811–820 of 841 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went over 2 pages of 1star reviews in rottentomatos and not one mentioned the woke stuff. Not sure where this notion that it’s been brigaded by the anti-woke crowd comes from. Most bad reviews mentioned bland characters, mediocre acting, bad dialogue/writing etc.
I wonder if someday people will invent giving something the lowest possible rating and then not telling the truth about why they’re giving it their rating? …nah.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actors should be a good match for the role they play. That includes accent, build, height, sex, attractiveness, characterization (Will Smith couldn't play Sauron) and skin colour.
So, what you're trying to tell us is that Denzel Washington was miscast in The Tragedy of Macbeth? Presumably also Ira Aldridge as King Lear. What's especially funny about this is that your criteria disqualifies Shakespearean theater in the time of Shakespeare .
"In film and television, the audition is called a screen test, and it is filmed so that the casting director or director can see how the actor appears on screen."
> disqualifies Shakespearean theater in the time of Shakespeare
Ira Aldridge was born a couple centuries later than Shakespeare's King Lear.
Theater and movies are different media, if you wanna put up a play about Matrix you need actors that are able to act and to fight like in the movie, which I guess are not that many.
If you're shooting a movie, you simply hire stunt doubles.
Cinema is a fiction, it's not a live performance.
Most of the times main actors are there because they are popular and help the movie promotion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, the writing is the issue. I have no problem with ethnicity or even gender swaps. Honestly, a gender swap of a male character would have been better than changing Galadriel The problem is that they’re more focused on tying the series to Peter Jackson’s work and ensuring that children can watch it. The original stories were better.
Funny how these people have 500 zillion to invest then hire shit writers. We have an old and well-established culture of writers and system for rating those writers. You'd think they'd consult that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$1 billion in box office is still huge; I wouldn't call it "peanuts". And the box office of the original three films was $776 million, $538 million, and $475 million, so that was quite similar.
Keep in mind that that is pre-inflation. Episode 4 made 1.3 billion adjusted for inflation, with a far smaller moviegoing audience. The new films are just milking every ounce of life out of the franchise. The money they're making is indeed peanuts to what a talented crew could have made.
At any rate, the message I originally replied to was "do these movies make money though?", and the answer to that is "absolutely yes!" I don't really have an opinion on Star Wars as I didn't care all that much even for the older films. They probably could have been better (and made more money!), but it's the difference between "making a fuckton of money" vs. "making a shitton of money", so to speak. You don't need to make "the best" to actually make money; "good enough" is, well, good enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
6.5 is just about where I would rate this show. It seems like a generic high-production-value fantasy show, not being particularly reliant on source material (and thus not really benefiting from being associated with Tolkien). The acting is pretty average so far, and the storylines are too early to judge, but seem to gravitate to generic 'Good vs Big Great Evil' narrative. The pacing is also fairly slow to accommodat…
The reaction is likely because Tolkien has many hard core fans that did not appreciate the changes made to the lore.
Now we know why their LotR consultant left early
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, what you're trying to tell us is that Denzel Washington was miscast in The Tragedy of Macbeth? Presumably also Ira Aldridge as King Lear. What's especially funny about this is that your criteria disqualifies Shakespearean theater in the time of Shakespeare .
Not op, but I believe he meant that casting in theater and cinema are different. " In film and television, the audition is called a screen test, and it is filmed so that the casting director or director can see how the actor appears on screen. " > disqualifies Shakespearean theater in the time of Shakespeare Ira Aldridge was born a couple centuries later than Shakespeare's King Lear. Theater and movies are different…
I don't get reviews saying that TRoP, or some other new prestige TV series, is "terrible", or "a disaster", based on the first couple of episodes. Some really excellent TV series have taken more than a whole 26-episode season before they find their rhythm and get properly good. ST:TNG is a classic example, but I'm pretty sure you can come up with others. And some people are claiming that a new series totally worthles…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The wikipedia article on African American literature would certainly suggest there's plenty to choose from. Absolutely, I recognize I might just be unaware, and that's probably because they're not made into big budget movies and very much should be. I'd also love to see that. And to be clear, I'm in 100% agreement that I want to see and think there should be a lot more of their stories represented and made into big…
>>>What I wonder though is how much those stories are a part of the average Afro American active culture. Do they grow up reading those books too, or they do so reading Tolkien instead? I read Tolkien, because my mother was a nerd, and shared her love of sci-fi/fantasy with me. I presume she got her exposure to sci-fi/fantasy at university (graduated 1973), despite attending an HBCU. I really do wonder who introduced…
I've got some follow up questions if you don't mind.
I understand you don't have issues with stories where there are no black characters. And I totally get that, I don't mind stories where there are no white characters, so the reverse seems true as well.
But my question is, do you mind if there were simply no big budget movies or TV shows to ever be centered around black American characters, or portray black American culture in any way?
Do you feel it's okay to have a large ethnic population and continue to exclusively produce content with only white people and historically white culture in them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and you keep ignoring the death rates for those expeditions.
Please point out the evidence for these death rates. Any way the death rates from disease don’t matter. What matters is the survivors. What we do know is this contact happened. That’s a fact. It was even common enough to be economically important. That’s all it takes for people from far populations or with distant ancestry to show up.
Somewhere between 10% to 30% of Europeans that moved to West Africa died each year.
To put that in context the black death on average killed between 30% to 60% of the population _once a generation_.
This kind of shit makes me want to never watch the show in spite.