While acknowledging media bosses not understanding causality vs correlation is a plague, is it wrong to hope the inevitable Monday QB'ing re: #Eternals (apparently?) being a hit "despite" reviews could AT LEAST lead to some actual introspection re: perspective/representation?
i.e. OBVIOUSLY, just as Virginia doesn't actually "mean anything" about national politics other than nobody likes Terry McAuliffe and too many people still enjoy racism; *NO,* #Eternals still making money doesn't "prove that critics were wrong" (or had "bad motives")...
...and much as I'd like it to be accurate (and I'm SURE it's a narrative you'll see touted by publicists and the studio etc) because it's a "feel good story;" it also doesn't empirically "prove that diverse audiences recognized something 'establishment' critics couldn't see"...
...I mean, that's probably SOME of it? A small part? It's more true than the mirror-universe version was when Churches were buying "PASSION" tickets in bulk and pretending that was a 'grassroots movement,' sure.
But it MOSTLY proves the MCU is bulletproof, and we knew that 🤷♂️
BUT! And I mean "but" sincerely, b/c I honestly dunno... since media needs a narrative anyway; is it REALLY the worst thing if movie journalism decides the place to land this time is "Huh, we missed this one - maybe we DO need to a more diverse roster of talent to cover things?"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. I would disagree with this characterization of many of these films and my appraisals thereof, but that's subjectivity about subjectivity so... whatever 🤷♂️
3. What I "prefer" isn't necessarily the type of film in this case, but the state of business where they are encouraged
...i.e. I think the state of affairs where Disney/Marvel says "Yes!" to a director who turns down an offer on a pre-sold surefire hit like 'BLACK WIDOW' to instead pitch their own take on a significantly more obscure project they happen to have the rights to and commits to it...
So at some point did all the other Avengers and friends just agree that they weren't going to ever ask Bucky which other famous historical assassinations between the late-1940s and 2016 were "really him;" or did they and they just ALL weren't so it's good?
Right but like even if they "understand" he still KNOWS the answer to all the "unsolved" ones; yeah? So unless there's a standing "rule" about it EVERY long-ish trip for Bucky must just be endless:
And you KNOW some people are gonna have REALLY specific "too far" limits where it's just immediately going to be a fight to the death. And it wouldn't even be any of the geopolitics stuff - if it turns out The Winter Soldier did Tupac/Biggie someone's just gonna pull his head off
Always watch the use of qualifiers like "complicated by" or "a desire to" in business-press answers, especially from movie and TV executives for whom "this was mentioned in a meeting by someone" is worth priceless face-saving P.R. cover day to day.
WB has been (and continues to be!) using "We ARENT forcing filmmakers to over-coordinated because Multiverse!" as a DC projects' selling point vs Disney/Marvel; they're doing two Batman and multiple Joker actors, etc - two Darkseids (one from a canceled directors cut)...
...would've been a non-issue and non-story. But obviously it's something that would've "COME UP" just in logistics, and now gossip-minded extrapolators on either end can imagine a scenario where their preferred version was getting "fought for" in some fashion.
ALSO: Warner Bros - whichever exec is REALLY into scenes - regardless of genre! - where people go "something something every civilization! something legends something myths are real!" while gesturing at 'cave paintings' of cereal mascots or whatever? Let someone else give notes
And I'm not even kidding - I FULLY expect to shortly see some formerly-respected Irish actor holding up a spelunking torch to illuminate a wall of 'primitive runes' and be like:
"Heart... Star... Clover... Horseshoe... ...The Blue Moon."
I feel like the key people are missing in the #SpiderMan3 stuff is they confirmed Doctor Strange before anyone else. That means you could conceivably start the story off in any kind of weird/off status quo because eventually a wizard is going to show up and say...
..."yeah actually you're in the wrong reality because of weird shit that happened in my movie and that TV show. See, here's two other you's - this kind of took some looking."
New Prediction: They'll do the "Everyone loves Spider-Man!"-verse HOUSE OF M for the fake one 😏
i.e. give Holland's Peter the "best case scenario" version of the life he'd want (Mysterio thing solved, everyone loves him, basically the new Iron Man, regularly throttles villains) ...until: "Sorry, this is all fake - to win, you have to go back to your Life Sucks reality."
“[Warner Bros] had a decades-long legacy as being known as the most talent-friendly studio. Now [they've] gone from that to a studio that in starburst colors lit up a sign that says, 'We don’t give a fuck about talent.’” - Anonymous
The most eyebrow-raising detail in the THR piece is the implication that WB was partly motivated by seeing their 2021 slate as a money-loser even without the pandemic, as it's hard to argue with: Apart from WW84, they had a lot of movie *I* was excited for... but iffy prospects?
Like... I *loved* "KING OF THE MONSTERS," but audiences didn't turn out for it and if "GODZILLA VS KONG" hadn't already been in production would that even have been *made* in the form it was? "SUICIDE SQUAD" is an apology/do-over sequel to a failure, "DUNE" is a dice-roll...