THE MARVELS starring Brie Larson, Iman Vellani and Teyonna Parris (2023) 9 9

[Randall Dowling]

On 11/16/2023 at 6:09 AM, RedRaven said:

In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part.

I really appreciate it when you say nice things about me, in such a nice way. 

[paqart]

On 11/16/2023 at 3:11 AM, Prince Namor said:

See, I made this comment to Roy and he bailed on the conversation. If you approach 'these people' with preconceived prejudices, they simply dismiss any evidence, regardless of how truthful or fact filled, if it goes against what they believe.

It's the opposite of scientific research. They have their conclusion FIRST, and everything they take in is geared towards reinforcing it. Anything that goes against it is completely ignored. 

I don't have that impression. For the record, I agree with you. I also don't remember anything from @VintageComics that would suggest disagreement. Maybe I missed it. It seems pretty obvious that the MCU audience has to include people who don't read comics due to the number of tickets sold. It undoubtedly benefits from people of earlier generations like myself, who may not buy comics now, but did in the past. This makes the math a little more complicated. The difference isn't between the 250,000 or so monthly sales Marvel gets on a contemporary best-selling comic and the 50,000,000 tickets they sell to a movie. I bought comics from 1971 through 1979 when a good title sold 750,000 copies in a month. Some viewers were likely active in the 1990's, when a few comics sold up to 8,000,000 copies.

Add those people up, take out the overlap, and go down a couple levels to people who weren't collectors but readers, and the number of potential customers from among comic buyers might be in the 10-15 million range. Still, it is less than the number who went to the theater. Therefore, it seems obvious that many of the people today (or at least up to Endgame) who enjoyed the MCU were not comic book afficianadoes.

Edited November 16, 2023 by paqart

[VintageComics]

On 11/15/2023 at 7:20 PM, sfcityduck said:

I have never walked in a theatre to watch a Marvel or Star Wars movie without at least one woman (almost always my wife, variously also my friends - usually couples - sister, and nieces). When there's a Marvel movie out around Christmas or July its a family affair. At home, we usually go with other couples.

I asked this question of Jaybuck who himself stated he "has all the info" on media and movies, and when he posted a graph showing that men lead women in seeing the MCU, the graph obviously showed men dominated attendance of MCU movies but that women trailed far behind, but not too far behind. 

From the graph below, it's obvious that men lead women by 20-25% across the board. 

----------------------------------------------------

My next logical question was, OK how many men took women vs women taking men?

A similar question would be how many women would go without men and visa versa?

These are SUCH LOGICAL QUESTIONS to me that get to the heart of the matter, and yet nobody will answer or discuss them from the opposing side.

And yet, we've seen almost every poster in this thread ON THIS MALE DOMINATED FORUM who has commented on demographics from personal anecdotes openly state that when they went to the movies they took their spouses or daughters with them. 

When I went to the movies, I usually had my wife or girlfriend with me, and at least 1 or 2 daughters would regularly join (but sometimes I'd literally take 5 women and 3 men). More importantly, I would take the women to movies they'd NEVER see otherwise. 

It's a part of my cultural training, meaning I wanted to expose my women to as many different aspects of culture as I could - I didn't choose male or female biased storylines, I chose storylines THAT WOULD MAKE THEM THINK and expand their world.

It's why I introduced by daughter to V for Vendetta as a Christmas present and it became her favorite movie. She'd NEVER had seen that movie otherwise, because it looked like a male superhero movie from the outside. It was far from that. 

------------------------------------------------------

Isn't this asking questions about the data how peer review works?

Wasn't this the foundation of ALL THE PANDEMIC ARGUMENTS from the very same people who now oppose dissecting the data here?

So to answer your many questions, let's focus on ONE POINT of hard data, through polite discussion without political baiting. 

Let's start by dissecting THIS GRAPH. In it, we will likely ALL find our answers. 

 

As for your questions about the science surrounding the discussion, we have a NEUROSCIENTIST participating in these very discussions but rather than add something constructive, he's stood on the sidelines and cast stones at messengers he disagrees with. 

Although, he did have this to say about me when I expounded on the biological and psychological differences between men and women in the Barbie thread. 

I'll take that to mean that I wasn't wrong about what I wrote in regards to the science between men and women in that thread. 

On 11/11/2023 at 7:48 PM, namisgr said:

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

More logical questions.

Is this forum male dominated?

Are Comic cons male dominated?

Is the comics hobby in general male dominated?

Are action movies, which are the core of the MCU male dominated?

Are non-action movies female dominated?

Are sports and sports viewers male dominated?

All reasonable questions that apply directly to the MCU discussion. 

 

[VintageComics]

On 11/15/2023 at 10:25 PM, Randall Dowling said:

Anyone that thinks girls/women aren't into comics, hasn't been paying attention at conventions over the last 20 years. 

This opening statement is very misleading. 

Not ONE SINGLE person has stated women aren't into comics. My 22 year old daughter is the world's largest Bone / Jeff Smith fan as an example. 

This discussion is about WHAT interests women about comics and what interests women in a MALE DOMINATED medium, and my position is that men and women in tights is far more interesting to men than it is to women. Just attend an NFL Football game as evidence.  

[namisgr]

You can just tell this is going to end well.  

[Buzzetta]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:02 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you anymore because all you, namisgr and a bunch of others have added nothing of value to this conversation and have just baited and snickered people perpetually and yet strangely, you and namisgr pride yourselves on being a teachers professionally.

The rest aren't rising to the bait and are staying on point. Please stop with the personal comments so we can have productive discussions.

You ignore quite a bit.  I noticed you read everything else but still have not responded to my post regarding movie fatigue being a real thing and relating it to a steak house.

[Mr Sneeze]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:02 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you anymore because all you, namisgr and a bunch of others have added nothing of value to this conversation and have just baited and snickered people perpetually and yet strangely, you and namisgr pride yourselves on being a teachers professionally.

The rest aren't rising to the bait and are staying on point. Please stop with the personal comments so we can have productive discussions.

People have added plenty of value, we generally can get our ideas down in a sentence or two and then move on. 

You don’t read anything that doesn’t reinforce your pedantic offerings.

[VintageComics]

I'm going to say something that is very much in need of saying and it has been on my mind for a while. 

We KNOW that Hollywood is a cesspool for sexual misconduct. We KNOW that Disney has had it's share of allegations as have the rest of the industry. Weinstein was literally the tip of many icebergs. All the stories you've heard make up a small percentage. 

The stories you HAVE heard, like Cory Feldman's and those of many others have been hushed over the years were utterly BURIED to keep Hollywood looking good. 

I am really surprised at the absolute wall of support for an industry that has been literally built through exploitation as though they are the perfect teachers for the public now.

It's quite a dichotomy to watch happen in real time. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:07 AM, Mr Sneeze said:

we generally can get our ideas down in a sentence or two and then move on. 

You don’t read anything that doesn’t reinforce your pedantic offerings.

I read everything, as do people who don't post here. 

And I don't think you can have a deep conversation in a "sentence or two" and move on, which really is the problem if most people think they can. 

And that really is a root problem with social media. People have been programmed to think a soundbite is a sufficient response. It's a recipe for disagreement and nothing else, which is why I choose to expand my responses. 

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 7:31 AM, VintageComics said:

 

My next logical question was, OK how many men took women vs women taking men?

A similar question would be how many women would go without men and visa versa?

These are SUCH LOGICAL QUESTIONS to me that get to the heart of the matter, and yet nobody will answer or discuss them from the opposing side.

And yet, we've seen almost every poster in this thread ON THIS MALE DOMINATED FORUM who has commented on demographics from personal anecdotes openly state that when they went to the movies they took their spouses or daughters with them. 

Isn't this asking questions about the data how peer review works?

 

 

The question you ask is one of audience demographics. It can only be accurately answered by an actual survey of the audience. Discussing it here will yield only anecdotes. If audience composition has been studied (and Disney probably has) the numbers are either proprietary or somewhere on the internet. So go look for the numbers. You can find them if they are accessible and get an answer to your question. 

Discussion without data is not really helpful. The fact you are not bringing data does not help your case.

it also misses the point. The data relevant to this discussion is whether MCU movies with strong female characters getting extensive screen time do better with women than those that do not. 

The best source for that info would be tv shows. Why? The data is gathered. There are fewer entry barriers to tv viewing. 

That comic collectors are largely male is the challenge the MCU is trying to overcome by centering films on strong female characters not a relevant data point on MCU audience composition.

Edited November 16, 2023 by sfcityduck

[Mr Sneeze]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:09 AM, VintageComics said:

I read everything, as do people who don't post here. 

And I don't think you can have a deep conversation in a "sentence or two" and move on, which really is the problem if most people think they can. 

And that really is a root problem with social media. People have been programmed to think a soundbite is a sufficient response. It's a recipe for disagreement and nothing else, which is why I choose to expand my responses. 

The irony here is so rich I think I sharted.

[Buzzetta]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:07 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm going to say something that is very much in need of saying and it has been on my mind for a while. 

We KNOW that Hollywood is a cesspool for sexual misconduct. We KNOW that Disney has had it's share of allegations as have the rest of the industry. Weinstein was literally the tip of many icebergs. All the stories you've heard make up a small percentage. 

The stories you HAVE heard, like Cory Feldman's and those of many others have been hushed over the years were utterly BURIED to keep Hollywood looking good. 

I am really surprised at the absolute wall of support for an industry that has been literally built through exploitation as though they are the perfect teachers for the public now.

It's quite a dichotomy to watch happen in real time. 

I agree with that in regard to being the tip of the iceberg, but I would urge you to reconsider that the numbers are understated in other industries as well leading to more of a widespread problem than you believe. 

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 7:36 AM, VintageComics said:

More logical questions.

Is this forum male dominated?

Are Comic cons male dominated?

Is the comics hobby in general male dominated?

Are action movies, which are the core of the MCU male dominated?

Are non-action movies female dominated?

Are sports and sports viewers male dominated?

All reasonable questions that apply directly to the MCU discussion. 

 

Your questions are not logical because they identify only the challenge faced by the MCU not the opportunity it is pursuing.

The questions you should be asking are:

Are there more women than men in the domestic market? 

What attributes attract women to superhero movies (or sports if you think it relevant)?

What can a movie maker do to increase the appeal of a superhero movie to women?

THEN ask yourself the same question about domestic moviegoers of Asian ethnicity, male and female, and you will begin to understand why the MCU has elected to center their movies around more than white men.

 

 

[1950's war comics]

On 11/16/2023 at 7:27 AM, paqart said:

This is deliberately offensive and personal. Not that you haven't done it before, but this crosses the line. I made a comment that was related to someone else's post. I used the closest reference available and now you use it as an instrument of mockery. It is disrespectful and concerns a dead relative, which makes it disturbing.

As for research, as with all my research, I report what I find honestly. I went to King's College, London, which is primarily a medical school. They have what is likely one of the best medical libraries in the world. And yet, I was unable to find any of the papers that raise questions about the efficacy of certain vaccines in their library. It's strange because I was able to find the articles elsewhere, and even the King's library has hundreds of articles questioning the efficacy of other vaccines right up until 2020, when they all disappear. It seemed to me that their psychology section would have material on post-feminism, and it does, but the articles I found were all written from the same pro-feminist perspective. All by itself that was strange, because anyone who has done a proper literature review will know that there are always two or more sides to every question, no matter how obvious the answer might seem. It that case, it may be I was using the wrong search terms. It isn't my field or area of interest, so that is possible.

In fact, the first sign of a poor literature review is that every cited paper agrees with the author. When that happens, you have not found "scientific consensus" but a lazy researcher. It may be that papers on one or more facets of a question inadequately argue in favor of their conclusions, but those papers are there in the literature. Their prominence in the field or even their abundance is no guarantee of quality or whether they are correct. Anyone who has done a proper literature review would know this also.

Please don't engage in psychoanalysis without a license or first meeting the patient. It is against medical ethics and impolite besides.

Touche '   !!

[1950's war comics]

On 11/16/2023 at 7:36 AM, VintageComics said:

More logical questions.

Is this forum male dominated?

Are Comic cons male dominated?

Is the comics hobby in general male dominated?

Are action movies, which are the core of the MCU male dominated?

Are non-action movies female dominated?

Are sports and sports viewers male dominated?

All reasonable questions that apply directly to the MCU discussion. 

 

you are on a roll Roy and it is a joy to behold 

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:13 AM, sfcityduck said:

The question you ask is one of audience demographics. It can only be accurately answered by an actual survey of the audience. Discussing it here will yield only anecdotes. If isudience composition has been studied (and Disney probably has) the numbers are either proprietary or somewhere on the internet. So go look for the numbers. You can find them if they are accessible and get an answer to your question. 

Discussion without data is not really helpful. The fact you are not bringing data does not help your case.

The best source for that info would be tv shows. Why? The data is gathered. There are fewer entry barriers to tv viewing. 

That comic collectors are largely male is the challenge the MCU is trying to overcome by centering films on strong female characters not a relevant data point on MCU audience composition.

Are you aware that @jaybuck43 is an expert in the field we're discussing?

And that he produced that graph originally as a rebuttal to me?

And that I asked Jaybuck for MORE DATA to better understand the graph?

And that NOBODY so far has produced more data but lots of replies?

I think your post is better directed to the person who introduced the graph in the first place and not to me, right?

 

On 11/16/2023 at 11:13 AM, sfcityduck said:

it also misses the point. The data relevant to this discussion is whether MCU movies with strong female characters getting extensive screen time do better with women than those that do not. 

You might be the only person in this entire thread that is asking this question and the question doesn't make sense in the context of the discussion. 

Follow me...

We WERE DISCUSSING why Marvels has done poorly. 

Many said it was "poor writing", "fatigue", "terrible villains" and whatever else.

I stood on the position that it was the ESG movement influencing corporate decisions from the outside and pressuring movie houses to add more inclusive content into films in the same way ALL CORPORATIONS are being influenced to hire more diverse staff. I mean, the evidence is overwhelming. You quite LITERALLY HAVE LAWS stating this (affirmative action) and those laws have extended into corporate ideologies forming their art and movies. 

I simply stated that by putting MORE women into tights, which is Marvel / Disney has done, HAS MISSED THE MARK and women aren't as interested as Disney thought they were. 

The question YOU are asking above PROVES my point. It's not whether they are in the lead role or not, it's whether that lead role is well written TO APPEAL TO WOMEN. 

------------------------------------------

Women OUT of tights do far better in appealing to women than women in tights. That's the entire premise of my point. 

Again, I will point to Evey in V for Vendetta, which are 2 of my 3 daughter's favorite films. 

Bridges of Madison County (one of my favorite films) where Meryl Streep is the obvious hero in the movie, QUITE LITERALLY OVERSHADOWING ONE OF THE GREATEST ROLE MODELS IN THE HISTORY OF MOVIES - Clint Eastwood. 

Wonder Woman I'd have to watch again ( really dislike DC movies so I have a hard time with most of them) but I think they did a reasonable job of placing her into a role in a way that was believable and relatable to SOME women in B v S - she played the part of the powerful CEO / Superhero - almost like a counterpoint to Tony Stark in the MCU.

 

Putting women into poorly written lead roles just to attempt to appeal to women is as patronizing and demeaning as hiring someone for a job just because they're a women when they're not the best fit for the job. It's offensive and borders on sadistic. 

And pointing that out is difficult because it's not popular, but if you polled all women, I'm betting most would agree. 

 

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:07 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm going to say something that is very much in need of saying and it has been on my mind for a while. 

We KNOW that Hollywood is a cesspool for sexual misconduct. We KNOW that Disney has had it's share of allegations as have the rest of the industry. Weinstein was literally the tip of many icebergs. All the stories you've heard make up a small percentage. 

The stories you HAVE heard, like Cory Feldman's and those of many others have been hushed over the years were utterly BURIED to keep Hollywood looking good. 

I am really surprised at the absolute wall of support for an industry that has been literally built through exploitation as though they are the perfect teachers for the public now.

It's quite a dichotomy to watch happen in real time. 

Squirrels. 

We have all heard of the casting couch. But we also have all heard and seen or heard of sexual harassment in our own industries. It is indemic. It was mostly a product of male privilege / toxic masculinity / power trips etc. (pick your terms) which are not unique to Hollywood.

Weinstein was mostly not a Disney problem. Read the filings in the NY venues suits against Weinstein if you want details.

None of this is germane to the discussion. You are just throwing mud against the wall in the hope some sticks. But it backfires. Because if the problem is a culture of sexual harassment and oppression then we should be focusing on solutions such as empowering women culturally, politically. Etc.

[1950's war comics]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:38 AM, VintageComics said:

Are you aware that @jaybuck43 is an expert in the field we're discussing?

And that he produced that graph originally as a rebuttal to me?

And that I asked Jaybuck for MORE DATA to better understand the graph?

And that NOBODY so far has produced more data but lots of replies?

I think your post is better directed to the person who introduced the graph in the first place and not to me, right?

 

You might be the only person in this entire thread that is asking this question and the question doesn't make sense in the context of the discussion. 

Follow me...

We WERE DISCUSSING why Marvels has done poorly. 

Many said it was "poor writing", "fatigue", "terrible villains" and whatever else.

I stood on the position that it was the ESG movement influencing corporate decisions from the outside and pressuring movie houses to add more inclusive content into films in the same way ALL CORPORATIONS are being influenced to hire more diverse staff. I mean, the evidence is overwhelming. You quite LITERALLY HAVE LAWS stating this (affirmative action) and those laws have extended into corporate ideologies forming their art and movies. 

I simply stated that by putting MORE women into tights, which is Marvel / Disney has done, HAS MISSED THE MARK and women aren't as interested as Disney thought they were. 

The question YOU are asking above PROVES my point. It's not whether they are in the lead role or not, it's whether that lead role is well written TO APPEAL TO WOMEN. 

------------------------------------------

Women OUT of tights do far better in appealing to women than women in tights. That's the entire premise of my point. 

Again, I will point to Evey in V for Vendetta, which are 2 of my 3 daughter's favorite films. 

Bridges of Madison County (one of my favorite films) where Meryl Streep is the obvious hero in the movie, QUITE LITERALLY OVERSHADOWING ONE OF THE GREATEST ROLE MODELS IN THE HISTORY OF MOVIES - Clint Eastwood. 

Wonder Woman I'd have to watch again ( really dislike DC movies so I have a hard time with most of them) but I think they did a reasonable job of placing her into a role in a way that was believable and relatable to SOME women in B v S - she played the part of the powerful CEO / Superhero - almost like a counterpoint to Tony Stark in the MCU.

 

Putting women into poorly written lead roles just to attempt to appeal to women is as patronizing and demeaning as hiring someone for a job just because they're a women when they're not the best fit for the job. It's offensive and borders on sadistic. 

And pointing that out is difficult because it's not popular, but if you polled all women, I'm betting most would agree. 

 

i wish i could put my thoughts into words as brilliantly as you do Roy ! you are very gifted in the respect  ! i can only add my compliments although i wish i could do more to make these boards great again as you have done 

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:26 AM, Buzzetta said:

I agree with that in regard to being the tip of the iceberg, but I would urge you to reconsider that the numbers are understated in other industries as well leading to more of a widespread problem than you believe. 

How do you know what I believe or know? 

You're saying Hollywood, the sex capital of the world, the most openly indulgent place on earth, one of the wealthiest places on earth, one of the most shallow places on earth, one of the most beautiful places on earth, a place that is literally America's hedonistic playground can be compared to working at Shell Oil?

You're comparing sexual abuse in Hollywood to Wal-Mart.

Does that make sense to anyone?

Yeah, let's continue to use Hollywood as a vehicle to empower our children. This is cultural cannibalism at it's finest.