Quote: (12-30-2016 04:14 AM)weambulance Wrote:  

Quote: (12-30-2016 03:14 AM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  

Even if the film is pro-masculinity, I refuse to give it one dime due to it having J-Law in it. She's such a feminist shrew, and she gets a percentage of every ticket sale and DVD. If you have to watch it, rent it from your local library.

I was going to say the studios are probably going to fuck her out of any money from the backend by cooking the books until the movie shows a loss like they do with every other movie, so don't worry about your money going to her. But then I realized she's a big enough name she probably gets some percent of gross.

It's just almost everyone else in the movie that's going to be fucked out of any share of net profits by Hollywood accounting.

It's 2016, are there still people in the industry dumb enough to take their points based on net profit?

If you're not a big name, do you have a choice? If you're in your first or second movie and relatively unknown, they'll just tell you to get fucked if you want gross points. Only big A-listers have any negotiating power.

I've read it's sometimes preferable for big stars to take net points, because they can claim their contracts are worth more that way. Like if you got $15 million for your last movie but the studio is only offering $8 million for this one, taking a big chunk of net points (that you know you'll never get) still allows you to represent yourself as a $20 million star, which is good for your next deal. I don't know how true that is, though.

Quote: (12-30-2016 11:17 PM)Peregrine Wrote:  

Quote: (12-30-2016 04:14 AM)weambulance Wrote:  

Quote: (12-30-2016 03:14 AM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  

Even if the film is pro-masculinity, I refuse to give it one dime due to it having J-Law in it. She's such a feminist shrew, and she gets a percentage of every ticket sale and DVD. If you have to watch it, rent it from your local library.

I was going to say the studios are probably going to fuck her out of any money from the backend by cooking the books until the movie shows a loss like they do with every other movie, so don't worry about your money going to her. But then I realized she's a big enough name she probably gets some percent of gross.

It's just almost everyone else in the movie that's going to be fucked out of any share of net profits by Hollywood accounting.

It's 2016, are there still people in the industry dumb enough to take their points based on net profit?

I've worked in the media industry for a short while, and the short answer is, yes. Although the smarter agents will wrangle for a big up-front payday, almost all of them will try to get their clients some sort of residual back-end. It is easy money if the movie is a hit, even if the small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number.

Quote: (12-30-2016 07:17 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

Quote: (12-30-2016 06:24 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

I have not watched the movie, but having Chris Pratt in it I have an assumption based on Jurassic World.


One reason feminists hated the Jurassic World movie was part due to the way the gender are portrayed, at the beginning the genders are separated and don't have need for each others, but once SHTF then the genders need each others to survive and preserve the children.

Stefan Molyneux did a good review on it, he mentions Chris Pratt has somehow become the only actor that can somehow display a level of masculinity not common today.

Feminists are already hating Guardian Of The Galaxy Vol 2 for being sexist, also it has to do with Chris Pratt.

I've read a few things as a result of this thread denigrating Chris Pratt for being "a sexist" for appearing in a slew of apparently sexist movies. As you mentioned above, I reckon he's become the go-to guy in Hollywood for 'modern day masculine(ish) man' because he used to play a chubby nerd in Parks and Recreation (I've never seen it, just the things I've read seem to indicate it). He's got 'unthreatening nice guy points' in the bag so to speak. I'm not sure whether that ties into what Stefan Molyneux said, but that's my guess.

As for this Passengers movie, I think it looks terrible. TV has completely taken over Hollywood in terms of new and original stuff, and has done for some time.

There is a rumor he will be the new Indiana Jones.

I don't know how much his real live has anything to do with his roles, but the guy is an avid hunter and speaks in ways not common in Hollywood.













I think is more natural and easy for him to play masculine roles given his outdoor hunting lifestyle.

Given that, the role in Jurassic World is perfect for him, it would be harder for a guy that never spend time in the wild to play that character.

I saw all I ever needed to see of J Law when I saw the inside of her asshole in those leaked pictures a few years ago. Chris Pratt's pretty cool though.

Just finished watching it, good movie, it's worth a watch. Chris Pratt keeps showing up in movies that are fun to watch. It seems like he's carved a space for himself similar to The Rock, as a family friendly, fun, athletic, masculine lead.

Quote: (12-31-2016 02:23 AM)iamdegaussed Wrote:  

I saw all I ever needed to see of J Law when I saw the inside of her asshole in those leaked pictures a few years ago. Chris Pratt's pretty cool though.

While aware of the film, I wasn't all that inclined to see it with any haste & this talk of critics & the film being 'problematic' I found a touch odd.
Now I can see why (spoilers) :








The script’s worst offense, then, is not Aurora’s sketchy characterization (because a poorly-written female character in a Hollywood movie isn’t exactly an uncommon occurrence), but the film’s overall romanticization of Jim’s actions. The leading man’s actions showcase an appalling sense of entitlement that the film barely questions, with only some lip-service deliberation on Jim’s part before he finally decides to wake Aurora. Not only does Jim wake (and effectively soft-core murder) Aurora; his compelling reason for doing so is that he likes her scant video profile and the way she looks. Jim convinces himself that he has come to know Aurora, and fall in love with her, through the most superficial of details. This is all to say that, if the person you think you’re falling in love with is asleep, you’re not really falling in love with that person. Like the character herself, Aurora scarcely exists as a human woman so much as a fantasy onto which Jim can project his own desires. And the film allows this, and expects its audience will too, as the two leads end the film more in love than ever.

http://screenrant.com/passengers-controv...ox-office/

Ahhh, that all explains the butt-hurt...

Quote:Cynical contrarian Wrote:

Quote:Butthurt critics Wrote:

The script’s worst offense, then, is not Aurora’s sketchy characterization (because a poorly-written female character in a Hollywood movie isn’t exactly an uncommon occurrence), but the film’s overall romanticization of Jim’s actions. The leading man’s actions showcase an appalling sense of entitlement that the film barely questions, with only some lip-service deliberation on Jim’s part before he finally decides to wake Aurora. Not only does Jim wake (and effectively soft-core murder) Aurora; his compelling reason for doing so is that he likes her scant video profile and the way she looks. Jim convinces himself that he has come to know Aurora, and fall in love with her, through the most superficial of details. This is all to say that, if the person you think you’re falling in love with is asleep, you’re not really falling in love with that person. Like the character herself, Aurora scarcely exists as a human woman so much as a fantasy onto which Jim can project his own desires. And the film allows this, and expects its audience will too, as the two leads end the film more in love than ever.

http://screenrant.com/passengers-controv...ox-office/

Ahhh, that all explains the butt-hurt...

Thats brilliant!
So the critics are angry that Pratt's character essentially applies the Tinder method?

Quote: (12-29-2016 08:14 AM)BillShatnerSmoothAF Wrote:  

she does nothing for me, id rather bang mccains daughter

That's going to be my new dog haha.

I downloaded it from a streaming site, it's a camrip, but I don't have enough interest to spend money to watch it. I will probably watch it when I have busy work to do, as background noise.

SJWs and feminists are furious at this movie, and attack it at every chance they have, calling it:

- opressive
- sexist
- creepy
- mysoginistic
- problematic
- terrible
- gross
- toxic

Over Twitter also there is a neverending war about this movie,
between us and the degenerate liberals who are denigrating it obsessively:

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vert...t&src=typd

If SJWs win, the future is looking very bleak, probably all movies
will be all the same like Mad Max the Feminist road:
strong independent woman kills all men, end of movie.

Quote: (12-31-2016 02:26 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

Just finished watching it, good movie, it's worth a watch. Chris Pratt keeps showing up in movies that are fun to watch. It seems like he's carved a space for himself similar to The Rock, as a family friendly, fun, athletic, masculine lead.

One Return Of Kings writer should definitely review this very good movie that triggerred so hard feminists and SJWs worldwide

It was a relatively ok movie for the current year moronic standards.

....












spoilers



Frankly they should have thanked him for waking her. Without another human being he would have gone crazy. Also they were lucky the captain woke up and opened the door or they all would have died.

In reality if he had not raised that girl, then he would have gone crazy and they all would be dead now. And men fall in love with a picture - they are highly visual. Besides - that was the beginning - he saw plenty of her vids later on. And he is a good-looking moderately masculine dude in the movie. She still chose to spend her life with him alone on a space ship. I bet that irks the feminists more - the ending. Because no woman would ever do that.

Fuck you bitches - that is why you will be all single mothers or cat ladies gulping down boxed wine and prozac.

I watched it while eating tacos, it was ok as far as I could tell.
Why weren't there more people running around in the end? They would've had kids, or possibly woken up a few other people to help keep the ship repaired when they got older. Maybe grandkids, but that would've reeked of incest if they didn't wake anyone else up, unless their kids woke some people up.

Quote: (01-02-2017 01:39 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  

I watched it while eating tacos, it was ok as far as I could tell.
Why weren't there more people running around in the end? They would've had kids, or possibly woken up a few other people to help keep the ship repaired when they got older. Maybe grandkids, but that would've reeked of incest if they didn't wake anyone else up, unless their kids woke some people up.

They still had 88 years to go, 87.5 until the first crewmembers woke up.

So even if they held out to her end-stage fertility cycle in 10 years the kids would be 77.5 at arrival on the planet. And if they had siblings, then it would be an incestuous clusterfuck. If there were at least 2 other couples they could have had kids, but not that way.

It was a wise decision. Nothing could have been done - live out a quiet life on a luxury cruise of eating, fucking and drinking, reading books and playing Playstation. It is not the worst of lives and that is why she decided to stay and that is why feminists were furious.

It has a 7.1 on IMDB and 31% on rotten tomatoes. That tells you all you need to know. A pretty good movie receiving poor reviews from professional movie watchers with an agenda to push. And in what was the then current year, you know why they're bitching.

I watched it, was enjoyable, but I found the ending to be too quick and lackluster.

But, hearing about feminists squirming over it makes it worth it.





SPOILER




I don't see how they bitch about this. The immorality of the whole thing was a central part of the plot. If you're socially aware (I.E. not a feminist) you'll notice subtle things about the way things happened. For instance, when Morpheus comes out of hibernation, he hears about snowflake's story and pauses to question the morality of it. He's a bit shocked, but since he's in the middle of both finding Neo and dying, he clearly doesn't have time for this shit.

Maybe it was, in spite of the enormity of the immoral act, he ends up saving the whole damn ship. He couldn't have done it without having committed the act. She forgives him. Forgiveness is something so alien to the feminist nature, as it means that the man has not accepted the original sin of owning a penis and thus subservient to the female. That, and it is an echo of the Christian base of the country, and that rubs the fat, blue-skrillex-haired monsters the wrong way.

....


spoiler....



Also keep in mind that the repair was a two-person job. Any woman by that time would have realized that it was likely fate that he woke her up or she would have died together with the crew then and there.

Quote: (01-02-2017 02:53 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

....


spoiler....



Also keep in mind that the repair was a two-person job. Any woman by that time would have realized that it was likely fate that he woke her up or she would have died together with the crew then and there.

The repair might have only required one person if he would have kept working instead of going crazy.

Jennifer's entire plan was stupid. Go on a 240+ year round trip to a colony so she can write a book - because she has daddy issues. Maybe people won't even read books in 240 years. Maybe there won't be people left on Earth.

And I didn't like that the captain's role was to wake up, open the door, explain the problems, then die. It seemed forced.

Instead of staying with Pratt, am I the only one to think that a woman's solution would have been to wake up more men to "help with ship repairs" but really to give her attention?

Also, Jennifer got paid 2X Pratt's salary. $20 million vs. $10 million.

Quote: (01-02-2017 01:52 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Quote: (01-02-2017 01:39 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  

I watched it while eating tacos, it was ok as far as I could tell.

It was a wise decision. Nothing could have been done - live out a quiet life on a luxury cruise of eating, fucking and drinking, reading books and playing Playstation. It is not the worst of lives and that is why she decided to stay and that is why feminists were furious.

Feminists were also furious as hell because:

JLaw saved Chris' Pratt life, although according to them, he was a "toxic male, a creepy mysoginistic stalker"

JLaw gave up her career and her dreams, to stay and be happy with Chris Pratt

The whole movie doesn't have a single pro-feminism or pro-social justice line

I just finished watching a camrip and my first thought was also "Shit man...why not wake a few more people up over the years. Especially as they get closer to the end."

I liked the sci-fi setting. The idea of a luxury cruise ship in space. And everything had the same kind of sterile "futuristic" deco that was in the movie Oblivion.

At first I thought it was really high concept but couldn't help thinking no, it's just "The Shining" meets "Moon."

I think I said in another thread...movies are now made by dumb people for an increasingly dumb audience. And it gets further dumbed down to appeal to booming international markets.

Stuff on HBO and Showtime is much better than movies these days. I was on the edge of my seat for the pilot episode of "The Night Of." This was just paint by number, cookie cutter Hollywood schlock with a nice set.

Perfectly fine to watch for free in the background but not worth paying money for.

> How and why should they wake up folk?

You are missing the time-frame - they had 88 years ahead of them. Most folk in hibernation had to be in their 20s to 30s. So if there was no reason to do it, then why should they wake up other people? Yeah - they would not be lonely, but the other folk would be old by the time they reached the planet. And even if they waited 50 years, then the couple would be in their 80s and the woken folk would have 38 years to go.

That is tantamount go giving them a life sentence in prison.

Nah - the makers of the movie actually thought this one through for a change. Most movies nowaday are way too illogical. Of course the ship's designers were moronic to not account for some failsafe like a backup-crew being woken if something goes wrong - even backup crew of backup crew of backup crew, since it would be better to sacrifice 20 people to boredom instead of 5000.

But again if that were the case then there would be no "romantic love story in space".

But I guess feminists hate even that. Should have been a trans-non-binary obese couple who were all about Tumblr. Finally the Tumbleristas decide to wake up everyone to spice things up and then starve to death 20 years later or engage in cannibalism. That would be certainly a much more fun story.

Quote: (01-03-2017 06:03 AM)etwsake Wrote:  

...At first I thought it was really high concept but couldn't help thinking no, it's just "The Shining" meets "Moon."
I think I said in another thread...movies are now made by dumb people for an increasingly dumb audience. And it gets further dumbed down to appeal to booming international markets.
Stuff on HBO and Showtime is much better than movies these days. I was on the edge of my seat for the pilot episode of "The Night Of." This was just paint by number, cookie cutter Hollywood schlock with a nice set...

As I've said before. Three generations of Useful Idiots have now spawned a generation of Useless Idiots.
If your education system is not orientated to produce the best & brightest, but rather, the participation award generation.
Then all they'll ever do is participate & never excel.

I liked this one - but then anything in space is usually at-least partially enjoyable.

[if you havent seen the trailer, I guess the following could be a spoiler]

Man wakes up early, manages to spend a year alone by himself, fixes lots of things, gets bored, wakes a chick. She proceeds to moan and cry and generally be useless, her only redeemable skill is putting makeup on a broken robot. Bad shit happens, he saves the day.

I dunno why he woke such an ugly women, or why he didnt throw her out the airlock and wake a better one - but hey 'horses' for courses.