Wasn't it just recently that a whole shitload of leftist reviewers and bloggers kept repeating the mantra about how "Shows don't have to be for everyone" and if you don't like something you should just say "This isn't made for me".
Well here's a thing then. A romantic comedy genuinely doesn't interest me. Regardless of the leads or material. Could be great. Don't fricking care. It's a romantic comedy, they're all fricking trash.
They were saying that when they thought the people who complained about the woke shit were a tiny minority. Now that it turns out even normies won't watch woke shit unless it had some other draw (big name actor or part of a successful franchise already).
It is fun to watch them pivot from, "don't watch it because it isn't made for you" to "you HAVE TO watch this because it is important to the culture war".
Why the frick do they expect “support?” Just make a good film and people will watch it, fail to do that and people will still watch it if it’s serviceably entertaining, fail to do both and you only have yourself to blame. Especially if you’re making mid market trash. An art film getting btfo at the box office is a tragedy if it’s good and the director deserves genuine credit for their achievement, but why would anyone need to support a multi million dollar project? You’re not a goddamn charity. I’m sick of this shit.
This trend of multinational corporations and actors screaming at the general public for not consuming their products is really fricking bizarre. It's so just so unhinged that these people feel entitled to earn massive profits and be successful.
make good movies for a broad audience then instead of pandering homosexual shit. not saying homosexual shit doesnt have its niche but plan your budget accordingly >budget 22 million
you needed to half that, and then take half of that. how the frick does this cost 22 MILLION
So he's either slurring generic audiences erroneously as homophobic, or validating any actual homophobes who will simply enjoy its failure. Has he thought this through?
Straight people will never let LGBT films into their little safe spaces it's sad but true. Claim to be 95% supportive of gay rights and then spit on us when we barely ask for any support.
That's called projecting, straight men should have no reaction when they see 2 men kiss but closeted right wing religious nuts will lose their minds and are secretly fricking all their friends husbands.
>that's called projecting
Is it now? https://www.psypost.org/2017/06/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots-49217
gay people in 2008: >it's not like we're forcing you to watch us make love to each other. don't be bigoted
gay people in 2022: >if you don't like watching us make love to each other that just means you're homophobic
There are multiple peer reviewed studies that demonstrate men’s instinctual disgust towards homos, moron. And the visceral instinctual disgust is the same regardless of political affiliation. Liberals just hide it better, kek.
I'm not that anon, but 'homophobes' =/= normal straight men. The latter put up with gays just fine, but still find the sight of them kissing instinctively repulsive. It's pure 'transphobes just want to frick me' style cope to suggest otherwise.
I'm in the same boat. The sight of gay men kissing is viscerally repugnant, regardless of political feelings on marriage equality etc. I dare suggest normies also feel this way, albeit internally, and really opted to dodge this film.
Normies do feel this way, psychologists have even done studies proving it kek.
Here’s one from 2017:
https://www.psypost.org/2017/06/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots-49217
>make a movie that appeals primarily to 5% of the population >surprised when it fails because 95% of the population doesn’t want to see it
They literally said this isn’t a “gay movie for straight people”. If straight people don’t watch it cause they don’t think it’s for them, who will?? There aren’t enough gays in the whole fricking country to make this movie a box-office success.
Right?!
It’s almost as if 98% of the population actually thinks homosexuals are absolutely disgusting and would rather watch a sheep get butchered then two fey and repugnant men act like 12 years old girls
>Straight people will never let LGBT films into their little safe spaces
society at large is not a "little safe space" you stupid shitposter. normal people don't relate to gay culture or humor, so gay films fail in a market of 98% normal people. go figure.
I've had a few gay friends in my life. I always said I don't care what you do in the bedroom but that doesn't mean I want a front row seat to the show. That is especially true these days when you guys literally have to flaunt it in front of everyone unashamedly, including innocent children. Go back to acting like gay men did in the 50's while in public and no one would have a problem with you.
>safe spaces >gays march down the most public street in every city in america waving flags, wearing strap ons and assless chaps once or twice a year >Leftists can't pass a federal bill creating an actual right to gay marriage so they have to abuse the Supreme Court to create an imaginary right that the people don't want >Pride weekends have turned into pride months >gays invade disneyland once a year
It's never been about having "rights". It's just a bunch of mentally ill losers whose fetish has become their whole identity. T
This. No straight man is going to watch any romcom, and no straight woman (romcoms’ primary demographic) are going to watch a movie where all the characters are men and all the romance is between men. That leaves just the lgbbq homosexuals (5% of population).
That’s simply FAR to niche to succeed in Hollywood.
There’s a reason most big movies are samey, mass produced goyslop made in a corporate boardroom - it’s to appeal to the lowest common denominator possible. It’s also the reason R rated films make less money - families with children are about 30-40% of all moviegoers. Any movie that is R is basically accepting a 40% cut in its box office revenue.
Lgbt is far less than 5%. Its barely 10% in democratic cities. Now imagine taking a sample of humans from democratic cities where they get these stats and add normal humans across the first world and even worse third world where they don't need to pretend to be gay for brownie points yet.
It’s probably something like 10% in liberal areas, 5% in moderate areas and 1-2% in conservative areas.
This is probably the reason everyone overestimated this movie. Hollywood is a liberal bubble filled with gays. Just because your gay movie does well at its LA premiere doesn’t mean it’ll fly in Utah or Kentucky.
>it’s to appeal to the lowest common denominator possible
i.e. Cinemaphile users
who have the delusion their edgieness and having the gays rent free in their head makes them special (if anything it's pretty obvious a lot of them are gays in the closet if they have so much gayness rent free).
but let's say it did - I could list a bunch of reasons: >ang lee had a great reputation as a director >one or both of the protagonists are bound to be every woman's type >it was about "classy" romance and tragedy for the most part so fairly easy to tolerate even as a sane man (i don't remember being disgusted by it and I'm disgusted by most homosexual stuff, even just two dudes holding hands) >had a good soundtrack >got rave reviews >most people who saw it liked it as well
This is how we win. Stop watching Rings of Power, House of the Dragon, The Witcher, superhero movies, nuhorror movies, etc. If we just stopped paying the israelites to make demoralizing and antiwhite propaganda they'd stop making so much of it.
Yep, it's so incredibly easy.
Stop crying about it on social media.
Stop review bombing shit.
Stop giving it ANY publicity whatsoever.
Just don't give them your money.
The israelites (aka, you) love the bad publicity. Any publicity is good. They can shit out stuff like Rings of Power, and blame racism for why it's doing so poorly. The average person believes it and demonizes white males.
Any racist post on social media just fuels their ability to portray it as such. Stop falling into their traps, you idiots.
This. Too many people use Twitter as a barometer for the real world when it's not even close.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I love the complete idiocy that leads to people believing this.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You deny that’s true?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Anon, you're posting an edited twitter cap as if it's true information.
Please don't be so dense.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's only inaccurate as we now know that only 5% of Twitter users are actual people, so it's even worse than that.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's bullshit but I believe it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Can't tell if you're trolling but it's well-known information by now.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/24/twitter-doesnt-reflect-how-most-americans-think-study/
2 years ago
Anonymous
>2019
2 years ago
Anonymous
Ah yes, three whole years.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's post Trump now moron, everything has changed for the better.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>inflation
You only think that because you unironically live in your mothers basement
2 years ago
Anonymous
His policies still effect us a few years on moron
2 years ago
Anonymous
It wasnt trump printing money this year that started the inflation.
How is it you people have laser precision political talking points for people you hate yet never bother to keep up with current event?
2 years ago
Anonymous
What do you mean " you people"?
2 years ago
Anonymous
you unironically live in a sewer like a ninja turtle
2 years ago
Anonymous
see
It wasnt trump printing money this year that started the inflation.
How is it you people have laser precision political talking points for people you hate yet never bother to keep up with current event?
What do you mean " you people"?
>What do you mean " you people"?
Idiots who dont keep up with current events
2 years ago
Anonymous
>ignoring what caused these events
Why are you people unable to think back to cause of the effect?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>trump out of office >Biden now in office >Biden passes bill to print billions of dollar >This causes inflation, he is the cause, the effect is inflation >this is trumps fault
Because trump can't time travel
2 years ago
Anonymous
The trump defence force is here lol. Absolutely obsessed all these years on.
2 years ago
Anonymous
i didnt vote for either of them i actually voted for Hillary im just not moronic enough to think Biden is a good president.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Did you pokemon go to the polls lol
2 years ago
Anonymous
>seething so hard he doesnt even make sense anymore
2 years ago
Anonymous
>he
2 years ago
Anonymous
>seething so hard she doesnt even make sense anymore
As expected from a woman
2 years ago
Anonymous
Rule 3 covers sexism too.
Last warning
2 years ago
Anonymous
What was sexist about the comment moron?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hmm let me explain, maybe the derogatory stereotype you fricking virgin
2 years ago
Anonymous
What was the stereotype you braindead frickwit?
2 years ago
Anonymous
See
>seething so hard she doesnt even make sense anymore
As expected from a woman
I'm talking to an idiot hah
2 years ago
Anonymous
Point out which part is the sexist part? You should be able do that if you have two braincells to rub together.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>more stereotypes
Incel vibe
2 years ago
Anonymous
>troony couldnt answer a simple question
Confirmed you don't have two braincells to rub together
And you will never be a woman
2 years ago
Anonymous
Lol fricking virgin hahahaha
2 years ago
Anonymous
>seething so hard because you met your intellectual better
lol lmao
2 years ago
Anonymous
>save me jannyman!
pitiful
2 years ago
Anonymous
>inflation happens in a week
moron
2 years ago
Anonymous
Who said it happened in a week? Are you demented or just moronic?
2 years ago
Anonymous
naturally most of the content is going to come from fewer users. that's just how things work. I had a twitter to follow mr robot and get free shit and I've never once posted.
2 years ago
Anonymous
In truth even those numbers are inaccurate because 90% of all twitter posts come from astroturfing bots and paid shills.
how does this homosexual know straights aren't seeing his flick? is he offering to suck off every dude who bought a ticket to see his gay rom-com, and literally every single person said yes? who the frick tabulates this shit
Won't make movies that arent marketed towards me. washed up director judd apataw with 2000s tier humor + gay homosexual rom com? Yeah thats pretty fricking cringe.
>"you are not the target audience" >"diverse representation so that not only white people watches things" >"don't like it? don't watch it" >wooow why didn't you watch my movie/show?
White people literally have to do NOTHING to make others seethe. Based.
He's unironically 100% right. It IS because of straight audiences not wanting to see homosexualry that his film flopped. Thankfully most of the world's audiences are still straight
>Cinemaphile is actually gonna pretend like gay people aren't shitting on this movie too.
They're too busy shitting on each other to shit on this movie.
>going to the movies as performative allyship
These fricking lying morons, trying to believe that people go to movies to support causes instead of going to the movies to literally forget the outside world. If I’m straight, I don’t go out of my way to pay to see gay shit. Make it good like Moonlight and I’m there. Make it actually funny and then I’ll go to laugh. But I’m not paying you just because you are gay
Im a straight man, and i dont go out and watch any rom-coms. Like wtf? Straight men have NEVER been the target audience for rom-coms. Why isnt he blaming women, the traditional target for romantic comedies?
this is clearly an example of WOMEN being homophobic, not men. This shit completely blows me away. Im not going out and watching traditional rom-coms, why would i go out and watch gay rom-coms? Fricking hell. Im sick of being a target just because im straight and white, i cant help who i am, why must i be made to feel awful for being myself, when im supposed toncelebrate everyone else being themselves?
He's only partially right, but isn't afraid to say the full truth. Yes, straight people are not going to see this movie. But who's fault is it actually? The same people who are responsible for most problems.
Women.
Rom Coms are made for women. No man, straight or gay, wants to go see a rom com. They go because women like to self insert into them and it works for their primitive brains. Women can't self insert into a gay romance and are disgusted by gays, so they aren't going. And if they aren't going, men aren't going with them.
But you can't say this out loud. How well do you think this would be received if he said "Women are to blame for the movie's poor performance"?
lol no, you've spent too much time on Twitter. Women love to support theoretical gays, the gays they never have to see or meet or give money to. They absolutely are disgusted by real gays and hate them.
Women will pay lip service to the gay cause to appear virtuous (and out of fear of social ostracisation otherwise). They don't, however, want to see two men kissing on the big screen.
>sister gets £300 a week from council >doesn't work >instead of looking after her kids she sends one to nursery three days a week for four hours at a cost of £100 a week >bills per week are £35 >has £165 to feed her and two kids and get everything else for them >still orders £30 takeaways each night >she went down to the council to demand more money because she can't survive
I hate women. I hate them
No its his fault and the networks fault for ever thinking there was demand for this. Blaming women either means you're a shitskin or a closet homo. Him blaming people his product was not intended for for not buying his product proved he's a dumb gay who should kill himself and should be a homeless dumpster diver not a director.
>make wheelchair >those who can walk don't buy it >oh my god why so lamephobic
>No man, straight or gay, wants to go see a rom com.
40 Year Old Virgin was kind of a fluke, and Apatow has been spending the rest of his career trying to catch lightning in a bottle twice.
I think it was so popular because it was kind of a rom com disguised as a bro comedy.
Just watched the trailer out of morbid curiosity and I have no idea how they are surprised it failed. All the characters are caricatures of what straight people thought gays were like in the 80's and it constantly mocked straight people. He should be more surprised anyone went to see it at all.
how much homos are there even? it must be like below a percent of the world population, makes you wonder why the alphabet gays are so loud on the internet
Remember when these same people that are stripping in front of children were insisting that they were doing things in the privacy of their own bedroom and it wasn't your business?
someone post that leftist comic from like 20 years ago with the list of "things that wont happen if gay marriage is legal" and they all came true after gay marriage was made legal.
Back in the ‘90s gay marriage wasn’t even really an actual debate. The vast majority of people both left and right understood that the whole concept was fricking stupid.
The first country to introduce gay marriage (Netherlands) didn’t even do so until 2001.
Gay marriage didn’t enjoy majority support among liberal voters until around 2007.
In 2008 even fricking CALIFORNIA voted against gay marriage.
Gay marriage is a concept that didn’t even fricking exist until ~25 years ago, and didn’t gain majority support until ~10 years ago.
Exactly. At the time (‘08) gay marriage was sitting at about 50% liberal support but less than 20% support among moderates. No matter what stance he took he’d alienate half the Democrats’ base, so he went with the option that pleased the moderates.
Degenerates need to be stopped. Spreading aids and monkey pox along with all matter of STD's is spreading misery too. >but muh tradition
is rooted in common sense sometimes. Dont stick your dick into every hole you can get your hands on should be basic b***h level of self awareness but for some reasons homosexuals think they're being oppressed when you tell them to stop fricking.
i agree, i heard in canada they have homosexuals smoking blunts, naked - in front of 12 year olds during pride parades. its simply gone too far. this is an absence of religion really
>your brain on neoliberalism
i dont think any adults should be stopped from marrying, simple as
>adults
You will be a bigoted chud in approximately 5 years
2 years ago
Anonymous
i already am despite having a bf
nothing wrong with nudity and nothing wrong with marijuana. >absence of religion
sounds like a utopia to me
yeah but its in front of impressionable minors who shouldnt be seeing that sort of thing at their age
2 years ago
Anonymous
You boyfriend fricks other men and he doesn't consider it cheating.
2 years ago
Anonymous
weirdo, we've been monogamous from the beginning... a decade now? and our body count starts and ends with each other
coomers get the fricking rope
2 years ago
Anonymous
Sure it does bud
2 years ago
Anonymous
not many people are blessed to have relationships that last thing long having both parties being virgins
should make a cute rom com about it
2 years ago
Anonymous
Have either of you fricked a woman?
2 years ago
Anonymous
reading comprehension is not your strong suite, our body count before meeting each other is 0, nothing, nada, hadn't had a lick of sex prior to it.
Cinemaphile morons barely have a grasp of how some homosexuals operate, and it's not entirely based off stereotypes either so slow your role
2 years ago
Anonymous
So you're both currently virgins
2 years ago
Anonymous
pretty much, we'll both be homosexual wizards soon enough ruling Cinemaphile, gayest of boards.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Are you the bottom?
2 years ago
Anonymous
we're both bottoms, i'm the shorter manlet at 5'2 so i guess so
2 years ago
Anonymous
>we're both bottoms
That sounds annoying.
And you dont get a vers or a top for both of you?
2 years ago
Anonymous
either of us can vers depending on the mood. hes physically tiny but hes as big as a monster can down there. i'm more of a power bottom but this is conversation is getting silly so ill close the thread and continue doing laundry & go shitpost on Cinemaphile
2 years ago
Anonymous
>either of us can vers
Vers is not a verb, it is a noun. Top, bottom, and versatile.
If you are both bottoms, then you are not vers.
>Reporter: do you think more straight people could have come out to see the movie? >actor: well that could be a component but there are other things at play here like XYZ >"""news website""": actor implies homophobia is to blame for movie bombing >Cinemaphile: why do you hate gays? look you ruined his movie
Guaranteed 400 replies.
>Anons are killing the reading industry >reading industry
Black person, shut the frick up you write like absolute dog shit, you don't have any place to talk about literacy.
I have unironically watched an hour of gay porn with my buddies a few years ago and out of 4 of us 3 got a boners several times it's just natural instinct
I was hanging out with a gay guy and a women and the girl said that she would suck my dick if the gay guy did it first. So I said what the hell, and let him suck my flaccid penis for a while. No boner whatsoever. The girl then took over and it was like instant erection. I ended up cuming in her mouth.
no lies there. I've also fricked a ladyboy raw dog (among several other female hookers) when I went to Thailand and came in "her" ass. Interesting how I had no problem getting it up that time.
there weren't enough boos to keep my attention sorry,LGBTQRSTUV community
ya wanna get married? fine ya wanna raise kids? fine
but goddamit all dont blame me for your movie tanking..Disney does that shit all the time and Disney can eat it
just make the couple a tall man and a bratty manlet, shaved of course, not the "im gay xD" personality, just normal guys, age gap and boom there i saved your shitty movie
The vast majority of people don't want to watch the homosexual movie? You know what the solution to this problem is in democratic countries with free markets, right? You put homosexualry and gratuitous homosex in EVERY Movie and remove all depictions of heterosexual relationships, that way, the people will have to consume it if they want to watch a movie. You will eat the goy slop.
Look. I have a gay family member. I don't judge people for being gay. It's your life. I may not agree with what you're doing but who am I to judge you? That being said....why would any straight person or couple go see a movie that is literally about homosexuality? Pic related, a friend of mine who isn't as tolerant as I am texted me this morning about the movie. They made gay movie about gay people doing gay things and they're mad that straight people didn't want to watch it?
>Evolution wise, why do gay people exist?
Not every mutation is based on survival necessity. Especially in humans, we've spent millennia tossing the natural order out the window.
Some think the following >"Behavioral sink" is a term invented by ethologist John B. Calhoun to describe a collapse in behavior which can result from overcrowding. The term and concept derive from a series of over-population experiments Calhoun conducted on Norway rats between 1958 and 1962.[1] In the experiments, Calhoun and his researchers created a series of "rat utopias" – enclosed spaces in which rats were given unlimited access to food and water, enabling unfettered population growth.
>Following his earlier experiments with rats, Calhoun later created his "Mortality-Inhibiting Environment for Mice" in 1972: a 101-by-101-inch (260 cm × 260 cm) cage for mice with food and water replenished to support any increase in population,[8] which took his experimental approach to its limits. In his most famous experiment in the series, "Universe 25", population peaked at 2,200 mice and thereafter exhibited a variety of abnormal, often destructive, behaviors including refusal to engage in courtship, females abandoning their young, and homosexuality. By the 600th day, the population was on its way to extinction. Though physically able to reproduce, the mice had lost the social skills required to mate.[6]
Lol I don't hate gay people but I love when "woke" shit fails and the creators blame everyone but themselves. Why would a "straight" guy watch a romcom at all?
>Y-you're just homophobic. It's not the fact that my movie was shit at all.
Yeah, I'm sure that was the reason. Brokeback Mountain was a movie about two gay guys, and it was highly successful. Imagine using your sexual orientation as an excuse for your own failure.
No but it's like HISTORIC because it is technically a STUDIO MADE movie and not just a movie MADE by a pretentious indie label and DISTRIBUTED by a big studio!!
but let's say it did - I could list a bunch of reasons: >ang lee had a great reputation as a director >one or both of the protagonists are bound to be every woman's type >it was about "classy" romance and tragedy for the most part so fairly easy to tolerate even as a sane man (i don't remember being disgusted by it and I'm disgusted by most homosexual stuff, even just two dudes holding hands) >had a good soundtrack >got rave reviews >most people who saw it liked it as well
I just thought of another VERY IMPORTANT reason brokeback mountain was received very differently:
gay stuff was not shoved in your face every day every where. >a movie about GAYS? sure, why not, never seen that before.
meanwhile 14 years of woke big bank propaganda later it's >ANOTHER movie about gays?? who the hell keeps making these and who is supposed to watch them? certainly not me.
t. not yet sentient when brokeback mountain came out
you don't realize that things really were different, even after 9/11. "western" society has changed RADICALLY over the last decade.
if you're 40 how do you not remember that sentiments on this sort of thing were vastly different in the late 2000s?
2 years ago
Anonymous
I remember better than you the reception for Brokeback when it came out.
2 years ago
Anonymous
what was it like then?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Here, refresh your failing memory.
Brokeback Mountain appeared on numerous American critics' lists as one of their favorite films of 2005.[98]
1st – Stephen Holden, The New York Times
1st – Joe Morgenstern, The Wall Street Journal
1st – Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald
1st – Ruthie Stein, San Francisco Chronicle
1st – Scott Tobias, The A.V. Club
2nd – Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
2nd – Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly
2nd – Noel Murray, The A.V. Club
2nd – Desson Thompson, The Washington Post
2nd – Kevin Thomas, Los Angeles Times
2nd – Mike Clark and Claudia Puig, USA Today
3rd – Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly
3rd – Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times
3rd – Shawn Levy, Portland Oregonian
3rd – William Arnold, Seattle Post-Intelligencer
4th – David Ansen, Newsweek
4th – Keith Phipps, The A.V. Club
4th – Michael Atkinson, Village Voice
5th – Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times
5th – Mike Russell, Portland Oregonian
5th – Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune
6th – Alison Benedikt, Chicago Tribune
6th – Ella Taylor, L.A. Weekly
7th – Nathan Rabin, The A.V. Club
7th – Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle
7th – Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper[99]
8th – Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle
Top 9 (listed alphabetically) - New York Film Critics Online
10th – Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Manohla Dargis, The New York Times
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Steven Rea, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Peter Rainer, The Christian Science Monitor
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Carina Chocano, Los Angeles Times
2 years ago
Anonymous
"great reviews" was literally a point on my original list of differences.
2 years ago
Anonymous
And then you went moronic and sperged about how things was different back when I was young.
The answer is simple and uncomplicated. >not a romcom >was a good movie
Doesnt take society drastically changing and woe to your memberberries to figure it out.
>gay stuff was not shoved in your face every day every where. >>a movie about GAYS? sure, why not, never seen that before.
Films about Gays or with characters that happen to be gay were already common by 2005 though. The only difference is that none of them ever felt forced and overly manufactured like they do now. Makes you think.
>make thing that 99% of the population doesn't identify with or relate to >no one comes out to see it because there is no appeal >WOW WHAT THE HELL WAY TO SHOW SUPPORT YOU OWE US
>homosexuals, led their whole lives by progressives to believe they're the most important people on the planet, discover they're actually a very small minority and nobody cares about them
God I hope trannies are next
I'm literally shaking reddit
Wasn't it just recently that a whole shitload of leftist reviewers and bloggers kept repeating the mantra about how "Shows don't have to be for everyone" and if you don't like something you should just say "This isn't made for me".
Funny how that only goes one way.
>then don't watch it, no one is forcing you to
>NOOO NOT LIKE THAT!!!!
There's a differenve between a film not being your cup of tea and actively avoiding it due to prejudice, chud.
Shut the frick up
>taking the bait
>le only pretending
he was obviously only pretending, moron
Well here's a thing then. A romantic comedy genuinely doesn't interest me. Regardless of the leads or material. Could be great. Don't fricking care. It's a romantic comedy, they're all fricking trash.
>differenve
This troons so made he can't even type lmao
>There's a differenve
lol lmao
have a nice day troony
>actively avoiding
you can't actively avoid anything unless someones forcing you to go.
no
You're the biggest moron on this entire board.
>actively avoiding it
What? No. I just don't give a frick. I never go to the cinema anyway
gr8 b8 m8
no, i think they temporarily abandoned that mantra when people used it as a reason to not watch 'turning red'
They didn't, they were using it a shitload to justify the "racism" towards House of the Dragon.
Turning Red was kino
They were saying that when they thought the people who complained about the woke shit were a tiny minority. Now that it turns out even normies won't watch woke shit unless it had some other draw (big name actor or part of a successful franchise already).
It is fun to watch them pivot from, "don't watch it because it isn't made for you" to "you HAVE TO watch this because it is important to the culture war".
>Homophobic
I'm not homophobic. Phobia implies fear. I'm not afraid of homosexuals. I hate them.
You know what they say, know your enemy. Go see the movie then
Hello Billy.
>You know what they say, know your enemy.
I already know my enemy, I've seen the pictures from the Folsom Street Fair. I cannot unsee them.
>Go see the movie then
No.
More importantly, it is implicitly irrational or unfounded.
gaycist
Work next to a radio for 8 hours a day. Was hearing ads for this all last week, but not a peep today.
Why the frick do they expect “support?” Just make a good film and people will watch it, fail to do that and people will still watch it if it’s serviceably entertaining, fail to do both and you only have yourself to blame. Especially if you’re making mid market trash. An art film getting btfo at the box office is a tragedy if it’s good and the director deserves genuine credit for their achievement, but why would anyone need to support a multi million dollar project? You’re not a goddamn charity. I’m sick of this shit.
1 art film getting btfo at the box office is a tragedy, 1million art films getting btfo at the box office is a statistic.
Because it’s not film, it’s propaganda. They’re upset because it isn’t working.
Damn straight people *shakes fist*
DONT
This trend of multinational corporations and actors screaming at the general public for not consuming their products is really fricking bizarre. It's so just so unhinged that these people feel entitled to earn massive profits and be successful.
>LISTEN I'VE GOT 2 MONTHS TO MAKE SOME CASH BEFORE ALL THE GOOD UKRAINIAN CHILDREN ARE BOUGHT UP SO YOU WILL WATCH MY SHITTY MOVIE
make good movies for a broad audience then instead of pandering homosexual shit. not saying homosexual shit doesnt have its niche but plan your budget accordingly
>budget 22 million
you needed to half that, and then take half of that. how the frick does this cost 22 MILLION
>how the frick does this cost 22 MILLION
round the clock cast monkeypox tests
If you don't watch this corperate goyslop you are racist to pedophiles or something
can gay people be funny?
fez whatley is the only funny gay ever, mostly to laugh at
So he's either slurring generic audiences erroneously as homophobic, or validating any actual homophobes who will simply enjoy its failure. Has he thought this through?
You don't understand what these words mean anymore. For example if you refuse to date a trans person, any trans person who asks, you are transphobic.
Please read your New Dictionary so you are up to date on the Correct Speak.
Straight people will never let LGBT films into their little safe spaces it's sad but true. Claim to be 95% supportive of gay rights and then spit on us when we barely ask for any support.
We were just offering lube
Actually straight men have the same reaction to seeing male on male love as seeing swarming maggots
It’s instinctual.
I have gay friends, but I would never want to see their love life
That's called projecting, straight men should have no reaction when they see 2 men kiss but closeted right wing religious nuts will lose their minds and are secretly fricking all their friends husbands.
>that's called projecting
Is it now? https://www.psypost.org/2017/06/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots-49217
Cope. No one likes your homosexualry and you can't do anything about it.
keep coping pickle kisser
Think of it in terms of evolution
The men that didn’t want to frick other men due to disgust had babies with women, and the ones that did want to all died out
gay people in 2008:
>it's not like we're forcing you to watch us make love to each other. don't be bigoted
gay people in 2022:
>if you don't like watching us make love to each other that just means you're homophobic
There are multiple peer reviewed studies that demonstrate men’s instinctual disgust towards homos, moron. And the visceral instinctual disgust is the same regardless of political affiliation. Liberals just hide it better, kek.
Do you want me to pull out the studies about homophobic men popping erections when exposed to gay porn?
I'm not that anon, but 'homophobes' =/= normal straight men. The latter put up with gays just fine, but still find the sight of them kissing instinctively repulsive. It's pure 'transphobes just want to frick me' style cope to suggest otherwise.
I bet you think it’s unfair straight people can reproduce toojvo2y
Neutrality implies acceptance but your way of life is just wrong on every basic level so a thinly veiled disgust is about as courteous as I can be
>t. feces blood and semen purveyor
I'm in the same boat. The sight of gay men kissing is viscerally repugnant, regardless of political feelings on marriage equality etc. I dare suggest normies also feel this way, albeit internally, and really opted to dodge this film.
Normies do feel this way, psychologists have even done studies proving it kek.
Here’s one from 2017:
https://www.psypost.org/2017/06/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots-49217
>make a movie that appeals primarily to 5% of the population
>surprised when it fails because 95% of the population doesn’t want to see it
They literally said this isn’t a “gay movie for straight people”. If straight people don’t watch it cause they don’t think it’s for them, who will?? There aren’t enough gays in the whole fricking country to make this movie a box-office success.
We're well past negotiation. I don't support you.
Right?!
It’s almost as if 98% of the population actually thinks homosexuals are absolutely disgusting and would rather watch a sheep get butchered then two fey and repugnant men act like 12 years old girls
>Straight people will never let LGBT films into their little safe spaces
society at large is not a "little safe space" you stupid shitposter. normal people don't relate to gay culture or humor, so gay films fail in a market of 98% normal people. go figure.
good. I hate you
I've had a few gay friends in my life. I always said I don't care what you do in the bedroom but that doesn't mean I want a front row seat to the show. That is especially true these days when you guys literally have to flaunt it in front of everyone unashamedly, including innocent children. Go back to acting like gay men did in the 50's while in public and no one would have a problem with you.
>safe spaces
>gays march down the most public street in every city in america waving flags, wearing strap ons and assless chaps once or twice a year
>Leftists can't pass a federal bill creating an actual right to gay marriage so they have to abuse the Supreme Court to create an imaginary right that the people don't want
>Pride weekends have turned into pride months
>gays invade disneyland once a year
It's never been about having "rights". It's just a bunch of mentally ill losers whose fetish has become their whole identity. T
>ask for any support.
>you have to buy movie tickets to support the cause.
Bizarre narcissism
how long until he pulls the antisemitism card too when he gets noticers tweeting him replies?
I don't even like straight romcoms, why the frick would I watch a gay one?
This. No straight man is going to watch any romcom, and no straight woman (romcoms’ primary demographic) are going to watch a movie where all the characters are men and all the romance is between men. That leaves just the lgbbq homosexuals (5% of population).
That’s simply FAR to niche to succeed in Hollywood.
There’s a reason most big movies are samey, mass produced goyslop made in a corporate boardroom - it’s to appeal to the lowest common denominator possible. It’s also the reason R rated films make less money - families with children are about 30-40% of all moviegoers. Any movie that is R is basically accepting a 40% cut in its box office revenue.
Lgbt is far less than 5%. Its barely 10% in democratic cities. Now imagine taking a sample of humans from democratic cities where they get these stats and add normal humans across the first world and even worse third world where they don't need to pretend to be gay for brownie points yet.
It’s probably something like 10% in liberal areas, 5% in moderate areas and 1-2% in conservative areas.
This is probably the reason everyone overestimated this movie. Hollywood is a liberal bubble filled with gays. Just because your gay movie does well at its LA premiere doesn’t mean it’ll fly in Utah or Kentucky.
>it’s to appeal to the lowest common denominator possible
i.e. Cinemaphile users
who have the delusion their edgieness and having the gays rent free in their head makes them special (if anything it's pretty obvious a lot of them are gays in the closet if they have so much gayness rent free).
How did broke back mountain become successful bros
did it even??
but let's say it did - I could list a bunch of reasons:
>ang lee had a great reputation as a director
>one or both of the protagonists are bound to be every woman's type
>it was about "classy" romance and tragedy for the most part so fairly easy to tolerate even as a sane man (i don't remember being disgusted by it and I'm disgusted by most homosexual stuff, even just two dudes holding hands)
>had a good soundtrack
>got rave reviews
>most people who saw it liked it as well
You wouldn't like me when I'm Ang Lee.
The time of troony is over. The time of the chud has just begun
This is how we win. Stop watching Rings of Power, House of the Dragon, The Witcher, superhero movies, nuhorror movies, etc. If we just stopped paying the israelites to make demoralizing and antiwhite propaganda they'd stop making so much of it.
Yep, it's so incredibly easy.
Stop crying about it on social media.
Stop review bombing shit.
Stop giving it ANY publicity whatsoever.
Just don't give them your money.
Nice try sodomite israelite
The israelites (aka, you) love the bad publicity. Any publicity is good. They can shit out stuff like Rings of Power, and blame racism for why it's doing so poorly. The average person believes it and demonizes white males.
Any racist post on social media just fuels their ability to portray it as such. Stop falling into their traps, you idiots.
>The average person believes it and demonizes white males.
no, no they don't
twitter bots are not real people
This. Too many people use Twitter as a barometer for the real world when it's not even close.
I love the complete idiocy that leads to people believing this.
You deny that’s true?
Anon, you're posting an edited twitter cap as if it's true information.
Please don't be so dense.
It's only inaccurate as we now know that only 5% of Twitter users are actual people, so it's even worse than that.
It's bullshit but I believe it.
Can't tell if you're trolling but it's well-known information by now.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/24/twitter-doesnt-reflect-how-most-americans-think-study/
>2019
Ah yes, three whole years.
It's post Trump now moron, everything has changed for the better.
>inflation
You only think that because you unironically live in your mothers basement
His policies still effect us a few years on moron
It wasnt trump printing money this year that started the inflation.
How is it you people have laser precision political talking points for people you hate yet never bother to keep up with current event?
What do you mean " you people"?
you unironically live in a sewer like a ninja turtle
see
>What do you mean " you people"?
Idiots who dont keep up with current events
>ignoring what caused these events
Why are you people unable to think back to cause of the effect?
>trump out of office
>Biden now in office
>Biden passes bill to print billions of dollar
>This causes inflation, he is the cause, the effect is inflation
>this is trumps fault
Because trump can't time travel
The trump defence force is here lol. Absolutely obsessed all these years on.
i didnt vote for either of them i actually voted for Hillary im just not moronic enough to think Biden is a good president.
Did you pokemon go to the polls lol
>seething so hard he doesnt even make sense anymore
>he
>seething so hard she doesnt even make sense anymore
As expected from a woman
Rule 3 covers sexism too.
Last warning
What was sexist about the comment moron?
Hmm let me explain, maybe the derogatory stereotype you fricking virgin
What was the stereotype you braindead frickwit?
See
I'm talking to an idiot hah
Point out which part is the sexist part? You should be able do that if you have two braincells to rub together.
>more stereotypes
Incel vibe
>troony couldnt answer a simple question
Confirmed you don't have two braincells to rub together
And you will never be a woman
Lol fricking virgin hahahaha
>seething so hard because you met your intellectual better
lol lmao
>save me jannyman!
pitiful
>inflation happens in a week
moron
Who said it happened in a week? Are you demented or just moronic?
naturally most of the content is going to come from fewer users. that's just how things work. I had a twitter to follow mr robot and get free shit and I've never once posted.
In truth even those numbers are inaccurate because 90% of all twitter posts come from astroturfing bots and paid shills.
>twitter bots are not real people
HR bots are
huh, wut you mean?
what is with the double first names?
They are literally bots. Look at the usernames too.
Frick off. Calling out the israelite and degeneracy is the only way forward
Keep the review "bombing"
Hotd is pretty good
you are not owed my money, homosexual
>hold my hand
>no, that's not my hand
how does this homosexual know straights aren't seeing his flick? is he offering to suck off every dude who bought a ticket to see his gay rom-com, and literally every single person said yes? who the frick tabulates this shit
Won't make movies that arent marketed towards me. washed up director judd apataw with 2000s tier humor + gay homosexual rom com? Yeah thats pretty fricking cringe.
>actually believing that the vast majority of people aren't repulsed by gays
This is your brain on Twitter.
>"you are not the target audience"
>"diverse representation so that not only white people watches things"
>"don't like it? don't watch it"
>wooow why didn't you watch my movie/show?
White people literally have to do NOTHING to make others seethe. Based.
He's unironically 100% right. It IS because of straight audiences not wanting to see homosexualry that his film flopped. Thankfully most of the world's audiences are still straight
I'd quite like to see a troony romance movie held up in the same way by critics just to see general audiences reject that too...
Sorry Hollywood, I just didn't feel represented by this movie. Representation matters!
Cinemaphile is actually gonna pretend like gay people aren't shitting on this movie too.
I mean if he's going to pretend that only straight people are shitting on it why should I disagree?
>Cinemaphile is actually gonna pretend like gay people aren't shitting on this movie too.
They're too busy shitting on each other to shit on this movie.
A gay comedy was never going to work, if a double act is going to be funny one of them needs to be the straight man.
hehe
>going to the movies as performative allyship
These fricking lying morons, trying to believe that people go to movies to support causes instead of going to the movies to literally forget the outside world. If I’m straight, I don’t go out of my way to pay to see gay shit. Make it good like Moonlight and I’m there. Make it actually funny and then I’ll go to laugh. But I’m not paying you just because you are gay
Im a straight man, and i dont go out and watch any rom-coms. Like wtf? Straight men have NEVER been the target audience for rom-coms. Why isnt he blaming women, the traditional target for romantic comedies?
this is clearly an example of WOMEN being homophobic, not men. This shit completely blows me away. Im not going out and watching traditional rom-coms, why would i go out and watch gay rom-coms? Fricking hell. Im sick of being a target just because im straight and white, i cant help who i am, why must i be made to feel awful for being myself, when im supposed toncelebrate everyone else being themselves?
If he put more truckers in it, the gays would make up for the lack of straights, for sure.
>consume shit or be called homophobic
I'm ok with being a homophobe.
I don't like seeing gay people in real life, so why would I pay money to watch a movie about sodomy?
He's only partially right, but isn't afraid to say the full truth. Yes, straight people are not going to see this movie. But who's fault is it actually? The same people who are responsible for most problems.
Women.
Rom Coms are made for women. No man, straight or gay, wants to go see a rom com. They go because women like to self insert into them and it works for their primitive brains. Women can't self insert into a gay romance and are disgusted by gays, so they aren't going. And if they aren't going, men aren't going with them.
But you can't say this out loud. How well do you think this would be received if he said "Women are to blame for the movie's poor performance"?
But I like wedding crashers and am a man 🙁
women love gays moron, 90% of lgbt support is from women while the vast majority of men hate gays
lol no, you've spent too much time on Twitter. Women love to support theoretical gays, the gays they never have to see or meet or give money to. They absolutely are disgusted by real gays and hate them.
>women love gays moron, 90% of lgbt support is from women
only libcuck women, normal women thing of gays as inhuman
they like gossiping with them not watching them buttfrick each other
They love gays as the sassy friend to the female lead, not the actual lead.
Dumbass
Women will pay lip service to the gay cause to appear virtuous (and out of fear of social ostracisation otherwise). They don't, however, want to see two men kissing on the big screen.
It's the same way they pretend to support Black folk.
That Karen would be wife material if she didn't feel the need to lie about her intentions
not a single thing in this comic is false or unjustified.
It never bothered me too much until I see my sister making problems in her own life completely by choice which ruin my neices lives too
even worse than pretending is actually doing it. some mothers want their children to suffer because of their white guilt.
>sister gets £300 a week from council
>doesn't work
>instead of looking after her kids she sends one to nursery three days a week for four hours at a cost of £100 a week
>bills per week are £35
>has £165 to feed her and two kids and get everything else for them
>still orders £30 takeaways each night
>she went down to the council to demand more money because she can't survive
I hate women. I hate them
No its his fault and the networks fault for ever thinking there was demand for this. Blaming women either means you're a shitskin or a closet homo. Him blaming people his product was not intended for for not buying his product proved he's a dumb gay who should kill himself and should be a homeless dumpster diver not a director.
>make wheelchair
>those who can walk don't buy it
>oh my god why so lamephobic
>No man, straight or gay, wants to go see a rom com.
40 Year Old Virgin was kind of a fluke, and Apatow has been spending the rest of his career trying to catch lightning in a bottle twice.
I think it was so popular because it was kind of a rom com disguised as a bro comedy.
Lol he's not going to win with this angle. Even Reddit caught on to the narrative he's trying to push.
Search billy eichner on Twitter and it seems literally everyone despises him lel
THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR FRICKING WITH ME ON THE STREET
Just watched the trailer out of morbid curiosity and I have no idea how they are surprised it failed. All the characters are caricatures of what straight people thought gays were like in the 80's and it constantly mocked straight people. He should be more surprised anyone went to see it at all.
how much homos are there even? it must be like below a percent of the world population, makes you wonder why the alphabet gays are so loud on the internet
They make solid points, most people with functioning brains can see that and agree, even if they're straight
>1999: we just want to be able to get married
>2022: if you don't want to pay to watch gay porn in the theater you are a bigot
>le slippery slope fallacy is not real!!
it's hilarious how quickly we were proven right.
it already happened in the past under the mantle of sexual revolution
https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-sexual-revolution-and-children-how-the-left-took-things-too-far-a-702679.html
Remember when these same people that are stripping in front of children were insisting that they were doing things in the privacy of their own bedroom and it wasn't your business?
someone post that leftist comic from like 20 years ago with the list of "things that wont happen if gay marriage is legal" and they all came true after gay marriage was made legal.
oof
Back in the ‘90s gay marriage wasn’t even really an actual debate. The vast majority of people both left and right understood that the whole concept was fricking stupid.
The first country to introduce gay marriage (Netherlands) didn’t even do so until 2001.
Gay marriage didn’t enjoy majority support among liberal voters until around 2007.
In 2008 even fricking CALIFORNIA voted against gay marriage.
Gay marriage is a concept that didn’t even fricking exist until ~25 years ago, and didn’t gain majority support until ~10 years ago.
When Obama ran for President, he was against gay marriage
Exactly. At the time (‘08) gay marriage was sitting at about 50% liberal support but less than 20% support among moderates. No matter what stance he took he’d alienate half the Democrats’ base, so he went with the option that pleased the moderates.
No one gives a shit about marriage. It's an outdated and irrelevant system
>t. "I just don't understand why society is collapsing around me"
muh traditions muhh keep it old
morality is based but dont turbosperg out about it i guess. two humans, both adults? have at it morons
Degenerates need to be stopped. Spreading aids and monkey pox along with all matter of STD's is spreading misery too.
>but muh tradition
is rooted in common sense sometimes. Dont stick your dick into every hole you can get your hands on should be basic b***h level of self awareness but for some reasons homosexuals think they're being oppressed when you tell them to stop fricking.
i agree, i heard in canada they have homosexuals smoking blunts, naked - in front of 12 year olds during pride parades. its simply gone too far. this is an absence of religion really
i dont think any adults should be stopped from marrying, simple as
>adults
You will be a bigoted chud in approximately 5 years
i already am despite having a bf
yeah but its in front of impressionable minors who shouldnt be seeing that sort of thing at their age
You boyfriend fricks other men and he doesn't consider it cheating.
weirdo, we've been monogamous from the beginning... a decade now? and our body count starts and ends with each other
coomers get the fricking rope
Sure it does bud
not many people are blessed to have relationships that last thing long having both parties being virgins
should make a cute rom com about it
Have either of you fricked a woman?
reading comprehension is not your strong suite, our body count before meeting each other is 0, nothing, nada, hadn't had a lick of sex prior to it.
Cinemaphile morons barely have a grasp of how some homosexuals operate, and it's not entirely based off stereotypes either so slow your role
So you're both currently virgins
pretty much, we'll both be homosexual wizards soon enough ruling Cinemaphile, gayest of boards.
Are you the bottom?
we're both bottoms, i'm the shorter manlet at 5'2 so i guess so
>we're both bottoms
That sounds annoying.
And you dont get a vers or a top for both of you?
either of us can vers depending on the mood. hes physically tiny but hes as big as a monster can down there. i'm more of a power bottom but this is conversation is getting silly so ill close the thread and continue doing laundry & go shitpost on Cinemaphile
>either of us can vers
Vers is not a verb, it is a noun. Top, bottom, and versatile.
If you are both bottoms, then you are not vers.
nothing wrong with nudity and nothing wrong with marijuana.
>absence of religion
sounds like a utopia to me
>this is an absence of religion really
No one wants to admit it either
>your brain on neoliberalism
Really the issue here is women not turning up. Men weren't anyway
>my movie failed because of the people who didn't watch it
Pretty much, but it's so obvious that there's no need to state it.
Why didn't the Elegy Beaty community turn up
How does he know his movie didn't flop because enough homosexuals didn't to come out to see it?
Can't wait for all the death camps for the straights who don't consume gay media.
HHHHNNNNNNNNNNNRRRRRRRNNNNNNNNNNN *plop*
FRICK YOU TROONS, FRICK YOU homosexualS, FRICK YOU LEFTSHITS
>FRICK YOU homosexualS,
post dick
The evolution of a story like this:
>Reporter: do you think more straight people could have come out to see the movie?
>actor: well that could be a component but there are other things at play here like XYZ
>"""news website""": actor implies homophobia is to blame for movie bombing
>Cinemaphile: why do you hate gays? look you ruined his movie
Guaranteed 400 replies.
>implying things that never happened
why are animegays such morons?
Could have been 399 replies if you would learn to ignore shitposting.
There is no reporter, those were his own fricking tweets.
But of course the animegay can't read and makes shit up. Don't you have more child porn to go download?
>The evolution of a story like this
>like this
Why do you hate literacy? Anons are killing the reading industry
>Anons are killing the reading industry
>reading industry
Black person, shut the frick up you write like absolute dog shit, you don't have any place to talk about literacy.
Shut the frick up and lurk more. Don't ever reply to me again without coming off so stupid.
>using a bunch of equally moronic headlines to justify yourself
you need to stop posting
Lurk more newbie. It's embarrassing that you can't recognize those headlines.
>I was only pretending to be moronic
nice defense moron
millennial here. I had no idea we were so powerful and fearsome. based.
>actor
I don't really like watching anyone kiss, let alone gays
How many straight men clamor to see ANY romcom?
I enjoyed Cashback.
All they needed to do was make a gay capeshit and it would be the top selling movie of all time
>gay capeshit
Please.
I went and saw this by myself at a matinee. I am based.
I can’t believe the Chinese bot farm accounts that mass-liked all the promo for this movie didn’t go out to watch it
I have unironically watched an hour of gay porn with my buddies a few years ago and out of 4 of us 3 got a boners several times it's just natural instinct
I was hanging out with a gay guy and a women and the girl said that she would suck my dick if the gay guy did it first. So I said what the hell, and let him suck my flaccid penis for a while. No boner whatsoever. The girl then took over and it was like instant erection. I ended up cuming in her mouth.
You may not technically be a homosexual, but you’re still a degenerate
no lies there. I've also fricked a ladyboy raw dog (among several other female hookers) when I went to Thailand and came in "her" ass. Interesting how I had no problem getting it up that time.
Neat.
I wonder if a bloke could get you hard with a handjob
Gaylord
It may be even gayer to engage in homosexual acts without actually being attracted to men.
there weren't enough boos to keep my attention sorry,LGBTQRSTUV community
ya wanna get married? fine ya wanna raise kids? fine
but goddamit all dont blame me for your movie tanking..Disney does that shit all the time and Disney can eat it
still at it with the outrage marketing huh
oh free support
going to stop by the support tree for a free giving of support
just make the couple a tall man and a bratty manlet, shaved of course, not the "im gay xD" personality, just normal guys, age gap and boom there i saved your shitty movie
When will gays learn? no one wants to watch you beig homosexual, go away
It wasn’t made for me.
Perhaps if every ad I heard didnt start with an insulting joke about straight people.
I'm a homosexual and this movie sounded insufferable.
>i blame everyone who didn't see my movie for not seeing my movie
*fart*
>DONT LIKE IT THEN DONT WATCH IT
>flops
A tale as old as time
Morbid curiosity, girlfriends, social pressure
For
Romcoms aren't exactly blockbuster hits in the first place.
The vast majority of people don't want to watch the homosexual movie? You know what the solution to this problem is in democratic countries with free markets, right? You put homosexualry and gratuitous homosex in EVERY Movie and remove all depictions of heterosexual relationships, that way, the people will have to consume it if they want to watch a movie. You will eat the goy slop.
Look. I have a gay family member. I don't judge people for being gay. It's your life. I may not agree with what you're doing but who am I to judge you? That being said....why would any straight person or couple go see a movie that is literally about homosexuality? Pic related, a friend of mine who isn't as tolerant as I am texted me this morning about the movie. They made gay movie about gay people doing gay things and they're mad that straight people didn't want to watch it?
What the frick did you mean there?
I was implying that watching the gay movie turned me a little gay and made me start walking around like Mr. Burns from The Simpsons.
Frick leftists and frick the woke.
Just watch the damn movie so they will stfu
If they've sunk to the point of spamming Cinemaphile they are well past failure. This place doesn't move the needle at all.
>doesn’t move the needle
it doesn’t do anything other than being forgotten and cast aside as footnote.
I dont watch rom coms and i dont like movies about homosexuals.
Evolution wise, why do gay people exist?
Literally only thing I can think of is
>tribe is breeding too much
>get extras baby sitters/workers who don’t breed
But nobody wants gays around their kids so that doesn’t work
Evolution isn't real.
So God makes sure people are gay.
God gives you free will, and some turn from God.
If God gives free will, then he doesnt know the future, and is not omnipotent.
Of course he knows the future. He gives you free will, and he sees what you will do with it.
If he knows the future, then I have no choice.
unless I can prove God wrong.
At which point - again - that is no God.
>Evolution wise, why do gay people exist?
Not every mutation is based on survival necessity. Especially in humans, we've spent millennia tossing the natural order out the window.
So now I'm obligated to see movies?
Some think the following
>"Behavioral sink" is a term invented by ethologist John B. Calhoun to describe a collapse in behavior which can result from overcrowding. The term and concept derive from a series of over-population experiments Calhoun conducted on Norway rats between 1958 and 1962.[1] In the experiments, Calhoun and his researchers created a series of "rat utopias" – enclosed spaces in which rats were given unlimited access to food and water, enabling unfettered population growth.
>Following his earlier experiments with rats, Calhoun later created his "Mortality-Inhibiting Environment for Mice" in 1972: a 101-by-101-inch (260 cm × 260 cm) cage for mice with food and water replenished to support any increase in population,[8] which took his experimental approach to its limits. In his most famous experiment in the series, "Universe 25", population peaked at 2,200 mice and thereafter exhibited a variety of abnormal, often destructive, behaviors including refusal to engage in courtship, females abandoning their young, and homosexuality. By the 600th day, the population was on its way to extinction. Though physically able to reproduce, the mice had lost the social skills required to mate.[6]
Lol I don't hate gay people but I love when "woke" shit fails and the creators blame everyone but themselves. Why would a "straight" guy watch a romcom at all?
homosexualry is white supremacy
>this guy has literally eaten his own poop off of penis that just jizzed in his butt
Lmao grosss
They keep calling him white. He’s israeli
I would rather watch Top Gun again.
>NOT ALL CONTENT IS MADE FOR YOU!
>w-why aren't straight dudes watching our movie about ugly middle-aged israeli men having butt sex
>make movie pandering and relatable to a very small percentage of people
>make a very small percentage of money
poopdicks seething because no one cares about their disgusting lifestyle
>watch milk, call my by your name, bad education, tinker tailor solider spy ect
>essential gay core because they’re interesting films.
>Y-you're just homophobic. It's not the fact that my movie was shit at all.
Yeah, I'm sure that was the reason. Brokeback Mountain was a movie about two gay guys, and it was highly successful. Imagine using your sexual orientation as an excuse for your own failure.
No but it's like HISTORIC because it is technically a STUDIO MADE movie and not just a movie MADE by a pretentious indie label and DISTRIBUTED by a big studio!!
I just thought of another VERY IMPORTANT reason brokeback mountain was received very differently:
gay stuff was not shoved in your face every day every where.
>a movie about GAYS? sure, why not, never seen that before.
meanwhile 14 years of woke big bank propaganda later it's
>ANOTHER movie about gays?? who the hell keeps making these and who is supposed to watch them? certainly not me.
That is stupid and overly complicated.
Brokeback did well for two reasons:
>it wasnt a romcom
>it was a good movie
t. not yet sentient when brokeback mountain came out
you don't realize that things really were different, even after 9/11. "western" society has changed RADICALLY over the last decade.
I'm almost 40.
How old are you, child?
31
if you're 40 how do you not remember that sentiments on this sort of thing were vastly different in the late 2000s?
I remember better than you the reception for Brokeback when it came out.
what was it like then?
Here, refresh your failing memory.
Brokeback Mountain appeared on numerous American critics' lists as one of their favorite films of 2005.[98]
1st – Stephen Holden, The New York Times
1st – Joe Morgenstern, The Wall Street Journal
1st – Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald
1st – Ruthie Stein, San Francisco Chronicle
1st – Scott Tobias, The A.V. Club
2nd – Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
2nd – Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly
2nd – Noel Murray, The A.V. Club
2nd – Desson Thompson, The Washington Post
2nd – Kevin Thomas, Los Angeles Times
2nd – Mike Clark and Claudia Puig, USA Today
3rd – Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly
3rd – Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times
3rd – Shawn Levy, Portland Oregonian
3rd – William Arnold, Seattle Post-Intelligencer
4th – David Ansen, Newsweek
4th – Keith Phipps, The A.V. Club
4th – Michael Atkinson, Village Voice
5th – Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times
5th – Mike Russell, Portland Oregonian
5th – Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune
6th – Alison Benedikt, Chicago Tribune
6th – Ella Taylor, L.A. Weekly
7th – Nathan Rabin, The A.V. Club
7th – Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle
7th – Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper[99]
8th – Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle
Top 9 (listed alphabetically) - New York Film Critics Online
10th – Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Manohla Dargis, The New York Times
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Steven Rea, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Peter Rainer, The Christian Science Monitor
Top 10 (listed alphabetically) – Carina Chocano, Los Angeles Times
"great reviews" was literally a point on my original list of differences.
And then you went moronic and sperged about how things was different back when I was young.
The answer is simple and uncomplicated.
>not a romcom
>was a good movie
Doesnt take society drastically changing and woe to your memberberries to figure it out.
>gay stuff was not shoved in your face every day every where.
>>a movie about GAYS? sure, why not, never seen that before.
Films about Gays or with characters that happen to be gay were already common by 2005 though. The only difference is that none of them ever felt forced and overly manufactured like they do now. Makes you think.
I'm bi and didn't give a frick about this movie. I know I can't be the only one.
I dont really know of him that well but he's probably trolling with this. How many guys want to see a romcom in general let alone one with gays?
>How many guys want to see a romcom in general
This, that should be pretty obvious
>DUDE STRAIGHT PEOPLE ARE FINISHED LMAO
>w-why wouldn't straight people watch our movie
Uh huh
>make thing that 99% of the population doesn't identify with or relate to
>no one comes out to see it because there is no appeal
>WOW WHAT THE HELL WAY TO SHOW SUPPORT YOU OWE US
why is this the reaction?
>homosexuals, led their whole lives by progressives to believe they're the most important people on the planet, discover they're actually a very small minority and nobody cares about them
God I hope trannies are next
>I hate gays!
>*jerks off to lesbian porn*
Gay men aren't gay enough to watch a romcom
>make movie that appeals to less than 2% of the population
>cry when it doesn't make 10s of millions
The one single ad I saw for this made me want to pull a Juicy Smollett
>made me want to pull a Juicy Smollett
A fake hate crime? That's fricked up.
Yes except this time I'd prank then by making it real halfway through. They'll never see it coming!
no one wants to watch disgusting fricking homosexuals.
Why is Cinemaphile so homophobic now? Other boards like Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile aren't like this.
>Cinemaphile
>not "homophobic"
so you've never been to Cinemaphile huh?
let's keep it that way.
>Gay romcom
>Isn't about a buff guy and his femboy bf who he makes wear a wiener cage
What a fricking manchild