- 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
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:40 pm to Sam Quint
quote:
that is way crazier than the "eliminate whitey and brainwash our kids into joining the LGBTXYZ+ crowd" theory.
Yes because a corporation making bad decisions is way crazier than some insane right wing conspiracy
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:43 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
Yes because a corporation making bad decisions is way crazier than some insane right wing conspiracy
even with years of experience and evidence telling them that they will lose billions of dollars if they continue down the same path? that's just "corporate making bad decisions"? ok.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:48 pm to Sam Quint
I think part of the issue is many media companies have decided that white men will always support them regardless and the losses they have taken have not been enough to make them change their mind. After all WB just outright scrapped several completed projects for tax write offs, many that included diversity characters. Sony will lose their pants on Madam Web but will write it off and investors won't see it truly effect their bottom line.
Some also assume it will take time to get a solid foothold i.e. streaming service platforms. They routinely lose money but companies keep pumping money into it because they believe rightfully or not that at some point it will turn a profit. Sony likely doesn't see the difference between Into the Spiderverse and Madam Web outside the box office totals.
I also feel cases of clear and deliberate race/gender swap get more media coverage than previous, making it feel like it happens more frequent than it actually does.
If I look at current movies released at my local theater I see many movies headline by white male characters with female love interest. Now granted some may have "woke" moments in it, but it certainly isn't some massive elimination of the straight white male from media.
The last few movies I saw in theater all featured straight white males in lead roles.
So yes, companies absolutely want to push more diversity and send a message. But this is a far cry from 1930s Germany where media very specifically targeted Jewish people as enemies of the state to radical the population against them.
Some also assume it will take time to get a solid foothold i.e. streaming service platforms. They routinely lose money but companies keep pumping money into it because they believe rightfully or not that at some point it will turn a profit. Sony likely doesn't see the difference between Into the Spiderverse and Madam Web outside the box office totals.
I also feel cases of clear and deliberate race/gender swap get more media coverage than previous, making it feel like it happens more frequent than it actually does.
If I look at current movies released at my local theater I see many movies headline by white male characters with female love interest. Now granted some may have "woke" moments in it, but it certainly isn't some massive elimination of the straight white male from media.
The last few movies I saw in theater all featured straight white males in lead roles.
So yes, companies absolutely want to push more diversity and send a message. But this is a far cry from 1930s Germany where media very specifically targeted Jewish people as enemies of the state to radical the population against them.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:12 pm to Sam Quint
quote:
even with years of experience and evidence telling them that they will lose billions of dollars
Quite the hyperbole
quote:
they continue down the same path? that's just "corporate making bad decisions"? ok.
Have you seen the Sony superhero movies?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:14 pm to dawgfan24348
just so i'm clear, is it your position there is no left wing ideological intent or motivation behind any of the DEI initiatives in Hollywood?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:18 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
If you want to argue that corporations have gone diversity hire out pure laziness sure but acting like it’s come grand conspiracy to push out whitey that’s just dumb
Examples of legal and publicly available examples of DEI being required by entertainment groups:
-Disney has actual dashboards presented at shareholder meetings outlining their requirements to limit white men by requiring other populations to be included (gay, minorities and women) at pre-determined levels regardless of how the original IP is written from a character perspective
-Hollywood giving outlines for DEI inclusion for films and awards
-Netflix outlining their content DEI requirements to greenlight any new content
-Virtually every major company in America thats publicly traded having DEI hiring requirements and goals as presented publicly to their shareholders and agreed to in writing as part of their websites and in most cases executive agreements
When you explicitly require preferential treatment for LGBTQ, blacks and women you are by definition creating by default an adverse environment for white, middle eastern and asian men who are by default limited in the number of roles and positions available to them because they have been earmarked for the groups you are giving preferred status to.
It would be like claiming that Jim Crow era laws in the south weren't discriminatory against blacks, they were just preferential towards whites.
By definition you cannot be preferential towards one group without creating an adverse consequence for another.
Trying to write off what was outlined as just some "conspiracy" despite the mountain of self-evident facts to the contrary is either gaslighting or delusional.
This post was edited on 2/14/24 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:23 pm to tide06
quote:
Examples of legal and publicly available examples of DEI being required by entertainment groups:
-Disney has actual dashboards presented at shareholder meetings outlining their requirements to limit white men by requiring other populations to be included (gay, minorities and women)
-Hollywood giving outlines for DEI inclusion for films and awards
-Netflix outlining their content DEI requirements to greenlight any new content
-Virtually every major company in America thats publicly traded having DEI hiring requirements and goals as presented publicly to their shareholders and agreed to in writing as part of their websites and in most cases executive agreements
this is why i dont see how any rational human can argue that it's just corporate laziness and poor writing. if anything, it's way MORE work for corporations to institute and implement all of the criteria that you listed above. corporate laziness would be just churning out more of the same types of movies that already made them billions of dollars and just keep making billions of dollars. it's completely illogical, to me at least, to argue that it's just lazy writing and a lazy attempt at finding new audiences while assuming they'd keep all the old audience as well.
This post was edited on 2/14/24 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:27 pm to Sam Quint
So if I look at the current release in theaters and upcoming releases I will see more than half of the films featured non white male characters?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:30 pm to ThoseGuys
i have no idea. did i say that somewhere? not sure what you're asking exactly.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:33 pm to Sam Quint
You and others have said that there is a clear push by Hollywood to follow DEI standards that is pushing out white males from roles in film.
Therefore if that is the case, we should be able to see less representation in upcoming or current films. Is that the case?
If not, when can we expect to start to see this take effect?
Therefore if that is the case, we should be able to see less representation in upcoming or current films. Is that the case?
If not, when can we expect to start to see this take effect?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:38 pm to ThoseGuys
nope, you win. clearly the strong, straight, white male hero archetype is exactly the same in 2024 as it always was and i'm just being gaslit into believing otherwise. thank you for educating me and helping me realize that what i thought i saw clear as day was just my lying eyes. and the official DEI standards at Netflix, Disney, etc, that are explicitly written in a way that limits white male roles in films and tv shows, are a figment of my imagination.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:43 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:
You and others have said that there is a clear push by Hollywood to follow DEI standards that is pushing out white males from roles in film.
Therefore if that is the case, we should be able to see less representation in upcoming or current films. Is that the case?
not disagreeing with your take. most hollywood blockbusters that come out are still going to have white leads, for better or worse.
but disney, netflix, etc. are going to release a shite ton of original content that meets quotas while still casting the rock, ryan gosling, ryan reynolds, daniel craig,etc.for their big releases every year.
throw bones to their diversity overlords while making money on what actually makes money.
we're basically arguing Title IX here. Football, Baseball, and Basketball will make all the money but we can do these other projects over here.
i'm not decrying that at all. glad for the other opportunities. but don't get mad when i don't watch women's softball or field hockey.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 2:55 pm to 3nOut
Exactly. You 100% nailed it I feel.
DEI is the Hollywood version of Title IX only it includes more than women. (Ironically Title IX now covers men wanting to participate in women's sports while still counting as a female athlete. Shits hilarious, can't make it up)
DEI is the Hollywood version of Title IX only it includes more than women. (Ironically Title IX now covers men wanting to participate in women's sports while still counting as a female athlete. Shits hilarious, can't make it up)
Posted on 2/14/24 at 4:22 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
Also the current state of the MCU seems to have way more to do with over exposure, being stretched too thin, and no sense of true direction
All of those to a degree but not having characters / actors people really want to see is hurting them.
The plan was to send the first generation Avengers out to pasture and replace them with the likes of Spidey, Captain Marvel, and Black Panther.
Sony holding the rights to Spidey and Chadwick Boseman’s death due to cancer fricked them hard. Captain Marvel / Brie Larson being very divisive has not helped matters.
They need to do one of several things…
1. Bring back someone written out, which is possible due to the multiverse storyline
2. Figure out a character which will have mainstream interest and find a big name actor willing to do that role, giving them the bank should it succeed
3. Finish off Phase 4 and let the MCU go fallow for a few years in order to get the bad taste out of people’s mouths
None of those are appealing to Disney because all of them will cost them a ton of money either in payouts to actors or lost revenue from films being cancelled.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 7:31 pm to Sam Quint
quote:
Disney has actual dashboards presented at shareholder meetings outlining their requirements to limit white men by requiring other populations to be included (gay, minorities and women)
-Hollywood giving outlines for DEI inclusion for films and awards
-Netflix outlining their content DEI requirements to greenlight any new content
-Virtually every major company in America thats publicly traded having DEI hiring requirements and goals as presented publicly to their shareholders and agreed to in writing as part of their websites and in most cases executive agreements
this is why i dont see how any rational human can argue that it's just corporate laziness and poor writing
I wonder what it would look like if a lawsuit went forward on the basis of racial discrimination?
Maybe it has to be done. A deep pocketed defendant clearly in the wrong might send a corrective message.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 7:42 pm to teke184
quote:
Read the first arc of Punisher Max.
He pretty much destroys a huge chunk of the New York mafia in one go at the 100th birthday party of a major Don where other families are in attendance.
Pretty sure he gets into the triple digits on killing white people in a single issue in that one.
Yeah, but he didn't do that as a declaration of "anti-racism" (
) so it doesn't count. Posted on 2/14/24 at 8:41 pm to teke184
quote:
2. Figure out a character which will have mainstream interest and find a big name actor willing to do that role, giving them the bank should it succeed
The problem with this is:
a) I’m not going to see many phase 4 movies. I’ve seen Thor L&T, GotG3, and Shang Chi.
b) Shang Chi is literally the only likeable person left. I guess Scott Lang but I haven’t even considered Antman 3.
I say this as a complete comic nerd who watched all of phase 1-3 in theaters.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 8:49 pm to Esquire
There was some shot pieces in DD that were better than most movies. The fight down the stairs. Kingpin quietly staring at art. A lot of beautiful cinematography.
Popular
Back to top

0









