Interesting that no one ever blames any part of the female population for not rushing to the theater to support a fellow WOMAN-- no, it's always the men's fault...
Do they ever, ever, EVER get tired of trotting out the "ist" and "phobe" arguments?
By all accounts, this is one of, if not the worst superhero movies ever. Ists and phobes didn't write, direct, or produce this trainwreck.
Is it all possible to take some responsibility or muster a shred of self reflection? What makes these people keep drinking deep from this poisoned kool aid?
Is it delusion? Echo chamber ignorance? Narcissistic lashing out? Pure cyniscm? Pathological need to be the victim?
I don't understand how anyone could be this willfully ignorant and hatefully clinging to projected, misplaced blame.
Do you have to be a sociopath/dark triad to be hired in Hollywood? That's one of the requirements, isn't it?
She needs a good laundry and hair wash. I haven’t read a comic book since I was around twelve and switched full-time to real books, but I prefer my superheroes to have their personal grooming together.
I seriously think everyone's just sick of superhero movies--we had a *lot* of them this past decade and a half. DC has picked a terrible time to start a new batch, as it's not like your average normie has any clue what the difference between DC and Marvel is.
Though, honestly, trying to copy Marvel but darker and edgier and screwing up everything not connected to Batman is kind of a DC trademark.
Of course Alcock didn't help matters by picking fights with the core audience. Things can have more than one cause.
The New York Times Blames "Misogyny" .... You can't make this up. If someone wrote this as a movie script, it would be considered worse and less competent than the one for Supergirl.
Actual break even, with domestic taking half and international taking a little over half is almost 600 million. Word of mouth is so bad a bit over a 2x multiplier is the best it can hope for, meaning 150-160 million revenue, call it 75 million net for a loss of...
I agree. These calculations in the trade press make no sense. The studio gets roughly half the box office (more in the opening weeks, less for foreign sales). Merchandising and dvd profits will be weak. With total costs of roughly $300 million (probably more) that is breakeven of (as you said) $600 m. it could lose $200m or even $300m.
The social engineers have determined they can "elevate" women through media. They don't care if you enjoy the movies, television shows, books, music, etc. they make. They are not being made for you, but for an entirely NONEXISTENT "younger audience," (read impressionable) who need to be "taught" to see the world in a "better" way. Time and time again, these projects fail to make money because their supposed audiences always fail to turn up. Their makers don't care. This is the hill on which they have decided to die. Hollywood will eventually go bankrupt. Good riddance!
Interesting that no one ever blames any part of the female population for not rushing to the theater to support a fellow WOMAN-- no, it's always the men's fault...
How is this misogynic when she looks like a down syndrome boy?
Yes she barely even qualifies as a “mid”. She is what used to be referred to as “plain”.
Welp…Misogyny kinda confirmed.
But am I wrong?
😂😂😂
Do they ever, ever, EVER get tired of trotting out the "ist" and "phobe" arguments?
By all accounts, this is one of, if not the worst superhero movies ever. Ists and phobes didn't write, direct, or produce this trainwreck.
Is it all possible to take some responsibility or muster a shred of self reflection? What makes these people keep drinking deep from this poisoned kool aid?
Is it delusion? Echo chamber ignorance? Narcissistic lashing out? Pure cyniscm? Pathological need to be the victim?
I don't understand how anyone could be this willfully ignorant and hatefully clinging to projected, misplaced blame.
Do you have to be a sociopath/dark triad to be hired in Hollywood? That's one of the requirements, isn't it?
Bad casting for one. She looks like the unpopular bar slut no one liked in community college, and then they presented her drunk in Superman. 🙄
They should have cast McKenna Grace.
Actually, I think they need to find an all new person. There aren’t a lot of young blonde actresses in Hollywood right now that fit the bill.
The women and gay guys running Hollywood can’t cast a beautiful and skilled actress. It goes against their values.
Meh.
Meg Donnelly maybe.
KRYPTOWNED
She needs a good laundry and hair wash. I haven’t read a comic book since I was around twelve and switched full-time to real books, but I prefer my superheroes to have their personal grooming together.
And dental work.
This bish was in a victimhood territory months before release. They never lear.
“They never lear.” Awesome! Nailed it!
Well they were close. It was misandry.
I seriously think everyone's just sick of superhero movies--we had a *lot* of them this past decade and a half. DC has picked a terrible time to start a new batch, as it's not like your average normie has any clue what the difference between DC and Marvel is.
Though, honestly, trying to copy Marvel but darker and edgier and screwing up everything not connected to Batman is kind of a DC trademark.
Of course Alcock didn't help matters by picking fights with the core audience. Things can have more than one cause.
I'll watch superhero movies until I'm 192 but not if they're made by people who hate me and hate the characters they're adapting.
What's that Brian Niemeier line? Don't give money to people who hate you?
Maybe it’s just not a good movie.
The New York Times Blames "Misogyny" .... You can't make this up. If someone wrote this as a movie script, it would be considered worse and less competent than the one for Supergirl.
170+120 = 290. Based on that math, this movie is going to lose close to $200M. Girl power!
Actual break even, with domestic taking half and international taking a little over half is almost 600 million. Word of mouth is so bad a bit over a 2x multiplier is the best it can hope for, meaning 150-160 million revenue, call it 75 million net for a loss of...
215 million
Yikes.
I agree. These calculations in the trade press make no sense. The studio gets roughly half the box office (more in the opening weeks, less for foreign sales). Merchandising and dvd profits will be weak. With total costs of roughly $300 million (probably more) that is breakeven of (as you said) $600 m. it could lose $200m or even $300m.
The social engineers have determined they can "elevate" women through media. They don't care if you enjoy the movies, television shows, books, music, etc. they make. They are not being made for you, but for an entirely NONEXISTENT "younger audience," (read impressionable) who need to be "taught" to see the world in a "better" way. Time and time again, these projects fail to make money because their supposed audiences always fail to turn up. Their makers don't care. This is the hill on which they have decided to die. Hollywood will eventually go bankrupt. Good riddance!
Then I guess I'm a misogynist too.
Put A Chick In It, And Make Her Lame And Gay
Ah, yes, Supergirl's only weakness: internet chuds.
Crawling across the floor toward Lex Luthor, weakened by his misogyny ray.
Doomsday all talking over her and manspreading.