How dare you compare Harvey Birdman to Velma.

With Banks directing I wonder what she will blame the failure on this time.

Re-use the same excuses or come up with something new?

> Lots of projects fail, that’s normal.

These failed for all the same reason, which is NOT normal. Studios generally don't purposefully put out bad products, except over the last few years.

They choose to push a message instead of entertaining, and that is exactly what the problem is. It is as simple as that.

> What are the examples of them making a worse story in pursuit of a more “palatable” movie to this audience?

Wait, seriously?

Oh boy...how many examples would you like?

Do I really have to bring up 'Velma' which did exactly that and failed horribly? Or I guess since we're talking about films how about the 2020 film 'The Hunt'?

Black Panther 2? Ghostbusters (2016)? They/Them? Nope?

Every Pixar film over the last few years?

Man there are HUNDREDS of examples, I'm barely scratching the surface.

You kind of proved my point here, minorities have not had any issue in the last 20-30 years telling their stories. There has been almost no pushback to that from studios, in fact minorities are far, far over-represented in film and TV compared to the national demographics.

Some white people have gotten pushback for trying to tell black stories, but does that really surprise you?

> It’s the woke era.

Funny because the person you responded to already did that.

> Studios walk on egg shells hoping to not offend anyone.

So you had the definition, you just ignored it because you don't have a response.

Do you have any examples to share?

> Despite all the complaining about the "Woke era" you until relatively recent most minorities creatives are the ones who had walk on eggshells to not offended the studio.

This is the part that makes no sense and wasn't brought up, it is mindbogglingly wrong.

That is where your bias is hurting you, because this just isn't a real thing in the film industry.

Because from a neutral perspective you are arguing against something nobody brought up.

You need to tone down your bias when having a discussion.

Wow, trigger warnings for art films. That's a new low.

> that they review bomb it

Maybe those movies just suck? Or do you always blame bad reviews on 'people offended by it'?

None of this was brought up, why are you inserting it into an argument when nobody is talking about it?

Great argument. Really persuasive.

Cody inserts tons of topical references and dialogues so her screenplays go out of date much faster than most films.

Some films are timeless, others quickly expire. Most depends on how much the writing relies on current events and trends.

Mostly the screenplay. Diablo Cody does not write screenplays that hold up to time, tons of old references and outdated slang.

> Jennifer's Body

That did not hold up so good to a rewatch. Felt incredibly dated and old fashioned.

Is Baldwin on set? He tends to create a few casualties wherever he goes.

It is mindboggling that people don't seem to think a company earning billions and billions in extra income isn't going to spend the majority of it on marketing...

Hell you can find Reddit censoring thousands of stories about negative effects of medication and side effects simply because Merck paid them a shitload to do it.

...why are you assuming the 'poorer backgrounds' are cockney or Irish?

They are referring to the huge influx of 'refugees' that they currently have.

Walmart. Cheapest I could find.

With the prices for groceries that may be easier than you realize.

Had to pay $10 for half a gallon of eggnog yesterday.

Well the shitty part is due to his NDA he can't complain about it, they made it extremely clear to him that if he even contacted a lawyer they'd hit him with the full weight of their legal team.

Technically he wasn't even allowed to tell me, and I have a feeling these NDAs have only gotten more extreme recently. Gives them carte blanche to edit anyone into 'winning' or 'losing' and they can't do jack shit about it.

There is a very good reason they don't do 'blind' judging for these shows.

They tried it a while ago and it turns out the results are....less diverse.

I look at reality 'competition' shows as just scripted now, just like awards shows. They edit it to get the direction they want to go regardless of what happens.

Had a friend who was on a dating reality show and they really fucked him over in the editing room.

You opened up a can of worms but we've seen a staggering amount of reality show winners who pretty clearly weren't the 'best' at what they did...however they fit the demographics 'best' so they end up winning.

I have to say it has removed almost all drama in these shows, has really gotten awful the last few years.

Are you seriously going to tell me it isn't being made and marketed to primarily children?