Latest Charlies Angels 'made for women' reboot flops, female director blames men

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22515]

Elizabeth Banks cranks out a stinker. In her initial interviews she claims she made the movie ‘for women’.

It was never set up to be a big money maker. They projected 12-16 million opening weekend.

The movie barely topped 8 million opening weeked.

Her response is that it’s doing bad because men aren’t going to see it.

Well, it appears not even women are going to see it either. Why hasn’t her ‘made for women’ movie bringing in the sisters? Why does she need men to make her numbers?

And real directors don’t blame their audiences for their failures. Kathleen Kennedy and her boy putzes, it didn’t work for them either. They continue to kill the SW franchise though. But when was the last time you ever heard a male director ever blame a male-oriented movie flop on the fact ‘women didn’t come out and buy tickets.’? Never. you’ve never heard this. Because no male director has ever blamed lack of support from women for a male-oriented film.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[NerdTunnelerParticipant]

LOL…Brilliant logic…

I stand with feet apart and let my balls hang free...Manginas dont have balls...See how they stand and sit at the whim of their masters...

[Ranger OneParticipant 16836]

Do women ever accept blame for the consequences of anything they do?

Responsibility? Accountability? I think those are male concepts, because they seem alien to females.

All my life I've had doubts about who I am, where I belonged. Now I'm like the arrow that springs from the bow. No hesitation, no doubts. The path is clear. And what are you? Alive. Everything else is negotiable. Women have rights; men have responsibilities; MGTOW have freedom. Marriage is for chumps. If someone stands in the way of true justice, you simply walk up behind them and stab them in the heart-R'as al Ghul.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22515]

Ranger One wrote:

Do women ever accept blame for the consequences of anything they do?
Responsibility? Accountability? I think those are male concepts, because they seem alien to females.

Well we never made them live up to them. Partly out of kindness, and partly because we all innately know its just not possible for them to do so.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[Gravel PitParticipant]

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

when was the last time a male director blame a movie flop on the fact ‘women didn’t buy tickets.’? Never.

Great point.

They are wearing people out on these WOKE films. People are sick of it.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

The Charlies Angels franchise was happy for years in the 70’s. The lack of entertainment content by it’s current incarnation is a symptom of Strong Woman overload. It’s not revolutionary, it’s de rigor.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[StealthParticipant 5335]

Saw the preview, looked like shÎt.

"Once you’ve taken care of the basics, there’s very little in this world for which your life is worth deferring." -David Hansson. "It’s not when women are mean or nasty that anything is out of the ordinary. It’s when they are NICE to you that you have to be on high alert..." -Jackinov.

[Ranger OneParticipant 16836]

Gravel Pit wrote:

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

when was the last time a male director blame a movie flop on the fact ‘women didn’t buy tickets.’? Never.

Great point.
They are wearing people out on these WOKE films. People are sick of it.

The stupid c~~~s never seem to learn.

The problem is the movie studios don’t seem to mind blowing millions just as long as they serve an agenda.

All my life I've had doubts about who I am, where I belonged. Now I'm like the arrow that springs from the bow. No hesitation, no doubts. The path is clear. And what are you? Alive. Everything else is negotiable. Women have rights; men have responsibilities; MGTOW have freedom. Marriage is for chumps. If someone stands in the way of true justice, you simply walk up behind them and stab them in the heart-R'as al Ghul.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22515]

Ranger One wrote:

Gravel Pit wrote:

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

when was the last time a male director blame a movie flop on the fact ‘women didn’t buy tickets.’? Never.

Great point.They are wearing people out on these WOKE films. People are sick of it.

The stupid c~~~s never seem to learn.
The problem is the movie studios don’t seem to mind blowing millions just as long as they serve an agenda.

I remember somewhere that some studios do some movie projects fully knowing they are going to lose money on them, and actually deliberately use them as write-offs for their budgets. They must pick them as PR boosters fully knowing they will hopefully pay off non-monetary dividends for them, capturing PC points, showing they aren’t sexist, stuff like that.

Is anyone here more familiar with this?

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[Mr. SpockParticipant 10910]

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

Her response is that it’s doing bad because men aren’t going to see it.

Since women need men like a fish needs a bicycle, why would they need men to see their crappy “you go girl” movies?

Feminism isn't about equality with men, it's about leverage over men.

[GrumpyParticipant]

Meh
It is just a crappy movie.
Mediocre story. Mediocre acting and performers, Mediocre direction/production/writing. Promoting an agenda that most people regardless of age/gender/sexual orientation are becoming exhausted of due to the forced “support” of said agendas.
Hollywierd can put out and promote any crap they so desire in the effort to make a profit. I, nor any other person is “required” by law to pay for or find it entertaining/educational.
If they lose enough money that cant be recovered as a tax write off, maybe just maybe they will start producing products that people will pay to see.

There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it

[Gravel PitParticipant]

Charlies Angels was already a reboot. They didnt do too hot either. Who ever believed it would be a good idea to reboot it again?

Theyve exhausted the reboot trend. Batman has been redone 6 times now. Spiderman has been done 4 times. Xmen, Avengers and Transformer films have people sympathizing with Timothy McVeigh. Even simps are tired of this sh!t. First it was a million female hero movies, then all the superhero crap, now everything is WOKE to the nth degree. People are delirious at this point

[HermitParticipant]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

The Charlies Angels franchise was happy for years in the 70’s. The lack of entertainment content by it’s current incarnation is a symptom of Strong Woman overload. It’s not revolutionary, it’s de rigor.

The evil in women’s hearts leaves them no moral bounds as to inhibit them from descending to the lowest levels of darkness to acquire their self entitled desires.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

Here is the issue. They billed the 2019 CA movie as an exciting, female driven, action movie. Instead, it was a film that was preachy, shunned femininity, had no real action scenes.

It is one thing to do a film reboot a first time. But, to do a second film reboot after the first film reboot was a success.

The producers of 2019 CA film did not want to spend the money for the talent in cast and production needed to make a good CA movie.

On the other hand, Charlies Angels 2000 did spend the money and made back that money and more. The talent from the CA 2000 film was incredible. A solid trio for the female cast, and the supporting cast included Bill Murphy and Tim Curry. Audiences would have just come to see the movie to watch those two actors ham it up. But, CA 2000 had so much more. The main cast were shown to be very different from each other, with their own problems. The supporting cast did an excellent job. Those playing the villains were great. The script was good, with a great plot twist in the middle. The film has just enough cheese to make things interesting, but not to much. And action and energy for the film was present from the beginning “Live Wire” scene to the climax helicopter scene at the end.

In addition, while the sequel Full Throttle had its problem, it was interesting.

I am really tired of film producers phoning in their work and using film productions as their personal therapy sessions. They do not put the effort and money to do the job right and when things do not go their way they blame the audiences for not accepting their half-ass s~~~ as a work of art.

You want to talk about films done right. The Joker cleared over a billion at the box office because those whom produced, wrote, directed, and acted in the film did it right.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22515]

Hermit wrote:

Puffin Stuff wrote:

The Charlies Angels franchise was happy for years in the 70’s. The lack of entertainment content by it’s current incarnation is a symptom of Strong Woman overload. It’s not revolutionary, it’s de rigor.

One of South Parks better episodes. Let’s top that off with some Creme Fraiche.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22515]

Faust For Science wrote:

Here is the issue. They billed the 2019 CA movie as an exciting, female driven, action movie. Instead, it was a film that was preachy, shunned femininity, had no real action scenes.
It is one thing to do a film reboot a first time. But, to do a second film reboot after the first film reboot was a success.
The producers of 2019 CA film did not want to spend the money for the talent in cast and production needed to make a good CA movie.
On the other hand, Charlies Angels 2000 did spend the money and made back that money and more. The talent from the CA 2000 film was incredible. A solid trio for the female cast, and the supporting cast included Bill Murphy and Tim Curry. Audiences would have just come to see the movie to watch those two actors ham it up. But, CA 2000 had so much more. The main cast were shown to be very different from each other, with their own problems. The supporting cast did an excellent job. Those playing the villains were great. The script was good, with a great plot twist in the middle. The film has just enough cheese to make things interesting, but not to much. And action and energy for the film was present from the beginning “Live Wire” scene to the climax helicopter scene at the end.
In addition, while the sequel Full Throttle had its problem, it was interesting.
I am really tired of film producers phoning in their work and using film productions as their personal therapy sessions. They do not put the effort and money to do the job right and when things do not go their way they blame the audiences for not accepting their half-ass s~~~ as a work of art.
You want to talk about films done right. The Joker cleared over a billion at the box office because those whom produced, wrote, directed, and acted in the film did it right.

If you consider that they did a second reboot as a tv series, with the former movie redux, this is actually the THIRD reboot. And apparently they went deliberately heavy lesbian overtones. You could tell from The one chick’s short lesbian haircut but apparently it was so targeted the lgbt community was jazzed about this. Yet another reason factoring into it’s awful, awful audience draws.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

If you consider that they did a second reboot as a tv series, with the former movie redux, this is actually the THIRD reboot. And apparently they went deliberately heavy lesbian overtones. You could tell from The one chick’s short lesbian haircut but apparently it was so targeted the lgbt community was jazzed about this. Yet another reason factoring into it’s awful, awful audience draws.

The dirty little secret about lesbians. A few different polls were done and it was found that most lesbians prefer to watch the cute, sexy female characters on screen, than the buzz-cut tomboys.

In other words, that CA 2019 does not even appeal to their target audience.

[MonkParticipant 16988]

Ranger One wrote:

The problem is the movie studios don’t seem to mind blowing millions just as long as they serve an agenda.

Movies ceased to be about making money a long time ago. If they do, it’s a bonus. Pushing the agenda is their primary objective.

[Gravel PitParticipant]

exactly, they dont even understand what gets Lesbians off … it aint blue jeans and buzz cuts! dumbasses

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

Gravel Pit wrote:

exactly, they dont even understand what gets Lesbians off … it aint blue jeans and buzz cuts! dumbasses

The people making these movies make one of the most common mistakes about homosexuals. A homosexual is not turn on by looking at their reflection. A homosexual is not looking for someone just like them, but for someone with different traits.

The one overlap between heterosexuality and homosexuality is that most aggressives are looking for passive mates and most passives are looking for aggressive mates. It is just harder to tell which is which among homosexuals.

[Author]

Posts