Funny when I reflected on it for a second, how effectively that sentence kills whatever little interest I might have in watching a film 
I have no interest in this particular film anyway, I’m a picky prick in general when it comes to film/music etc. 
but man that is an extraordinarily off-putting comment on a couple of levels lol
Joker doesn’t need a sequel leave it as a standalone film.
Did you feel the same about the LOTR films, knowing they would have to have sequels?
1 Like
I know this comment is old… but all movies are made to pander to the masses. That’s the whole fucking point of a movie. Give the masses something they like to get them to spend money. This faux logic is the kind of shit that he alt-right uses to sound reasonable, but the reality is you sound like a moron.
Unless it’s a some art house film that is too cool for that.
haha no, but I was initially absolutely repelled at the thought of Jackson doing them after having watched Braindead, Bad Taste and Meet The Feebles for fun as a kid, thinking how can they possibly give such a tremendous task to someone who used to make b comedy splatters with a budget of a few hundred dollars, then I thought about it for a while and considered that maybe he is a genuine fantasy nerd and will actually “get” the ambience and character development of the books and will surprise us all and do great, so I decided to give it a chance mentally.
Then budget numbers started getting thrown around and I saw the first bits of footage and was quickly mind blown ofc, he did a great job with them in many ways, almost in every aspect, speaking of which - my only gripe with them is that they were made during that short period when ~2.35:1 aspect ratios were a pop thing and I’ll never buy into the idea that it was for any other (such as artistic) reason. Imo it also makes them age poorly, if you forgot they were like that and you put them on now you have to spend the first hour adjusting to the feeling that you watching the film through window blinds 
lol
but you’re right, they’re a good counter example. I guess the argument is for when I don’t know how the story ends and someone just says “it ends with a hanger” I just go I’m out. But as I said I have a shitty attitude to begin with, it starts uphill lol
Joker doesn’t really end with a hanger to be honest, it just ends with the Joker on the loose basically.
It honestly was a very good film, great even, and you’re doing yourself a disservice by not watching it.
I just watched LOTR 1 and 2 yesterday and today with my mum (her first time ever) and they’re just such good films. I’d forgotten how much fucking content they squeezed into each one but they still managing to get an engaging pacing throughout. The practical effects and makeup still hold up so well but the CGI is very noticeably 20 years old for sure haha
One thing is that we watched the normal theatre cuts - which I never watch. I always watch the extended editions but Netflix only had the theatre cuts and they honestly leave out a lot of stuff that adds to the world building and the story. Having mostly watched the extended editions, my viewing experience has not been quite as good as it could been yesterday and today but I still fucking love them and I still rate it as the best trilogy ever made.
1 Like
It doesn’t end with a cliffhanger. But there is lots of Joker lore from the comics that has never been put on film, in particular the lead up to the birth of Batman, and this film ends while Bruce Wayne was still a kid.
1 Like
Then it would clearly not be feministic bullshit because more than half the world doesn’t pander to that.
The pandering helps in PR but does it really translate into good story telling?
Sevchenko said best.
Stories and cultures are modified to placate a specific set, and forcefed to everyone else.
I’m not clear on whether you think they are pandering to the masses or not
I should have used a different word.
With masses, I wasn’t referring to whole audience rather the folks who give extra credentials for “inclusivity”
1 Like
Being inclusive isn’t a good idea?
1 Like
No, not if it is done for sake of doing it
1 Like
You have any examples of undeserved inclusivity?
Other than Ghostbusters, which I concede was peak PC shittiness 
1 Like
It’s a decent film and I don’t really understand why it’s thought of as done for PC reasons. It’s just a slightly different telling of the story.
2 Likes
Because the cast is all female.
My girlfriend watched it and I caught some, I’ve gotta say, from what I saw it wasn’t anywhere near as bad as I thought it would be, I chuckled a couple of times, mostly at Chris Hemsworth to be fair.
My objection was simply to the fact that I didn’t want to see Ghostbusters remade/rebooted, could have been an all male cast and I’d have felt the same tbh. No need to fuck with the classics. But there’s also no need to cry about it, nobody is forcing you to go and watch these films. If you don’t watch a film, it can’t tarnish your memory of, and fondness for, the original.
3 Likes
Definitely agree with this.
The only thing is when we don’t go see these films they blame misogyny like the current Charlie’s angels movie. The director said it’s a movie of the me too era and has feminism the sprinkled in there. Now it’s bombing in cinema it’s mens fault for not wanting to watch female action stars 
Are your average cinema goers going to care about metoo or feminism? It’s meant to be a form of escapism at least for me anyway.
Edit: when has men not liked female action stars there has been many over the years. Alien franchise, terminator franchise and even kill bill from the top of my head
Who is they?
Actually, don’t answer that, I don’t care.
Just ignore it, it’s just noise. If you don’t want to watch a shit remake of an already shit film then don’t, you know it doesn’t make you misogynistic, so unless someone you know is directly saying that you are personally a misogynist for this reason, I don’t see any reason to let it bother you.
I know that my reason for not watching the new Charlie’s Angels film is that I have an aversion to totally boring shite, and not because I have a problem with women, so I’m not gonna get wound up about someone saying the reason it’s doing badly is misogyny lol
2 Likes
Ghostbusters is not shit. It’s a classic!
Lol I’m not taking about me personally wasn’t really interested in watching it because it did not look great anyway. I only found out about the misogyny crap recently as I was checking non spoiler reviews of movies to gauge what to watch. All that crap came from the director and the director of ghostbusters apparently men are at fault Which is a stance I always found strange