Off Topic The Official:TV-Show-Movie-Games Thread
- Thread starter BCR
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Like Ghostbusters remaking a film/franchise with the only hype being it's a woman is lazy. It is also unfair on female actors... here we are tossing you a man's role... so it will be compared negatively both by ****wits and because like Ghostbusters it just won't be any good.
Women want female centric films that give the female actress the actual lead that isn't just the villainous slut or homely trouble mom. They don't actually want the man's role...just same effort put into producing a film with a female lead and of course the same pay.
Women want female centric films that give the female actress the actual lead that isn't just the villainous slut or homely trouble mom. They don't actually want the man's role...just same effort put into producing a film with a female lead and of course the same pay.
I agree completely.
I don't mind with Dr. Who because the nature of the show is that it changes. Just recasting women in men's roles doesn't accomplish anything besides make the female versions look bad. (Remakes are rarely as good as originals).Making a new film with a female lead does more and will likely be better than just making a woman play a role a man has alreasy established.
I've never been a fan of comic book movies either way so doesn't bother me or impress me if they did that.
There is actually a bat woman though from what I recall, so that would be an actual different character. It would be more problematic if they made a woman play Batman than a woman play batwoman.
Gotham City Sirens...although that name may now be an argument against my point lol
the greatest sin of new Ghostbusters was lazy writing and stereotyping.
it was melissa.mccarthys worst film.
the one making eyes at this all the way through was pish
the mashing of egon and ray into one character was the only good acting in entire thing.
it's not about it being originally a.mans role. it's about butchering the original
it was melissa.mccarthys worst film.
the one making eyes at this all the way through was pish
the mashing of egon and ray into one character was the only good acting in entire thing.
it's not about it being originally a.mans role. it's about butchering the original
Watched end of season 3 of the path. By far the best of the 3 seasons. First two were merely OK but 3rd season upped the ante a lot.
They should have started with season 3 and not done the first 2 seasons...
They should have started with season 3 and not done the first 2 seasons...
Binned Travelers, I can see how some may like it but just not for me.
Thinking about starting A Series of Unfortunate Events, there are 2 seasons of it and it has good ratings.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/a_series_of_unfortunate_events/
Critics Consensus: Enjoyably dark, A Series of Unfortunate Events matches the source material's narrative as well as its tone, leaving viewers with a wonderfully weird, dry, gothic comedy.
Thinking about starting A Series of Unfortunate Events, there are 2 seasons of it and it has good ratings.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/a_series_of_unfortunate_events/
Critics Consensus: Enjoyably dark, A Series of Unfortunate Events matches the source material's narrative as well as its tone, leaving viewers with a wonderfully weird, dry, gothic comedy.
i can't recall but is die hard 5 the "son" and "daughter" rubbish russia?
I think the only one i'd argue is 4.0 as a 9. I would agree on the rest.
Yea 5 is the one in Russia with his son. absolutely ridiculous that I watched it in dribs and drabs.
4 is the one with the daughter and the hackers (if it wasn't cause it was techy I probably rate it lower)
I thought the villian in 4 made the whole thing.
TBH the villian in each makes it or not i suppose.
3 was good purely for scenario and Samuel jackson.
Got the bonus edition of The Last Jedi. Documentaries included give a good insight into Directors thinking regarding Luke, cyclical nature of the bigger picture force confrontations and balance etc... interesting stuff.... if you're a fan obviously lol
that'd be nice if they didn't turn luke into a grouchy ol town drunk in a bad western type character.
IMO the rouge 1 hit the spot... largely.
The no 7 and no no 8 were... well... not marvelous. Better than the pure pile of ****e that 1 2 and 3 were.
someone should say carrie fisher WTF did you do to your face... harrison ford why didn't you get your face done... the thing was great imo due to the dealy between movies since no 3 and there was a desire for it to be good. but its not really good.
Similar threads
- Poll
