|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Jul 14, 2018 19:21:03 GMT
The braindead SJW snowflake beehive wins again!! I'd like to puke blood all over their fascist movement. đ đ
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Jul 14, 2018 19:34:11 GMT
Or on the other hand, maybe the film now turns out to be much better than it would otherwise, avoids the negative buzz and bad hype that were already clouding it before it even started filming, and turns out to have a fighting chance at the box-office based on positive reactions and word of mouth, instead of flopping like last year's Johansson/Sanders vehicle that got bad press for its casting and wound up losing Paramount a lot of money. Do you think theyâre spiteful enough to shelve it altogether, since things didnât go their way, they scrap it under the guise of âThe project just wasnât coming together?â I HOPE THEY DO!! FUCK THE WHINY SJW BITCHES!! ScarJo doesn't get her dream role, NO ONE DOES!! Sounds beautifully petty to me. I'd LIVE for the awesomeness of that pettiness!! SJW's are a terminal CANCER who have been slowly ruining Hollywood since October, when they saw an opening after the horror of the Weinstein scandal to bring back MCCARTHYISM on a mass scale, and I cherish and rejoice at anything that thwarts their agenda. Shut this project DOWN, ScarJo!!
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jul 14, 2018 19:42:32 GMT
It's their money, and they can make the movie they want with the actors they want. They're not hurting anybody, and they're not obligated to give anybody opportunities. Nobody is entitled to it. If anybody has a problem with it, don't watch the movie.
Honestly, if all the people whining about this put in $1000 each, they could make the movie they want with the actor and cast they want. Put your money where your mouth is. Complaining about what other people do with their money only serves to give you virtue points on the Internet.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jul 14, 2018 20:00:25 GMT
they should shut down the whole project and try again in a few years with a better director.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 14, 2018 20:19:09 GMT
It's their money, and they can make the movie they want with the actors they want. They're not hurting anybody, and they're not obligated to give anybody opportunities. Nobody is entitled to it. If anybody has a problem with it, don't watch the movie. Honestly, if all the people whining about this put in $1000 each, they could make the movie they want with the actor and cast they want. Put your money where your mouth is. Complaining about what other people do with their money only serves to give you virtue points on the Internet. Thatâs not a fix. If theyâre given an easy out, then thereâs no reason for them to change. Thatâs just contributing to the whole âignore the problem, and hope it goes awayâ philosophy that people like this have been relying upon for years. It worked for years, but itâs not good enough anymore, not when we know better now. And more importantly, they want to make this movie the way they want, ignore the implications, fine. If they would rather play it safe by garnering a big name, instead of giving an up and comer (of which weâre gonna need if Hollywood wants to keep going) a chance, then fine. They can choose to ignore it, they can choose to remain oblivious, and people can go see it if they like (I hate that excuse of âwhy do you watch it if youâll just hate it?â). But that *does not* exempt them from being called out on it.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jul 14, 2018 21:42:17 GMT
Thatâs not a fix. If theyâre given an easy out, then thereâs no reason for them to change. Thatâs just contributing to the whole âignore the problem, and hope it goes awayâ philosophy that people like this have been relying upon for years. It worked for years, but itâs not good enough anymore, not when we know better now. A fix for what? Why should they even change? What's the problem? What do we know better now? It's their movie. Their business. They can run it however they want. I don't know why anybody has to tell them how to run their business or what's good for them. That doesn't mean you can't "call them out" on whatever you want to. You can call anybody out on anything. That's your right. You can call America out for no longer having any slaves, too, if that's your thing. The point is that they're using their money to do what they want. Are they hurting anybody? No. Are they violating anybody's rights? No. Are they breaking any laws? No. Are they obligated to help anybody out? No. So what's the problem here?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 14, 2018 22:43:39 GMT
It's their movie. Their business. They can run it however they want. I don't know why anybody has to tell them how to run their business or what's good for them. That doesn't mean you can't "call them out" on whatever you want to. You can call anybody out on anything. That's your right. You can call America out for no longer having any slaves, too, if that's your thing. The point is that they're using their money to do what they want. Are they hurting anybody? No. Are they violating anybody's rights? No. Are they breaking any laws? No. Are they obligated to help anybody out? No. So what's the problem here? Youâre right. They have no obligation, theyâre not doing anything legally wrong. But with the amount of power that she has, she could take this opportunity to give the spotlight to someone else, to give a newcomer a chance to be seen, but instead she decides to turn it a vanity Oscar project (can we honestly say sheâll be starving for plenty of those?). And yeah, sheâs not doing anything legally wrong or doing anything others havenât done, but that complacency - thatâs emblematic of representation of character, but not by performer - isnât helpful to either party, and after the duoâs last ill-advised venture, it was not the smart thing for her to do. Weâre always talking and complaining about how everythingâs getting too safe and marketable, but then we have a chance to break that, and they cast a name as safe and marketable as it gets. Thatâs really the issue here. Itâs not simply moral, itâs principle.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jul 14, 2018 22:51:31 GMT
Or on the other hand, maybe the film now turns out to be much better than it would otherwise, avoids the negative buzz and bad hype that were already clouding it before it even started filming, and turns out to have a fighting chance at the box-office based on positive reactions and word of mouth, instead of flopping like last year's Johansson/Sanders vehicle that got bad press for its casting and wound up losing Paramount a lot of money. Iâll be willing to see it either way but itâs pretty rare for a film to have financial success without some star power. Star power arguably means less now than it ever did, and Johansson herself isn't much of a box office draw.
|
|
|
Post by Billy_Costigan on Jul 17, 2018 14:02:05 GMT
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 1,389
|
Post by Film Socialism on Jul 18, 2018 8:59:08 GMT
oh no a trans movie by cis people who don't care about trans people isn't being made what a tragedy
|
|