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

[paqart]

On 11/16/2023 at 12:01 PM, EastEnd1 said:

This is exactly right... every public company's challenge is to show constant growth to keep shareholders and Wall Street placated.  When your traditional market has reached maturity, as is the case with say young males with superhero movies, or sports fans with light beer, it's difficult to continue generating the growth that stakeholders are demanding.  So one way to overcome this is to try to secure new customers OUTSIDE your traditional base, say with females in the case of superhero movies, or the LGBTQ community in the case of beer.  These decisions are driven by the pursuit of profits and growth, not vast corporate conspiracies.  If the pursuit of that growth has an adjacency to some positive messages about the inclusivity of marginalized groups, or the empowerment of young girls, well all the better... corporations will certainly tout this as it plays well with most, especially the new customers they're targeting!  But that's just the icing on the cake... it's not the cake.  And btw, this strategy is not simple to execute and does carry risk... management spends months analyzing, testing and evaluating before green-lighting and committing resources.  It's not guaranteed to succeed, and quite often fails, so it's not done "willy-nilly".  But executed well, it can right a challenged ship.    

There is the problem with the idea that female leads in superhero movies leads to female backside in theater seats. Maybe women aren't interested in that kind of movie. My wife certainly isn't, nor is my daughter. At least, not any more. Of some interest, they did enjoy the early MCU. As soon as the female characters started putting down the male characters, they both lost interest. As in, I can't drag them to an MCU movie any longer. It's a funny thing, but maybe women like strong men, and don't like belligerent women. 

I was a CG animator for a few years, but I haven't liked any movie with animators as characters. I'm not wealthy, but have enjoyed many movies with wealthy characters. I am half Swedish, but do not seek out movies with Swedish actors. My wife is Chinese, but she doesn't go out to see every movie with a Chinese character. When she does see them, she is often critical. The reason is that the characters on screen are disrespectful of others, or they have played up the "Chinese" aspect of the character to such a degree that she finds it nauseating. She does like Chinese-subtitled Korean soap operas, particularly those that center on historical events from hundreds of years ago. The waken American usage of ethnic minorities is, in her opinion, insulting.

I have run into a number of women who also find the portrayal of women in movies as not only offensive, but a deliberate slight to them because they have chosen to raise a family. They don't want to see another wealthy sexy single woman in a tight skirt bossing around groveling men as she shuffles through her rolodex of one night stands. To them, that is an empty and unappealing life. Nor do they find it amusing to watch timorous men obey the commands of a female CEO in a Chanel pant suit. That kind of role-reversal is not, in many cases, a true role reversal.

If you look at the way different people report the same incident, you know that different people see the same things differently. A man might think he's made a polite offer of a dinner date, the woman may be uninterested and call it harrassment. When you put a script together with the intention of reversing roles, but those roles are based on a flawed perception of the people, you won't get role reversal. What you get is something that doesn't make any sense. For instance, Pepper Potts as CEO of Stark International. This is all the more true when the previously loyal and considerate Pepper suddenly starts treating Tony Stark as if he was a smelly dog.

The issue, as @VintageComics keeps saying, is the stories themselves, not the demographics the characters belong to. That is irrelevant. Trying to force us to think those things are relevant simply turns off the audience. How many of you have seen a video on Twitter of some crazy screaming person Do you leave the volume on or turn it off I turn it off, and rarely watch the entire video. Who wants to see a crazy screaming person, not me. I react the same way to forcefed messaging. Some don't even notice because they're either so used to it or they actually like it. That doesn't mean it isn't there.

 

[CAHokie]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:03 PM, jaybuck43 said:

There has only ever been one Space Jam.  LeBron doesn't act in movies.

Judging by his flopping ability on the court and his fake crying, I though that he would have Oscar / Emmy winning performances. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by CAHokie
Added word

[paqart]

On 11/16/2023 at 12:13 PM, sfcityduck said:

 

When hiring a CEO there are never really “best” candidates.  There are multiple candidates who can do the job. Hiring is ultimately just a choice between candidates who both are qualified on paper - leap of faith. 

 

 

 

I disagree strongly with this. I've never hired a CEO, but have hired many other people. It is a very rare occasion when any of the candidates meet my standards for being hired. For that reason, I almost always have to choose from a small group of people that look like they might grow into the job. At Sony, I participated in the search for someone who would be (I think) president of an LLC. We didn't find anyone we liked, so we went without. Instead, the existing COO did the job.

It is very difficult to find someone who can do the job. Finding someone you like is even harder. The idea you can find someone capable and you like in multiple racial and gender groups is ludicrous. Maybe it has happened a few times in the history of civilization, but I don't see how it could be expected. More likely, standards on the first two items are compromised to satisfy the third.

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:00 PM, jaybuck43 said:

ESG is not an investment vehicle.  It's an investment strategy.  The concept behind ESG scores is that investors are more likely to get a better return on investment from companies who have embraced long term issues and planned for them.  For instance Apple relies heavily on Rare Earth for its iPhones, whose sales make up 52% of their revenue.  70% of rare earth comes from China.  This means that Apple is heavily reliant on China and must maintain good relations to ensure continued delivery.  How do you reflect this issue (and how Apple deals with it) in their annual report?  How can investors know about this?  So you create a score based off some metric you design.  OK Apple has a bunch of former trade officials working for them in a government relations department?  They get an "A".  Samsung doesn't?  They get an "F".   Microsoft (they still make phones right?) has a government relations departments but fully staffed by Yale graduates?  "C".  Take all the various grades you've assigned and it generates a score.  Voila.  ESG.  Theoretically (and so far in practice) a company with a higher ESG score SHOULD be a better investment long term, since they're clearly more risk adverse.  

But... it's chicken and the egg.  Which came first?  The argument is that ESG leads to changes in policies, when in actuality it's more likely that ESGs are REFLECTING changes in policies.  To whit.  As I said, it's about grading companies planned response to long term issues.  So for instance, when #MeToo started, and there was a lot of talk about issues in the boardroom and lack of representation, the ISSUE becomes "hey companies might get bad PR for not having females, do you have a plan to address that?" ESG then kicks in and says "O, Disney has a plan for that, they get an A, Comcast doesn't have a plan for that they get an F".  It's not ESG pushing this, but rather reflecting issues in society.  

Vehicle / strategy = Tomato / tomato.

I'm well aware of what ESG is but I know that many aren't. 

The "chicken or the egg" part of the discussion is precisely the discussion we were trying to have, but some people had trouble even believing ESG was real, so thank you for validating that for everyone. 

How do you prove whether something reflects or affects policy would be a 150 page discussion for each example we chose to discuss, so we can't have that discussion here. 

We KNOW that part of corporate sustainability influences hiring processes, therefore ESG affects hiring processes. 

Specifically in this thread, this seems to be the simplified flowchart: ESG >> Corporations >> Employees >> Movies >> Viewers

So the question I have, is does ESG affect the art form (or end product) of a company?

 

 

 

 

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 9:26 AM, VintageComics said:

Can I focus on this for a second, because I really think it's the "white elephant" in the room. 

Most people "on the other side" of my points are trying to paint the opinions of people on THIS side as though we are trying to uncover a conspiracy. 

NOBODY has been talking about conspiracy.

More importantly, nobody on THIS side has been a "bad actor". All the "bad acting" seems to be coming from only one side. 

Every pot shot, accusation of intent, names and labels have without fail have come from one side of the discussion.

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

I've repeatedly stated that the ESG agenda is influencing corporate decision making. That's it.

Even Jaybuck43, who is a lawyer that specializes in entertainment and media hasn't denied it. Mr. Sneeze hasn't denied it. namisgr hasn't denied it. Buzzetta hasn't denied it. sfcityduck hasn't denied it. 

NOBODY HAS DENIED IT.

You know what's really strange?

This ESG investment vehicle is "Fuelling Wall Street" (those are the words of Bloomberg, Business Insider and Reuters News), driving 800 of the world's largest corporations and 200 world leaders to meet and discuss it regularly, so it is literally influencing every human on earth, and it's "been around for 20 years" as Jaybuck stated.

The world is surrounded by ESG ideology like oxygen, AND YET MOST HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS.

Even you were unaware, IIRC, right?

Weird that it's such a quiet topic.

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

The only point I've tried to discuss is how much the ESG agenda has influenced corporate decision making and by extension, the art form of making movies and film. 

That's it. 

I believe it's influenced everyone to a far greater degree than they realize, and more than some care to admit.

Others believe it hasn't.

This isn't conspiracy. It's just discussion about economics and influence of those economics on the art form.

So if anyone wants to discuss my points, this is it in a nutshell. 

No. You are saying that ESG has had a significant negative influence on the MCU. You have made that argument by based on a portrayal of ESG as something which it is not. You have done this to support an argument against centering movies on strong female characters. You have voiced a number of notions about women which are not really germane to supporting any arguments you are making about the MCU.

Not in parallel, you have also voiced the view, with which we all agree, that bad writing is undesirable. But having women or minority centered movies is not inherently "bad writing." So even if ESG has led to the MCU having more female or minority characters in lead roles, which I personally think is not as big a factor as profit seeking, then that's not a problem with ESG. The problem is the writing choices made. Great stories can be told about anything. Bad stories can be told about the greatest subjects. That's on the writers, directors, and overseers (if they have that level of micro-management control).

[paqart]

On 11/16/2023 at 12:57 PM, VintageComics said:

I genuinely don't want to continue to derail the topic to talk about sex but I've travelled extensively to every major US city many times over for comic cons, so I was speaking not only from extensive personal experiences but also from insight gained from spending time in these places and developing deep, lasting relationships with people in those places.

I also tend to be a bit of a historian on Hollywood due to my love for Vintage things and Vintage culture, hence the name. 

Sex is very much more "in your face" there than in any other city I've been to, whether it's Seattle,Chicago, NYC. 

Go to ANY nightclub, bougie dinner place or bar and you'll see what I mean. Most "fun" places look like a watered down version of a Great Gatsby or Wolf Of Wall Street movie, quite literally and after last call? Forget about it. Everyone is high and drunk and looking for where to go next. 

"Boys Town" is the LGBTQ's nickname for the area on Santa Monica Blvd in West Hollywood and it's one "in your face", unpretentious example. It's the largest LGBBTQ community in the US and walking down the street is an experience, especially at night.

West Hollywood in general though, is highly sexualized and is quite literally a world to itself. It's the epicentre of debauchery and in my opinion only rivalled by Vegas or Miami which tie for 2nd IMO.

Just walk the streets of West Hollywood one night on a weekend and everyone will see what I mean. 

The reason? The most "attractive" people in the world move there to make it in entertainment, so is it any wonder that their looks become the vehicles to success? It's literally supermodel central, every day, all day.

OK, carry on. 

 

That makes sense. I spent my free time driving to Yosemite to hike and paint watercolors. I didn't visit any of the places you mention. I also wasn't invited to any of the "wild" parties that were going on all over the place because it was obvious I wasn't interested. My view of that activity was narrow, and limited to the hot tub at my apartment complex, and observations within my office.

My apartment complex's hot tub, btw, had its share of intrigue. Enough that I sometimes wondered why I ever entered it after a swim. I had two apartments there, and numerous well-known celebrities lived there as well. For instance, Alyssa Milano, Gary Graham (Alien Nation, Star Trek), and the writer Donald Spoto, who wrote numerous Hollywood biographies. One guy was the casting director of the Travolta film "Michael." His stories were easily the most shocking I've ever heard.

[paqart]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:01 PM, CAHokie said:

The real Space Jam right, not the one with LeBron? 

The one released in 1996 starring Michael Jordan. I don't know about another one with LeBron.

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:03 PM, paqart said:

It's a funny thing, but maybe women like strong men, and don't like belligerent women. 

 

On 11/16/2023 at 1:03 PM, paqart said:

I have run into a number of women who also find the portrayal of women in movies as not only offensive

 

On 11/16/2023 at 1:03 PM, paqart said:

Trying to force us to think those things are relevant simply turns off the audience.

I have been on every single dating app over the years.

YOU CANNOT IMAGINE HOW MANY WOMEN PUT THIS STUFF THAT PAQART WROTE ABOVE IN THEIR DATING APPS. 

They write things like:

"I want a real man who takes the lead."

"I want a man's man."

"I want a man, not a boy."

"I want a real man who can think independently"

"I want my man to be a man so I can be a women."

"I want a man to make me feel safe and secure so that I can be a woman for him"

We are literally living in the most dysfunctional time in human history, where the media is telling men what women want, is telling women what men want but when women are crying out AROUND AND IN SPITE OF THE MEDIA for what THEY want, NOBODY IS LISTENING.

And then we label the men as misogynists for pointing it out. 

Go argue with these women about what they want, not with me.

THIS IS literally a CLOWN WORLD we live in right now. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:19 PM, paqart said:

My apartment complex's hot tub, btw, had its share of intrigue. Enough that I sometimes wondered why I ever entered it after a swim. I had two apartments there, and numerous well-known celebrities lived there as well. For instance, Alyssa Milano, Gary Graham (Alien Nation, Star Trek), and the writer Donald Spoto, who wrote numerous Hollywood biographies. One guy was the casting director of the Travolta film "Michael." His stories were easily the most shocking I've ever heard.

That's just a little "brush" you had with Hollywood through degrees of separation. Imagine immersing yourself in it the way most that live there do. 

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:15 PM, sfcityduck said:

No. You are saying that ESG has had a significant negative influence on the MCU. You have made that argument by based on a portrayal of ESG as something which it is not. You have done this to support an argument against centering movies on strong female characters. You have voiced a number of notions about women which are not really germane to supporting any arguments you are making about the MCU.

My perception was that the MCU was influenced by ESG and the discussion got derailed by bad actors. I'm glad it's back on track again. 

My logic is pretty consistent in everything I write. Even Jaybuck just wrote that it's a "chicken and egg" discussion, which is the crux of my point on ESG, so where did I portray ESG as something it isn't?

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 9:32 AM, VintageComics said:

If you hire based on math vs merit, you are inadvertently hiring unqualified people over qualified people because merit is no longer the only criteria.

This actually is borne out with scientific studies in egalitarianism in some of the countries with the greatest egalitarian laws like Scandinavia and other parts of Europe (and I think Paqart can speak well to this, because he spent a lot of time studying and living in Europe).

But I will say that this isn't a discussion point for this thread, or this forum. I simply brought it up as a supporting point to my greater point that putting anyone into a role that isn't well suited for them, simply to represent them is counter productive to the greater cause. 

It literally puts a focus on the flaws in the end product rather than on the message they're trying to convey. It may not be evident to everyone, but this is actually what the scientific literature supports. 

And quite frankly, what viewers have been saying about the MCU for a few years now. 

 

Have you ever been part of a corporate hiring process?  I have.

No one is hiring based on "math vs. merit." There is no "math" in hiring a corporate officer, lawyer, etc. There's just experience, education, personality, attractiveness (this may be the worst and most influential hiring factor), reptuation, recommendations, and other "soft" factors that are often not predictive of anything. These are judgment calls not science. 

You never know how someone will do in a new role because past performance is no guarantee of future success. CEO history teaches us, even at Disney, that a hand-picked successor - a no. 2 in waiting, may become an example of the Peter Principle when promoted to no. 1. That does not mean that the no. 2 was "unqualified," such a person may well have been the most qualified from a "math" perspective, it means he was unsuccessful.

The notion that there are "unqualified" versus "qualified" candidates is an entirely false premise. Usually there are many "qualified" candidates - and the art form is to try to predict which would be successful.  What the anti-bias training seeks to do is cause hirers to realize that just because you had a good run under a white man does not mean that a non-white man cannot do the job. If you look at the CEOs in corporate America today, you will see that there are many examples of female and minority CEOs who are very successful and also examples of those that aren't. Just like with white males. Which is the sole point of such hiring: Ensuring that irrelevant factors don't blind you to good candidates.

Frankly, to my eyes your view of corporate hiring comes across as second hand message board info not consistent with the actual experience that most of us in those worlds have had.

 

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:33 PM, sfcityduck said:

No one is hiring based on "math vs. merit."

Affirmative action was just that. It is choosing people from groups based on math and not merit. 

The problem with this sort of strategy is the same with any other flawed strategy, it pretends to address root problems but only addresses symptoms. 

Without addressing symptoms, you eventually run out of bandages and the patient suffers a worse death than if you'd addressed the symptom in the first place. 

 And you just keep adding more unnecessary insults. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by VintageComics

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 9:37 AM, jaybuck43 said:

 

This is the most interesting stat.  Because the overwhelming majority of folks on this site are Boomers or GenXers.  And the clear takeaway from this stat is that our views are the least important of potential moviegoers if the goal is attracting new viewers for superhero movies.  Which sort of renders every opinion offered on this thread irrelevant. LOL!

[skypinkblu]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:24 PM, VintageComics said:

I want a real man who takes the lead."

"I want a man's man."

"I want a man, not a boy."

"I want a real man who can think independently"

"I want my man to be a man so I can be a women."

"I want a man to make me feel safe and secure so that I can be a woman for him"

If it's a dating app, I think they are probably embellishing while fishing for dates.

Speaking as one of the female majority here, I've never needed a male to make me feel like a woman..never dreamt about a strong male. Except for one time when I was 5 and I found out boys could write in the snow and I could not, I've never thought of males as anything other than equals. 

I'm waiting to see the Marvels till they are on TV, main reason is, despite trying to watch Captain Marvel twice, my favorite character was the Cat.

 

[CAHokie]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:22 PM, paqart said:

The one released in 1996 starring Michael Jordan. I don't know about another one with LeBron.

[sfcityduck]

On 11/16/2023 at 10:24 AM, VintageComics said:

 

 

I have been on every single dating app over the years.

YOU CANNOT IMAGINE HOW MANY WOMEN PUT THIS STUFF THAT PAQART WROTE ABOVE IN THEIR DATING APPS. 

They write things like:

"I want a real man who takes the lead."

"I want a man's man."

"I want a man, not a boy."

"I want a real man who can think independently"

"I want my man to be a man so I can be a women."

"I want a man to make me feel safe and secure so that I can be a woman for him"

We are literally living in the most dysfunctional time in human history, where the media is telling men what women want, is telling women what men want but when women are crying out AROUND AND IN SPITE OF THE MEDIA for what THEY want, NOBODY IS LISTENING.

And then we label the men as misogynists for pointing it out. 

Go argue with these women about what they want, not with me.

THIS IS literally a CLOWN WORLD we live in right now. 

Another anecdote. Does anyone use dating apps anymore? Not the youth. In any event, anglers offer what they think the fish want. Your post is not logic or science.

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:43 PM, sfcityduck said:

Another anecdote. Does anyone use dating apps anymore? Not the youth. In any event, anglers offer what they think the fish want. Your post is not logic or science.

So any anecdote from me is "not science", and the fact that I reflect the values of 3 daughters, a step daughter, several exes and many female friends are summarily dismissed but every anecdote from anyone who disagrees with me is a worthy contribution. Got it. 

CLOWN WORLD.

Most MEN in this thread outside of those who are in families probably rarely even talk to women but have all sorts of opinions about them. 

I am not trying to say that ALL women think the same. I AM saying that traditional women are being silenced and told they are WRONG. 

You know what the greatest virus in the world is? The media, and the disease is those who buy it, hook line and sinker. 

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:41 PM, CAHokie said:

Jordan released The Last Dance to cement his legacy. Lebron released that to try to cement his.

 

[pemart1966]

On 11/15/2023 at 8:43 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Where is Silvermane in all this?

That same question was asked 5 pages earlier but bears repeating for a third time - WHERE IS SILVERMANE???

[VintageComics]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:43 PM, sfcityduck said:

Does anyone use dating apps anymore? Not the youth. In any event, anglers offer what they think the fish want. Your post is not logic or science.

I'm VERY interested to know more about this data.

In my experience, because I travel a lot I find dating apps and their demographics vary greatly city to city. 

Do you have any insights to share?

And what do you mean about "youth"? Which age groups?

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

My "logic" comes from CONVERSATIONS I HAVE HAD WITH WOMEN I'VE EITHER BEEN MARRIED TO OR DATED OR HAVE BEEN A FATHER TO or total strangers I have zero interest in other than the conversation (and I've probably had 100s of convos at this point on the topic). Not an expert by any means but pretty well versed in the topic and at LEAST above average. 

Where does your logic on the topic come from? Your laptop, your cell phone or your personal experiences?