|
Post by janntosh on Jul 1, 2024 14:05:39 GMT
Don’t know if you work for Disney or anything but you seem to be whistling past the graveyard. One hit doesn’t change how they’ve damaged some of their biggest franchises This is the next argument I expected. Actually, it was the first. "Well, they've still had a bunch of other failures." You guys make up blanket arguments as to why all Disney/woke/Hollywood/whoever is to blame for your insecurity movies fail these days, then you have to come up with something else when they succeed. Hey, at least you haven't fallen back to "Disney must be buying out empty theaters to make it look like it's doing well," because that was an all-timer. I don't work for Disney. I just said I haven't seen either Inside Out movie and couldn't sit through Elemental. I hate the Star Wars sequel trilogy (not because it's 'woke,' but because the writing sucks). I just have an aversion to the culture war stupidity constantly displayed on this board. Disney and the progressives are the ones that started the culture war stuff. It’s not going back into the bottle And yes one hit doesn’t change the fact they have had so many failures.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 1, 2024 14:47:27 GMT
This is the next argument I expected. Actually, it was the first. "Well, they've still had a bunch of other failures." You guys make up blanket arguments as to why all Disney/woke/Hollywood/whoever is to blame for your insecurity movies fail these days, then you have to come up with something else when they succeed. Hey, at least you haven't fallen back to "Disney must be buying out empty theaters to make it look like it's doing well," because that was an all-timer. I don't work for Disney. I just said I haven't seen either Inside Out movie and couldn't sit through Elemental. I hate the Star Wars sequel trilogy (not because it's 'woke,' but because the writing sucks). I just have an aversion to the culture war stupidity constantly displayed on this board. Disney and the progressives are the ones that started the culture war stuff. It’s not going back into the bottle And yes one hit doesn’t change the fact they have had so many failures. By doing what? Including more minorities? I'm sure that's made your life so much more difficult, I can see why you're so upset. It's not going back into the bottle as long as screaming youtubers and those brainwashed by them continue to see what they want to see, instead of what's actually there. It does change the narrative, though. It forces people like you to invent a new explanation as to why these movies are failing or succeeding. Kind of a non-sequitur here, but you know what's funny? I've never seen a Toy Story movie and I saw Lightyear in the theater. I thought it was fine, probably because I've never seen a Toy Story movie. See, I understand people's disassociation with it on the grounds that it didn't feel like a Toy Story movie. Anyone who avoided it because of THE MESSAGE or whatever, I don't really understand where they're coming from, and I never will.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 1, 2024 17:17:42 GMT
Disney and the progressives are the ones that started the culture war stuff. It’s not going back into the bottle And yes one hit doesn’t change the fact they have had so many failures. By doing what? Including more minorities? I'm sure that's made your life so much more difficult, I can see why you're so upset. It's not going back into the bottle as long as screaming youtubers and those brainwashed by them continue to see what they want to see, instead of what's actually there. It does change the narrative, though. It forces people like you to invent a new explanation as to why these movies are failing or succeeding. Kind of a non-sequitur here, but you know what's funny? I've never seen a Toy Story movie and I saw Lightyear in the theater. I thought it was fine, probably because I've never seen a Toy Story movie. See, I understand people's disassociation with it on the grounds that it didn't feel like a Toy Story movie. Anyone who avoided it because of THE MESSAGE or whatever, I don't really understand where they're coming from, and I never will.
Can you explain how Scarface, a non-diverse movie about CUBANS, a movie with NO black characters, became a staple in hiphop culture, why every black rapper wants to be Cuban Tony Montana, played by Italian American Al Pacino?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 1, 2024 17:22:57 GMT
It’s called knowing your audience. A movie like Barbie was able to heavily appeal and tap into that female audience What progressives online are demanding though is they take what was done with Barbie and transplant that into other franchises. Nobody demanded Barbie be changed to appeal more to male audiences, but franchises like Star Wars and Marvel have to change to appeal more to female audiences. Again, are we just talking about having a female lead here? "Changed" is hardly the word I'd use for the two Abrams rehashes otherwise. Also, what is the actual problem with girls liking Star Wars?
JUST having a female lead hasn't been JUST having a female lead in years.
The problem isn't girls liking Star Wars, because millions of them did in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s, the problem is saying 'men being the main Star Wars audience is the problem, so we need to get rid of all the white male characters or just make them the incompetent villains and make the heroes lesbian minority women who are perfect and flawless with no training or effort, so all the lesbian minority women out there feel represented'.
There's also an issue with making these women 'hero' characters soulless murderers who kill innocent people for episodes before it's revealed oh wait, they're actually the GOOD guy. Based on what? They've already exhibited behavior just as bad if not worse than the sith lords.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 1, 2024 17:34:11 GMT
Again, are we just talking about having a female lead here? "Changed" is hardly the word I'd use for the two Abrams rehashes otherwise. Also, what is the actual problem with girls liking Star Wars?
JUST having a female lead hasn't been JUST having a female lead in years.
The problem isn't girls liking Star Wars, because millions of them did in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s, the problem is saying 'men being the main Star Wars audience is the problem, so we need to get rid of all the white male characters or just make them the incompetent villains and make the heroes lesbian minority women who are perfect and flawless with no training or effort, so all the lesbian minority women out there feel represented'.
There's also an issue with making these women 'hero' characters soulless murderers who kill innocent people for episodes before it's revealed oh wait, they're actually the GOOD guy. Based on what? They've already exhibited behavior just as bad if not worse than the sith lords.
Last I checked, Rey was neither lesbian nor a minority, nor was she going around murdering innocent people. And the villains of Star Wars movies have always been white men (or aliens). It was actually Disney that introduced the first female villain into the movies in Phasma. And I don't think any minority character achieved anything in the sequel trilogy as significantly heroic as Lando blowing up the second Death Star 41 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 1, 2024 17:37:36 GMT
By doing what? Including more minorities? I'm sure that's made your life so much more difficult, I can see why you're so upset. It's not going back into the bottle as long as screaming youtubers and those brainwashed by them continue to see what they want to see, instead of what's actually there. It does change the narrative, though. It forces people like you to invent a new explanation as to why these movies are failing or succeeding. Kind of a non-sequitur here, but you know what's funny? I've never seen a Toy Story movie and I saw Lightyear in the theater. I thought it was fine, probably because I've never seen a Toy Story movie. See, I understand people's disassociation with it on the grounds that it didn't feel like a Toy Story movie. Anyone who avoided it because of THE MESSAGE or whatever, I don't really understand where they're coming from, and I never will.
Can you explain how Scarface, a non-diverse movie about CUBANS, a movie with NO black characters, became a staple in hiphop culture, why every black rapper wants to be Cuban Tony Montana, played by Italian American Al Pacino? Can you explain what this has to do with anything? I need to understand what point you're trying to prove here. Wait, is it that Hollywood shouldn't hire Cubans to play Cubans, they should just stick with Italians playing Cubans? The ol' "Nobody ever thought it was racist before," defense? This isn't exactly a hot topic for me, and it has zero to do with the conversation, but I disagree with you nevertheless. Pacino makes a better Cuban than John Wayne made a Mongol, that's for sure. Anyway, as far as hip hop culture goes, it's often entwined with the 'gangster' culture, which explains the allure of a story like Scarface to that culture. Anything else you need help with?
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 1, 2024 18:13:18 GMT
So there will probably be two now? Deadpool 3 should at least get very close.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jul 1, 2024 18:21:23 GMT
I would say the number one reason why Lightyear and Strange World did so poorly is because the marketing was by and large very ineffective. Most people I ran into (online and in person) didn't know what to make of Lightyear - is it a movie based on the action figure of Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story? Is it the reverse? Why does the toy version sound nothing like Chris Evans and the movie version sound nothing like Tim Allen? The storyline also looked pretty uninteresting and not much justifies something that resembles feeling "toyetic". Controversy surrounding two female characters kissing was just the icing to the cake for some people.
Strange World looked very bland, the trailers presented nothing to really get people intrigued, and the movie itself was fairly nonsensical. The subplot of the son character being into boys (controversy that came closer to release) was, from a storytelling point of view, the least of the movie's issues, as the characters just were not engaging enough, the conflict didn't excite, and every time it was at the bat, the jokes kept missing the ball.
The Dial of Destiny underperformed in large part due to its big budget. If you do the math, it cost more than the original trilogy combined (even when adjusted for inflation). To make matters worse? The set-up presented in the trailers didn't create enough interest. The "hook" of Indiana Jones being older and going on perhaps one last adventure was already done with the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull years prior. Had it been made for a smaller budget, it may have performed better at the box office.
Barbie was a financial success for a few reasons. The first is that it was set to open on the same day as Oppenheimer, which lead to the internet fascination of "Barbenheimer", where people would pay to see both movies on the same day. The second is commercial appeal, Barbie is still a successful brand. The third reason, I think, is because of the strikes the filmmakers were not able to explain their intentions for the picture that completely to the trades, which sparked conversation amongst movie goers who went to see it and walked out with polarizing views on it - feminist propaganda, or satire? The variety of perspective sparked many conversations. The fourth reason I would say is that Barbie was the first "girl movie" that was a major studio release in a long time. Such movies still are made, but most go to streaming to air on television, but Barbie came along with the same kind of budget and marketing strategy as any of the other tentpoles coming out and was unapologetically a "girl movie". Female viewers could finally claim something as their own and argue that it was made for them. (not to say men cannot enjoy Barbie)
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 1, 2024 22:07:13 GMT
Can you explain how Scarface, a non-diverse movie about CUBANS, a movie with NO black characters, became a staple in hiphop culture, why every black rapper wants to be Cuban Tony Montana, played by Italian American Al Pacino? Can you explain what this has to do with anything? I need to understand what point you're trying to prove here. Wait, is it that Hollywood shouldn't hire Cubans to play Cubans, they should just stick with Italians playing Cubans? The ol' "Nobody ever thought it was racist before," defense? This isn't exactly a hot topic for me, and it has zero to do with the conversation, but I disagree with you nevertheless. Pacino makes a better Cuban than John Wayne made a Mongol, that's for sure. Anyway, as far as hip hop culture goes, it's often entwined with the 'gangster' culture, which explains the allure of a story like Scarface to that culture. Anything else you need help with?
The issue isn't a non-Cuban playing a Cuban, the issue is somehow millions of black people did not CARE that Tony Montana didn't look like them, that they were not being represented, that Scarface wasn't a 'more diverse' movie.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 1, 2024 22:11:08 GMT
JUST having a female lead hasn't been JUST having a female lead in years.
The problem isn't girls liking Star Wars, because millions of them did in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s, the problem is saying 'men being the main Star Wars audience is the problem, so we need to get rid of all the white male characters or just make them the incompetent villains and make the heroes lesbian minority women who are perfect and flawless with no training or effort, so all the lesbian minority women out there feel represented'.
There's also an issue with making these women 'hero' characters soulless murderers who kill innocent people for episodes before it's revealed oh wait, they're actually the GOOD guy. Based on what? They've already exhibited behavior just as bad if not worse than the sith lords.
Last I checked, Rey was neither lesbian nor a minority, nor was she going around murdering innocent people. And the villains of Star Wars movies have always been white men (or aliens). It was actually Disney that introduced the first female villain into the movies in Phasma. And I don't think any minority character achieved anything in the sequel trilogy as significantly heroic as Lando blowing up the second Death Star 41 years ago.
Still a Mary Sue who needed no training or effort to best the HEROES of the original trilogy in their fields of expertise, merely being a woman made her perfect enough. Why? Because apparently women heroes shouldn't HAVE to grow or learn or suffer setbacks as the male heroes did, that would apparently demean the female heroes, they have to be built up by making everybody else around them an incompetent, which again, would be like some new STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER being able to defeat Darth Vader, the 2nd most powerful and dangerous person in the universe, where an entire galaxy failed.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 1, 2024 22:34:10 GMT
Last I checked, Rey was neither lesbian nor a minority, nor was she going around murdering innocent people. And the villains of Star Wars movies have always been white men (or aliens). It was actually Disney that introduced the first female villain into the movies in Phasma. And I don't think any minority character achieved anything in the sequel trilogy as significantly heroic as Lando blowing up the second Death Star 41 years ago.
Still a Mary Sue who needed no training or effort to best the HEROES of the original trilogy in their fields of expertise, merely being a woman made her perfect enough. Why? Because apparently women heroes shouldn't HAVE to grow or learn or suffer setbacks as the male heroes did, that would apparently demean the female heroes, they have to be built up by making everybody else around them an incompetent, which again, would be like some new STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER being able to defeat Darth Vader, the 2nd most powerful and dangerous person in the universe, where an entire galaxy failed.
The only time I recall Rey ever "besting" a hero of the original trilogy is when she fixes the electrical overload on the Falcon, but at that point it had been in the possession of her boss and she'd probably worked on it whereas Han hadn't seen it for years. And you're literally just inventing things to be mad about with the Vader thing, but since you brought it up - Disney did have a "new strong female character" attempt to fight Vader in that Obi-Wan show and Vader effortlessly kicked her ass. People still complained though, because all it takes to set them off is a female character breathing.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 1, 2024 22:59:24 GMT
Can you explain what this has to do with anything? I need to understand what point you're trying to prove here. Wait, is it that Hollywood shouldn't hire Cubans to play Cubans, they should just stick with Italians playing Cubans? The ol' "Nobody ever thought it was racist before," defense? This isn't exactly a hot topic for me, and it has zero to do with the conversation, but I disagree with you nevertheless. Pacino makes a better Cuban than John Wayne made a Mongol, that's for sure. Anyway, as far as hip hop culture goes, it's often entwined with the 'gangster' culture, which explains the allure of a story like Scarface to that culture. Anything else you need help with?
The issue isn't a non-Cuban playing a Cuban, the issue is somehow millions of black people did not CARE that Tony Montana didn't look like them, that they were not being represented, that Scarface wasn't a 'more diverse' movie.
Uh... should I bother pointing out that the largest self-identifying ethic group in Cuba is WHITE? You thought most Cubans were black?! No wonder this argument made no sense from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 1, 2024 23:16:26 GMT
The issue isn't a non-Cuban playing a Cuban, the issue is somehow millions of black people did not CARE that Tony Montana didn't look like them, that they were not being represented, that Scarface wasn't a 'more diverse' movie.
Uh... should I bother pointing out that the largest self-identifying ethic group in Cuba is WHITE? You thought most Cubans were black?! No wonder this argument made no sense from the beginning. I think she's saying that because black people enjoy Scarface in spite of it not having black people, they are thus capable of enjoying movies without black people, and therefore movies don't need or should not have black people. Of course, the irony of people who claim to not understand why a little Asian child or whatever might like to see an Asian in the entertainment they consume is how absolutely steamed they themselves get over the real or imagined slights they see in representations of white people. Then again, racists wouldn't be racists if they were able to recognize their commonalities with other races.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 1, 2024 23:19:00 GMT
The issue isn't a non-Cuban playing a Cuban, the issue is somehow millions of black people did not CARE that Tony Montana didn't look like them, that they were not being represented, that Scarface wasn't a 'more diverse' movie.
Uh... should I bother pointing out that the largest self-identifying ethic group in Cuba is WHITE? You thought most Cubans were black?! No wonder this argument made no sense from the beginning.
That's your assumption. I'm the one pointing out movies that are actually GOOD, can do it without having to make everybody feel represented. How many gay people do you think like Scarface? But there are no gay characters in it. So why do they like it? Why do black people like a movie that doesn't have any black people in it? We're told today this is not a thing, it's not acceptable, a movie HAS to have gay characters if we want gay viewers to watch it or it's just oppressive. Jaws, a movie with only white people, who as far as we can tell, are all straight, $476 million box office. First Star Wars with no Lando, no Asian Imperials, no lesbian witches, $775 million, which adjusted for inflation, would be a $4 billion box office movie today. The FIRST Toy Story with no gay characters, $373 million. E.T., no gays, no blacks, no Asians, etc., $360 million. Batman (1989), white heroes, white villains, very minor role for Billy Dee Williams, $400 million. The original Ghostbusters, 1 black guy, no Hispanics, no Asians, no gays, no kickass women characters who upstage the men, $230 million. So you think the ONLY people going to these movies looked like the starring actors?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 2, 2024 0:20:16 GMT
Uh... should I bother pointing out that the largest self-identifying ethic group in Cuba is WHITE? You thought most Cubans were black?! No wonder this argument made no sense from the beginning. I think she's saying that because black people enjoy Scarface in spite of it not having black people, they are thus capable of enjoying movies without black people, and therefore movies don't need or should not have black people. Of course, the irony of people who claim to not understand why a little Asian child or whatever might like to see an Asian in the entertainment they consume is how absolutely steamed they themselves get over the real or imagined slights they see in representations of white people. Then again, racists wouldn't be racists if they were able to recognize their commonalities with other races.
Hey everybody gets wanting to see themselves in something, but the actual execution often leaves something to be desired. Ironside with Raymond Burr lasted 8 seasons, Ironside with Blair Underwood lasted 9 episodes, only 5 of them aired. The reboot of Murder, She Wrote starring a black woman, didn't happen.
Most people are fat, and they are vastly under-represented in the media. Should there be a plus size Justice League where every super hero in spandex and miniskirts is 300 pounds? Would that get a big reception at the box office? Even among the fat community?
Unfortunately most productions today lack the subtlety and finesse 90s kids' shows had: Power Rangers, Ghostwriter, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo, etc., all very diverse, and it worked, because it flowed naturally, it wasn't beating people over the head with it, it just happened and it was done without a political social agenda by people who 'enjoy making men uncomfortable' or by companies that send out memos 'don't hire white people'.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 2, 2024 3:52:47 GMT
I think she's saying that because black people enjoy Scarface in spite of it not having black people, they are thus capable of enjoying movies without black people, and therefore movies don't need or should not have black people. Of course, the irony of people who claim to not understand why a little Asian child or whatever might like to see an Asian in the entertainment they consume is how absolutely steamed they themselves get over the real or imagined slights they see in representations of white people. Then again, racists wouldn't be racists if they were able to recognize their commonalities with other races.
Hey everybody gets wanting to see themselves in something, but the actual execution often leaves something to be desired. Ironside with Raymond Burr lasted 8 seasons, Ironside with Blair Underwood lasted 9 episodes, only 5 of them aired. The reboot of Murder, She Wrote starring a black woman, didn't happen.
Most people are fat, and they are vastly under-represented in the media. Should there be a plus size Justice League where every super hero in spandex and miniskirts is 300 pounds? Would that get a big reception at the box office? Even among the fat community?
Unfortunately most productions today lack the subtlety and finesse 90s kids' shows had: Power Rangers, Ghostwriter, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo, etc., all very diverse, and it worked, because it flowed naturally, it wasn't beating people over the head with it, it just happened and it was done without a political social agenda by people who 'enjoy making men uncomfortable' or by companies that send out memos 'don't hire white people'.
I think you have to be pretty fit and active to fight crime every day, thus an overweight superhero would seem odd (though fortunately enough plenty of overweight people do get represented in the roles of their loyal friends and compatriots, ie the Ned character in the new Spider-Man trilogy and Rebel Wilson in Wonder Woman). Is there any reason an athletic black person can't fight crime?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 2, 2024 4:08:53 GMT
Hey everybody gets wanting to see themselves in something, but the actual execution often leaves something to be desired. Ironside with Raymond Burr lasted 8 seasons, Ironside with Blair Underwood lasted 9 episodes, only 5 of them aired. The reboot of Murder, She Wrote starring a black woman, didn't happen.
Most people are fat, and they are vastly under-represented in the media. Should there be a plus size Justice League where every super hero in spandex and miniskirts is 300 pounds? Would that get a big reception at the box office? Even among the fat community?
Unfortunately most productions today lack the subtlety and finesse 90s kids' shows had: Power Rangers, Ghostwriter, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo, etc., all very diverse, and it worked, because it flowed naturally, it wasn't beating people over the head with it, it just happened and it was done without a political social agenda by people who 'enjoy making men uncomfortable' or by companies that send out memos 'don't hire white people'.
I think you have to be pretty fit and active to fight crime every day, thus an overweight superhero would seem odd (though fortunately enough plenty of overweight people do get represented in the roles of their loyal friends and compatriots, ie the Ned character in the new Spider-Man trilogy and Rebel Wilson in Wonder Woman). Is there any reason an athletic black person can't fight crime?
Is there a reason a trans Asian might not be well received as the Black Panther?
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 2, 2024 4:12:17 GMT
I think you have to be pretty fit and active to fight crime every day, thus an overweight superhero would seem odd (though fortunately enough plenty of overweight people do get represented in the roles of their loyal friends and compatriots, ie the Ned character in the new Spider-Man trilogy and Rebel Wilson in Wonder Woman). Is there any reason an athletic black person can't fight crime?
Is there a reason a trans Asian might not be well received as the Black Panther?
The Black Panther persona is passed from monarchs in an African state. Are there trans Asian monarchs in Africa?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 2, 2024 4:50:32 GMT
Is there a reason a trans Asian might not be well received as the Black Panther?
The Black Panther persona is passed from monarchs in an African state. Are there trans Asian monarchs in Africa?
We're supposed to believe there were black Samurais in Japan hundreds of years ago when historically there was ONE black person who was essentially the samurai's caddy.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jul 2, 2024 5:19:22 GMT
The Black Panther persona is passed from monarchs in an African state. Are there trans Asian monarchs in Africa?
We're supposed to believe there were black Samurais in Japan hundreds of years ago when historically there was ONE black person who was essentially the samurai's caddy.
So black people have only a couple of mainstream superheroes to represent them, but because of a black samurai in some undisclosed film, they should have black superheroes taken away from them?
|
|