Female leads ruining great movie franchise's which were all male leads once?

Avatar image for carljohnsoncj
#1 Edited by carljohnsonCJ (548 posts) -

Ghostbusters 2016, Men in Black International, Ocean's 8, Star Wars and many more. Also Charlies Angel's 2000 was tolerable, now shitty teen actresses going to be Charlies Angels.

I wonder how can a shitty looking, shitty unfunny actress like Melissa Macarthy getting action roles.

Is it me or Hollywood deliberately shitting on us? Or is it a new gen thing?

Discuss

Well?

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#2 Edited by LJS9502_basic (167151 posts) -

Misogny is not a good look. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

Avatar image for pyro1245
#3 Posted by pyro1245 (5264 posts) -

Damn dude.

Hollywood has been garbage for far longer than that and it doesn't have anything to do with casting.

Avatar image for r-gamer
#4 Posted by R-Gamer (641 posts) -

Get woke go broke. Yes it's a thing. People will always say "buh buh Captain Marvel or Black Panther" The difference is it's ok to make movies based off original heroes. People will watch that. But the whole race and gender swapping thing almost always fails.

Avatar image for crimsonbrute
#5 Edited by CrimsonBrute (25468 posts) -

I have no problem with diversity unless it is forced. Unfortunately most Hollywood movies are doing it.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#6 Edited by uninspiredcup (35066 posts) -

Can't think of any, it's usually down to bad writing and direction. Most of the people involved in Ghostbusters for example were very talented comedians.

There are people who thinly veil their hatred of woman as a scape-goat and vice versa, attempt to hide behind gender to excuse how piss-poor the movie is.

Avatar image for judaspete
#7 Posted by judaspete (3137 posts) -

Race and gender swaping has been going on as long as Hollywood has existed, it just used to switch characters from minorities and females into white men to broaden the appeal. Justin Lin ( director of the better Fast and Furious movies) shopped around his script for Better Luck Tomorrow for years because studios kept trying to cast white actors instead of asian ones. Finally got MTV Movies to agree to a small budget and limited release, but at least it was the movie he wanted to make. The MIT card counting scheme that the movie 21 was based on cast Jim Sturgess to play a character that was asian in real life. Thats off the top of my head, but this used to be pretty typical in Hollywood.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#8 Edited by Sevenizz (4075 posts) -

Hollywood has skewed so far left that they don’t even know how to make a good movie anymore. More attention is paid to making a movie politically correct than a script, writing, etc. Box office has been falling in recent years and the excuses they use are streaming or Netflix when the real issues are sitting right in front of their carefully sculpted noses. Make a damn movie we want to see and stop making movies you think we need to see to promote your political agendas. We really, REALLY don’t care - and the numbers prove it.

Ib4 thread lock.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#9 Posted by Serraph105 (34055 posts) -

@carljohnsoncj: Ghostbusters 2016, Men in Black International, Ocean's 8, Star Wars and many more. Also Charlies Angel's 2000 was tolerable, now shitty teen actresses going to be Charlies Angels.

Of those I've only seen Ocean's 8, which, for the record, good movie. Oh, and I've seen every recent Star Wars and enjoyed those as well. I don't really understand how you could argue Star Wars was a "gender swap" thing considering that all of the old characters are still in that series.

MIB international also had Chris Hemsworth as a co-star so I don't think "gender swapping" had anything to do with that movie's failure. As far as Charlies, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the original is pretty universally seen as a bad movie, and was also filled with ladies.

Avatar image for r-gamer
#10 Posted by R-Gamer (641 posts) -

@judaspete: And now it's the opposite.

Avatar image for horgen
#11 Posted by Horgen (121180 posts) -

Sometimes I wonder if the movies with female lead, that Hollywood in general opt for gender swap so it feels forced and garbage so they can return to white men in leading roles again...

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#12 Edited by Sevenizz (4075 posts) -

@Serraph105: ‘As far as Charlies, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the original is pretty universally seen as a bad movie, and was also filled with ladies.’

The previous two movies were about camp, sexiness, and fun. Cameron Diaz was at the height of her bombshellness, Lucy Liu was an energetic newcomer, and Drew - well, she hired a good director. Judging by the reboot’s trailer (I haven’t seen the movie), it looks as though they’re ignoring what fans enjoyed in the previous instalments - and even the tv show. This is a franchise sin. What’s funny is that they already tried to reboot the tv franchise a few years ago and that bombed hard. This movie is actually following what that show failed with.

Avatar image for KungfuKitten
#13 Edited by KungfuKitten (26800 posts) -

I don't think it has anything to do with female leads. It's just that they are made for all the wrong reasons (capitalize on original success/men are not OK) and don't have the good ideas/writing necessary to make a good movie.

It also seems so unnecessary. There are so many good movies with good female leads or characters in them. Why would you take something with fans, and then genderswap it? I guess that could be fun? I enjoy genderswapping in fanart of known IP's but it seems like a very small idea to base an entire movie around. I think that's the biggest problem with these movies that are so much worse than the originals.

Avatar image for tenaka2
#14 Posted by tenaka2 (17227 posts) -

Male insecurity is a sad thing.

Avatar image for judaspete
#15 Edited by judaspete (3137 posts) -

@r-gamer said:

@judaspete: And now it's the opposite.

Yeah. I said that in the first sentence of my post. Hollywood has always switched gender and race of characters. They just used to change them to white males. They did this to the point where we all just started thinking of white male leads as a default. Now they're doing it in the other direction and people flip out like it's some giant conspiracy pushing some agenda.

Hollywood is going to do whatever they think will make the most money. There is more diverse casting due to changing demographics and a global audience. There is no conspiracy, this is just free market capitalism at work.

Avatar image for speeny
#16 Posted by Speeny (1978 posts) -

It doesn't bother me. I enjoyed Captain Marvel. But it only becomes an issue for me personally when it feels like they're forcing the whole "feminist" thing.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#17 Edited by Solaryellow (5171 posts) -

@carljohnsoncj said:

I wonder how can a shitty looking, shitty unfunny actress like Melissa Macarthy getting action roles.

She is quite unfunny and unappealing as far as acting goes. Mike & Molly was entertaining thanks to the cast w/o including her.

Avatar image for r-gamer
#18 Posted by R-Gamer (641 posts) -

@judaspete: Except it's been a financial failure in almost every circumstance. Perhaps they will get the memo though as the losses keep piling up.

Avatar image for volsung
#19 Posted by Volsung (324 posts) -

It's certainly not Daisy Ridley's fault that Disney has no fucking clue what they're doing with Star Wars. Haven't seen the others you mentioned.

Avatar image for judaspete
#20 Edited by judaspete (3137 posts) -

@r-gamer: XXX 3, Baywatch, and Skyscraper all bombed recently. Do you think Hollywood will stop casting buff bald dudes anytime soon?

Also, Shaft bombed the same weekend as MIB, and that movie got criticised for not being woke enough.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#22 Posted by mrbojangles25 (44402 posts) -

Disagree. Movies are bad because they are bad, not because they cast female leads or reboot franchises with a feminine twist.

With that said, I think the pandering needs to stop. Most of the "give me a break" exasperations I've heard during the "girl power" scene at the big fight in Avengers: End Game were from women.

A movie won't succeed simply by virtue of whatever progressive cause it is catering to; it needs to be a good movie in it's own right.

Case in point: Captain Marvel. Worst movie in the MCU because it tried to pander and didn't put in effort anywhere else. Now, if they got Kathy Bates to star in it, it might actually be enjoyable (if not believable, I mean Ms. Bates flying around shooting energy and stuff? But damn can she act).

@LJS9502_basic said:

Misogny is not a good luck. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

Pretty much this. They are bad movies regardless of who was the main star/s.

Avatar image for judaspete
#23 Edited by judaspete (3137 posts) -

@Serraph105 said:

@carljohnsoncj: Ghostbusters 2016, Men in Black International, Ocean's 8, Star Wars and many more. Also Charlies Angel's 2000 was tolerable, now shitty teen actresses going to be Charlies Angels.

Of those I've only seen Ocean's 8, which, for the record, good movie. Oh, and I've seen every recent Star Wars and enjoyed those as well. I don't really understand how you could argue Star Wars was a "gender swap" thing considering that all of the old characters are still in that series.

MIB international also had Chris Hemsworth as a co-star so I don't think "gender swapping" had anything to do with that movie's failure. As far as Charlies, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the original is pretty universally seen as a bad movie, and was also filled with ladies.

You know, you're right. Of the movies the op mentioned, half aren't even "gender swaps" to begin with.

MIB was never great and got progressively less decent with each installment. International just continued on this trajectory.

For Star Wars, the main characters in the original trilogy were two dudes and a lady. The main characters in the prequel trilogy were two dudes and a lady. The main characters in the Disney trilogy are two dudes and a lady.

What the hell is this thread even?

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
#24 Posted by R4gn4r0k (31608 posts) -

I think Ghostbusters was ruined by terrible writing and a terrible director. Some of the leads have actual talent.

Avatar image for saltslasher
#25 Posted by SaltSlasher (1318 posts) -

They are bad movies cause dumb people are making them, and only dumb people make the choices like making Aerial black. Which doesn't seem like big deal at first, til you look at every live action film they've done, all match the original characters, but now Aerial doesn't have red hair. So they gonna pull a Fantasic Four and make Johnny Storm black but keep his sister white, and stuff in basic line of dialogue to right this off.

Star Wars brought in old cast to hand it off, yet not rebooting, Rey is fine since many other leads. Ghostbusters used same name, yet didn't pass off to new gen, like The Mummy, it was just another Melissa McCarthy comedy/Tom Cruise action film, they were both ass, especially Ghostbusters for reversing the secretary role. Ocean's 8 was good, but its epitome of "doing girl version" of a movie, but at least story wise it worked, being main character's sister. To be actual woke, you do both genders, and stop doing opposite just for sake of being opposite, like making the ghetto black girl the tech genius instead of the street smart thug, instead they put an Asian girl. It shouldn't matter, but they always forcing people into boxes, and the boxes say 1 thing, and actor doesn't match up.

Charlies Angels is 100% gonna be another ass movie. None of them are attractive, which was original point last time I checked. None of them hold a candle to Jaclyn Smith, and Charles Angels shouldn't be a movie anyways, should have done a TV series with Lucy Lu instead of whatever shes done since.

Avatar image for lucidique
#26 Posted by lucidique (597 posts) -

@crimsonbrute said:

I have no problem with diversity unless it is forced. Unfortunately most Hollywood movies are doing it.

This is ultimately the problem.

If the existence of the movie is justified by a good script, as well as actors that can perform, it is usually no problem.

This is an issue that is not exclusive to diversity.

Avatar image for nepu7supastar7
#27 Edited by nepu7supastar7 (5203 posts) -

@lucidique: @carljohnsoncj: @Sevenizz:

Gender swapping isn't anything new. It's been happening for a long time in Hollywood. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But there's no hidden agenda behind it. That's just paranoia talking. It's just what happens when you start running out of ideas. Rehashes, remakes and gender swaps. Then the original fans get butthurt because they can't handle change. So they go on a tirade and write angry reviews to make sure the movie bombs.

Avatar image for npiet1
#28 Posted by npiet1 (2528 posts) -

@r-gamer said:

Get woke go broke. Yes it's a thing. People will always say "buh buh Captain Marvel or Black Panther" The difference is it's ok to make movies based off original heroes. People will watch that. But the whole race and gender swapping thing almost always fails.

That's pretty much it, I don't think you should swap any character.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#29 Edited by uninspiredcup (35066 posts) -

Think the only timeI liked gender swapping was The Quick and the Dead, where Sharon Stone is effectively taking the place of the archetype male hero. Really underrated movie. Gene Hackman's toxic masculinity is through the fucking roof.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for PSP107
#30 Posted by PSP107 (17524 posts) -

@pyro1245: "Hollywood has been garbage for far longer than that "

Since 2000 imo.

"and it doesn't have anything to do with casting."

That's one of the reasons.

Avatar image for livingdeadman
#31 Posted by livingdeadman (372 posts) -

What's with that? Calling someone "shitty?" Plus it's called evolution. You don't have to evolve with the rest of us.

Avatar image for lucidique
#32 Posted by lucidique (597 posts) -

@nepu7supastar7 said:

@lucidique: @carljohnsoncj: @Sevenizz:

Gender swapping isn't anything new. It's been happening for a long time in Hollywood. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But there's no hidden agenda behind it. That's just paranoia talking. It's just what happens when you start running out of ideas. Rehashes, remakes and gender swaps. Then the original fans get butthurt because they can't handle change. So they go on a tirade and write angry reviews to make sure the movie bombs.

I believe the issue is real and debatable. Because you disagree with something does not make it any less real.

I also find alienating your fans to be a dangerous game to play. If you feel the need to do so, at the very least, be sure to lock down a new target audience first.

I really doubt movies bomb because of negative reviews. If that was the case, Captain Marvel (2019) would not have been so successful.

And voicing your concerns, be it positive or negative, is always good. It bothers no one.

If you find you are bothered by somebody disagreeing with you, it tells a lot more about your need to grow a shell to be able to interact with the rest of society.

Avatar image for nepu7supastar7
#33 Posted by nepu7supastar7 (5203 posts) -

@lucidique:

"I believe the issue is real and debatable. Because you disagree with something does not make it any less real."

- I get that you believe it to be real. I just don't see it as an actual issue. Looks like I'm not the only person thinking so either.

"I also find alienating your fans to be a dangerous game to play. If you feel the need to do so, at the very least, be sure to lock down a new target audience first."

- Fans alienate themselves when a big change happens to a franchise that they don't like. They do this a lot.

"I really doubt movies bomb because of negative reviews. If that was the case, Captain Marvel (2019) would not have been so successful."

- Plenty of people actually did that with Ghostbusters and trashed the movie before it even came out.

"And voicing your concerns, be it positive or negative, is always good. It bothers no one."

- It doesn't bother anyone but unnecessary discord over small changes is poisonous and counterproductive. Saying that you didn't like the new direction is fine but spreading a rumor about an agenda? Then you're just bringing politics into a place it doesn't belong.

"If you find you are bothered by somebody disagreeing with you, it tells a lot more about your need to grow a shell to be able to interact with the rest of society."

- I don't even know how you get to that. I'm just pointing out the obvious. If you can't handle a simple gender swap in a series and jump to the conclusion that suddenly the liberal media is trying shove an agenda down your throat then maybe YOU need to grow a tougher shell. Because this new vision of said series doesn't even affect or destroy anything you've already seen.

If they made Lara Croft and turned her into Lars Croft, I wouldn't care! I mean, I'm definitely not going to bother with that version of Tomb Raider but that doesn't destroy the older games. We still have those to look back on and always will. Just like old fans of Ghostbusters still have the original movies to look back on and always will.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#34 Posted by Sevenizz (4075 posts) -

@nepu7supastar7: What are these so-called gender swapping hits?

Avatar image for watercrack445
#35 Edited by watercrack445 (1843 posts) -

Anyone up for Mean Girls remake but with male main cast members?

Mean Boys?...???

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#36 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1798 posts) -

Women and minorities deserve better than being given previously white male roles. How about making some good original content instead? Screw Jane Bond and all this other dumb crap.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#37 Edited by uninspiredcup (35066 posts) -

@ezekiel43 said:

Women and minorities deserve better than being given previously white male roles. How about making some good original content instead? Screw Jane Bond and all this other dumb crap.

She isn't playing James Bond, nor replacing him as a franchise lead, which has been widely misreported by "woke" media, many of whom I doubt have watched Bond beyond casually given there overzealous response, it's just the progressiveness gets their woke tingles going and they start basically, mouthing off.

She's a replacement of the 007 in the context of the movie. And it's not some out-of-the-blue thing, the previous movie was all about his aging in a changing world, he failed the evaluation tests with M lying and loses in a shooting contest to Raoul Silva. In fact in the first scene they meet he calls him a mess. A retired, out of the game Bond is a logical step for the next movie, and having an agent be black, white, Chinese, man, woman means nothing, and female spies of his equivalent is nothing new.

If Bond was replaced with a woman, it would be a problem, as he's intrinsically a male character who's an idealized power-fantasy. Might as well not call it James Bond anymore.

If however he changed skin color i.e. Idras Elba, it would have meant jack shit. Idras Elba fits that Bond persona of the man men want to be, and woman want to be with, better than pretty much any actor I can think of working atm. The problem is, he himself is already pretty old, almost the same age as Craig.

Bonds origins were already changed by the author himself, to Scottish and black people, as well as other races, crazily enough, do grow up as part of British culture. I doubt anyone, unless they were some mentalist racist would have a problem viewing Idras Elba as British.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#38 Edited by Ezekiel43 (1798 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:
@ezekiel43 said:

Women and minorities deserve better than being given previously white male roles. How about making some good original content instead? Screw Jane Bond and all this other dumb crap.

She isn't playing James Bond, nor replacing him as a franchise lead, which has been widely misreported by "woke" media, many of whom I doubt have watched Bond beyond casually given there overzealous response, it's just the progressiveness gets their woke tingles going and they start basically, mouthing off.

She's a replacement of the 007 in the context of the movie. And it's not some out-of-the-blue thing, the previous movie was all about his aging in a changing world, he failed the evaluation tests with M lying and loses in a shooting contest to Raoul Silva. In fact in the first scene they meet he calls him a mess. A retired, out of the game Bond is a logical step for the next movie, and having an agent be black, white, Chinese, man, woman means nothing, and female spies of his equivalent is nothing new.

If Bond was replaced with a woman, it would be a problem, as he's intrinsically a male character who's an idealized power-fantasy. Might as well not call it James Bond anymore.

If however he changed skin color i.e. Idras Elba, it would have meant jack shit. Idras Elba fits that Bond persona of the man men want to be, and woman want to be with, better than pretty much any actor I can think of working atm. The problem is, he himself is already pretty old, almost the same age as Craig.

Bonds origins were already changed by the author himself, to Scottish and black people, as well as other races, crazily enough, do grow up as part of British culture. I doubt anyone, unless they were some mentalist racist would have a problem viewing Idras Elba as British.

I know that. I am calling her Jane Bond to make a point. James is getting the boot for the time being because modern times dictate 007 must now be a woman. It's lame. By the way, that theme about him ageing in a changing world was really cringe, since he just became 007 two movies prior. But it's true that James Bond is becoming harder to integrate in our time, which is why they should take him back to the fifties where he belongs.

I don't know why everybody wants Idris Elba to be Bond. That would be terrible. By the time he started filming, he would already be in his fiftes. They always pick someone younger, who can star in a series of movies. Edit: Oh, you said that. But to get to your point about a black James Bond, I say no thanks. I don't even approve of Bond's Scottish accent. Fleming made Bond Scottish AFTER seeing Connery, so it means **** all.

Avatar image for carljohnsoncj
#39 Posted by carljohnsonCJ (548 posts) -

@ezekiel43 said:

Women and minorities deserve better than being given previously white male roles. How about making some good original content instead? Screw Jane Bond and all this other dumb crap.

This

Avatar image for dave123321
#40 Posted by dave123321 (35400 posts) -

No

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
#41 Edited by KillzoneSnake (2481 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

Misogny is not a good look. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

Sorry but no. No female can play the role of Solid Snake as well just like no women can box the heavy weight male champ. Women could be play roles better that fits a woman more.

Avatar image for saltslasher
#42 Posted by SaltSlasher (1318 posts) -

1-I think Ocean's 9 done it best, it was a woman led movie and worked. I didn't feel like all up in my face and story and everything fit the woman side but still for everyone. If 007 could do what they did then I'd be down, unless they gonna go all Ghost Busters with money penny, like they did with their assistant being Chris Hemsworth, where whole thing is a just an exercise in role reversal and all up in the face.

2-I don't want a woman 007 if its just cause producers won't back up a new IP, and would only invest with the 007 logo. I've always felt they had powerful roles, Denise Richard's role was literally woke era level woman's role. Ghost Busters was trashy-era SNL parody compared to it.

3-We need Wonder Woman films. Doesn't have to be mostly female writing/directing/lead, but its nice if a woman either writes or directs a female lead. I've seen enough extras to know, Peter Jackson took a ton of advice from woman, cause that Fran and Philippa basically worked with him to make every movie since LotR, its better for it.

How many big movies have women writers on board or in lead, and if they do, are they dumb girly movies like Juno, Freaky Friday and Danish Girl or AAA amazing movies like Lord of the Rings, Kingsman, and Captain Marvel. We need more woman writing the AAA amazing movies, we already know they can do female flicks. Its why I think I rather have 007 written by a female over a female being 007 himself.

Avatar image for volsung
#43 Posted by Volsung (324 posts) -

@KillzoneSnake said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Misogny is not a good look. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

No female can play the role of Solid Snake

why not?

Avatar image for balaminienbgs
#44 Posted by BalaminienBGS (68 posts) -

Thing is with franchises is that you can think they're ruined, but that screams opportunity and some people pick up the pieces. What's better than starting a great franchise? Reviving one!

Ask yourself this ... did you ever see something so shoddy you thought you could do better? Some people act on that sort of thinking

Avatar image for sakaixx
#45 Edited by sakaiXx (6077 posts) -

IDK. Nostalgia is a very big thing and I get it. I rather hollywood invent rather than reinvent but due to hollywood not ready to invest a lot of money on an original female character, theyrjust reinvent the ones we have.

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
#46 Posted by KillzoneSnake (2481 posts) -

@volsung said:
@KillzoneSnake said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Misogny is not a good look. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

No female can play the role of Solid Snake

why not?

Becuase a man is far superior in battle. Should we remake the original Rambo movie with Ms. Ramboness or something? lol

Avatar image for npiet1
#47 Posted by npiet1 (2528 posts) -

Washing of any character is wrong. They should just create their own original series. They also use the wrong person. Look at Alien, original story and Sigourney Weaver is bad ass. No problem.

Avatar image for volsung
#48 Posted by Volsung (324 posts) -

@KillzoneSnake said:
@volsung said:
@KillzoneSnake said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Misogny is not a good look. Poor scripts are the culprit. Not gender.

No female can play the role of Solid Snake

why not?

Becuase a man is far superior in battle. Should we remake the original Rambo movie with Ms. Ramboness or something? lol

isn't snake like.... an elderly man in mgs4? and isn't it a weird sci fi world where nanobots exist?