WB's BARBIE THE MOVIE starring Margot Robbie (2023) 7 7

[sfcityduck]

On 7/31/2023 at 9:33 AM, namisgr said:

'Snowflake' and 'triggered' don't capture the distaste for people's concern with discrimination and intolerance the way derogatory use of 'censored' does.

The censored word is not advocating for discrimination or intolerance. It's misuse as a false right wing political tag line is probably the reason it was banned. The point was to get politics out of this thread. Something that many seem to be resisting. 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/31/2023 at 4:54 AM, Gatsby77 said:

 

Four westerns have won Best Picture. Three of the four were from 1990 to present. The only other one was from the 1930s -- in terms of the Academy Awards (a proxy for both quality and "cultural relevance"), the westerns of the 1950s-1960s are entirely absent.

 

I would not call the Oscars the touchstone of cultural relevance.  What superhero movie has won a best picture Oscar.  That LOTR won was more than a bit of a surprise, but its cultural relevance cannot be underestimated.  I'd say Westerns hit their Apex in the 1940s and 1950s, both the movie theaters and tv were saturated with westerns.  That turned in the 1960s. 

But this has nothing to do with Barbie, a movie that is generating huge buzz and a big gate.

 

[jdandns]

On 7/30/2023 at 12:58 PM, drotto said:

Tell that to Taylor Sheridan. Seems to me he has the hottest streaming shows going right now, many of which are essentially modern day westerns. 

"Justified" is also very much a modern Western (at least the original series was, the current revival has a different vibe, so far.)

It definitely remains a viable genre as is can still be used in different ways to say a lot of different things.

[Buzzetta]

On 7/31/2023 at 11:07 AM, CAHokie said:

I still can’t believe that word is banned. Lol

Do we add snowflake and triggered next? 

I know, and I am going to use moving forward as it was originally intended.

I was literally going to post in a certain other thread, "I woke up at 6:30 am on a day off to the sound of three helicopters circling above my house" which you know is actually true and what the helicopters were doing, and the word in the post was edited.  I mean really?

Hot garbage. 

Could someone please move the cursor to the upper right hand corner of this post and hit those three little dots. Report is the first option and file a complaint with, "Masking a censored word through changing the color of the text."

 

[Gatsby77]

On 7/31/2023 at 12:49 PM, sfcityduck said:

What superhero movie has won a best picture Oscar. 

Precisely my point.

Three westerns have won Best Picture since 1990 - so it's not exactly a dead genre.

And zero superhero movies have won Best Picture, despite their incredible commercial success.

Cultural relevance is multi-dimensional.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/31/2023 at 9:58 AM, Gatsby77 said:

Precisely my point.

Three westerns have won Best Picture since 1990 - so it's not exactly a dead genre.

And zero superhero movies have won Best Picture, despite their incredible commercial success.

Cultural relevance is multi-dimensional.

Or winning the Oscar is not the same as mass popularity. I have been talking about audience connection.  Clearly, Barbie is a magnet.

Edited July 31, 2023 by sfcityduck

[Cat]

On 8/1/2023 at 3:00 AM, sfcityduck said:

Or winning the Oscar is not the same as mass popularity.

Or Oscars and audiences are vastly out of touch with each other. 

[jdandns]

"Birdman" which won in 2015 is, at a minimum, super-hero adjacent, and last year's winner "Everything Everywhere All At Once" absolutely contains super-hero elements.  

Edited July 31, 2023 by jdandns

[Buzzetta]

There have also been quite a few Westerns that are cinematic masterpieces with either a message to send, "Unforgiven", or are basically a "how to" guide for film itself like the "Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" in terms of pacing, camera, score, scenery, location et all. 

I never got into the John Wayne westerns.  As a kid and still as an adult I find the majority of them hokey.   I think it was @Bosco685 that around a decade ago was surprised I had never seen and suggested for me to see, "The Wild Bunch" and that was excellent and that has ranked up there as a favorite within the genre.

As far as Barbie?  I will actually sit down and watch this when it is available for streaming.  Now to be fair, I will also watch Mission Impossible when that is available for streaming.  Oppenheimer I may have to go to the theater myself to see as no one within my circle wants to sit through it.  

[CGC Mike]

On 7/31/2023 at 11:07 AM, CAHokie said:

I still can’t believe that word is banned. Lol

Do we add snowflake and triggered next? 

What word was it?

[CAHokie]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:09 PM, CGC Mike said:

What word was it?

 

[CGC Mike]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:11 PM, CAHokie said:

 

You can tell me.

[sd2416]

On 7/31/2023 at 12:09 PM, CGC Mike said:

What word was it?

1 word, 1 syllable
Past tense of wake. 

[Poutine]

Bake?

[Buzzetta]

Here is my question in readily comparing the numbers on streaming movies btw @drotto @CAHokie and @sfcityduck and I do not pretend to know the answer. 

How do we accurately compare the numbers on shows when streaming services are al a carte?

When it comes to comparing the numbers of one movie against another we can compare box office and that is simply weighing in on someone's opportunity cost in what they will see at a given point.  When it comes to streaming movies, you must first actually invest in the service and then decide to watch the movie.

I would love to see Yellowstone and see what all the fuss is about.  I would love to see Star Trek Strange New Worlds and see what the fuss is all about.  I do not want to subscribe to yet another streaming platform after I already am paying for or have access to, Max, Peacock, Apple+, Disney+, Amazon Prime Video, and Netflix. 

So here is my question.

Platform "A" has 1,000,000 subscribers and it's star program has 500,000 streams.

Platform "B" has 5,000,000 subscribers and it's star program has 2,000,000 streams.

Is the show on "A" more successful because it has a better ratio of streams to subscribers?  Is "B" more successful because it has more streams?  Can an argument be made that a single program is luring subscribers to that particular platform?

I honestly do not know so I am asking.  

How is all of this gauged? 

[CGC Mike]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:13 PM, sd2416 said:

1 word, 1 syllable
Past tense of wake. 

Ah.  After seeing this posted in several spots, I decided that we could do without that word.  

[drotto]

On 7/31/2023 at 12:43 PM, sfcityduck said:

The censored word is not advocating for discrimination or intolerance. It's misuse as a false right wing political tag line is probably the reason it was banned. The point was to get politics out of this thread. Something that many seem to be resisting. 

It is impossible to completely remove politics from movie discussions.  When the creators and cast of the film have been open and honest about some of the messaging included in the film, and it is part of the public discourse beyond this forum, it is going to happen.  As long as it is done respectfully and in context of the film, I do not see it as an issue. It therefor becomes very difficult to fully discuss a film without touching on those elements. 

[namisgr]

On 7/31/2023 at 12:43 PM, sfcityduck said:

The censored word is not advocating for discrimination or intolerance. 

That's what I wrote and what you quoted.  I wrote that its derogatory use does, not its well established definition.  

Edited July 31, 2023 by namisgr

[drotto]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:15 PM, Buzzetta said:

Here is my question in readily comparing the numbers on streaming movies btw @drotto @CAHokie and @sfcityduck and I do not pretend to know the answer. 

How do we accurately compare the numbers on shows when streaming services are al a carte?

When it comes to comparing the numbers of one movie against another we can compare box office and that is simply weighing in on someone's opportunity cost in what they will see at a given point.  When it comes to streaming movies, you must first actually invest in the service and then decide to watch the movie.

I would love to see Yellowstone and see what all the fuss is about.  I would love to see Star Trek Strange New Worlds and see what the fuss is all about.  I do not want to subscribe to yet another streaming platform after I already am paying for or have access to, Max, Peacock, Apple+, Disney+, Amazon Prime Video, and Netflix. 

So here is my question.

Platform "A" has 1,000,000 subscribers and it's star program has 500,000 streams.

Platform "B" has 5,000,000 subscribers and it's star program has 2,000,000 streams.

Is the show on "A" more successful because it has a better ratio of streams to subscribers?  Is "B" more successful because it has more streams?  Can an argument be made that a single program is luring subscribers to that particular platform?

I honestly do not know so I am asking.  

How is all of this gauged? 

That is a massive issue in Hollywood right now,  and is one of the biggest issues in the current strikes.  Streamers have been very resistant to releasing real numbers, and we know they have them.  Netflix is better than most, but beyond that we rely on Neislen, Parrot and Samba to estimate numbers based on different and usually indirect analytics.  So the best numbers are likely marginal at best.

 

In addition, tradition TV has always been base on estimated viewers or households.  Now streamers tend to release minutes watched. But that is an inherently bad statistic, because all shows are different lengths, and have a different number of episodes.  So this number will inherently favor shows with longer run times, and more episodes availible. Especially since new seasons tend to spike demend for older episodes which is included in that minutes watched number.  Also, the minutes watched gives no indication if the viewer finished watching an episode or season, and no indication how many people were watching a given viewing.  As you see a rather poor statistic.  What we need is the streamers to report how many times each episode was watched to completion and estimate actual views based of that. That is what they do not want to give us.

[namisgr]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:16 PM, drotto said:

It is impossible to completely remove politics from movie discussions.  When the creators and cast of the film have been open and honest about some of the messaging included in the film, and it is part of the public discourse beyond this forum, it is going to happen.  As long as it is done respectfully and in context of the film, I do not see it as an issue. It therefor becomes very difficult to fully discuss a film without touching on those elements. 

Given that women and girls are showing as the predominant viewers of the film, it would be nice to have a variety of their viewpoints here.  The general consensus from reading sites that collect layperson reviews is that a message for empowerment and the freedom to choose direction in life is enjoyable for young women.  And as the example posted earlier of dramatic changes in gender representation in medical practice over the past 60 years attests, it's a message that's been impactful for quite a while.

Edited July 31, 2023 by namisgr