I asked for proof of "killed off in the name of woke" and all I get is a list of movie titles. Where is the proof of your statement?
Star Wars, Star Trek and other Sci-Fi
- Thread starter Triton
- Start date
- Status
That is your belief but that is not proof.
Don't forget "Dr. Who" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark." The new Raiders movie was apparently so bad that they went back for a *year* of reshoots.
Ghostbusters is an outlier. GB'16 was a disaster on every conceivable level and was kind of the ur-text on how to deal with the fans pointing out that you've made a crappy movie: call them names. But as disastrous as GB'16 was, it at least didn't try to say that the original Ghostbusters didn't exist or try to tarnish their reputations by retconning them into scumbags. And the franchise was able to hang on, and eventually produced a sequel to the originals that, while imperfect, was still pretty good and did ok at the box office despite getting very little press.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,930
- Reaction score
- 11,113
Netflix & Disney gettin' hit pretty hard too. And how 'bout women's sports? Gotta love that. I'm sure it'll be a case of, "nothing to see here" there too though.
Disney's multi-decade plan for Star Wars was derailed when their movies *sucked,* and now they have no firm plans for another Star Wars movie, never mind whole trilogies. Star Trek is, from all accounts, doing dismal business for Paramount. Cowboy Bebop was cancelled in less than three weeks. The latest Matrix movie has done astonishingly bad at the box office (been out a week and made a paltry $24 million domestic, about 6% waht Spider Man did in its first week). I'm increasingly convinced that the movie was intentionally made bad as a way to stick it to Warner Brothers.
So they spend millions to deliberately lose money...right.
If you permit someone to mutilate art and culture without complaint or pushback, they will simply carry on.
"If you don't like them burning books, just read other books."
Star Trek isn't some cheap throwaway bit of meaningless pop culture like the Powepuff Girls or Sex and the City... Star Trek *means* something to a *lot* of people. It is *culture.*
Lana Wachaowski didn't spend her *own* money. She spent Warner Bros money. And *reportedly, she didn't want to make another Matrix movie, but they were going to go ahead whether she was on board or not.So they spend millions to deliberately lose money...right.
This would not be the first time someone has done something like this. Witness the sequel to "Forest Gump." That's an *amazing* tale of cutting one's nose off to spite the other guy.
I'm sure a lot of the fan of your so-called "meaningless pop culture" would say the same about Star Trek. I find the outrage constantly expressed in this thread laughable beyond belief. A bunch of presumably middle aged guys complaining about modern day changes to their childhood heroes/movies etc and then adding in some "it's a conspiracy" crap to justify their complaints. Really is pathetic. Kind of into this territory:
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 8,024
- Reaction score
- 9,417
i have Two example of Tv Show destroy by Woke, National Socialist Justice Warriors and bad management
Star Trek: Discovery aka STD for the mind
Producer Alex Kurzmann, who say this in a interview: i don't know much Star Trek, i'm more in Star Wars...
Les Moonvest ex-CBS CEO who wanted make money and don't care about franchise since he killed it in 2004.
A bunch Writers who not understand Star Trek and had own agenda of Woke and NSJW
They stole the premise of show from independent Game Designer and humiliated him in Court.
Powerful woman characters of worst kind like Mighty Spock sister Michael Burnham who stars a war criminal and get promoted
Were men get down size to jerks best example for that is "Short Treks the trouble with Edward"
One of old writes from Original series got fired because of Racism, fact the Afro-American man tool the Bunch his experience
He endure with Racism, only got a call from woke infested Management he Fired because he a Racist ! HYPOCRITES !
apropos Management Kurzmann lured NETFLIX into producing STD with clause in little printed part of contract.
Either produce 3 seasons STD, or pay $480 Million in damage to Secret Hideout company of Kurzmann.
in the End Kurzmann destroy a beloved franchise into bizarre caricature, that makes no sense at all.
Come on, they face since 4 season a "Anomaly" that try to or has destroy the Galaxy... boring senseless crap !!!
BATWOMAN aka for christ sake what is that Shit ?!
CW Boss Mark Pedowitz and Stephen Amell wanted a another Arrowverse Show, so fine so good.
but they take Caroline Dries as Producer and she had a long Woke and NSJW to do list...
and her bunch of Writers had not a clue to make a TV script, Next to that the hire Ruby Rose als Batwoman.
What viewer got was a Carpet licking experience drench in Wokeness & NSJW issues and incomprehensible story lines...
Bad woke Management make matter worst lack of safety, suffer Ruby Rose a spinal chord injury operate on set!
Only to get demand from Producer to come back in three days for shooting, while Stundwoman end up in wheelchair !
After one season Ruby Rose quit this shit and Javicia Leslie became the next designated victim of Internet woke Trolls,
in 3 seasons the Carpet licking experience turned into a Eldritch Horror that can burn a sane man brain out !
What's rather remarkable is that the same network that made unwatchably ideological propaganda shows like "Supergirl" and "Batwoman" also made "Superman & Lois," which I went into fully expecting to hate... and I actually kinda loved it. because somehow, and I can't imagine how, the writers and producers of the show actually respected the character of Superman. They wholly upended the typical Superman status quo; the series starts off with Clark and Lois not only married, but with two teenage sons, characters invented entirely for the show. And they still produced stories that respected what Superman is and is supposed to be.
Rhinocrates
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 26 September 2006
- Messages
- 2,724
- Reaction score
- 6,533
I think Discovery needs Saul Tigh as XO, Hannibal Lecter as counsellor... and David Cronenberg behind the camera.
Last edited:
Conspiracy theories simplify complex things, and the decline of good storytelling is a complex and ongoing thing - Walter Benjamin's essay "The Storyteller" from 1936 is a pretty good read about the inverse relationship between information and stories.
"Get woke go broke," of course, was coined by John Ringo - a quick comparison of his novels with the conservative/libertarian-leaning greats of the past, all of whom I continue to enjoy, will confirm that political bludgeoning and bad writing isn't confined to progressives.
Now imagining a rewrite of Fahrenheit 451 where the firemen go around enlarging every image of the Enterprise by 30%.
Old men yelling at clouds is fine, old men posting memes from actual neonazis isn't. Forgot that last night.
???
- Joined
- 16 December 2010
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 3,183
Perhaps a more pertinent question is with the shows in question, do they also list the people who 'vet' the scripts for suitability (What used to be called 'Corporate' or 'Broadcast Standards' (aka 'BS'...)) back in the 1960s.) in the credits.
If they do, how many names appear, I'd bet it's much fewer than the names of the scriptwriters.
If they do, how many names appear, I'd bet it's much fewer than the names of the scriptwriters.
Last edited:
Here is a bit of evidence straight form Marvel comics, featuring Vita Ayala of, as it turns out, Marvel Comics. Note that what they're looking for in new hires isn't the most qualified editors, but those who check the right boxes. This is an example of ideology trumping the profit motive... and an example of why Marvels profits are what they are.
View: https://twitter.com/definitelyvita/status/1476667484182884358
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Messages
- 4,058
- Reaction score
- 3,127
In an attempt at peace, light and tranquility I bring you the opposite. So far offon topic it cries.
View: https://youtu.be/2txqsxIcdtw
- Joined
- 6 November 2010
- Messages
- 4,764
- Reaction score
- 4,407
Marvel is simply a company that seeks to increase its audience. They think money can be made by catering more to black/brown/queer/non-cis, because they think the general population is shifting that way. I witnessed mods & rockers, flower power, punk, new romantics, metrosexuals, yuppies, goths, emos, fundamentalists of all convictions, strangers from all over the world arriving. Over the decades, all of them were catered for, because there were bucks to be made there. 90% of the offerings were rubbish. 90% of everything has always been rubbish, in old, new, but always annoying ways. Shift your gaze to the non-rubbish stuff, be aware that what is rubbish to you is delight to someone else. Some of the rubbish is toxic to society, but wisdom, and a cool head, is needed to determine what is and what is not.
With hindsight, I am amazed stuff like B5 and the Galactica remake were completed. B5 had its weak episodes, but to tell a coherent story in 110 episodes was quite the achievement. I have lost interest in all things ST/SW years ago, my tastes in comics has never included anything from Marvel. I still discover new books/movies/tv-series/comics/music that I like. They are all different from the material I enjoyed as a teenager, but a lot of that stuff sits on my shelves anyway, to enjoy again and again. Then there's even older stuff. Joseph Conrad. Billy Wilder. Pérez Prado.
Most As a rule, conspiracy theories suck big time.
With hindsight, I am amazed stuff like B5 and the Galactica remake were completed. B5 had its weak episodes, but to tell a coherent story in 110 episodes was quite the achievement. I have lost interest in all things ST/SW years ago, my tastes in comics has never included anything from Marvel. I still discover new books/movies/tv-series/comics/music that I like. They are all different from the material I enjoyed as a teenager, but a lot of that stuff sits on my shelves anyway, to enjoy again and again. Then there's even older stuff. Joseph Conrad. Billy Wilder. Pérez Prado.
Last edited:
That may be the thinking, but collapsing comic books sales argues that that strategy is simply not working. Because at the same time they're working to increase their audience in groups that aren't interested in their stuff, they are turning off those who *were* interested in their stuff. This is a *bad* business model. There are reports that Marvel may end the practice of actually publishing comic books, to focus instead on movies and TV shows.
One might argue that "well, movies and TV are simply where society is going," to which I will counter with "go to Barnes & Noble." There you will find *rows* of manga/anime/whatever. Maybe a shelf or two of dusty American graphic novel compilations, but *vast* numbers of Japanese publications. Stuff that I look at and my first thought is "WTF am I looking at." But I don't begrudge them their success; they are filling the need that American comic book companies - the companies that invented the friggen' genre - have abandoned.
Nobody hereabouts is promoting "conspiracy theories." People are pointing out what is actually going on (the changing nature of storytelling), pointing out that these changes are bad on many levels (including basic business practices) and pointing out - as with the Vita-tweet, that the people responsible for these changes are open about what they're doing and why. It's no more a conspiracy theory than to suggest "Democrats support higher taxation and welfare spending than Republicans," or to whisper the dark secret that there are no married bachelors. Nobody is suggesting secret cabals in dark rooms. The people making these changes are doing so out in the open.
Amazed at the "guesses" posted here. A few facts.
Audiences age. "Modern" doesn't mean anything.
As someone who knows something about Hollywood, Producers will meddle because they put up the money. Depending on their skill level, they will suggest reasonable to unreasonable changes, primarily to save money, up to and including personal wishes and motivations based on personal politics/beliefs or 'trendy' things going on at the time they happen to agree with and want to promote.
A Hollywood script editor friend and I compared notes and 98% of the manuscripts we get are not worth publishing/using.
I spoke at length with Gene Roddenberry not long after the end of the original Star Trek. I asked him what his next project was. He replied that Earth II was coming to TV. I watched it and was disappointed. It quickly left the air.
A friend of mine hit me with the "I'm a Trekker not a Trekkie" nonsense. Apparently, "serious" Star Trek fans were intellectually superior to Trekkies who were second-class, to the point where "serious" Star Trek Fans would never associate, or want to be confused with, "them."
Audiences age. "Modern" doesn't mean anything.
As someone who knows something about Hollywood, Producers will meddle because they put up the money. Depending on their skill level, they will suggest reasonable to unreasonable changes, primarily to save money, up to and including personal wishes and motivations based on personal politics/beliefs or 'trendy' things going on at the time they happen to agree with and want to promote.
A Hollywood script editor friend and I compared notes and 98% of the manuscripts we get are not worth publishing/using.
I spoke at length with Gene Roddenberry not long after the end of the original Star Trek. I asked him what his next project was. He replied that Earth II was coming to TV. I watched it and was disappointed. It quickly left the air.
A friend of mine hit me with the "I'm a Trekker not a Trekkie" nonsense. Apparently, "serious" Star Trek fans were intellectually superior to Trekkies who were second-class, to the point where "serious" Star Trek Fans would never associate, or want to be confused with, "them."
Bah. Conspiracy theories, I tells ya...
The changing nature of storytelling? When did this happen? Look at any Batman movie: one or more bad guys, the mandatory pretty girl, a series of fights, new gadget(s)/vehicles and put in new examples in the next movie, or bring one or two elements forward.
I know people working for Marvel and DC and watch sales of Marvel and DC Comics. I also know award winning creators. A young Jim Starlin was at a comic-con and asked me and a friend to look over his portfolio. He wondered if Marvel would like his work. We encouraged him to give them a try
Comic book sales collapsing? No. Not true. I watched last year as they worked to get comics into the hands of readers. Changing distribution strategies and so on. There has been "talk" of dropping comic books as a line item but it hasn't happened.
Robotech and a few other things in the 1980s helped fuel interest in anime. I was there at stores that catered to people who admired Japanese designs, such as Gundam. I bought what I could, from High Complete Models, which were exquisitely detailed toys, not model kits, to magazines and books. I never cared for black and white manga but some did.
The "Elint Seeker" from Macross the Movie was stunning.
Last edited by a moderator:
"How much money is that scene going to cost me?" Producer looking over black and white storyboards.
Indeed, just as has been argued...not some conspiracy to deliberately make movies bad to piss old farts and conservatives!
Making money is job one. However, some would take over, or try to take over, a movie for personal interests/motivations. I followed Variety in print and the typical page one headline was a movie title followed by a number and lots of zeroes. That was all the credibility anyone needed. It might make others in Hollywood take notice, so your next project might attract some money.
Today? The formula appears to be: Scandal, scandal, issue(s) to advocate and bits and pieces about movies and TV shows -- and "fights" for this or that cause, because all the cool kids are doing it.
If you lump manga in with traditional comic booms, yeah, sales look great. More copies of the Japanese manga "Demon Slayer" were sold than the *entire* US comic book industry sold in the same time.
Some independents are doing well crowdfunding their own titles.
I watch crowdfunding and yes, based on the dollar goals, some independents can publish their books. Are they any good? On a strictly art quality level, not good, with the occasional exception. I've seen some offerings, and like ebooks, if you have the money, someone will print it. I had an independent comic tossed on my desk given to us by an artist we know whose skills are marginal. I was discussing another comic with our (former) in-house artist and we agreed that there were things wrong with the art. Having the money does not equal quality.
Fortunately, the average manga, and comic book buyer, does not wake up every day and look at the numbers. I'm on sites where I see the reports and I know what's happening in manga from a print run/dollar standpoint. The big two know this. Stan Lee tried to get some work done by the Japanese but little happened there.
Last edited by a moderator:
And has been pointed out, it's a bad business model. It's been known to be a bad business model for *years.* And yet... they still plow ahead. For example, remember "Vagrant Queen?" Of course you don't. Few do, and none should. It was a comic book written by one "Mags Visaggio," who appears to have gotten to her place of prominance based purely on identity. VQ was a comic that sold a whopping 2,000 copies of it's first issue (this is *dismal* even by current comic standards). Second issue, 1200. Third, 993, fourth, 769. Issues five and six were apparently never printed, because it's clearly a disaster. Well, ok. Vagrant Queen took its shot and it failed. There's no shame in that. But where the shame comes in: the SyFy network, after watching this comic book crash and burn, decided to buy the rights to it and dump large sums of cash into making a series based on it. A series that was quickly cancelled, because as little as people wanted to read the comic, they didn't want to watch the show just as much. I recall watching the first episode and thinking that it was poorly written, poorly made trash, and promptly put it out of my head.
*WHY* did SyFy spend the time and money on VQ when they'd already seen just how little interest there was in it? It's not because Visaggio has some phenomenal record of success. it's not because it's a fantastic story, or because it had a built-in fanbase. All Visaggio has going for Visaggio is Visaggio's identity.
I've seen some that are quite good. "BRZRKR" was a crowdfund success story, and very clearly a Keanu Reeves ego-project/Netflix pitch, and the art looks good to me. The art in "Odinn's Eye" looks spectacular to me, especially compared to the rubbish cranked out in a lot of Marvel titles.
BRZRKR and other trendy words. I'm watching that nonsense play out. "Let's see if we can get Keanu Reeves behind our project."? Sure. Why not? Netflix is very secretive about costs and other things.
Like I wrote, there are a few exceptions. I go to a local comic book store to keep track of the latest. Marvel is trying to squeeze every last dollar out of their existing I.P.s but concept-wise, they are grasping. I was looking at the latest Iron Man cover and thought 'the next "evolution" of Iron Man will be Amorphous Blob Iron Man.' I work with some very creative people and I'm not seeing much creativity from the big two. Like 'Batman sells! Let's do more Batman books!' and what do I see on covers? Mood covers and technique covers because it can't look like the "old" stuff. They can do what they want but I haven't, with a few exceptions, bought comics since 1985.
- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,138
- Reaction score
- 6,298
I always think it telling that Star Trek TOS did not even feature the date of the first manned moon landing, because it was still in the future when the series aired.
Attempts to shoehorn Earth history as mentioned now and again in ST into the later franchise have been pretty hamfisted.
For my part I would be happy to live with original series as a colourful momento of the 1960s and forget the ponderous films and TV series which never capture the light hearted fun of the original. Same is true in spades for Batman.
Of course as a 60s brat I would say that. But historically this was the decade when Colour TV burst in the US (even Brit TV series had to be filmed in color for the US market so we had glorious colour photos from Thunderbirds in comics and mags).
I am relaxed in the extreme about remakes of old films and TV series because I get it that I am not the intended audience. In the same way I am happy to watch old episodes of Top Cat and leave Peppa Pig to our schoolboy Prime Minister.
If the remakes are too "woke" or too shallow not my problem.
Attempts to shoehorn Earth history as mentioned now and again in ST into the later franchise have been pretty hamfisted.
For my part I would be happy to live with original series as a colourful momento of the 1960s and forget the ponderous films and TV series which never capture the light hearted fun of the original. Same is true in spades for Batman.
Of course as a 60s brat I would say that. But historically this was the decade when Colour TV burst in the US (even Brit TV series had to be filmed in color for the US market so we had glorious colour photos from Thunderbirds in comics and mags).
I am relaxed in the extreme about remakes of old films and TV series because I get it that I am not the intended audience. In the same way I am happy to watch old episodes of Top Cat and leave Peppa Pig to our schoolboy Prime Minister.
If the remakes are too "woke" or too shallow not my problem.
In the late 1980s, my employer and I were reviewing a new anime for possible licensing. The designs were excellent but the stories were quite bland and simplistic. We dropped the idea. There are still standards by which to judge new things that don't rely on just your age. I can still enjoy old TV cartoons from the 1960s.
Before the internet, I could like something, or not, and not think more about it. Or mention it to a friend or two who usually agreed and that was the end of it.
Before the internet, I could like something, or not, and not think more about it. Or mention it to a friend or two who usually agreed and that was the end of it.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,930
- Reaction score
- 11,113
Still waiting to see if DC follows through on their plan to jettison Henry Cavill in favor of the Ta-Nehisi Coates Superman. Not for woke of course. Henry just ain't up to snuff when it comes to representing the Man of Steel.
- Status
Similar threads
-
-
New ‘Star Wars’ Trilogy in the Works From ‘X-Men’ Alum Simon Kinberg
- Started by edwest4
- Replies: 52
-
-
-
