I agree that Hollywood will do whatever they think will make money, in their minds they are agnostic.
I just think they live in a relatively liberal bubble and can't comprehend that the rest of the country doesn't have their sensibilities sometimes. And they leave a ton of money on the table because of it.
Jmo.

I mean, isn't it kind of obvious that they're aware of this? There's a reason there were 3 Taken films, more and more Jurassic Parks, more and more Transformers, sequels to Harry Potter sequels, etc. Most films are proven commodities targeted towards wide demographics.

But there's also a more untapped audience of people who are underrepresented in film, and when that hits the right note it hits big. See Black Panther, Wonder Woman, Crazy Rich Asians, etc.

How does she explain making $8mil (opening weekend) this time versus the 2000 treatment making $40mil (opening weekend)?

Maybe the point of Charlie's Angels is sexy and dangerous, not just dangerous women that have the shape and haircut of 8yo boys. Also the Diaz treatment seemed....wait for it....fun. action-comedy is wider appeal. Bill Murray vs Patrick Stewart, completely different tone for people judging by the trailer.

I mean, I don't know what kind of 8 year olds you hang out with but...

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

It will bomb.

---

Which seems most sexual, least sexual?



?w=980&q=75

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

Banks blamed the films failure on white men and misogyny. If she kept her yap shut, there wouldnt be a tenth the talk about it.

Most would say "it looks like sht" "the reboot no one asked for" "a cast no one cares to watch". Seriously the biggest angel is KS who is only popular because of twilight. She isnt half as hot as any of the previous 6 Angels. Ironically she isnt as hot as Banks as bosleys daughter or whatever her role is.

The Debt said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

Banks blamed the films failure on white men and misogyny. If she kept her yap shut, there wouldnt be a tenth the talk about it.

Most would say "it looks like sht" "the reboot no one asked for" "a cast no one cares to watch". Seriously the biggest angel is KS who is only popular because of twilight. She isnt half as hot as any of the previous 6 Angels. Ironically she isnt as hot as Banks as bosleys daughter or whatever her role is.

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

Forum 13 is only for approved posts.

No discussion will be had on a message board, especially discussion that is 100% dead on about why a stupid idea for a movie was, in fact, stupid.

M.C. Swag said:

---

The Debt said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

Banks blamed the films failure on white men and misogyny. If she kept her yap shut, there wouldnt be a tenth the talk about it.

Most would say "it looks like sht" "the reboot no one asked for" "a cast no one cares to watch". Seriously the biggest angel is KS who is only popular because of twilight. She isnt half as hot as any of the previous 6 Angels. Ironically she isnt as hot as Banks as bosleys daughter or whatever her role is.

---

---

For someone who doesn't care, you sure do post a lot about not caring.

Never change Forum 13

TresPuertas said:

---

UnderoosAg said:

---

If they aren't using trans men then its sexist.

---

This is kind of my question. I'm 1000% sure this thing is going to absolutely bomb.

I guess my curiosity stems from the following question:

Is hollywood aware that not many people want to see this woke-ertainment and willing to lose money to make their political points.

or..... and

are they stupid and actually think people want this?

---

Yep.

If you want to see how out of touch Hollywood is, look at the "Listen to me because I'm famous" video about not voting for Trump.

Edit: I didn't post this to make this thread political, just to point out how highly they think of themselves and how little credit they give to the intelligence of those that aren't in their tiny little circle of ignorance.

CJS4715 said:

---

The discussion re: this movie on the politics board was more a more interesting read.

---

Yeah, no it wasn't. Unless by interesting you mean everyone agrees with you.

As for the film itself and speaking as one of the few here who actually saw it, I really don't get the whole SJW argument here. Other than a female Bosley, which was doesn't seem like much of a leap for a team of female agents, there wasn't anything in this significantly different than past iterations. The other thread mentioned that Patrick Stewart's character was gay, which I can't recall even being hinted at in the film if that was the case.

There are lots of reasons why this bombed, the largest being that it's something that just wasn't in demand from audiences, but there's been far more discussion about the politics around the film than anything that was actually in the film.

fig96 said:

---

CJS4715 said:

---

The discussion re: this movie on the politics board was more a more interesting read.

---

Yeah, no it wasn't. Unless by interesting you mean everyone agrees with you.

As for the film itself and speaking as one of the few here who actually saw it, I really don't get the whole SJW argument here. Other than a female Bosley, which was doesn't seem like much of a leap for a team of female agents, there wasn't anything in this significantly different than past iterations. The other thread mentioned that Patrick Stewart's character was gay, which I can't recall even being hinted at in the film if that was the case.

There are lots of reasons why this bombed, the largest being that it's something that just wasn't in demand from audiences, but there's been far more discussion about the politics around the film than anything that was actually in the film.

---

There is no rule that one has to be conservative to post on the political board. There are liberals who post there every day. The rules are the same for them as everybody else. As long as they don't troll and follow the other rules, they can continue to post there.

I actually go there to have my point of view challenged. I find that far more interesting than otherwise.

TCTTS said:

---

TresPuertas said:

---

UnderoosAg said:

---

If they aren't using trans men then its sexist.

---

This is kind of my question. I'm 1000% sure this thing is going to absolutely bomb.

I guess my curiosity stems from the following question:

Is hollywood aware that not many people want to see this woke-ertainment and willing to lose money to make their political points.

or.....

are they stupid and actually think people want this?

---

A) Hollywood is run by executives trying desperately to keep their jobs.

B) Literally every movie is a massive gamble.

If a certain studio's slate doesn't perform well over X number of years, those execs are removed and a new team is brought in. This happens over and over and over again in Hollywood. So the best chance a team of execs has at keeping their jobs is to make as many "safe bets" as humanly possible. This is where IP - intellectual property - comes in. If a property has name brand recognition, or an already built-in audience, execs are more willing to bet on it because they know at least a certain audience will likely show up. This is how and why we get so many sh*tty reboots like this latest iteration of Charlie's Angels. Some of these IP bets are extremely smart. Some of them are extremely dumb. CA certainly seems to fall in the latter category.

It never ceases to amaze me that people - especially those who frequent the politics board - think Hollywood's business model is somehow based solely on trying to be "woke." I promise you, the people running the show are nothing more than money-hungry capitalists trying desperately to keep their jobs. That doesn't mean they're not "Libs" and that doesn't mean that diversity or "wokeness" or whatever isn't an aim from time to time.

But self-preservation, above-all, is what drives the decision-making in this town.

Not idealism.

---

What you say has the ring of absolute truth.

It just seems that the people with reigns on many projects have ideological tunnel vision and studio managers are under cutting their profit margins literally into the millions.

Nothing ruins a party like somebody spouting off gay politics and the same goes for movies.

Just go with what sells: p_ssy and guns. In outer space, in ancient Rome, in contemporary America. It's not Chinese Calculus.

TRADITIONAL heros
TRADITIONAL stories
TRADITIONAL (heterosexual) romance

Bards don't sing the tale of history's losers. They sing of the glorious victors.


That pretty much eliminates Christin Stewart and any of her fans.

Are you writing this down? I'm telling you how to retire in Martha's Vineyard here.

Furthermore, consider this.

Traditional audiances mean reliable income.

Traditional audiances like the same things yesterday, today and tomorrow. Not because they lack sophistication, but because their values don't fluctuate much over their lifetime. Because those values work again and again.

They like Rocky 3, Red Dawn, Ghostbusters and Three Men and a Baby just as much today as when they were released.

Don't bet on what surveys say of what's trending with newer generations. Bet on timeless human nature: victory in battle, overcoming odds and successful mating/genetic continuation with an alpha male/female.

People want the boy to get the girl, the hero to save the day and they hate radical departure from that formula.

A young George Lucas followed the perfect formula in Star Wars with the hopeful young hero people want to be, the rule breaking rouge they wish they could be and the beautiful but strong princess they want to be or long to hold. It told of overcoming insurmountable odds to slay the tyrant in a magical world that felt like anything could happen.

The greatest sin(s) Rian Johnson/Kathleen Kennedy committed was not necessarily broadcasting untraditional politics. Although they are unrealistic.

It was their lack of reverence (and even disdain) for cultural heroes and that which average people aspire to be.

Nobody wants to be Rose, the naive fat girl. No one wants to be Holdo, the condescending ***** who mocks one of the few likable characters in the franchise's"new direction". And no one wants to be Fin, the clumsy guy who can't get the girl he wants (Rey),but instead settles for the frumpy dumb one (Rose).

They wanted to see Luke be a bad ass - a mature Jedi whom had mastered the force after years of refining his art. They wanted to see him be the catalyst for Rey to become a great Jedi in her own right.

Instead they find a burned out, bitter old man who had lost faith in everything audiences wanted to believe in (if only for two hours). Instead they found that which we fear most in our own lives.

Many will brush off my views with cynicism as being outdated or simple. But you can not argue the spoils that TRADITIONAL American values have reaped. We are the richest and most powerful dynasty the world has ever known surpassing all empires before us as the peak of human civilization and accomplishment.

The "haves" want to hear their victories told and the "have nots" want to dream of being something greater.

But nobody wants to be Rose. Not even Rose.

Current IMDB ratings:

Charlie's Angels - 4.1

Ishtar- 4.4

Freddie Got Fingered- 4.6.

It's that bad apparently,

Out of more I'd curiosity I read the comments on IMDB for it, they fall into three main categories...

Terrible script and acting.
Terrible idea to cast Kristen Stewart
And another movie where women are strong, men are weak, woke garbage - When the original series and earlier franchise did just fine in showing strong women without all of that.

And now Banks blaming misogyny essentially will only further doom it. Don't know how many of these bombs it will take before Hollywood finally realizes the formula doesn't work.

PaulSimonsGhost said:

---

Furthermore, consider this.

Traditional audiances mean reliable income.

Traditional audiances like the same things yesterday, today and tomorrow. Not because they lack sophistication, but because their values don't fluctuate much over their lifetime. Because those values work again and again.

They like Rocky 3, Red Dawn, Ghostbusters and Three Men and a Baby just as much today as when they were released.

Don't bet on what surveys say of what's trending with newer generations. Bet on timeless human nature: victory in battle, overcoming odds and successful mating/genetic continuation with an alpha male/female.

People want the boy to get the girl, the hero to save the day and they hate radical departure from that formula.

A young George Lucas followed the perfect formula in Star Wars with the hopeful young hero people want to be, the rule breaking rouge they wish they could be and the beautiful but strong princess they want to be or long to hold. It told of overcoming insurmountable odds to slay the tyrant in a magical world that felt like anything could happen.

The greatest sin(s) Rian Johnson/Kathleen Kennedy committed was not necessarily broadcasting untraditional politics. Although they are unrealistic.

It was their lack of reverence (and even disdain) for cultural heroes and that which average people aspire to be.

Nobody wants to be Rose, the naive fat girl. No one wants to be Holdo, the condescending ***** who mocks one of the few likable characters in the franchise's"new direction". And no one wants to be Fin, the clumsy guy who can't get the girl he wants (Rey),but instead settles for the frumpy dumb one (Rose).

They wanted to see Luke be a bad ass - a mature Jedi whom had mastered the force after years of refining his art. They wanted to see him be the catalyst for Rey to become a great Jedi in her own right.

Instead they find a burned out, bitter old man who had lost faith in everything audiences wanted to believe in (if only for two hours). Instead they found that which we fear most in our own lives.

Many will brush off my views with cynicism as being outdated or simple. But you can not argue the spoils that TRADITIONAL American values have reaped. We are the richest and most powerful dynasty the world has ever known surpassing all empires before us as the peak of human civilization and accomplishment.

The "haves" want to hear their victories told and the "have nots" want to dream of being something greater.

But nobody wants to be Rose. Not even Rose.

---

Good Lord you're a good poster

aTmAg said:

---

fig96 said:

---

CJS4715 said:

---

The discussion re: this movie on the politics board was more a more interesting read.

---

Yeah, no it wasn't. Unless by interesting you mean everyone agrees with you.

As for the film itself and speaking as one of the few here who actually saw it, I really don't get the whole SJW argument here. Other than a female Bosley, which was doesn't seem like much of a leap for a team of female agents, there wasn't anything in this significantly different than past iterations. The other thread mentioned that Patrick Stewart's character was gay, which I can't recall even being hinted at in the film if that was the case.

There are lots of reasons why this bombed, the largest being that it's something that just wasn't in demand from audiences, but there's been far more discussion about the politics around the film than anything that was actually in the film.

---

There is no rule that one has to be conservative to post on the political board. There are liberals who post there every day. The rules are the same for them as everybody else. As long as they don't troll and follow the other rules, they can continue to post there.

I actually go there to have my point of view challenged. I find that far more interesting than otherwise..

---

No, I mean I went and read the actual thread and it's everyone agreeing and the OP talking about how by telling this forum it would bomb and we didn't need this film you'd have thought they kicked our dog (which is strange as pretty much everyone here agreed that it would bomb and that this film didn't need to get made). I also found out there's apparently gays and "trannies" galore in this film, which is odd as I didn't see that actually watching it.

And I'm sure others post there, but 96% of the threads are conservative or making fun of the left by people who just want to win their argument or make fun of "libtards". I fall fairly in the center politically and enjoy having my views challenged and talking about issues with others who actually want to engage, but I have no desire to attempt to discuss things with people who obviously don't have any interest in listening.

Mark Hamill summed Star Wars up best - a pirate, princess, farm boy and wizard. It was that basic fairy tale, combined with modern technology that makes it timeless. Now what do we have?

"It's the stuff that fairytales are made of. We have a fairy princess, we have an innocent farm boy who yearns for adventure. Alec Guinness is a wise old wizard who teaches me a mystical Force, somewhat like Merlin would teach a young King Arthur. Harrison Ford plays Han Solo, a cynical space pirate who we hire to transport us through the galaxy."

https://io9.gizmodo.com/watch-a-young-mark-hamill-explain-star-wars-the-stuff-1748453365

SlimM said:

---

CapCityAg89 said:

---

Absolutely a thread I would expect from a politics board guy. The movie won't bomb because "people don't want to see 'woke' movies" - the movie will bomb if it's not entertaining; it will be a surprise hit if it IS entertaining. That's it. And yes, it can absolutely be entertaining with a "butch" female lead. No doubts.

---

Interesting to see the OP's opinions on this thread get treated like the politics board treats people with opposing views.

---

I guess I missed the name calling and telling him how he's ruining our country.

Where did anyone do anything but relatively nicely disagree with some of the OP's premise (or calling Kristen Stewart a "butch lesbian") and generally agree that it will probably bomb?

The Debt said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

Banks blamed the films failure on white men and misogyny. If she kept her yap shut, there wouldnt be a tenth the talk about it.

Most would say "it looks like sht" "the reboot no one asked for" "a cast no one cares to watch". Seriously the biggest angel is KS who is only popular because of twilight. She isnt half as hot as any of the previous 6 Angels. Ironically she isnt as hot as Banks as bosleys daughter or whatever her role is.

---

I guess you have to be of a certain age and/or a Twilight fan to see what so great about KS. I don't see it all.

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

We got over your wall!

The Debt said:

---

YouBet said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

why tf are all these politics board posters coming here?

---

We got over your wall!

---

there was no wall for much of the territory between the pb and forum 13.

Maybe someone should build one. A big beautiful wall...

---

And r&p will pay for it