Said Gunn at the time of that annoucement, “In our series we see the difference between Superman who was sent to Earth and raised by loving parents from the time he was an infant, versus Supergirl who was raised on a rock, a chip off Krypton, and watched everyone around her die and be killed in terrible ways for the first 14 years of her life, and then came to Earth when she was a young girl. She’s much more hardcore; she’s not exactly the Supergirl we’re used to seeing.”
I thought they were veering away from the whole “dark and gritty” approach to DC. Really hope this isn’t a bad sign.
It’s just to call out that Supergirl is going to have lots of room to grow.
Basically the Superman film is going to have an established Superman, no origin story (although I’m sure sprinkled in). Supergirl is going to be more of an origin story (as I read it).
It will be the job of Superman to teach Supergirl who is coming from a very different background.
Remember the scene from Suicide Squad where the Ratcatcher father is telling Ratcatcher daughter about rats? Swap in Superman and Supergirl and change rats to humanity, boom. That’s the kind of wisdom Superman is going to be dishing out.
Interesting! I guess the studio’s marketing for it didn’t connect with me. I’ll have to watch it next chance I get.
I remember the old series being pretty basic with a Tarzan-like plot that didn’t evolve much between episodes, which is probably why they decided to do a fish-out-of-water story for the 90s film, or so I remember. Then again, I could be confusing it with other Brenden Frasier films from around that time like “Blast from the Past” and “Encino Man”.
This is kind of stupid tbh. Margot and Greta are NOT competing against Ryan. They’re competing against other females. This is because of this thing called “categories”.
Ryan getting nominated has NOTHING to do with this. It’s not like Ryan got nominated but they didn’t because he took their place.
This is happening because of the absolute flood of female centric characters and movies that came out recently. There’s too much competition. And much to the “feminists” dismay, Barbie is actually mid compared to the other movies and actresses.
Awesome, thanks for making that clear. Now, which other females do you think should’ve been nomimated? Because if there aren’t any, she was simply beat out by other directors.
I think Greta should have been nominated. I don’t really understand what point you are trying to make. Did you read the original comment where women are getting passed over but men are getting congratulated for theirs and it’s mimicking the Barbie storyline?
They literally compete in different categories and an actress from Barbie did get nominated. The ones that didn’t weren’t snubbed, other women got their place because they were better. Simple as that.
Right, but it is important to understand the origin of those differences.
They could be prohibition, straight discrimination, social stigma, culture or personal preference. And these are usually linked together and evolve over time. Once prohibition is abolished, discrimination begins. Once discrimination is abolished, social stigma remains… It’s like decaying radioactive elements.
But yeha, if there are 10% female directors and 10% of the winners were female, sounds like there’s no discrimination there. Anyways, even if percentages don’t match it’s important to go in and check if the decisions were fair. What if the 10% of female directors are really really bad for the movies released that year?
Too many variables. Things like these require statistical analysis, social analysis, artistic analysis… Pretty complex. I don’t know.
Cool, it sounded like you were spouting idealist nonsense without recognizing it, but that’s not the case, so fuck yeah! Let’s celebrate underrepresented artistic influence!
It feels like you’re saying there should be more. I have no idea who’s been nominated, nor do I know most of the films that came out last year, so I’m out of the loop and would like to know if you have any female director movies you’d recommend in place of who’s been nominated.
Barbie was a cultural phenomenon so I would say Greta should at least be nominated. Openheimer was an ok movie in my eyes I didn’t see any of the others. I don’t personally think Barbie was a great movie not a bad movie but more like a good movie. The fact it gave a voice to so many women should mean something.
You said it, it was a cultural phenomenom, not a great movie. Those are two very separate, very different things. That does not mean that the director of the movie was great. It’s more closely related to what Barbie already means (socially) and the marketing campaign.
But why was openheimer nominated, why was Ryan gosling nominated, why were so many movies nominated, not because they’re great acting or writing or movies but because the impact they have on society.
Beause it’s a better movie. Because he was better than other male actors in movies from 2023. That last one I’m not sure what you’re talking about. Which movie was nominated because of its “social impact”?
I kinda thought the writers made her character meh on purpose to show young girls that while stereotypical Barbie is a cool toy, she’s not really someone they should aspire to be
In case you’re in any doubt, people are downvoting you for your atrocious framing, obvious victim complex, and general cuntiness. The fact that most of your posts are whining about whateverthefuck woke means is just confirmation that the worms have eaten your brain.
Gosling maybe deserved a nomination. Robbie didn’t. In an equality world all is well.
Yet some people, the orignal post, have an issue with that weirdly. I see no reason why I should change my opinion.
I actually thought Barbie was fairly egalitarian and not about men doing something better and getting recognition for it. Also the oscars are separated by sex anyway so the post doesn’t make any sense. Robbie got bested by other women.
Your point/analysis isn’t the problem - the issue is the utter nonsense and reactionary bullshit underpinning it that you’re telegraphing for all to see. Your arse is showing, and I’m not sure you even realise it.
I agree with your point, but agreeing with someone practically screaming such nonsense is a pretty good reason for me to second-guess myself.
Ah - it’s Schrodinger’s asshole - throw out dumb reactionary nonsense, self-victimisation and whining about the nebulous concept of “woke”, and if it’s not well recieved, it was satire.
I’ll be charitable, put it down to Poe’s law, and recommend you give some kind of tell that you’re engaging in satire, because there was nothing in your post or what I saw of your post history that would indicate your nonsense isn’t sincerely believed.
Yep - that, and not the dogshit takes you’re telegraphing behind that satire, which are validated almost immediately by a glance at your post history are the problem, Schrodinger.
I’ll let you get back to sobbing about whatever the fuck woke is taking over and ruining everything for you.
I’m not sure you understand what satire is. If you do you do it right. This reads as failed sarcasim followed by a “its just a joke, bro” lazy deflection.
Kind of a weird thing for him to say imo. It’s not like they got snubbed, this year was just really stacked, and the other nominations being filled with other incredibly talented women shows that. Be happy for them, don’t put a damper on their achievements because you’re upset that your co-star didn’t get nominated.
Obviously I get that he can’t help how he feels, but making this whole statement just feels like an odd choice.
He’s saying that without the leading actors of the film being who they are - simply, the extremely talented people they they are - he wouldn’t have had a movie in which to act (the Barbie movie) to shine and gain the honor of being nominated.
More to the point, him being nominated when they are not, is, in and of itself, ironic; on several levels.
His entire sentiment here is that they should have had recognition for their roles in a very culturally relevant film, in which they did really great work. They commanded the screen in a way that few can. The entire thing pivots around the leading characters.
Honestly, I couldn’t give two fucks about how stacked the year was. If you examine mentions of films in news, social media, and other sources where people discuss movies, the Barbie movie would be mentioned a lot more than pretty much any other. And yet, the headlining character, played by an amazingly talented young woman, didn’t get nominated?
Bluntly, I’m surprised his comments were this restrained. If I was in his shoes I would have told them to take their nomination and shove it. It clearly doesn’t mean anything if they won’t even give a nomination to Margot. Her performance was picture perfect as far as I’m concerned.
I’m surprised that Margot Robbie gag account on lemmy hasn’t rung in on this post. Or are they back to obsessing about android phones again? WAKE UP, BOT!
It happens to all these movies. Nice when you stumble across an unheard of underground film, but then the flip happens: “HOW DOES NOBODY KNOW ABOUT THIS??”
Like legitimately one of the best parts is Ken and his dance number, the director went hard on that and fucking aced it. I don’t remember much else from the film and about Barbie tbh
I know it’s always meant to be, you’re a clown… But it just looks like your username with the clown face every time, not the person you’re trying to call a clown. Just sayin lol.
Why should people be triggered by “Hollywood crapolla”? This reminds me of that bit John Waters has about how a lady called the cops after renting Pink Flamingos.
Why don’t they just turn it off if it’s offensive? Thats what I did when “Forrest Gump” started running.
Dumbfuck… can I call you “Dumbfuck”? Dumbfuck: if you had said you didn’t like the concept or plot or don’t like X as an actor or whatever that’s fine, I wouldn’t agree with you but that’s fine. But to say it’s just a “stupid shit movie” means ignoring excellent sets, excellent costumes, excellent casting, excellent cinematography, excellent writing, excellent line delivery, excellent music, etc. Not every great movie has good all of those things, this one did, so even if you didn’t like the message (which cleverly switched throughout the movie) any of those things still gives you something to appreciate. Unless you’re really fucking dumb, Dumbfuck.
Well, those of us who’ve actually been intimate with and listened to women over the years understand that, while just a Hollywood movie, Barbie was a reasonably accurate commentary on how shitty this whole farce of “men do it best (yes everything)” winds up sucking for both men and women (and all in between).
What didn’t you like? Did you expect a movie about toys coming to our world to have a haunting belabored plot that explored every realm of literary significance? Or are you sad that it made men being stupid actually as ridiculous as it looks?
Having a hard time articulating any sort of argument, huh? Need a dictionary to teach you some more words? Or maybe an English class to teach you how to form a coherent, complete sentence?
With all of is controversy with the Barbie movie and nominations next year we might see an expansion of the pool of nominations
Smaller how TDK changed how the best picture nomination was awarded but we could do the same thing for actor and actress nominations. After 2008 a lot of people felt that the dark night was snub for best picture, so the academy changed the number of nominations that could be awarded for best picture. Originally only five movies could be nominated for best picture but after 2008 the minimum number of best picture nominees was 10. a few years later 10 was too much so they changed it to minimum 5 and maximum of 10 nominations. I think that’s a good compromise because some years have very good performances while other years have mediocre, but you can definitely find five performances that outshined everyone else and having a maximum of 10 nominations limits the number of people that can be nominated.
I personally think we should remove the gendered nominations for acting actresses and instead separate them by age. Same way how the Grammys removed gender nominations, but instead for the academy. If you separate them by age, it makes more sense. Most older actors and actresses can’t play roles that are for younger actors and actresses and vice versa for young artists. It is also more inclusive for trans and non-binary artists. It also evens the playing field a little bit because generally speaking older performers have more experience so it’s harder for younger performers to be nominated.
personally think we should remove the gendered nominations for acting actresses
No this would be a bad idea. Then any time a man won (or got nominated like Ryan here), people will be like “omg patriarchy”. Look at what’s happening now. They’re not even nominated in the same category, and people are bitching. It’s gonna be so much worse if this is implemented. Men can’t get nominated at all.
movies
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.