• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

It's men's fault charlie angels is a bomb

ludin said:
Elizabeth Banks suggests her '''Charlie'''s Angels''' box office bomb is because men '''don'''t go see''' female-led action films | Fox News

I don't know where these people come up with this stuff.
if the movie bombed it is because the movie was bad and well people aren't interested.

Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman, Atomic Blonde
the tomb raider remake was pretty successful as well.
so her blaming men not wanting to see a female action flick is 100% false.

I haven't seen it yet but the last charlie angels were bad.
Click to expand...

I thought that men who ragged on the Ghostbusters remake were Nazi misogynists.

Then I saw the Ghostbusters remake.

:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
AProudLefty said:
It's a good question. The forum is misleading because there's nothing political about it so it's a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Sexism is most certainly a political issue that is addressed very often by our politicians. Wtf are you talking about?
 
ajn678 said:
Sexism is most certainly a political issue that is addressed very often by our politicians. Wtf are you talking about?
Click to expand...

I am sure you can explain.
 
Felis Leo said:
Perhaps Elizabeth Banks is onto something, ludin. Speaking only for myself, I don't see many female-led action movies. But then, I don't see very many action movies period, unless they are in the science fiction or fantasy genres. I have not had one iota of interest in Charlie's Angels. I also find Kristen Stewart utterly without charm, charisma or stage presence.
Click to expand...

Her argument lacks credibility because other female-led action movies have been successful; some very much so (Wonder Woman). Also, the last Charlie's Angels did way better than this one and I'm pretty sure it wasn't just women watching. Banks made a bad excuse for the movie's poor performance. Everything from poor marketing (I didn't even know it was released) to lackluster cast, to just a bad movie could have been the culprits.
 
Charley's Angels was a crap TV show and a crap movie.

Now it's a crap movie again.
 
Current Hollywood film realities:

#1 - 80% of all Hollywood films today are made with what the movie going audience in China prefers. Robots, big explosions, heavily filled with CGI special effects, and sparse on dialog and/or character development.

#2 "Me too" themes may be entertaining to audiences who tune in to watch Oprah or The View, but not so much to everyone else out looking for a couple of hours to disengage from politics or reality. That is what PBS is for; that is what documentaries do.

#3 As it applies to the creators of this film:

2b6d308e236315a3c282982d397fb52a.jpg


...therefore see items 1&2 above.
 
Internet Movie Data Base gives the movie 4.1 out of 10 Rotten Tomatoes have it 59% Boy, if we can all forget politics and put out heads together..someway..somehow, we might be able to figure out the reason Men and Women are not going to see this pile of crap. :)
 
HIP56948 said:
Internet Movie Data Base gives the movie 4.1 out of 10 Rotten Tomatoes have it 59% Boy, if we can all forget politics and put out heads together..someway..somehow, we might be able to figure out the reason Men and Women are not going to see this pile of crap. :)
Click to expand...

Some of the greatest films ever made have low IMDB numbers.

Also, politics often enters into these ratings when a subject is controversial.
 
ludin said:
your opinion is noted and dismissed.
Click to expand...


Yes, we knew that.

Evidently there must be some right wing talk radio show that uses “dismissed” as a way to shut down an argument, because several of you talk radio types are parroting it.

I guess you think its witty.

If you can’t tell the difference between the serious business of politics and the not at all important matter of a box office failure, than you probably actually think you’ve won and argument by being rude and saying “dismissed”.
 
TomFitz said:
Yes, we knew that.

Evidently there must be some right wing talk radio show that uses “dismissed” as a way to shut down an argument, because several of you talk radio types are parroting it.

I guess you think its witty.

If you can’t tell the difference between the serious business of politics and the not at all important matter of a box office failure, than you probably actually think you’ve won and argument by being rude and saying “dismissed”.
Click to expand...
no because what you posted was meaningless.
nothing to do with the topic or anything else.
 
Mach said:
So why do you believe this is an important discussion to be had in the Political forums?
Is some random Hollywood actress trying to cover her ass with a box office bomb...important to the nation? To the politics of the nation?

I believe it's not.
Click to expand...

I think it's very important that Fox report something that one woman said to keep the men riled up.

It works.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Some of the greatest films ever made have low IMDB numbers.

Also, politics often enters into these ratings when a subject is controversial.
Click to expand...

I have not seen that.

But then, I seldom give more than a passing glance at IMDb numbers. Usually, I’m looking at the cast,who directed, who produced, and at what studio.

But it is useful if you are looking for whether the mob thinks the picture is entertaining. The mob usually doesn’t place too much stock in a film’s actual quality.

But it is useful if you’re a film buff, as the ratings tend to be more accurate, because classic movie fans tend to value quality,
 
ludin said:
I think that it is more of the issue. People simply do not find Charlies Angels interesting anymore.

If she is onto something then why did
Captain Marvel
Wonder Woman
and Atomic Blonde be such huge hits?

they were all female centric action hero movies.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is a problem with Charlie's Angels in itself.

I just saw a picture of four of them from the new movie. The words motley crew come to mind.

The TV series featured 3 girls that looked like they were a cohesive group. These latest people do not look like they belong together at all.
 
CaughtInThe said:
I think it's very important that Fox report something that one woman said to keep the men riled up.

It works.
Click to expand...


Infotainment is what Fox does.

Watch it during the day. It’s full of no news stories that make for “good television”. Small town scandals, dog bites cat stories, Hollywood and tabloid gossip, car chases and political talking points, generally served as soto voche sidebar comments on stories, all delivered by news models in short skirts and ken doll types.

In the evening, they become right wing talk radio with pictures. Serving up the trash and vitriol much of the audience had been steadily consuming all day long.
 
Felis Leo said:
And there is one more thing: Those movies were apparently well-written, well-acted and starred women who had charisma and stage presence. Kristen Stewart has all the charm (and likeness) of a hungry possum I might find rooting around in my trashcan.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen this movie so I don't know if this is a continuation of the last movies, or if they completely ignore the existence of the previous girls.

The original movie had a cameo by Jacquelyn Smith thereby tying it to the TV series.

I agree with you about Kristin Stewart.
 
3leftsdoo said:
I thought that men who ragged on the Ghostbusters remake were Nazi misogynists.

Then I saw the Ghostbusters remake.

:eek: :eek: :eek:
Click to expand...

Yeah, that movie was such a hit, they are making another one hoping you will forget the last one even exists.
 
Wonder Woman would like to tell Ms. Banks to go pound sand....
 
3leftsdoo said:
Some of the greatest films ever made have low IMDB numbers.

Also, politics often enters into these ratings when a subject is controversial.
Click to expand...

What you say is true. I also based my post on hearing from my daughter, her friend and my wife. My wife made the comment "Felt like a lousy Life-Time movie that was injected with some sort of phony male steroids." My Daughter said "Those women (in the film) would never be accepted by N.O.W"
On the other hand, you'd be amazed at the trash I watch!
 
Felis Leo said:
Perhaps Elizabeth Banks is onto something, ludin. Speaking only for myself, I don't see many female-led action movies. But then, I don't see very many action movies period, unless they are in the science fiction or fantasy genres. I have not had one iota of interest in Charlie's Angels. I also find Kristen Stewart utterly without charm, charisma or stage presence.
Click to expand...

I dont know about her acting skills, but Kristen Stewart is pretty hot. :mrgreen:
 
I personally wouldn't see it for the same reason I don't see most of the Hollywood remakes: they're totally uncreative.

I don't need to see 10 different renditions of Charlie's Angels. What I want to see is brand new material that's creatively produced, thought provoking, and entertaining.

Hollywood is really scraping the bottom of the barrel these days. Maybe they should stop hiring millennials who think all this nostalgic writing is going to captivate audiences, when really all it does is bore us to death.
 
ludin said:
If she is onto something then why did
Captain Marvel
Wonder Woman
and Atomic Blonde be such huge hits?
Click to expand...
Was skimming the thread and first read this as "...and Atomic Blonde have such huge tits?"

Freudian slip, I suppose. :doh
 
The Charlie's Angels trope was always sexist. Maybe that's why it doesn't translate well now...without the T&A focus, what's left that isn't done better in a million other examples? If you want to put up women in a lead role in a positive way, maybe don't start out with a franchise that is based on their objectification?
 
Mason66 said:
I don't think it is a problem with Charlie's Angels in itself.

I just saw a picture of four of them from the new movie. The words motley crew come to mind.

The TV series featured 3 girls that looked like they were a cohesive group. These latest people do not look like they belong together at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah they don't seem to meet the standard of Charlie angels that was set.
 
COTO said:
Was skimming the thread and first read this as "...and Atomic Blonde have such huge tits?"

Freudian slip, I suppose. :doh
Click to expand...

i said huge hits. i mentioned nothing of tits.
yes you did a freudian slip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom