go find something else if they don’t like it anymore, in a last ditch effort to push critics out of the “community” once and for all. “Don’t like it, don’t buy it.” They will also engage in Gaslighting, a method of psychologically manipulating an adversary into thinking that they’re crazy. This will oftentimes come in the form of the SJW saying that their brand of politics has always been in the IP from the very beginning. 16. IP BLEEDING – The IP starts to hemorrhage money, as long time customers begin to abandon the IP in droves. 17. CUSTOMER BASE OBLITERATION – The customer base is utterly destroyed, leaving behind only the small handful of SJWs who don’t make any purchases. 18. THE END – The new incarnation of the IP comes to an end. Since the majority of the customer base has abandoned it, there’s no more controversy or discussion about it. It’s over. The best case scenario is that the original IP is largely forgotten with the exception of a few die-hards who still carry the torch. The worst case scenario is that the new incarnation of the IP overwrites the original, and the original IP is forgotten altogether and overshadowed by the new incarnation in all future shill media mentions. 19. MIGRATION – The SJW is primarily interested in popular IPs that have a large audience, which can serve as a vehicle to spread their political message as widely as possible. Therefore, the remaining SJWs jump ship from the decimated IP, to devour a new IP that is popular and undergoing a transitional phase that they can barnacle themselves to through entryism. 20. REBIRTH – The process begins again, in the newly targeted IP. If normal creators have jumped ship from the targeted IP and start fresh in their own endeavors, SJWs will chase them down on the internet and in real life, to endlessly harass them in an effort to destroy their ability to make that new effort a success. The new effort will be maligned with the help of the SJW legacy media. You write all that or just copy and paste it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Nov 18, 2019 19:52:02 GMT
Except that ISN'T what she meant because she didn't even know Spielberg directed The Color Purple. Why are you defending her? Someone can only say so much dumb shit before people start seeing a pattern. She makes excuses is what she does. Let's conveniently ignore all the other female led action movies that were successful that aren't comic book movies. She'd find an excuse for every one of them if she wasn't ignoring them. I'm not defending her.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 18, 2019 19:53:17 GMT
Except that ISN'T what she meant because she didn't even know Spielberg directed The Color Purple. Why are you defending her? Someone can only say so much dumb shit before people start seeing a pattern. She makes excuses is what she does. Let's conveniently ignore all the other female led action movies that were successful that aren't comic book movies. She'd find an excuse for every one of them if she wasn't ignoring them. I'm not defending her. It seemed like you were kind of making excuses for her even if it was in a backhanded sort of way. Maybe she meant this. Maybe she meant that.
|
|