Studios & NYT blame audiences for not watching their movie sermons? (cinema network)

RELATED: Demise blamed on toxic fans & misogynists (JesterBell) ...... Film Threat's reaction to "Supergirl" after watching it in theater (SV)
- - - - - - - - - - - -

AFTER PARTY with Emily Jashinsky
https://youtu.be/EGLw45tH8hE

VIDEO EXCERPTS: So, let's get into the way the New York Times frames this. [...] So the author writes, "Audiences have become much more selective about superhero movies starring the since the genre's heyday in the 2010s. ... the author writes, "Box office analysts on Sunday noted an uncomfortable truth. Female-led superhero movies have been rejected almost uniformly over the past 5 years or so, perhaps reflecting a resurgent misogyny among the core fan base, which is largely male...

[...] So immediately in this article, the New York Times is broaching the framing of misogyny to explain why Supergirl is faltering at the box office. Well, let's turn to the critics, shall we? This is a review in Variety, which is hardly some like right-wing publication. That would be a ridiculous description of it. The headline from reviewer: "Milly Alcock takes charge in a dystopian superhero movie so flat it is super horrendous".

This is again in Variety. I'm not really reading from the Daily Wire. I'm reading from Variety. This is so brutal...

[...] Now, maybe that's just one review. Let's go to the aggregator. Rotten Tomatoes. You an see this up on the screen right now or shortly you'll be able to see this up on the screen. Amazing. Here, Rotten Tomatoes has the movie right now at 54% on the tomato meter, 76% on the popcorn meter. Which actually undercuts also the New York Times case that it's purely misogyny among the fans. Because this is a case where audiences like the movie better than reviewers...

Why the media blamed the audience ... https://youtu.be/EGLw45tH8hE
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EGLw45tH8hE

(Yesterday 09:34 PM)C C Wrote: Here, Rotten Tomatoes has the movie right now at 54% on the tomato meter, 76% on the popcorn meter. Which actually undercuts also the New York Times case that it's purely misogyny among the fans. Because this is a case where audiences like the movie better than reviewers...

The Rotten Tomatoes' popcorn meter has been rigged since about 2010. It is not a reflection of actual audiences, which is why I check Metacritic, where the critic and users scores are much more aligned and accurate.

STILL review-bombing Supergirl? lol She must've really shaken up the obscure little MAGA podcaster world. Of course controversy gets them more views, so...

"Jashinsky has identified as a Christian and describes her politics as generally conservative, saying that she is between the "Old Right" and "New Right."---Wikipedia

Still haven't put your money where your mouth is and supported the movie yourself? You know, so you can give us a real review. @_@
Or just admit all your genetic fallacies are just cover for your arguments from ignorance.

Quote:Still haven't put your money where your mouth is and supported the movie yourself?

What movie? The one MAGA podcasters are determined to review bomb off the map because a woman was portrayed as strong and heroic in it? Sorry...superhero movies don't even show up on my "films to see" radar.

Quote:Female-led superhero movies have been rejected almost uniformly over the past 5 years or so, perhaps reflecting a resurgent misogyny among the core fan base, which is largely male.

The "5 years" was carefully chosen because Wonder Woman did really well in 2020 (six years ago) and it was a female-led superhero movie. Of course, the protagonist was played by the extraordinary Gal Gadot. Both men and women paid to see that movie.

Wonder Woman couldn't be made today, since Gal Gadot is Israeli. There would be riots outside theaters where it was being shown. The Jews used to be leaders of the "progressive" movement and they and the democrats were joined at the hip, one and the same. But since Hamas attacked Israel, the Jews have been unceremoniously and at times even violently dumped.

Supergirl is played as a pouty adolescent with little sex appeal and zero charisma. What's worse is that Milly Alcock did her very best to alienate a large part of the movie's potential audience by making herself controversial and divisive before the film even opened. (The Rachel Zegler school of public relations.)

I don't know what the studio that made this movie was thinking. They dumped some $200 million into making it, so they must have had a target audience in mind. Presumably they crafted their product to appeal to that audience. From the looks of it the movie was intended to appeal to pouty alienated highschool girls.

But is that a big enough audience to support a $200 million summer blockbuster? Apparently not. It's looking like the studio stands to eat a $100 - $200 million loss.

Milly Alcock

Gal Gadot

(Today 04:30 AM)Yazata Wrote: Milly Alcock

---

(Today 04:23 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:Still haven't put your money where your mouth is and supported the movie yourself?

What movie?

So argument from ignorance. Got it!

Quote:Both men and women paid to see that movie.

I'm sure men and women and even kids paid to see Supergirl. Perhaps though not for the reason you think they went to see Wonder Woman. lol

‘Supergirl’ Braces for $100 Million Loss: What DC Studios Should Learn From Its Box Office Bomb
...
Yet the initial box office results for “Supergirl” would suggest that audiences are, in fact, writing off the film — and continuing to reject lesser-known comic book protagonists. The Warner Bros. and DC Studios adaptation, which centers on Superman’s cousin Kara Zor-El, misfired with $37.1 million in North America and $62.6 million globally in its opening weekend. Monday’s final tally was below Sunday’s estimate of $38 million domestically and $68 million worldwide. After launching below expectations, the big-budget film is shaping up to be a money loser for the studio, as well as a major setback for the newly rebooted DC Universe.
- https://variety.com/2026/film/box-office...236797855/


‘Supergirl’ Flops at the Box Office, Warner Bros. to Lose up to $125M
Despite a long-awaited release, Milly Alcock and the cast fail to meet DCU expectations
...
With a budget of $170 million and an unspecified amount of marketing costs, Warner Bros. must brace itself to lose roughly $125 million.
- https://lamag.com/arts-and-entertainment...p-to-125m/

Those damn conservative incels at Variety and LA Magazine.

Quote:Those damn conservative incels at Variety and LA Magazine.

Probably has less to do with the standard maga/incel hatred for women in lead roles and more to do with superhero movies in general. I know I'm exhausted by them. Maybe the masses are cinematically evolving as well.

Oh and look! Google AI backs me up!

"The popularity of superhero movies is currently experiencing a significant historical transition, characterized by a transition from absolute box office dominance to a period of "superhero fatigue" and softer commercial returns. While the genre remains a major fixture in global pop culture, the era where nearly every comic book adaptation was a guaranteed billion-dollar blockbuster has concluded."