Picking on the matrix sequels is just silly at this point, the wachowski's screwed up, their reach exceeded their grasp, there is no reason to point out how badly they fucked up.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Picking on the matrix sequels is just silly at this point, the wachowski's screwed up, their reach exceeded their grasp, there is no reason to point out how badly they fucked up.
It's like the Star Wars sequels, they're easy targets and fun to tear apart.
Eh I can see that, but for me its not Lucas where they damaged an existing really good trilogy, they tried to follow up their fun actiony anime movie with a bunch of nonesense no one wanted and effectively hurt their own cool brand before it had a chance to get cooler.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Things like the Matrix sequels make me wish that there were post-mortems for films, where the people involved sat down and talked about what they were trying to do and why things did and didn't work. Never going to happen though, I can't see any directors or screenwriters wanting to admit to making mistakes. It'd probably be career suicide.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
0
Options
DeadfallI don't think you realize just how rich he is.In fact, I should put on a monocle.Registered Userregular
Things like the Matrix sequels make me wish that there were post-mortems for films, where the people involved sat down and talked about what they were trying to do and why things did and didn't work. Never going to happen though, I can't see any directors or screenwriters wanting to admit to making mistakes. It'd probably be career suicide.
Eh directors and writers admit to mistakes all the time.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Things like the Matrix sequels make me wish that there were post-mortems for films, where the people involved sat down and talked about what they were trying to do and why things did and didn't work. Never going to happen though, I can't see any directors or screenwriters wanting to admit to making mistakes. It'd probably be career suicide.
Things like the Matrix sequels make me wish that there were post-mortems for films, where the people involved sat down and talked about what they were trying to do and why things did and didn't work. Never going to happen though, I can't see any directors or screenwriters wanting to admit to making mistakes. It'd probably be career suicide.
Nah, Blomcamp admitted he fucked up on Elysium.
Only a little, and the only reason 'fucked it up' was said was because the question was phrased that way, I am certain that Blomkamp would not describe it as being fucked up on his own. Some mistakes and flaws sure (just the script really), but the majority of the work put into the film was good in his opinion.
There's a ton of movies where the more skilled female mentor character is beaten by the newbie male character, but I can't think of any that got awards for the acting.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Chappie is currently sitting at 30% at Rotten Tomatoes, and Devin Faraci's review today called it worse than Elysium and the smoking gun that District 9 was a fluke and Blomkamp is a washout.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
Chappie is currently sitting at 30% at Rotten Tomatoes, and Devin Faraci's review today called it worse than Elysium and the smoking gun that District 9 was a fluke and Blomkamp is a washout.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
And here comes the dread he's attached to the new aliens movie. Though I guess with Aliens he can't just redo district 9 this time with aliens... shit he can't do that can he?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Considering that the short film he made before District Nine (of which Chappie is the full length version) is literally just "Robot police! What if, huh!?" I'm unsurprised that Chappie lacks a story beyond what it plagiarized from Short Circuit.
Elysium wasn't a bad film, it's just kind of half-baked and soulless. My god, though, dat production design.
+3
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
Speakng of Hugh Jackman, anyone ever see Australia? I heard it was just all the aboriginal stuff from Quigley Down Under and Midnight Oil's Beds are Burning for 3 hours.
The whole gender thing in modern cinema just seems so weak an argument to me (and in the case of that comic borderline insultingly misleading) because we've been living in an era of gender subversion for a long time and the current generation has grown up in it, if people actually looked at it objectively instead of looking for Jack Handy Deep Thought retweets. More often than not the chick always stays better than the dude or is the equal.
Look at the Icebox from Little Giants, Julie The Cat Gaffney (didn't even have to look that up memory burn beer me five), every Disney Princess movie post Beauty & the Beast, Lisa Simpson, Jessie in Toy Story, any darn sitcom since the 90's, Hitgirl from Kick Ass, every female from Fast & the Furious, it's to the point where it feels mandated and any deviation is seen as regression when not really, it's just a bit worn out.
I'd rather people focus on how dumb the "chosen one" idea is. It's kind of sad when Kung Fu Panda has to be the one to poke fun at it, which coincidentally also has its own gender subversion thing going on.
The Lego Movie also poked fun at 'the chosen one' but I don't think it did anything more than that. It explicitly stated that the idea was made up and that anyone could be the chosen one, but in practice it was no different from every other 'chosen one' story in media.
Also, cool female mentor, newb male who is best thing.
Gvzbgul on
0
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
I think y'all are taking this overly literally. The point is just this common male fantasy of "all of a sudden I'm a badass because I was special all along" often comes at the expense of female characters and female power fantasies.
I'm willing to accept this as a common sexist cliche, but little evidence has been provided in this thread. Wanted, and that's about it.
Matrix doesn't count, because it's Morpheus that finds Neo, trains him, and is surpassed by him, and I'm pretty sure Morpheus was a dude. Lego Movie is a little iffy since it was largely a satire of The Matrix.
So we have a total of one film in support of our thesis? Not only is that not enough data to establish a trend, it's not even enough data to establish a straight line.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
He's never shown to be more competent than her and he spends just as much, if not more, time training than she did.
And her sacrifice at the end might as well have been flipping a coin. They both died after all.
He died killing the main bad guy, she died before him fighting a drone. There was no flipping a coin with the script, no movie is going to choose Blunt over Cruise when the chips are down.
His power was the only one activated in the movie, her's was used up when he got his. That's why he knew what choices to make to save her. Which was a plot point with the helicopter. She's not his equal with that abilities, and he quickly becomes as good as she does about half way into the film.
wut
If I remember correctly, she died killing an ALPHA in single combat.
Which ironically is how the Omega knew they were coming, because she killed an Alpha.
And Cruise killed the final boss to defeat the aliens permanently. She didn't.
No, this is silly.
EOT Spoilers
He doesn't defeat the enemy, he just makes it close enough to pull the pins on the grenades. There's no skill or badassery really involved here. At the end, there is an Alpha that needs distracting and a grenade that needs planting. She says she'll distract the Alpha. Mostly, it seems, because she's still better then him and distracting the Alpha while he runs over and grenades the Omega is the harder job.
+11
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
Chappie is currently sitting at 30% at Rotten Tomatoes, and Devin Faraci's review today called it worse than Elysium and the smoking gun that District 9 was a fluke and Blomkamp is a washout.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
I've been saying since District 9 that Blomkamp does good ideas that he then doesn't develop or do anything with. All his movies so far have been that.
Maybe he's just only good at short films where a single concept can sustain you?
I think some people should just stop consuming media with male protagonists if it bothers them that much, or comes as some sort of a shock when a film starring Tom Cruise is primarily about Tom Cruise.
there really is no need to take this angle. I think it's an interesting discussion and good to point out the trend. that doesn't mean I'm going to boycott movies with men in them or something.
That's the disconnect, really. I don't find it interesting to put every last thing under the lens of gender politics. I find it dreary.
I think part of what made District 9 so successful was the pseudo-documentary intro and epilogue. It made the film feel real. Elysium just throws you in and expects you to be invested in this strange world without finding it ridiculous.
The whole gender thing in modern cinema just seems so weak an argument to me (and in the case of that comic borderline insultingly misleading) because we've been living in an era of gender subversion for a long time and the current generation has grown up in it, if people actually looked at it objectively instead of looking for Jack Handy Deep Thought retweets. More often than not the chick always stays better than the dude or is the equal.
Gender subversion is a new thing, and Hollywood is nowhere near equal with its female roles. There's progress, the problem isn't fixed yet. To this day female lead super-hero, action movies and in general are a fraction of the roles males are, and more prone to getting worse films since Hollywood puts less effort into it and writes off the successes as flukes. Even the female stars are paid less behind the scenes I.E. Jennifer Lawrence. It'll be 18 movies before Marvel starts filming their only female lead super-hero movie in the pipeline. Black Widow's not getting a solo movie any time soon either.
Look at the Icebox from Little Giants, Julie The Cat Gaffney (didn't even have to look that up memory burn beer me five), every Disney Princess movie post Beauty & the Beast, Lisa Simpson, Jessie in Toy Story, any darn sitcom since the 90's, Hitgirl from Kick Ass, every female from Fast & the Furious, it's to the point where it feels mandated and any deviation is seen as regression when not really, it's just a bit worn out.
Exceptions to the rule.
I'd rather people focus on how dumb the "chosen one" idea is. It's kind of sad when Kung Fu Panda has to be the one to poke fun at it, which coincidentally also has its own gender subversion thing going on.
Ask yourself this - how many films are about female "chosen ones"? And judge them how their written opposed to their male counterparts.
I think some people should just stop consuming media with male protagonists if it bothers them that much, or comes as some sort of a shock when a film starring Tom Cruise is primarily about Tom Cruise.
there really is no need to take this angle. I think it's an interesting discussion and good to point out the trend. that doesn't mean I'm going to boycott movies with men in them or something.
That's the disconnect, really. I don't find it interesting to put every last thing under the lens of gender politics. I find it dreary.
#fakeliberal #cryptohitler etc etc etc.
it's cool, just maybe don't belittle others who feel like discussing it
So It Goes on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Chappie is currently sitting at 30% at Rotten Tomatoes, and Devin Faraci's review today called it worse than Elysium and the smoking gun that District 9 was a fluke and Blomkamp is a washout.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
I've been saying since District 9 that Blomkamp does good ideas that he then doesn't develop or do anything with. All his movies so far have been that.
Maybe he's just only good at short films where a single concept can sustain you?
I think it's mostly a problem of someone having enough buzz to get too much creative control.
Everyone wants creative control. Not everybody needs it. Hell, most people don't need it. Even the true auteurs who use it well still manage to fumble on occasion, and nothing Blomkamp has done really points to him being an auteur, it mostly points to him being really good with visuals and really big on high-concept ideas.
Luckily, Blomkamp sounds like the kind of person who can take criticism without being too defensive, and this guy with a good producer and talented storytellers could be a legit talent. But for now, he's mostly making feature-length FX reels.
Chappie is currently sitting at 30% at Rotten Tomatoes, and Devin Faraci's review today called it worse than Elysium and the smoking gun that District 9 was a fluke and Blomkamp is a washout.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
I've been saying since District 9 that Blomkamp does good ideas that he then doesn't develop or do anything with. All his movies so far have been that.
Maybe he's just only good at short films where a single concept can sustain you?
I think it's mostly a problem of someone having enough buzz to get too much creative control.
Everyone wants creative control. Not everybody needs it. Hell, most people don't need it. Even the true auteurs who use it well still manage to fumble on occasion, and nothing Blomkamp has done really points to him being an auteur, it mostly points to him being really good with visuals and really big on high-concept ideas.
Luckily, Blomkamp sounds like the kind of person who can take criticism without being too defensive, and this guy with a good producer and talented storytellers could be a legit talent. But for now, he's mostly making feature-length FX reels.
Blomkamp is the guy you want pitching your movie and then directing someone else's script treatment of that idea I think.
Like, both District 9 and Elysium are legitimately fantastic sci-fi premises in the great tradition of sci-fi social commentary. But it's like he doesn't realise that's what he's actually pitched or perhaps just doesn't know how to follow through.
Maybe you are right and he is just not the kind of guy (at least right now) with enough skill/talent for full creative control. He needs an editor. Tons of artists have been improved with good editors.
Pfft, it was more mildly wounded. Flying isn't so hard, crash landing is just another aspect! He probably hurt himself more during the filming of the new Star Wars.
The whole gender thing in modern cinema just seems so weak an argument to me (and in the case of that comic borderline insultingly misleading) because we've been living in an era of gender subversion for a long time and the current generation has grown up in it, if people actually looked at it objectively instead of looking for Jack Handy Deep Thought retweets. More often than not the chick always stays better than the dude or is the equal.
Gender subversion is a new thing, and Hollywood is nowhere near equal with its female roles. There's progress, the problem isn't fixed yet. To this day female lead super-hero, action movies and in general are a fraction of the roles males are, and more prone to getting worse films since Hollywood puts less effort into it and writes off the successes as flukes. Even the female stars are paid less behind the scenes I.E. Jennifer Lawrence. It'll be 18 movies before Marvel starts filming their only female lead super-hero movie in the pipeline. Black Widow's not getting a solo movie any time soon either.
Look at the Icebox from Little Giants, Julie The Cat Gaffney (didn't even have to look that up memory burn beer me five), every Disney Princess movie post Beauty & the Beast, Lisa Simpson, Jessie in Toy Story, any darn sitcom since the 90's, Hitgirl from Kick Ass, every female from Fast & the Furious, it's to the point where it feels mandated and any deviation is seen as regression when not really, it's just a bit worn out.
Exceptions to the rule.
I'd rather people focus on how dumb the "chosen one" idea is. It's kind of sad when Kung Fu Panda has to be the one to poke fun at it, which coincidentally also has its own gender subversion thing going on.
Ask yourself this - how many films are about female "chosen ones"? And judge them how their written opposed to their male counterparts.
That's not really what the comic was bagging on though. Certainly the lack of female centric movies is well established, but the idea that "hero's journey" type movies usually involve males easily overtaking the more skilled females just isn't borne out. It just isn't that common.
Interestingly I'm trying to decide if edge of tomorrow would be more progressive if you switched the two leads genders, and I can't really decide. The big pro is obviously you go from supporting female lead to just a straight female lead, but on the other hand, a lot of the characteristics of the two characters already seem reversed.
Blunt is the hardcore badass who doesn't need/want help, is pretty emotionless/closed off, get's pissed when cruise start's being sentimental, plus it seems like there's several instances where she uses her skills to save cruise, while cruise only ever "saves" her by telling her exactly what's about to happen so she doesn't get into trouble in the first place (not really being saved so much as being warned). Cruise on the other hand starts off as inept, not really interested in fighting, shows a lot of emotions rather than just being a killing machine, ect.. Flipping the characters would make them seem more like stereotypes to me.
"The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
+8
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
The whole gender thing in modern cinema just seems so weak an argument to me (and in the case of that comic borderline insultingly misleading) because we've been living in an era of gender subversion for a long time and the current generation has grown up in it, if people actually looked at it objectively instead of looking for Jack Handy Deep Thought retweets. More often than not the chick always stays better than the dude or is the equal.
Gender subversion is a new thing, and Hollywood is nowhere near equal with its female roles. There's progress, the problem isn't fixed yet. To this day female lead super-hero, action movies and in general are a fraction of the roles males are, and more prone to getting worse films since Hollywood puts less effort into it and writes off the successes as flukes. Even the female stars are paid less behind the scenes I.E. Jennifer Lawrence. It'll be 18 movies before Marvel starts filming their only female lead super-hero movie in the pipeline. Black Widow's not getting a solo movie any time soon either.
There's a lot of other factors as to why there aren't female driven action movies. Could be a lack of interest, the target audience (women) really not caring for those types of movies because it sure seemed like the Tomb Raider franchise didn't set the world on fire, international markets.
The money side, who knows? Rogen made more than Franco for The Interview, should we be up in arms about that? or is it because Rogen wrote it/produced it/etc etc. The good Hemsworth made next to nothing (in terms of Hollywood) doing Thor for the first three films until everyone renegotiated, but was able to carry that notoriety from the films over into bigger $$$ for other movie roles. Lawrence was signed up for Hunger Games before she won the oscar, and her contract probably reflects that. Pratt probably makes less than Lawrence. And I bet Jolie makes more money per movie than those three combined.
And so what if it's taken Marvel 18 movies to get to Captain Marvel? If you want to look at the numbers despite all the hype about her she can barely keep her own comic from being cancelled and her protege outsells her by a decent and consistent margin, she's been a B/C-list hero for the longest time until this push to make her A-list which began in 2012 with the monker change (years after the MCU was already putting things in place and Phase 2 started), and every character Marvel has used before her is completely justified in terms of presence and history to build a franchise around. Hell, just be thankful the talking racoon gamble made so much money to let Marvel try the second tier of characters they have (which in reality is the third tier because Sony and Fox had the first tier).
Look at the Icebox from Little Giants, Julie The Cat Gaffney (didn't even have to look that up memory burn beer me five), every Disney Princess movie post Beauty & the Beast, Lisa Simpson, Jessie in Toy Story, any darn sitcom since the 90's, Hitgirl from Kick Ass, every female from Fast & the Furious, it's to the point where it feels mandated and any deviation is seen as regression when not really, it's just a bit worn out.
Exceptions to the rule.
Is it really? The point is that you have a whole generation who grew up where the girl is often superior to the boys or clearly an equal and it's going to finally show through in hopefully less obnoxious ways, and in fact already has in a lot of places, so to act like this is a never narrowing gap is silly or that super drastic action is needed. Hillary Swank as Karate Kid did more for equality than Patricia Arquette in every movie she did ever, Dream Warriors included, and that's a roundhouse kick of a fact.
I'd rather people focus on how dumb the "chosen one" idea is. It's kind of sad when Kung Fu Panda has to be the one to poke fun at it, which coincidentally also has its own gender subversion thing going on.
Ask yourself this - how many films are about female "chosen ones"? And judge them how their written opposed to their male counterparts.
[/quote]
Fantasy has largely been a male dominated area, so of course it will be about male protagonists because that is the lens used. And as time has gone on (Divergent, Twilight, Hunger Games, that City of Bones whatever) we see the female chosen ones also appear, ham fisted and still as bad as guy dude bro chosen ones.
Now ask yourself this - how many romcoms are about men in the city working for a magazine trying to have it all while finding love? And judge how they're written opposed to their female counterparts.
:heartbeat:
tldr TRL LOL: Everyone just chill the hell out and float with me in the skies of levity
Is Highlander a chosen one movie? Teacher Sean Connery, student Christopher Lambert, Connery is killed by psycho, Lambert beats psycho and THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
It's like the Star Wars sequels, they're easy targets and fun to tear apart.
pleasepaypreacher.net
And the police chief in Super Troopers.
xbl - HowYouGetAnts
steam - WeAreAllGeth
Eh directors and writers admit to mistakes all the time.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Nah, Blomcamp admitted he fucked up on Elysium.
Ironically, most of the reviews I'm reading reiterate what Blomkamp himself was just talking about earlier this week with Elysium, in that the film is little more than a single high-concept idea ("What if . . . a robot could think!) foundering around for a feature-length running time without any kind of story to support it or take the concept anywhere interesting.
I also hear it's one of the worst roles in Hugh Jackman's career, so maybe there's some morbid curiosity value to this film yet.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
And here comes the dread he's attached to the new aliens movie. Though I guess with Aliens he can't just redo district 9 this time with aliens... shit he can't do that can he?
pleasepaypreacher.net
I'm definitely still going to see it. Even the rotten reviews still describe the movie as something I'm keen on seeing.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This is pretty terrible both as an X-Men parody and a Wes Anderson riff.
But since none of those things are true this isn't like a Wes Anderson film at all.
The whole gender thing in modern cinema just seems so weak an argument to me (and in the case of that comic borderline insultingly misleading) because we've been living in an era of gender subversion for a long time and the current generation has grown up in it, if people actually looked at it objectively instead of looking for Jack Handy Deep Thought retweets. More often than not the chick always stays better than the dude or is the equal.
Look at the Icebox from Little Giants, Julie The Cat Gaffney (didn't even have to look that up memory burn beer me five), every Disney Princess movie post Beauty & the Beast, Lisa Simpson, Jessie in Toy Story, any darn sitcom since the 90's, Hitgirl from Kick Ass, every female from Fast & the Furious, it's to the point where it feels mandated and any deviation is seen as regression when not really, it's just a bit worn out.
I'd rather people focus on how dumb the "chosen one" idea is. It's kind of sad when Kung Fu Panda has to be the one to poke fun at it, which coincidentally also has its own gender subversion thing going on.
Also, cool female mentor, newb male who is best thing.
I'm willing to accept this as a common sexist cliche, but little evidence has been provided in this thread. Wanted, and that's about it.
Matrix doesn't count, because it's Morpheus that finds Neo, trains him, and is surpassed by him, and I'm pretty sure Morpheus was a dude. Lego Movie is a little iffy since it was largely a satire of The Matrix.
So we have a total of one film in support of our thesis? Not only is that not enough data to establish a trend, it's not even enough data to establish a straight line.
No, this is silly.
EOT Spoilers
What needed explaining? It's some sort of machine leader/aggregate consciousness or something. There's nothing else that need be covered.
I've been saying since District 9 that Blomkamp does good ideas that he then doesn't develop or do anything with. All his movies so far have been that.
Maybe he's just only good at short films where a single concept can sustain you?
That's the disconnect, really. I don't find it interesting to put every last thing under the lens of gender politics. I find it dreary.
#fakeliberal #cryptohitler etc etc etc.
Gender subversion is a new thing, and Hollywood is nowhere near equal with its female roles. There's progress, the problem isn't fixed yet. To this day female lead super-hero, action movies and in general are a fraction of the roles males are, and more prone to getting worse films since Hollywood puts less effort into it and writes off the successes as flukes. Even the female stars are paid less behind the scenes I.E. Jennifer Lawrence. It'll be 18 movies before Marvel starts filming their only female lead super-hero movie in the pipeline. Black Widow's not getting a solo movie any time soon either.
Exceptions to the rule.
Ask yourself this - how many films are about female "chosen ones"? And judge them how their written opposed to their male counterparts.
I think it's mostly a problem of someone having enough buzz to get too much creative control.
Everyone wants creative control. Not everybody needs it. Hell, most people don't need it. Even the true auteurs who use it well still manage to fumble on occasion, and nothing Blomkamp has done really points to him being an auteur, it mostly points to him being really good with visuals and really big on high-concept ideas.
Luckily, Blomkamp sounds like the kind of person who can take criticism without being too defensive, and this guy with a good producer and talented storytellers could be a legit talent. But for now, he's mostly making feature-length FX reels.
Blomkamp is the guy you want pitching your movie and then directing someone else's script treatment of that idea I think.
Like, both District 9 and Elysium are legitimately fantastic sci-fi premises in the great tradition of sci-fi social commentary. But it's like he doesn't realise that's what he's actually pitched or perhaps just doesn't know how to follow through.
Maybe you are right and he is just not the kind of guy (at least right now) with enough skill/talent for full creative control. He needs an editor. Tons of artists have been improved with good editors.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11412926
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
pleasepaypreacher.net
That's not really what the comic was bagging on though. Certainly the lack of female centric movies is well established, but the idea that "hero's journey" type movies usually involve males easily overtaking the more skilled females just isn't borne out. It just isn't that common.
Interestingly I'm trying to decide if edge of tomorrow would be more progressive if you switched the two leads genders, and I can't really decide. The big pro is obviously you go from supporting female lead to just a straight female lead, but on the other hand, a lot of the characteristics of the two characters already seem reversed.
Blunt is the hardcore badass who doesn't need/want help, is pretty emotionless/closed off, get's pissed when cruise start's being sentimental, plus it seems like there's several instances where she uses her skills to save cruise, while cruise only ever "saves" her by telling her exactly what's about to happen so she doesn't get into trouble in the first place (not really being saved so much as being warned). Cruise on the other hand starts off as inept, not really interested in fighting, shows a lot of emotions rather than just being a killing machine, ect.. Flipping the characters would make them seem more like stereotypes to me.
There's a lot of other factors as to why there aren't female driven action movies. Could be a lack of interest, the target audience (women) really not caring for those types of movies because it sure seemed like the Tomb Raider franchise didn't set the world on fire, international markets.
The money side, who knows? Rogen made more than Franco for The Interview, should we be up in arms about that? or is it because Rogen wrote it/produced it/etc etc. The good Hemsworth made next to nothing (in terms of Hollywood) doing Thor for the first three films until everyone renegotiated, but was able to carry that notoriety from the films over into bigger $$$ for other movie roles. Lawrence was signed up for Hunger Games before she won the oscar, and her contract probably reflects that. Pratt probably makes less than Lawrence. And I bet Jolie makes more money per movie than those three combined.
And so what if it's taken Marvel 18 movies to get to Captain Marvel? If you want to look at the numbers despite all the hype about her she can barely keep her own comic from being cancelled and her protege outsells her by a decent and consistent margin, she's been a B/C-list hero for the longest time until this push to make her A-list which began in 2012 with the monker change (years after the MCU was already putting things in place and Phase 2 started), and every character Marvel has used before her is completely justified in terms of presence and history to build a franchise around. Hell, just be thankful the talking racoon gamble made so much money to let Marvel try the second tier of characters they have (which in reality is the third tier because Sony and Fox had the first tier).
Is it really? The point is that you have a whole generation who grew up where the girl is often superior to the boys or clearly an equal and it's going to finally show through in hopefully less obnoxious ways, and in fact already has in a lot of places, so to act like this is a never narrowing gap is silly or that super drastic action is needed. Hillary Swank as Karate Kid did more for equality than Patricia Arquette in every movie she did ever, Dream Warriors included, and that's a roundhouse kick of a fact.
[/quote]
Fantasy has largely been a male dominated area, so of course it will be about male protagonists because that is the lens used. And as time has gone on (Divergent, Twilight, Hunger Games, that City of Bones whatever) we see the female chosen ones also appear, ham fisted and still as bad as guy dude bro chosen ones.
Now ask yourself this - how many romcoms are about men in the city working for a magazine trying to have it all while finding love? And judge how they're written opposed to their female counterparts.
tldr TRL LOL: Everyone just chill the hell out and float with me in the skies of levity