>Box office $1.031 billion
Why was Cinemaphile so wrong about this movie? saying it was gonna flop?
 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
|
>Box office $1.031 billion
>Box office $1.031 billion
Why was Cinemaphile so wrong about this movie? saying it was gonna flop?
|
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
|
>Plebbit spacing
reddit spacing is double line breaks you fricking newbie.
That IS a double line break you turboBlack person.
you did a double line break
go back
Who fricking cares about an extra linefeed? Stupidest thing to criticize someone about I've ever seen.
Whyre we scared of spacing
Because it looked like the Charlie's angels reboot, the ultra rad feminist propaganda just happened to work this time.
>ultra rad feminist propaganda
literally touch grass lmao
nta, and I haven't seen this movie, but my gf said the same thing after going with my sister the other day.
>people don't think the same as me? Democracy has... le fallen
Even my sister who's a feminist disliked it lmao
>Because it looked like the Charlie's angels reboot, the ultra rad feminist propaganda
The women were hotter here
It was never going to flop anyone who is claiming that it was, is genuinely moronic and knows nothing about marketing. Now, if people were claiming that it was going to be a shit movie, that's a completely different story and they are vindicated as well.
Barbie's target audience is the exact same audience as the Spice Girls and they've tailored their message specifically towards that known demographic.
The Charlie's Angels reboot failed because the primary demographic for the original TV series and movie was men, making going full blown radfem an idiotic decision turning off most of their customer base to appeal to a tiny minority.
When yoy really think about it, the movie isn't feminist propaganda. Barbie abandons her matriarchal society for the patriarchal real-world in the end. People look too hard into the gender role aspect of the film and ignore that the movie is about finding yourself and how even living an idealistic existence won't necessarily mean you have a fulfilling life.
The movie is very explicitly anti-radfem. However you want to characterize its feminism and define wokeness, the one thing it isn't is radfem.
it turns out minus 1 (margo) times minus 1 (goose) equals 1
>goys slurp the goyslop
>THIS IS YOUR FAULT
Man, I sure to get to blamed for a lot despite never leaving my basement and I won't do shit.
Gosling is kino. What exactly I'm doing in a feminist propaganda piece, I do not know. Perhaps I'm undercover subtly turning it into a pro-male movie?
>Perhaps I'm undercover subtly turning it into a pro-male movie?
Lotsa copeatti
It unironically is only because of the marketing and Ryan gosling. I'm not even kidding.
Nah, it's a feel good movie for the most part. It's fun to look at, it plays with interesting ideas and it's well made on all accounts. You don't become the highest grossing movie of the year because "marketing"
>you don't sell movie tickets with marketing
WEW LAD
>You don't become the highest grossing movie of the year because "marketing"
Dyslexic fricking moron can't even read a simple sentence lmao
Yes, you do
Box office successes are marketing successes. Unless you think box office reflects movie quality. Is that what you're claiming?
Yea, you're definitely moronic
I accept your concession
The Barbie aesthetic ropes in the girls as does Gosling playing Ken. Then the feminist bullshit slips on a banana peel and makes the women the triumphant villains at the end. How this is going to bring the simps back to work so they can get evil wives is anyone's guess but if destabilizing society is the goal, it's an honest try with a many decades old giga famous brand on its cover.
>Hollywood wants to destablized society
>by getting the simps married and back to work
you're just saying random shit
How do you misunderstand a post this badly?
explain what you think Hollywood's master plan is.
#1 the marketing department were gods to downplay the feminism as much as they did.
#2 the feminism was so moronic its fascinating to watch it hindsight.
Cinemaphile memory holes their defeat as usual.
>Why, yes! I did go see the Barbie film! How could you tell?!
You can tell when its a shill thread when they ask a rhetorical question postulating an idea as true when it is indeed false.
For example
>Why is the sky red?
>Why is 2, 3?
and so on.
I don't recall a single post saying it would flop, why do you keep spamming this?
Very good marketing campaigns still make people go watch slop.
Ben Shapiro was right.
The fact that they had to Trick and decieve the audience
Not mention its a woke feminist screeching movie in its marketing campaign and press tour
Is a win for the Go Woke Go Broke crowd.
They learned from the Charlie's Angels Reboot and thats why Elizabeth Banks is mad at the media for marketing it as woke
I don't think anyone here thought it would actually flop.
We knew it was going to be leftist/feminist bullshit, which tricked audiences into going to see it.
An "anti-capitalism" film successfully tricked audiences into shelling out cash to see it.
The irony is so delicious its difficult to find words to describe it.
[ctrl + F "trick" = 3]
This argument holds no water after the second week results.
Sunk cost fallacy
The rubes who got tricked into seeing it dont want to admit they've been had and want other people to get tricked into watching it too so that they feel better about themselves
Its a masterclass of trickery.
Imagine if they focus on that mexican and her insufferable stupid feminist monologue.
Everyone would have buried this movie
Lmao
I remember them only talking about the shitty set and how magical it looks
Lmfao
They never mention the Anita Sarkeesian tier anti white male feminist gateway messaging
Still not going too see it. Try again shill.
They embargoed the press to not talk about the feminist shittery for the first weekend it was showed
Even Garce Adler was not allowed to mention it.
By that time everyone got tricked into pre purchasing the tickets.
This movie was so obsess with mentioning "The Patriarchy" it was so cringy.
I did expect Barbie to have a girl boss moment. But this moive was all preach and no do.
Cause /vt/ is full of brain broken morons that believe everything is a psy op and forgot how to enjoy a funny movie. Not like the opinions of Cinemaphile matters anyway
>women and troony apologists are moronic consoomer
no Cinemaphile is pretty right about this
why does he look 100+ years old
this movie managed to mobilize the female audience, something most woke movies dont.
How mentally ill are you ?
Also, you will never be a woman
>Holding people accountable using an archive is based unless it makes me look bad
Lol
why is Cinemaphile so shocked that a BARBIE movie has ultra-feminist themes? It's fricking BARBIE. You incels need to get outside and touch grass. Be thankful they even included Ken's patriarchy fantasy at all.
Cinemaphile absolutely blown the frick out
falsefalg posts, probably wrote the yourself too
man lefties sure are desperate for "a win" huh
Anon, living a lie is unhealthy.
Why you keep doing it then?
It's just an unironic incel from reddit or twitter.
> Letters???? Spaced???? IM GOING INSAAAAAAANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cinemaphile isn't exactly a very rational board. None of these anons would be willing to bet on these beliefs in a prediction market like polymarket.
That alone tells you how much they actually believed it would flop
>Hah! Cinemaphile was before! Barbie is a huge success!
>who cares about the other media that failed, Barbie debunks everything you filthy chud!
It's all so tiresome
What was debunked was that it would flop. Nothing was said about the state of movies as a whole
test
I hate woke shit but it was obvious Barbie would be a success as soon as it released. Sometimes Cinemaphile can’t see the obvious.
Cinemaphile did see that though, why are you agreeing with something that didn't happen? Looking through a few of the troon spammers pics I saw 2 that even included the word "flop", one was an ecelebs opinion (discarded) and the other was obviously a shitpost.
Half do, beside you have to keep in mind that for 3/4 of those morons break even was at 800 million. What they essentially meant was that it was going to flop (and even then, breaking even is clnsidered by those same moron as a flop).
>beside you have to keep in mind that for 3/4 of those morons break even was at 800 million
You don't get to redefine flop.
Here is an experiment, Barbie's budget was reported to be 100M back in january, now it is reported to be at 150M.
So that means those who said it was barely going to break even back in january meant it was going to flop now? No, they meant it was going to be a failure either way, "breaking even" was just their way of saying it while trying to appear impartial.
What part of "you don't get to redefine flop" don't you understand you disingenuous little troon? The vast majority of them just said it'd do worse than oppenheimer. They didn't say it'd flop.
I notice you ignored the guy who searched the archive and proved no one called it a flop. Why would you do that?
You're playing semantic, they said it was going to fail, which is pretty much the same thing. That's what they mean when they say "it's barely going to break even" here.
For example
in context in the thread he was saying it was going to be a flop on par with ghostbuster 2016, even if he didn't outright say it was going to be a flop.
Trying to search for terms is irrelevant because the way this board works relying on pics and context.
That guy is severely mentally ill. You could probably keep up a back and forth with him until page 10. I wouldn't waste the time
>they said it was going to fail
No they didn't, most were comparing it to Oppenheimer and said it'd do worse in comparison. Your cherry picked screencaps are irrelevant.
That doesn't include the marketing budget btw
Which was was easily $900m+. It was a complete flop.
the woman audience is impossible to predict.
Why would I want my own movie to flop?
That's textbook denial, you cherry pick your memory to not see how Cinemaphile was completly wrong.
Take your gaslighting and shove it up your neovegana.
I checked the archive.
>there are less than 125 posts from Cinemaphile that include the words "Barbie" and "flop"
>this includes posts from 2013 when Amy Schumer was attached to the film
>almost all of these posts are made from people who just hate Margot Robbie
Why are you so disingenuous? Need to make up fake victories for a Barbie movie?
Not that these also destrol the chud cope that the woke messaging was hidden. That was never true.
He got DESTROYED
The movie was marketed to millenials, hence Margot and Me starring in it
Millennial love that gender commentary shit. Its not zoomers seeing movies, they're off on tik tok
It needs $1.8B to recoup its budget. Still a flop.
anyone who thought it would flop is moronic
EVERY woman owned a barbie and is obsessed with barbie, how is that 'impossible to predict'?
it doesn't even have anything to do with marketing it's like saying a mario or minions movie would flop
TLM only underperformed because of halle
>everyone still b***hposting about Barbie
>meanwhile my boy Jason Statham just scored a win with Meg 2 with $142 mil over the weekend
Meg 3 b***hes
where did Barbie succeed where Ghostbusters 2016 failed? they're basically the same movie
Ghostbuster was too ahead of its time. I wonder of there are other examples of movie that caught a trend way too early.
Boils down to a few key points
>GB was an already established media franchise with a large fanbase
>Paul Feige seriously could not stop taunting the fanbase with the feminism shit
>have multiple actresses in the movie come out in various stages of butthurt before the opening weekend is even over
>known for months before hand every older GB actor was arm twisted by Sony into playing a bit part in the movie, especially Bill Murray
Barbie avoided all of that drama and just leaned into female movie about a female toy series for which most women will eat it up just for that. They entirely avoided the issue the movie being more filled with feminism bullshit than a clown car has clowns in it until well past opening weekend when its devolved into women supporting the movie no matter what because women.
>They entirely avoided the issue the movie being more filled with feminism bullshit than a clown car has clowns in it until well past opening weekend when its devolved into women supporting the movie no matter what because women.
This is false, as soon as you went deeper than the trailers the fepinist aspect of the movie was front and center, Gerwig and Robbie never made it a secret, nor the rest of the cast. Cinemaphile and far rights groups were prepared for weeks.
>Cinemaphile and far rights groups were prepared
You say that like there's anything to do about it. Do you think we would enter in an arena and physically fight the barbie movie until it flopped?
Prepared to cope, not to fight of course.
>Barbie is much more well known IP
>Margot Robbie and Me
>unlimited marketing budget
>women desperate to make a political statement through consumption more so since RVW got rightfully overturned
they're all ugly turds and margot is pretty
also women dont care about ghostbusters
>where did Barbie succeed where Ghostbusters 2016 failed
Do you know why Hollywood is only making sequels or movies about famous IP? The hardest thing to do in marketing is to create a brand from scratch and the absolute vast majority of attempts fail. So to spend 100s of millions of dollars on a venture that is likely to fail is just plain gambling to the point where you are better off going to a casino and throwing it all on red and you'll likely have better odds.
So to get around that they focus on established IPs with a known demand for the product. To answer your initial question, Ghostbusters 2016 failed, because instead of using their existing fanbase, they actively turned against it under the misguided belief that "true fans" will go and see it regardless and anyone that they drove away will be replace by new fans (Which is essentially the same as starting from scratch). Barbie doesn't have that problem. It's a toy line marketed towards little girls. The "girl power"/feminist message plays into exactly what the existing fanbase wants and thus it was successful.
>Ghostbusters
women dont give a frick about ghost busters
>barbie
every woman wants or wanted to be barbie at some point and had barbie dolls + merchandise as a kid.
> listening to anyone on this godforsaken site
So here's your first mistake
The only thing ive learned about this place, is that incels and chuds are very sore losers. They'll use deflection, strawman arguments or just blatantly ignore you, but no one can ever admit they were wrong on this website and if they do they're just a rational sane person
Ok, bye
>movie comes out
>Cinemaphile says it’s feminist woke garbage and it’ll flop
>critics and audience love it
>does amazing first weekend
>Cinemaphile copes that it’ll drop off massively on second weekend
>it doesn’t
>cope shifts to “it’s not actually woke or feminist”
>movie does a billion
>cope is now that no one ever said it would flop, the Barbie IP is now elevated to that of Spider-Man and Batman and it was a guaranteed hit no matter what
How anyone takes this board seriously is beyond me. It’s only useful for the occasional memes
>Cinemaphile says it’s feminist woke garbage and it’ll flop
Turns out your imagination isn't reality.
You wanna provide source or just keep deflecting and coping? Actually, I don’t care. You have mental problems and nothings going to help you.
Do you not know what the archives are?
Are you paid by Barbie's marketing department?
>the Barbie IP is now elevated to that of Spider-Man and Batman
It literally is and always has been at least on par with comic book/action figure characters. If not greater as girls have always played with Barbie dolls, while boys interests have constantly shifted over time.
>>"I think Margo Robbie is trans...."
Opinion discarded
i can't wait for the Mr Potato cinematic universe
That's toy story.