OtherGround Forums Eliz Banks says Charlie’s Angels failed bc Sexism

24 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 18722

Nolte: Big Fat Liar Elizabeth Banks Blames Sexism for ‘Charlie’s Angels’ Flop

Elizabeth Banks attends the Women In Film 2017 Crystal and Lucy Awards at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on Tuesday, June 13, 2017, in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP)

Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP

JOHN NOLTE

18 Nov 20191,028

4:55

Prior to Charlie’s Angels (2019) fiery death at the box office, writer-director-star Elizabeth Banks had already formulated sexism as an excuse for her coming flop. Per IndieWire:

Prior to the movie’s disastrous opening weekend, Banks gave an interview to the Herald Sun that is now proving to be somewhat controversial. The filmmaker, who also wrote and produced “Charlie’s Angels” and stars in the movie as Bosley, called out a potential box office bomb as being sexist. “Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money,” she said. “If this movie doesn’t make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t go see women do action movies.”

To explain away the box office success of Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel, two female-led smashes, Banks added, “They’ll [meaning: evil men] go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre.”

“So even though those are movies about women, they put them in the context of feeding the larger comic book world, so it’s all about, yes, you’re watching a Wonder Woman movie but we’re setting up three other characters or we’re setting up ‘Justice League,’” she added.

Banks’s comments are not only a pathetic act of pre-emptive crybabying, they are a bald-faced lie.

First off, Charlie’s Angels (2019) is not just a flop. That $8 million opening weekend is a catastrophea humiliation, and hopefully a wake-up call that no one — man, woman, young, old — is interested in these obnoxious, joyless, sexless, woketard movies.

Already five major franchises — five — have been killed at the box office after being rebooted to exclude and demean men.

How many more before this slaughter of golden geese comes to an end?

And of course, the dried-up harpies blame men. Male critics were blamed when Disney stripped A Wrinkle in Time of its Christianity and replaced it with woketardianity — and it flopped. Men were blamed for avoiding the misandry of the objectively terrible all-girls Ghostbusters reboot.

You see, it’s our fault guys, because we’re not enlightened enough to spend our hard-earned money and free time on movies that inform us the future doesn’t include men  — that even though we fight all the wars and do all the dangerous jobs (weird how feminists never fight to work in coalmines), that we are the problem.

Sorry, Hollywood, but this is still America, where even men are allowed to choose how to spend their money and time, so fuck you… Go unclog your own toilet, open your own jar, kill your own spider, fight your own wars, dig for your own energy, build your own skyscraper, trim your own trees, pull your own fish out of the ocean, shingle your own roof…

But then there’s Banks’ lying… The lying…

NEWSFLASH:  You do not need even one man to produce a hit movie. Hell, you don’t even need women who live in red states, or women who sold out to the patriarchy by getting married. Get this…

Two million women live in Los Angeles and 73 percent of them are single. That’s 1.46 million single women in one super-blue city alone…

There are ten million women living in New York City and 55 percent of them are single. That’s 5.5 million single women in another super-blue city.

If just those women had gone to see Charlie’s Angels, that’s a $60 million opening weekend.

In other words, while Banks is blaming men for not showing up, her lousy movie could not even attract 15 percent of the single women in two of the most left-wing cities in America.

Banks’ second anti-science whopper is a bald-faced lie that says men are only willing to see women in action if it comes from “male genre” of superhero movies that lead to a male-dominated Justice League or Avengers.

Uhm…

Aliens, Resident Evil, Hunger Games, Underworld — all successful, female-led franchises that have nothing to do with male super heroes.

Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Atomic Blonde, Salt, Wanted, Tomb Raider 1 & 2, Mad Max: Fury Road, Lucy, and… Oh, yeah! Let’s not forget a 2000 movie called — no joke — Charlie’s Angels, that opened to $40 million, and its 2003 sequel, Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle, that opened to $37 million…

How could this be? How is this possible? All of these hit action franchises starring women, all of these hit action movies starring women, and all of it happening before The Woke Era enlightened and uplifted us?

 

 

24 days ago
8/20/03
Posts: 148362

Banks is trying to shame people into 1) seeing th emovie or 2) blaming them for the flop.

She's sad.

24 days ago
2/5/05
Posts: 49037

Search Charles angels. 

Theres already a multi page thread on this. :)

24 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 22511

I'm going to assume a man came up with Charlie's Angels. Why can't she create her own content? 

 

I don't wanna bash her too much, she's hot as hell, a good actress, and probably a pretty good director too but her head is in the wrong place on this issue.

 

 

24 days ago
2/23/05
Posts: 14936
This makes my mangina cry
24 days ago
4/27/18
Posts: 2033

So stoopid 

24 days ago
12/24/10
Posts: 4146

The only way that sack of shit movie had a chance is if all those cunts were bottomless the entire   film ??

24 days ago
10/4/14
Posts: 5849

I didn’t even know there was a new Charlie’s Angels movie until I heard how bad it flopped. Maybe shitty marketing played a part? Or the fact that it’s a Charlie’s Angels movie? Nobody cares about that shitty franchise anymore. Come up with an original idea for once. 

24 days ago
7/23/08
Posts: 2801

Man, I used to like her but she has proven to be insufferable since becoming a director

24 days ago
9/14/03
Posts: 6935
Typical woman. Wants men's full support while sticking it to men.
24 days ago
12/7/17
Posts: 224

Because it sucks. Women super hero's suck. It's true, I'm sorry but they suck. 

24 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 354
Got woke, go broke.
24 days ago
4/6/19
Posts: 3285
phatcat -

The only way that sack of shit movie had a chance is if all those cunts were bottomless the entire   film ??

charlie anals

24 days ago
12/15/11
Posts: 27386

Perhaps if they created a new story, instead of  rewriting old, they could have a hit.

24 days ago
7/15/02
Posts: 19194

Even SJW’s are going to turn on her in a moment. Just wait. 

24 days ago
6/3/03
Posts: 103140
Cire -

Nolte: Big Fat Liar Elizabeth Banks Blames Sexism for ‘Charlie’s Angels’ Flop

Elizabeth Banks attends the Women In Film 2017 Crystal and Lucy Awards at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on Tuesday, June 13, 2017, in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP)

Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP

JOHN NOLTE

18 Nov 20191,028

4:55

Prior to Charlie’s Angels (2019) fiery death at the box office, writer-director-star Elizabeth Banks had already formulated sexism as an excuse for her coming flop. Per IndieWire:

Prior to the movie’s disastrous opening weekend, Banks gave an interview to the Herald Sun that is now proving to be somewhat controversial. The filmmaker, who also wrote and produced “Charlie’s Angels” and stars in the movie as Bosley, called out a potential box office bomb as being sexist. “Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money,” she said. “If this movie doesn’t make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t go see women do action movies.”

To explain away the box office success of Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel, two female-led smashes, Banks added, “They’ll [meaning: evil men] go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre.”

“So even though those are movies about women, they put them in the context of feeding the larger comic book world, so it’s all about, yes, you’re watching a Wonder Woman movie but we’re setting up three other characters or we’re setting up ‘Justice League,’” she added.

Banks’s comments are not only a pathetic act of pre-emptive crybabying, they are a bald-faced lie.

First off, Charlie’s Angels (2019) is not just a flop. That $8 million opening weekend is a catastrophea humiliation, and hopefully a wake-up call that no one — man, woman, young, old — is interested in these obnoxious, joyless, sexless, woketard movies.

Already five major franchises — five — have been killed at the box office after being rebooted to exclude and demean men.

How many more before this slaughter of golden geese comes to an end?

And of course, the dried-up harpies blame men. Male critics were blamed when Disney stripped A Wrinkle in Time of its Christianity and replaced it with woketardianity — and it flopped. Men were blamed for avoiding the misandry of the objectively terrible all-girls Ghostbusters reboot.

You see, it’s our fault guys, because we’re not enlightened enough to spend our hard-earned money and free time on movies that inform us the future doesn’t include men  — that even though we fight all the wars and do all the dangerous jobs (weird how feminists never fight to work in coalmines), that we are the problem.

Sorry, Hollywood, but this is still America, where even men are allowed to choose how to spend their money and time, so fuck you… Go unclog your own toilet, open your own jar, kill your own spider, fight your own wars, dig for your own energy, build your own skyscraper, trim your own trees, pull your own fish out of the ocean, shingle your own roof…

But then there’s Banks’ lying… The lying…

NEWSFLASH:  You do not need even one man to produce a hit movie. Hell, you don’t even need women who live in red states, or women who sold out to the patriarchy by getting married. Get this…

Two million women live in Los Angeles and 73 percent of them are single. That’s 1.46 million single women in one super-blue city alone…

There are ten million women living in New York City and 55 percent of them are single. That’s 5.5 million single women in another super-blue city.

If just those women had gone to see Charlie’s Angels, that’s a $60 million opening weekend.

In other words, while Banks is blaming men for not showing up, her lousy movie could not even attract 15 percent of the single women in two of the most left-wing cities in America.

Banks’ second anti-science whopper is a bald-faced lie that says men are only willing to see women in action if it comes from “male genre” of superhero movies that lead to a male-dominated Justice League or Avengers.

Uhm…

Aliens, Resident Evil, Hunger Games, Underworld — all successful, female-led franchises that have nothing to do with male super heroes.

Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Atomic Blonde, Salt, Wanted, Tomb Raider 1 & 2, Mad Max: Fury Road, Lucy, and… Oh, yeah! Let’s not forget a 2000 movie called — no joke — Charlie’s Angels, that opened to $40 million, and its 2003 sequel, Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle, that opened to $37 million…

How could this be? How is this possible? All of these hit action franchises starring women, all of these hit action movies starring women, and all of it happening before The Woke Era enlightened and uplifted us?

 

 

24 days ago
12/2/05
Posts: 84921
phatcat -

The only way that sack of shit movie had a chance is if all those cunts were bottomless the entire   film ??

Lol like Donald ducking it? 

24 days ago
5/22/04
Posts: 2173
Charlies Angels was never even about the action... duh... it was for men who wanted to check out the TNA.

whoever financed this made a bad investment.
24 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 27169
SHOW US YOUR TITS!!!!!
24 days ago
2/9/12
Posts: 6215

Ghostbusters

Terminator

Star Wars

Predator

Game Of Thrones

Charlie’s Angels?

24 days ago
8/29/08
Posts: 5358

I thought it was a show that was coming on same channel as the new batwomen.Why remake the movie of a remake that's already been done.

24 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 1660

Budget between $48-$55 million.  

What did all that investment go towards? 

24 days ago
3/12/07
Posts: 12273

This thread could use more pics and less words.

24 days ago
6/22/03
Posts: 6788
Why haven't women flocked to see this great adventure?
24 days ago
1/3/18
Posts: 5875
Badder Harry - Charlies Angels was never even about the action... duh... it was for men who wanted to check out the TNA.

whoever financed this made a bad investment.

Hopefully it was that fat jewfucker soros.