- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Dune will bring more femininity to the story . . .
Posted on 9/30/21 at 6:51 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 6:51 pm
LINK
quote:
“For me, it was important to bring more femininity to the story,” Villeneuve said. “I am fascinated by the relationship of femininity and power, the place of women in society.”
8
Posted on 9/30/21 at 7:37 pm to Bham4Tide
One of the most powerful factions in the Dune story is a group of clandestine women attempting to shadow control everything. How and why do you need "more"?
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 7:38 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 7:46 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
One of the most powerful factions in the Dune story is a group of clandestine women attempting to shadow control everything. How and why do you need "more"?
My cynical side says that Villeneuve is bullshitting for the sake of marketing. He knows the story already has feminist undertones, but he knows if he says that he requested “more” he’ll get some good publicity for it and the regular moviegoer won’t know the difference when they see the movie.
Edit: Think back to Ghostbusters (2016). Now, I saw the movie, and it was many terrible things, but it wasn’t overtly “feminist” (aside from a few particular jokes). But Paul Feig and Co. were characterizing it during the press junket as a landmark movie for women.
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 8:00 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 7:58 pm to Bham4Tide
That sounds like a lot of tits. Doesn't seem true to the original material, but I'll take it.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 8:20 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Think back to Ghostbusters (2016). Now, I saw the movie, and it was many terrible things, but it wasn’t overtly “feminist” (aside from a few particular jokes)
The villain in the movie was a nerdy man child that lives in his mother’s basement and was done solely due to the fans reaction to it. Female Ghostbusters villain is in the debate for the worst and most petty villain ever written as a “frick You” to the fans. What are you talking about it wasn’t feminist? Even Richard Roeper said this was terrible and the writers and fans lost their fricking minds.
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 8:21 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 8:44 pm to Bham4Tide
The Bene Gesserit, Lady Jessica and Chani weren't enough?
OK.
OK.
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 8:47 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:07 pm to SouthEasternKaiju
I mean, I always got the feeling Paul had some feminine qualities. They go on and on about how he was taught stuff that should only be taught to women, etc.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:15 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Think back to Ghostbusters (2016). Now, I saw the movie, and it was many terrible things, but it wasn’t overtly “feminist” (aside from a few particular jokes). But Paul Feig and Co. were characterizing it during the press junket as a landmark movie for women.
And it was a failure. Everyone involved in that movie should be ashamed of themselves
.png)
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:20 pm to Bham4Tide
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:28 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
What are you talking about it wasn’t feminist?
“Aside from a few particular jokes.”
The villain (which isn’t really set up until the movie is halfway over) and Chris Hemsworth being a mindless hunk are basically the only “feminist” parts of GB (2016).
The point being, if you were listening to Paul Feig on the press junket, you would have thought it was a landmark film in cinema for women in sci-fi/comedy. (Or at least movie that aspired to be. It didn’t even do that. The Ghostbusters in 2016 could have easily have been male characters and the movie wouldn’t have changed. The notion that the movie was trying to be a girl power movie was invented to give Paul Feig and Co. a way to sell the movie.)
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:39 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
“Aside from a few particular jokes.”
That’s the central villain. No, that’s not “aside from a few particular jokes”. It’s like saying The Lord of the Rings isn’t focused on the corruption of power. No, it’s the central focus, because the movie (outside of Chris Hemsworth being an idiot) isn’t funny.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 10:50 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
That’s the central villain. No, that’s not “aside from a few particular jokes”. It’s like saying The Lord of the Rings isn’t focused on the corruption of power. No, it’s the central focus, because the movie (outside of Chris Hemsworth being an idiot) isn’t funny.
Not to derail a Dune thread into a Ghostbusters (2016) thread. (My point about Villeneuve saying what he said for cynical reasons in my original comment still stands. His last movie, Blade Runner: 2047, while critically successful, was not a box office success. I'm sure Dune has its share of female fans, but I'm willing to bet WB is worried about not enough women showing up to see it and so Villeneuve is trying to get women into movie theater seats to guarantee a good box office return.)
Like I said, GB (2016) is a terrible movie. But even the basement-dwelling, man child villain is barely a "feminist" joke. Even people who don't consider themselves feminist can say they have gripes with man-children and nerd culture.
And the movie is primarily unfunny not for anything to do with the characters' sex but more so for the unfunny and incessant improvisation throughout the movie. They turned every character into the Venkman character, instead of having just one Venkman-like character.
Because such a highly improvised movie is probably easily re-shot, it wouldn't surprise me if any and all "feminist" elements in the movie were added by Sony when they saw the first cut of the movie and realized that the movie wasn't funny at all and they needed an angle to sell the movie. Would certainly explain why the villain's characterization as a basement-dweller feels tacked on. (If I remember correctly, he only shows up at the 1 hour mark of a 1 hour and 40 minute movie.
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 11:03 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 11:02 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
But even the basement-dwelling, man child villain is barely a "feminist" joke. Even people who don't consider themselves feminist can say they have gripes with man-children and nerd culture.
I don’t think it’s a feminist joke. I think it’s a petty and butt hurt joke of the highest order. The villain was clearly thought out on the fly by paper thin skinned individuals. I don’t think there has ever been a more petty and vindictive villain directly aimed towards their fanbase as an insult towards them ever. The producers and writers of this movie are a bunch of butt hurt pussies that wrote him simply due to the fans reactions and as a direct frick you to anyone that likes the franchise.
Seriously, they declared every person that liked Ghostbusters and had some hesitations towards an all female Ghostbusters as a bunch of virgins who could never get laid and thus that’s the villain. He’s the worst and most petty villain ever made. It was a sign of things to come which says frick all our actual fans. I’m sorry, I think you’re either an idiot, a pussy, or a tyrant to defend this film and it’s choice of villain. Either way you have rightly earned my disdain. frick right off you pathetic excuse for a human being. Defending this film at best makes you a coward.
Continue to defend these fascist count. You will pay for your cowardice.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 11:04 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
I’m sorry, I think you’re either an idiot, a pussy, or a tyrant to defend this film and it’s choice of villain. Either way you have rightly earned my disdain. frick right off you pathetic excuse for a human being. Defending this film at best makes you a coward.
Dude...come off it.
This post was edited on 9/30/21 at 11:06 pm
Posted on 9/30/21 at 11:08 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Like I said, GB (2016) is a terrible movie. But even the basement-dwelling, man child villain is barely a "feminist" joke. Even people who don't consider themselves feminist can say they have gripes with man-children and nerd culture.
It’s the central focus, dude. Seriously the writers and producers were this simple and vindictive minded: “How dare they question our feminist Ghostbusters. So instead we’ll make the hot guy comic relief a fricking idiot and the villain just an enraged man child living in his parents basement. Ghostbusters fans should die in a car fire, because it’s our time to take this franchise from these eternal virgins.”
Why the frick are you giving these people any benefit of the doubt. If you voted for Trump, they’d shoot you in the head if they could get away with it.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 11:09 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Dude...come off it.
Which of the three are you? I’m going with coward.
Posted on 9/30/21 at 11:38 pm to Bham4Tide
I mean, that is a core of the story. You'd don't have to do anything different with the source material.
The BG are serious business.
The BG are serious business.
Posted on 10/1/21 at 1:23 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Dune will bring more femininity to the story
quote:
Think back to Ghostbusters (2016).
Good lord.
Dune is one of my favorite books ever written.
Ghostbusters 2016 is one of the worst movies ever made on multiple levels. It’s not funny, it doesn’t understand it’s source material, it shits on its source material, it’s so full of itself it actually insults the audience, etc.
Bringing Ghostbusters up as a positive comparison in a Dune thread is just an absolutely horrible take.
quote:
I'm sure Dune has its share of female fans, but I'm willing to bet WB is worried about not enough women showing up to see it and so Villeneuve is trying to get women into movie theater seats to guarantee a good box office return
With source material like Dune you should be focused on making an incredible movie true to the material. Not trying to include a soundbyte for every possible diverse category of people to try and increase base level box office numbers. All that’s going to do is drive off and alienate all the source fans while failing to attract anyone who doesn’t know the material. It’s a shitty lose/lose scenario Hollywood has been trapped in for over a decade
This post was edited on 10/1/21 at 1:32 am
Posted on 10/1/21 at 7:27 am to Freauxzen
quote:
I mean, that is a core of the story. You'd don't have to do anything different with the source material.
The BG are serious business.
Since the second movie is going to focus on Chani, not Paul, maybe that's what he is talking about? If not, the comment makes no sense based on the actual characters and plots of the Dune series.
ETA: I guess it could also include the gender swap he did for Liet Kynes
This post was edited on 10/1/21 at 7:29 am
Posted on 10/1/21 at 7:44 am to OMLandshark
quote:
It’s the central focus, dude. Seriously the writers and producers were this simple and vindictive minded: “How dare they question our feminist Ghostbusters. So instead we’ll make the hot guy comic relief a fricking idiot and the villain just an enraged man child living in his parents basement. Ghostbusters fans should die in a car fire, because it’s our time to take this franchise from these eternal virgins.”
Did they hit too close to home with the basement dwelling man child? You are way too emotional about ghostbusters
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News