http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/10/07/warner-bros-says-no-more-female-lead-characters/
This is going to hurt them
Well, that's the dumbest thing I've heard all day.
Its only 10:30 for me.... I still got a full day left!
it is almost 19:40 for me... anyway this is the "dumbest thing of the day"
Okay, for a long time I have thought those in control of Hollywood were sort of an out-of-touch old-boys network, but this... if this is true, it has to rank at the stupidest thing I've heard in a LONG time. The movies cited as factors from what I read had lousy scripts and stories, could maybe people are tired of stories that suck?
Nah, it can't be that. Perish the thought that pandering to the lowest common denominator with the least effort not work.
Gads, this industry needs an enema.
EDIT: Another article on the subject
http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=29356
Funny, since Hollywood itself has become so disgustingly left wing....it's amazing that it can function at all with views like this at the top.
Quote from: Glitch Girl on October 08, 2007, 10:59:56 AM
Gads, this industry needs an enema.
Ummm... if the industry gets an enema, that that means it'll produce even MORE excrement - only more watered down, and with lots more flatulence.
Ohhh wow.........I definitely didn't need to hear that........ :blink:
Quote from: Glitch Girl on October 08, 2007, 10:59:56 AM
Gads, this industry needs an enema.
Or hormone equilibrium.
It takes an exceptional actress (or actor, for that matter) to save a bad script, to unite an otherwise clueless ensemble, or to resist deleterious direction. Let's not place the blame on one person's shoulders, whether male or female, when a film tanks at the box office. When the right elements--well cast leads and supporting roles, good script, expert direction, careful editing--are in place, magical things can happen. I've seen a number of films featuring actors I typically despise that turned out to be good films under the right directors. How dunderheaded must one be to suggest that the success or failure of a film depends on the sex of the lead? :huh: ... <_< ... :angry:
ow_tiobe_sb
Phantom Bunburyist and The Prat in the Hat
Don't listen to BentonGrey... if there's one thing FR needs, it's more poop jokes.
Don't listen to Spud.....what? You need a reason? ^_^
Quote from: ow_tiobe_sb on October 08, 2007, 12:44:52 PM
How dunderheaded must one be to suggest that the success or failure of a film depends on the sex of the lead? :huh: ... <_< ... :angry:
ow_tiobe_sb
Phantom Bunburyist and The Prat in the Hat
Dunderheaded enough to make Catwoman.........
Okay, I'm not a feminist, or anything anywhere close, but this is still idiotic. Films with female leads have done well in the past, take the Underworld series for instance. Yeah, these few have done poorly, but just picking one factor and saying that is the reason is pretty bad thinking.
I say Hear! Hear! Let's get women back into the film rolls they belong in: sex objects and victims of violent crime!!
Pfeh. Do people here actually believe this? I agree with everyone saying that WB making this its official policy would be stupid. But, I am holding off judgment on whether this is even vaguely legitimate until something better than "unnamed sources" exist to back it up. Even Gloria Allred couched her statements on the matter with "If that's what he said,..." and "If that studio confirms,..." conditionals.
BTW, there is a big difference between a studio exec spouting off angrily when getting a dismal report on weekend box-office receipts and a big studio actually adopting a serious policy change.
True Stumpy, and I have no real expectations that WB will actually make this a policy, but (and you have a good point about not assuming the veracity of the statement) the fact that the head of the studio said something as incredibly dim-witted as this is rather appalling.
guess i won't be working for Warner Brother anytime soon . . .
this is yet another reason I would rather stay with independent markets instead of being exclusively with a studio.
The only thing this means for me is that we're less likely to see a real Wonder Woman movie now.
Don't forget WB is a business, if female lead movies aren't making money for them right now, let them stop making them. theres at least 4 other big studios out there that would be willing to pick up the slack. not to mention the actual independant or semi-independent productions that are more likely to be better movies anyway.
i say go for it.
Here's my problem. "The critic has to educate the public; the artist has to educate the critic." - Oscar Wilde
That was before 'the studio'. I guess the studio freaks out at audience response and limits the artist.
Some updates:
http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/10/09/warner-brothers-denies-comments-about-female-leads/
This is looking more like a molehill than a mountain. And, given that the original accusation is still just Nikki Finke with no corroboration whatsoever, I am not especially surprised. (And, all the other reports are just repeating Finke's claim. There is no multiple sourcing for this story.) Unless an verifiable witness comes forward and states Robinov said what Finke claimed and that it was in context, it seems like the story is dead.
Whether they feature men or women, WB seems to stink regardless. How about a "no more cheap franchises" edict?