This title of this article is making me so angry

makes me laugh because it's petty and retarded

>>84167666
Yes, it's men that's the problem with those movies. Obviously.

FACT: Baywatch is a more intelligent movie than Wonder Woman.

File: atlas.png (285KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1000x800px

>being a normie who watches or cares about new flicks
You deserve everything you get

>>84167694
How they fail to even mention Sofia Boutella who plays a major character in the Mummy gets me even more pissed

>>84167666
>This article is making me so angry
You are that article's author's dream come true.

>>84167666
You should just accept it, sweetie. The age of toxic masculinity is over. Women are here to stay.

Any drumpftards that can't get over this need to remain in 2016.

>>84167736
I mean: Sofia is MILES better to watch on screen then Gadot! Better acting, better accent, more dedicated to her role

Welcome to feminism.

>women are falling behind? Men's fault, has to be.
>men are falling behind? Well done women well done, men this is just fucking embarrassing for you what's wrong with you?
>I love equality ;)

>Superhero movie out sells other movies
Who would have thought?

These blogging cum addicts are RELENTLESS in their agenda pushing. It's so exhausting. I wish Michelle Carter would coax these losers into killing themselves.

File: Dark-Universe-Logo.jpg (30KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 640x360px

>>84167729
>implying the Dark Universe isn't going to save cinema
The reason it didn't get a large box office as it should have is because of the recent shit that has been spewing out at the cinemas so people were hesitant to go and see the Mummy and of course the critics were not kind to it because it's a film not made for them but for classic movie goers and artistic imaginative people. Critics these days only care about how good are the quips and does it have any political themes that people can relate to.

Why would a man write an article like this?

I'm fucking sick of identity politics seeping into every facet of life everywhere I look. It's disgusting. Fuck this 2014-present self-parody world, fuck it hard.

>>84167897
>Why would a man write an article like this?
He wants to get laid?

File: 813.jpg (18KB, 236x354px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 236x354px

>>84167774
I'm cutting my dick off right now and identifying myself as a pretty little girl scout.

>>84167914

that's a pretty fucking low bar if a woman takes that bait.

>>84167666
That's because you are Satan.

>>84167666

It's about facts not your feelings, snowflake. Women led movies are doing better at the box office than men led movies. It's just math. You can do math, right? Or is math some feminist construct?

>>84167974
>Women led movies are doing better at the box office than men led movies.
Name me 1 other movie starring woman that is doing really well

>>84167974
yeah the fact is the feminist agenda is being pushed regardless of whether the majority of people want it in their lives or not

why this article make you angry exactly?

every movie there is a remake or a sequel, all hollywood flicks, all forgettable summer blockbusters, wonder woman too, maybe you need to find better things to watch

File: Woman.png (1MB, 1010x818px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1010x818px

>>84168036
All I want is rebellious/villainous woman characters. Enough of goody moral good

>>84167775
lmao

File: SofiaBoutella.png (2MB, 2652x350px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2652x350px

>>84168169
It's true though. If you think Gadot is better, something is wrong with you

>>84167974
Even if that were true (it's not) and even if your post wasn't b8 (it is), there's no evidence that it's the gender of the lead roles determining the profit.

This is the third main DC film to come out in this generation. Isn't it much more likely they just learned from their mistakes?

>>84168219
Okay, I'll play along waifufag

>>84168237
>Even if that were true (it's not)
So it is about your snowflake feelings?

>there's no evidence that it's the gender of the lead roles determining the profit
Let's just ignore the male leads and sure, you got it.

>>84167666
It has less to do with her gender and more to do with the fact that shes one of (((them))).

File: TrumpSmug.jpg (29KB, 750x393px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 750x393px

>>84167795
>Well done women well done
HOWEVER

>>84168327
kek

>>84167897
he was reaised by a "strong" single mother

>>84168300
>So it is about your snowflake feelings?
Not sure how this is even relevant.

>Let's just ignore the male leads
Or this, really. Even if movies with female leads are doing better, it doesn't mean the female lead is the reason why. You have to prove that.

>>84168269
>most dedicated actress with the amount of make up she has put on her in all movies
>was a dancer so is very athletic and does a lot of her own stunts
What's your problem with not preferring her over Gadot?

Not to mention she is way more attractive than Gadot

File: 1493934919282.png (41KB, 911x773px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 911x773px

>>84167666
What you're saying is that you are triggered by it?

Didn't Guardians of the Galaxy just make buck, and it was a film about father-son bonding?

>>84167666
I'm pretty sure movies starring men make more money than movies starring women. The only reason WW made money is because it's capeshit and even if it was wonder Man instead of Wonder Woman it would have made money.

>>84167666
>My manhood is threatened by an internet article

File: 1491670493957.png (225KB, 1012x496px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1012x496px

>>84168515

Stop reading blogshit and read shitposting on 4chan instead. Youll still get mad, but its a different kind of mad that doesnt make you lament society as a whole. Just autism.

>>84167666
I think this might be satire of people saying the reverse about women led movies. But I'm not going to check to find out.

Also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell_%282017_film%29

>Budget $110 million
>Box office $169.8 million

Assuming double for marketing as always, and that's a flop.

>>84168476
>Not sure how this is even relevant.
Yeah, it pays off the actually read the posts you're triggered about.

>it doesn't mean the female lead is the reason why
You'd have a point if it wasn't the most marketed aspect of said films.

>>84167885

Anons think that people who like the DCEU are just joking, so now they're going to pretend the Mummy was good

stop
getting
triggered
by
everything

stop
falling
for
clickbait
articles

It's not 2015 anymore. This kind of headlines have lost their ragebait potential

>>84168612
Don't forget domestic and foreign cuts.

If the SJWs writing blog posts for a living knew anything about how to make money in business, they wouldn't be blogging for a living

>>84168638

So that title can be refuted with GotG2 (male hero) doing really well and GitS (female hero) failing. Christ, these fucking idiots are acting like WW is the first time a woman has ever been a protagonist in the history of film. That's the worst part.

>>84168716
They also act like it's the most successful capeshit movie ever made.

>>84168578
>didn't make a billion
JUST

>>84167666

If you see dumb shit like this, just remind yourself how fucking dumb it is and don't click on it. Stop linking this garbage to /tv/. you give them clicks, you make them write more of this trash.

>>84168612
Just curious, why assume double for marketing? Have they ever actually given out marketing budgets?

>>84168760
To be fair, he did not provide a link at all. Just the screenshot.

>>84168626
>You'd have a point if it wasn't the most marketed aspect of said films.

How? /tv/ threads about propaganda pieces by liberal journalists isn't marketing. If anything, it's portrayed like every other superhero movie out there.

>>84167774
sweetie posting should be more common tbqh

>>84168877

They almost never do, but it's how most people guess the real cost of a movie. The bigger the film, the more shit you need to do to promote it, not just regular advertising, but parties, events, schwag, buying more expensive ad slots, etc.

Those Blumhouse horror movies aren't doing ad campaigns like that, because those movies are dirt cheap.

>lets mock people that go to movies

Yeah, this is a brilliant strategy, especially since domestic profits have been plummeting the whole summer.

>>84167666
it's capeshit, it's the first female capeshit, so that was ALWAYS a recipe for success.

moving the fuck on

>>84168979
>it's the first female capeshit
That is not even true.

>>84168919
If you're gonna pretend to be retarded and claim these movies aren't marketed as female-led titles with feminist undertones here and there, be my guest.

>>84167666
Don't be angry, it's taken 100 years for a movie with a female mc to make the paying audience, which is mostly women with their children, wet. It'll take another 100 years for it to happen again. Unless of course they keep heading in the direction of big budget movies being ultra trash that appeals only to the extremely stupid. Then we might be in trouble.

>>84168950

Oh, and sometimes it's more, like with Ghostbusters 2017. They said that film would need to get about $500m to break even. It also had a longer more ridiculous ad campaign than most films do. So saying double the budget is about as close as we get to understand what the studio needs to not really lose. Then the studios lie through Hollywood accounting to make all films a loss because it gives them better tax credits.

File: 420397461.jpg (63KB, 500x498px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x498px

>>84167666
Confirmation bias is a bitch. So is this author.

>>84169019
it is of either of the cape cinematic universes and that's what really matters, like it or not

>>84169025
I'm just asking for some proof to the shit you're saying. I think a lot of people, on both sides of the political spectrum, are reading far too much into this movie.

My local theater cancelled screenings so they could have more for WW.

File: dilbert-confirmation-bias.gif (107KB, 1000x311px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1000x311px

>>84169098
Even Dilbert knows.

>>84169159

What do you have, 8 screens?

>>84169141
That's just moving goalposts.

Off the top of my head, Marvel had Elektra and DC had Catwoman. Why didn't either of those do well, despite "strong women"?

>super hero shit kills everything else

w0w

even the "bad" DC movies mop the floor with other shit

>>84169186
Identity politics weren't a thing back then

>>84169157
>I'm just asking for some proof to the shit you're saying.
While making false statements and denying reality. Boy, am I looking forward to that for the next hour!

Yeah, no thanks, if I wanted to argue with an intellectually dishonest redditor I'd skip a few boards and stick my head in /pol/. I got you to admit female-led titles are doing much better, which is about enough to make you grind your teeth in frustration. I exit the thread satisfied.

File: 1494057643255.png (192KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 512x512px

If any article or reviewer ever uses gender, political ideology or race to judge a something, send it straight to the trash.

didn't that female comedy just come out and bomb hard?

>>84169186
capeshit movies weren't vogue back then. Even the male lead ones got shat on before cinematic universes became all the rage. Even Batman, AKA King Capeshit had it's brand destroyed until Begins.

Alternative title: Decent movie makes money, shitty ones flop

>>84169321
Nolan saved comic book films... Bravo.

>>84169319
Yes.

More to the point, the only response anyone should've had to this article was either "What about Guardians 2?" or "Boy, he'll look stupid when Spider-Man comes out". But here we are.

>>84169319
Yes, but they can't talk about that because:

1. Two of the actresses currently play character on SNL meant to make fun of Trump
2. It had a female director

>>84167666
Baby Driver is going to BTFO Wonder Cunt

>>84168477
>dude she had to put on makeup lmao

by this logic every female in GotG2 is a phenomental actress

>>84169432

>edgar wright movie
>money

>>84169432
lmao

how long until wonder woman wins a nobel peace prize?

>>84169490
You'll see, they'll all see!

>>84169500
I'm actually going to bother with the Oscars this year just because I can see it getting memed in

the funposting will be unreal if so

>>84169530

justice league will sweep the oscars though

DC only produces arthouse movies

File: 19390877_1831669203819098_2011746141988701187_o.jpg (66KB, 1079x810px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1079x810px

>>84167666
What's wrong with this faggot?

>>84167666
And WW wasn't even a feminist movie.

She messed up everything,steve died for our sins

>>84169530
>self congratulation for """"empowering women"""
>jew

how long will the standing ovation be?

>>84169371
>"Boy, he'll look stupid when Spider-Man comes out"
Isn't that one actually on track to disappoint, for some reason? Besides, even if it succeeds, it has an ethnically diverse cast which is still considered a win.

>>84169754
But then those anons can point out to the IP and how it made money "because it was Spider-Man", even though people are "tired of Spider-Man remakes".

>>84167885
>>84168629
Everyone knows these people are shills right? No gives that much of a shit about capeshit. I hope

>>84169849
I do. I genuinely do. I recite the Green Lantern oath every night before I go to sleep.

>>84167666
BRING BACK ZACK

>>84167666
Satan, that's the point. I'd think you know this after being alive since the beginning of time.

>>84167666
devil's trips!

:O

I agree. It's stupid, as if they're related.

>>84168219
oh she was in kingsmen. that's where i've seen her before

>>84170554
Yeah, she had the sexy legs.

File: you_poor_fucking_baby.jpg (74KB, 464x333px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 464x333px

ITT leftards pretend to be mad at an article.

As for the article, it is obvious Seth is still butthurt about Girl Ghostbusters. Aww, that poor little baby!