But remember: they don't NEED men to watch it either. And if women don't watch it, it's because of internalized misogyny. Which is why they also don't need Depp or Jack Sparrow.
.
Using this formula they can make certain that their failure is never their own fault, it is always everybody else who is wrong
FUck this pandering to an audience of people so fucking afraid of being politically incorrect that they go to see a movie they don't like, and give it five fucking stars because otherwise they'll get fired
How about Pirates of the Caribbean: the Curse of Oak Island (which is in Canada) starring Amber Heard as the villianess; i wanna say ... mmm... maybe Pierce Brosnan as the English commander looking for the Pirates and treasure. Ooh Jean Reno as the French leader of the Knights Templar burying the treasure. Hey, writes itself...
There is already an abundance of key female characters and them saying they will add more is just pandering to feminists, or feminazis whatever you want to call it, and ignores that that there is a lot of females in the movie. Instead of aiming for a quality movie they're "fighting for equality". That is the issue.
the way its worded is
"added obviously a very key female element to that world"
which doesnt really have a positive way of framing
youve got
1. implying its obviously key simply because its female
2. implying its obviously lacking existing key female elements
3. or implying both at once
.
Using this formula they can make certain that their failure is never their own fault, it is always everybody else who is wrong
"added obviously a very key female element to that world"
which doesnt really have a positive way of framing
youve got
1. implying its obviously key simply because its female
2. implying its obviously lacking existing key female elements
3. or implying both at once