Gina Carano fired

[BBally81]

I think we should also take into account how would casual audiences react.

The Ghostbusters reboot didn't outright bomb but it underperformed because casual audiences found it to be an average film so not worth the arguments from both sides about it, while the Charlie's Angels reboot bombed hard, because the trailer didn't interest people and those who saw it viewed it as a bad film in general.

However Captain Marvel was a big hit, gaining around $1.128 billion worldwide despite all the drama surrounding the film regarding Brie Larson or the weird "her not smiling is a statement" that caused an uproar among the anti-woke part of social media and it didn't have a "big opening followed by big drops", the film had a stable performance at the box office while another divisive film like Batman V Superman opened big but saw big drops in the following weeks.

Basically audiences found something to enjoy in CM (I personally didn't care for it), of course the anti-woke crowd including the youtubers tried to push this "Disney bought extra seats" in an attempt to explain why the film didn't just outright bomb but made ton of money in spite of their efforts to trash the film, even it were true, I doubt Disney buying some extra seats would have resulted the film getting $1.128 billion worldwide. Whether it was because it's an MCU film that was supposed to have connection to Endgame (which I think played a big part), it doesn't matter, what matters is that they acted like the film would bomb, it didn't and then they tried to spin this around so that people wouldn't realize how full of it they were.

[Captain Crimson]

I don't care to do, since everything in Hollywood is made for the casual audience now. It's something that the internet age has mainstreamed, which I don't think should have been.

Again, TOS and DS9 was made for the fans. The SG TV shows were made for the fans. B5 was made for the fans, and the SW EU was made for the fans. Those times are long gone.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think we should also take into account how would casual audiences react.

The Ghostbusters reboot didn't outright bomb but it underperformed because casual audiences found it to be an average film so not worth the arguments from both sides about it, while the Charlie's Angels reboot bombed hard, because the trailer didn't interest people and those who saw it viewed it as a bad film in general.

However Captain Marvel was a big hit, gaining around $1.128 billion worldwide despite all the drama surrounding the film regarding Brie Larson or the weird "her not smiling is a statement" that caused an uproar among the anti-woke part of social media and it didn't have a "big opening followed by big drops", the film had a stable performance at the box office while another divisive film like Batman V Superman opened big but saw big drops in the following weeks.

Basically audiences found something to enjoy in CM (I personally didn't care for it), of course the anti-woke crowd including the youtubers tried to push this "Disney bought extra seats" in an attempt to explain why the film didn't just outright bomb but made ton of money in spite of their efforts to trash the film, even it were true, I doubt Disney buying some extra seats would have resulted the film getting $1.128 billion worldwide. Whether it was because it's an MCU film that was supposed to have connection to Endgame (which I think played a big part), it doesn't matter, what matters is that they acted like the film would bomb, it didn't and then they tried to spin this around so that people wouldn't realize how full of it they were.

Not bad.

Re; Captain Marvel: It was actually a archetypically practical move. I think it's safe to say that Superman has become lost in translation between mainstream audiences and fan expectations. It's supposed to be the president, but market forces tend to favor Batman on the big screen. Wonder Woman showed a huge potential but it's having trouble breaking from its freshman shell. Superman's success likewise has not been able to get out of 1978. This is kind of a tangent commencing segment, but Batman and the MCU have an edge that Superman, Wonder Woman, and Fantastic 4 don't.

Captain Marvel is the established Superman of the MCU now. And it's not in some grand symbolic manner of hope, and she's not tied down with baggage of family or tradition that Superman, F4, and Wonder Woman are. They gave her an edge and let Neo actually get to rage against the machine city rather than being a Jesus allegory. Tony Stark on the other hand actually earned the martyr allegory instead of fans just saying he is and failing at the box office.

There's also the matter of the Kree vs Skrull war, which to me seems like a very succulent conflict for comic fans to sick their teeth into, and already had mainstream initiation with Agents of Shield season 4. Not to mention Fox's X-Men's attempt to implement that into Dark Phoenix didn't really get off the ground much, leaving comic fans more desiring.

[Thebestoftherest]

I've disagreed with Clownfish TV more than once, yet I don't think there's ill intention with the channel. And yet it's not like they present an alternative to the MSM they say they hate. Because what would truly be a superior alternative is presenting both sides in balance. But feeding the outrage machine always nabs views. Look at something like Mr. Walker's videos for Channel Awesome.

I used to like Nostalgia Critic because I saw them as silly comedy reviews that weren't supposed to be taken 100% seriously (unlike people like Clownfish or theQuatering) and he would poke fun at both the SJW and Anti-SJWs but the problem is that his humor got stale and then the Change The Channel controversy happened so I stopped watching. The AVGN is better any way.

Yep

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't care to do, since everything in Hollywood is made for the casual audience now. It's something that the internet age has mainstreamed, which I don't think should have been.

Again, TOS and DS9 was made for the fans. The SG TV shows were made for the fans. B5 was made for the fans, and the SW EU was made for the fans. Those times are long gone.

I thought there was a big dismissal of DS9 from fans.

[Captain Crimson]

I don't care to do, since everything in Hollywood is made for the casual audience now. It's something that the internet age has mainstreamed, which I don't think should have been.

Again, TOS and DS9 was made for the fans. The SG TV shows were made for the fans. B5 was made for the fans, and the SW EU was made for the fans. Those times are long gone.

I thought there was a big dismissal of DS9 from fans.

There was, whether B5 fans or purists to Mr. Roddenberry, but at the same time, from all I see, it was still made with that mindset, it wasn't never insulting their customers. Mr. Moore was quite active on online chats back in the day, the same as Mr. JMS. Or take the fans and their letter-writing campaigns during the days of TOS.

Look at the old EU. When's the last time you saw Disney offer a fan contest where the winner gets to choose the name of the next Sith Lord? While during LOTF's run, there was such a contest for Darth Caedus. Rather than that, Mr. Abrams just steals a name from the older Droids cartoon.

And there are many such examples that are not longer present like that.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't care to do, since everything in Hollywood is made for the casual audience now. It's something that the internet age has mainstreamed, which I don't think should have been.

Again, TOS and DS9 was made for the fans. The SG TV shows were made for the fans. B5 was made for the fans, and the SW EU was made for the fans. Those times are long gone.

I thought there was a big dismissal of DS9 from fans.

There was, whether B5 fans or purists to Mr. Roddenberry, but at the same time, from all I see, it was still made with that mindset, it wasn't never insulting their customers. Mr. Moore was quite active on online chats back in the day, the same as Mr. JMS. Or take the fans and their letter-writing campaigns during the days of TOS.

Look at the old EU. When's the last time you saw Disney offer a fan contest where the winner gets to choose the name of the next Sith Lord? While during LOTF's run, there was such a contest for Darth Caedus. Rather than that, Mr. Abrams just steals a name from the older Droids cartoon.

And there are many such examples that are not longer present like that.

I suppose there's an admiration for DS9 expanding the lore the way it did, but it was departing from the formula. It's more characterized as a stretching of what used to be a fun and simple show. People look back on it now and say, "see that's how it's done right fellas," but are ignoring how obscure it's generally regarded.

That's a lot of the same argument I hear regarding Discovery and Picard. There's definitely some jarring aspects to Discovery and Picard's smoldering runs a little dank maybe more distinctively. But the move to 13-episode streaming stories is an overall success imo. I have to watch Discovery S3 again, but the premise of them being in the future works as far as I remember. Then again, I might still not take to the plot that easily.

[Makeshift Python]

I think we should also take into account how would casual audiences react.

The Ghostbusters reboot didn't outright bomb but it underperformed because casual audiences found it to be an average film so not worth the arguments from both sides about it, while the Charlie's Angels reboot bombed hard, because the trailer didn't interest people and those who saw it viewed it as a bad film in general.

However Captain Marvel was a big hit, gaining around $1.128 billion worldwide despite all the drama surrounding the film regarding Brie Larson or the weird "her not smiling is a statement" that caused an uproar among the anti-woke part of social media and it didn't have a "big opening followed by big drops", the film had a stable performance at the box office while another divisive film like Batman V Superman opened big but saw big drops in the following weeks.

Basically audiences found something to enjoy in CM (I personally didn't care for it), of course the anti-woke crowd including the youtubers tried to push this "Disney bought extra seats" in an attempt to explain why the film didn't just outright bomb but made ton of money in spite of their efforts to trash the film, even it were true, I doubt Disney buying some extra seats would have resulted the film getting $1.128 billion worldwide. Whether it was because it's an MCU film that was supposed to have connection to Endgame (which I think played a big part), it doesn't matter, what matters is that they acted like the film would bomb, it didn't and then they tried to spin this around so that people wouldn't realize how full of it they were.

THANK YOU!

I watched GB16 when it came out because I really liked the work of the filmmakers/cast from previous years, with BRIDESMAIDS being one of my favorite comedies of the 2010s. Of all the problems, the fact that the cast is female never even registers. Most of the problems all come down to the fact that it's just not funny and lacks the atmosphere of the original. Wiig and McCarthy aren't even that good in it, and from what I read they had a lot of clashes on set which is likely why the chemistry felt off. Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon were the only two cast members that came off funny more than not. It's also very apparent that Paul Feig was just not the right director for this project.

Every time I see Fandom Menace claim that this film flopped because audiences rejected it over being woke, it's the biggest bullshit narrative I've heard.

I don't care to do, since everything in Hollywood is made for the casual audience now. It's something that the internet age has mainstreamed, which I don't think should have been.

Again, TOS and DS9 was made for the fans. The SG TV shows were made for the fans. B5 was made for the fans, and the SW EU was made for the fans. Those times are long gone.

I thought there was a big dismissal of DS9 from fans.

There was, whether B5 fans or purists to Mr. Roddenberry, but at the same time, from all I see, it was still made with that mindset, it wasn't never insulting their customers. Mr. Moore was quite active on online chats back in the day, the same as Mr. JMS. Or take the fans and their letter-writing campaigns during the days of TOS.

Look at the old EU. When's the last time you saw Disney offer a fan contest where the winner gets to choose the name of the next Sith Lord? While during LOTF's run, there was such a contest for Darth Caedus. Rather than that, Mr. Abrams just steals a name from the older Droids cartoon.

And there are many such examples that are not longer present like that.

I suppose there's an admiration for DS9 expanding the lore the way it did, but it was departing from the formula. It's more characterized as a stretching of what used to be a fun and simple show. People look back on it now and say, "see that's how it's done right fellas," but are ignoring how obscure it's generally regarded.

That's a lot of the same argument I hear regarding Discovery and Picard. There's definitely some jarring aspects to Discovery and Picard's smoldering runs a little dank maybe more distinctively. But the move to 13-episode streaming stories is an overall success imo. I have to watch Discovery S3 again, but the premise of them being in the future works as far as I remember. Then again, I might still not take to the plot that easily.

I've come to realize over the years that when certain hated nerd properties are no longer a novelty, they become less hated and you see more fans express their adoration.

TNG, VOY, DS9 and ENT all had a loud group of fans that talked a big talk about how they were damaging the franchise for whatever reason. I especially remember that with ENT because the online discourse was just flat out vicious. But in recent years, especially in light with DISCO coming out, I've started to see fans regard it more favorably, grouping it with past shows as the 1966-2005 "golden era" of canon. "Berman & Braga" used to launch a thousand negative threads back in the day, and then over a decade later I see memes with them that says "Miss Us Yet?"

And the same is with the Star Wars prequels, albeit in that case it had a major backing of Generation Z/Millennial fans that grew up with those films as well as Clone Wars, thus have a stronger admiration for that era of Star Wars than the old cynical farts that used to play with AT-ATs as kids in 1980.

[Captain Crimson]

Yeah, we saw this play out with the DCEU. It wasn't hitting the kinda numbers the suits wanted, so they meddled a lot. Plus Mr. Snyder's tragedy with his daughter, RIP.

Who cares if a well-beloved IP is more obscure? Mainstreaming it means higher chances for profits, so it has tighter supervision, meaning they are going to dilute the lore. They don't care about the artwork so much as what brings back big bank. We're going to see this play out in full if SG ever returns, mark my words. When SW "came back" (it never went away) it's not shocking one of the first things they did was to nuke the EU and refuse to let it be continued. They are very controlling and highly jealous. They don't just want the financial returns, but the critical accolades in the little cliques they have.

[Makeshift Python]

They don't just want the financial returns, but the critical accolades in the little cliques they have.

If the work is ultimately entertaining, who fucking cares?