Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp
ANOTHER MOVIE WITH A FEMALE LEAD OH NO  |
i would also cast a female lead if that will generate more revenue for the publicly traded company, whos primary legal obligation is to satisfy the stockholders.
of course that is what the computers crunching out the data and patterns being fed into it would say too.
it's the obvious strategy until that pattern is normalized, then they have to move onto the next thing.
i predict it will be asian actors. or just plain old non-white actors. probably female as well. that way it captures more female audience, and the male audience will always fantasize about women so it's okay.
it's all about the money.
why cast a male actor, when you can make more casting a female? it's only the logical thing to do.
my only complaint is it's the same fucking type of character.
some person that's "been on their own, since forever" and rebellious and all that. plus the fact that it's a female kinda makes it even more obvious that they're milking some kinda social justice equality demand.
it will be very obvious 20 years from now when critics look back and review movies of this age... actually it's very obvious already.
but you can't deny the fact that it boils down to money. it's purely a strategic move. otherwise they woulda did it 30 years ago.
don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a female lead. but it's blatantly obvious that a lot of production companies and gaming companies are trying to be "inclusive" of everyone, TRYING to appear to take a liberal stance on equality and all that stuff...
but it's obvious that that's just a facade, it just boils down to "inclusive" meaning "more people watching/buying movies/games" meaning more money.
nothing wrong with trying to make more money by expanding your audience. but it's definitely not because of equality or whatever. they definitely wouldn't do it if it mean making less money.