>We just had a couple weeks ago, we had the Planet of the Apes movie that floppped as well.

>We just had a couple weeks ago, we had the Planet of the Apes movie that floppped as well. That already came out, no one even knew it came out.
>See, that's what I mean, it was a huge flop

>Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes budget: $160m (+ $160m RLM advertising cope)
>Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes box office gross: $337m
>Net profit: $17m
>"huge flop"

>"Movies will female leads always flop" - which isn't true.

>Furiosa budget: $168m (+ $168m [No! You can't do that to movies I like!])
>Furiosa box office gross: $114m
>Net Loss: $222m

There are people on this very board who pay these guys monthly for their opinion on film.

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Both are correct

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nothing in your post refutes what they said

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"Movies will female leads always flop" - which isn't true.

    notice how they didn't expand on that to give even one example

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was a moronic point anyway. Just because Alien wasn't a flop doesn't mean Furiosa didn't flop because it has a female lead.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Barbie

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Twilight movies and Barbie?

        Barbie would have flopped if it had a male lead in the same way Furiosa had a female lead.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          bullshit. if barbie had Tom Hidleston + the snape guy before he melted it would make 10 times the amount. Stop with your conservashit copes

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Twilight movies and Barbie?

        both of those were already a known recognizable franchises.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          doesn't matter, the point was "female led movies will always flop", those are 2 ips that didn't.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Twilight movies and Barbie?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ever heard of Julia Roberts or Meg Ryan

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Twilight movies and Barbie?

        Barbie

        name something that isnt girl shit

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >just answer a different question while I move my goal posts

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            it was a moronic statement by gay jowlsman anyway that didnt reflect what people have been saying. hes the one that moved the goalpost first and your a disingenuous homosexual if you cant see that

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Alien. Terminator 2. Metroid.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      To be fair what they say is true now “Modern movies where males are target audience with female leads always flop” that’s a true statement

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      [...]
      [...]
      name something that isnt girl shit

      Kill Bill
      Hunger Games
      Lara Croft
      Charlie's Angels
      Everything Everywhere all at Once

      You may not like all the movies in the list, but they all were action movie hits with female leads.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >1 kids film
        >3 films with heavily sexualised female characters
        >1 film closer to sci-fi/comedy than action

        Thanks.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Female superhero movies or actions movies usually flop but there are tons of movies with female main characters that are successful. Barbie, Twilight, Beauty and the Beast, Mamma Mia, Hunger Games, Silence of the Lambs, Amelie, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Kill Bill, Fifty Shades of Grey, Devil Wears Prada, Everything Everywhere All At Once, and so on.

      I suppose the takeaway is that women will not support a superhero movie just because the main character is female. They will support "girly" movies or movies that specifically appeal to women, like Twilight.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Taylor Swift's movie

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >defending a shitty Planet of the Apes sequel
    RLM are a bunch of morons, especially Mike, but they are 100% correct in this case. No one gives a shit about a new Planet of the Apes.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they are 100% correct in this case
      In what way? It wasn't a "huge flop".

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>"Movies will female leads always flop"
    This was never the argument. Very disingenuous framing of the narrative.

    The argument is that casting a woman in the lead of an action movie is just bad business practice. You can find the few go-to outliers like Alien. But the thing is, Alien would've been a massive flop if it came out in the 2020s because it would've had a budget of $200 million instead of $10 million.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He was already proved wrong when he said Garfield was a flop

    It's not a flop at all. It didn't cost 300 million dollars to make. It already made money.

    Fricking moron says Daisy Ridley is charismatic as hell but doesn't mention how she literally has a new movie that's in movie theaters. Yeah, I wonder why....

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Movie costs 160 milion to make
    >Earns 17 back
    Wow, what a box office hit!

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >claim is that it's a "huge flop"

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >It made a handful of bucks back at a budget of a smaller city, so it's not a huge flop

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          By definition, yes.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            literally no you dense motherfricker

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              For something so obvious to you, you have NOTHING to support you.
              If a movie that makes money is a huge flop, what do you call a movie that loses money?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >NOTHING to support you
                accept for common knowledge how movies are made and how they make money

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >accept
                Make sense now; You're a moron. You clear don't know what "huge" or "flop" means.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >what do you call a movie that loses money?
                A disaster, which furiosa is because it looked like shit and is trying to be a mad max movie (A FRICKING PREQUEL, EVEN) without mad max like anybody is going to pay to go to the theaters for a mad max cinematic universe

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      moron

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >+ $160m RLM advertising cope
    cope. advertising is real.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Advertising is rarely over $50 million per movie. All the money just gets stolen by "advertising companies" owned by friends of the executives.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's another "Jay uses a strawman argument no one is making to dismiss criticism" episode

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If one forgets the identity politics just for a minute, maybe they'd realize that a Mad Max movie with no Mad Max is a really difficult thing to market?

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    im dying, lauren

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >he thinks studios get the entire box office gross
    Monke was shit and it flopped. Deal with it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Prove theatre cut isn't included in the budget.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They never said it flopped

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yes you did bauman

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The studio only gets about half the box office earnings.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *