Posted on 05/26/2020 11:59:22 AM PDT by knighthawk
Which is why pretty much I only watch foreign movies now. F Hollywood!
What did work in 2016 was putting Wonder Woman in Batman v. Superman, and people seemed to have no issue with that. She was probably the best part of that movie. But then...she was her own character, not just a male character whose gender was changed to make some point.
Loved the original movies.
Disliked most of the female actors in the reboot - then I saw the previews and was like “No WAY”.
“Print is dead.”
“I collect spores, molds and fungus.”
... and butt ugly women.
The Second City and SNL of the 80s had some of the best comedians of all time.
And if you think about it, the hollywood fictional world items in your post are what Bill Murray's Venkman character might have said if his "mass hysteria" description lasted about 2 minutes.
Human sacrifice.
Dogs and cats living together.
Mass hysteria.
Liberal arts students making more than engineers.
Lesbians happy and not overweight.
Democrats hating Russia after they quit being communist.
There's a gay gene but no longer a Y-chromosome making you male.
The best programmers are women.
LOL!
I gave it around 20 minutes and then stopped. I don’t know what the original thought was, or how they got the money, but this was a pure and absolute loser.
It’s like bringing up Pacific Rim. All that effort and it’s maybe juvenile enough for 12-year-old kids to watch.
And the original was a subversively conservative movie. Guys get tossed from academia, open a business that is successful and the government comes in and screws the whole thing up.
No, all the male characters except the funeral director were weasels
I bet that if the movie had been funny, it would have succeeded.
Maybe they should have factored that into their budget then.
You know, sonce it was so obvious a threat to the movie’s success.
I really hate it even more when men act like women.
I think your premise is wrong. They're remaking everything because there aren't any good stories out there. Hollywood is entirely liberal, and thus are incapable of producing anything other than politically corrected, virtue-signaling dreck.
Only in Hollywood would a movie that took $133 million to make and took in $220 million would be considerd a flop!
Exactly. Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd and the third guy, can remember his name. Plus wasn’t Harold Ramis involved too?
This is one time where I would say “Hillary is innocent of these charges!”.
The Ad Campaign alone was way too preachy.
I loved “the private sector expects results.” LOL!
If you don’t want to lose your shirt, then have the common sense to make a movie that is just fun and has no political agenda.
Or black. The media will still accord some respect, albeit grudgingly, to black worshippers (who are probably considered quaint, anyway, and treated condescendingly).
I'm Jewish, and I have to see portrayals of all rabbis as corrupt, misogynist, racist, etc.
People who are rational don’t like identity politics being used to populate / propagandize films. Such people don’t want to see “re-boots” of ANY film populated by whatever politically correct sex / color / gender preference is #1 at the moment.
People who are rational also don’t tend to be Democrats, who are like feral little three year old children who live by their “feelings” and get entertainment out of smearing poo on walls. Not being Democrats, these people naturally wouldn’t vote for that corrupt, vile demon-on-earth known as Hillary Clinton.
Other than that, Paul, there’s no connection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.