• Thor?

    From T987654321@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 8 10:10:10 2022
    So is the new Thor: Love and Thunder any good?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 9 09:47:47 2022
    On 2022-07-08 17:10:10 +0000, T987654321 said:

    So is the new Thor: Love and Thunder any good?

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with
    Natalie Portman playing a female Thor. :-\

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan Smithee@21:1/5 to Your Name on Fri Jul 8 23:09:27 2022
    On 07/08/2022 06:47 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 17:10:10 +0000, T987654321 said:

    So is the new Thor: Love and Thunder any good?

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie Portman playing a female Thor. :-\


    Is she as good at playing Thor as she was at playing an exotic dancer in "Closer"?
    :-D

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ted Nolan @21:1/5 to qwrtz123@gmail.com on Mon Jul 18 18:13:03 2022
    In article <d66d7457-89fe-460e-95c5-5b50b196236cn@googlegroups.com>,
    T987654321 <qwrtz123@gmail.com> wrote:
    Grosses
    DOMESTIC (46.9%)
    $233,271,136
    INTERNATIONAL (53.1%)
    $264,600,000
    WORLDWIDE
    $497,871,136

    Thor: Ragnarok was a sure-footed action-comedy. This one replaces
    "sure" with "lead". I think all the stars did what they were asked to just fine. Would that they had been asked to do something different.
    --
    columbiaclosings.com
    What's not in Columbia anymore..

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From T987654321@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 18 11:07:11 2022
    Grosses
    DOMESTIC (46.9%)
    $233,271,136
    INTERNATIONAL (53.1%)
    $264,600,000
    WORLDWIDE
    $497,871,136

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From trotsky@21:1/5 to Your Name on Tue Jul 19 04:29:13 2022
    On 7/8/2022 4:47 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 17:10:10 +0000, T987654321 said:

    So is the new Thor:  Love and Thunder any good?

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie Portman playing a female Thor.  :-\



    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know
    what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Stasiak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 22 01:13:00 2022
    Trotsky
    Your Name

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie Portman playing a female Thor. :-\

    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    Seems to me that the movie/tv business nowadays is more concerned about political correctness and checking off the mandated Progressive propaganda points then making a good flick, even if this means alienating the existing fanbase and losing money in the process.

    The modern American executive class is even more brainwashed by social
    media then regular people, to the point their entire lives revolve around how they're perceived on Facebook, with the result that movies/tv shows are seen
    as vehicles for shilling the Progressive agenda regardless of the financial costs.

    (This space ___ reserved for Trotsky calling me a sock puppet.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From moviePig@21:1/5 to Ed Stasiak on Fri Jul 22 10:24:43 2022
    On 7/22/2022 4:13 AM, Ed Stasiak wrote:
    Trotsky
    Your Name

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie >>> Portman playing a female Thor. :-\

    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know
    what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    Seems to me that the movie/tv business nowadays is more concerned about political correctness and checking off the mandated Progressive propaganda points then making a good flick, even if this means alienating the existing fanbase and losing money in the process.

    The modern American executive class is even more brainwashed by social
    media then regular people, to the point their entire lives revolve around how they're perceived on Facebook, with the result that movies/tv shows are seen as vehicles for shilling the Progressive agenda regardless of the financial costs.

    (This space ___ reserved for Trotsky calling me a sock puppet.)

    You lost me at "business...more concerned about...X...than...money".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Stasiak@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 23 06:49:36 2022
    moviepig
    Ed Stasiak

    The modern American executive class is even more brainwashed by social media then regular people, to the point their entire lives revolve around how
    they're perceived on Facebook, with the result that movies/tv shows are seen
    as vehicles for shilling the Progressive agenda regardless of the financial costs.

    You lost me at "business...more concerned about...X...than...money".

    The Wall Street corporate media happily became the US Government’s
    Propaganda Dept. during WWII (and I thank them for their service)
    and they obviously retained those skills, which they're now using to
    promote their own agenda.

    There's no denying that Hollywood has gone all-out in supporting
    the Progressive/Woke movement and the message is simply more
    important then the money (which they're still making, even if it's less).

    These are True Believers we're talking about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From trotsky@21:1/5 to moviePig on Sat Jul 23 05:35:26 2022
    On 7/22/2022 9:24 AM, moviePig wrote:
    On 7/22/2022 4:13 AM, Ed Stasiak wrote:
    Trotsky
    Your Name

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with
    Natalie
    Portman playing a female Thor.  :-\

    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know >>> what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    Seems to me that the movie/tv business nowadays is more concerned about
    political correctness and checking off the mandated Progressive
    propaganda
    points then making a good flick, even if this means alienating the
    existing
    fanbase and losing money in the process.

    The modern American executive class is even more brainwashed by social
    media then regular people, to the point their entire lives revolve
    around how
    they're perceived on Facebook, with the result that movies/tv shows
    are seen
    as vehicles for shilling the Progressive agenda regardless of the
    financial costs.

    (This space ___ reserved for Trotsky calling me a sock puppet.)

    You lost me at "business...more concerned about...X...than...money".



    The sockpuppet would've lost anybody with a fully functioning brain. If
    he isn't one, perhaps the lying motherfucker can make up some fake
    details of his existence on the planet. Those, at least, I find
    entertaining.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to gmsin...@gmail.com on Sat Jul 23 23:12:59 2022
    On Tuesday, 19 July 2022 at 05:29:16 UTC-4, gmsin...@gmail.com wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 4:47 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 17:10:10 +0000, T987654321 said:

    So is the new Thor: Love and Thunder any good?

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie Portman playing a female Thor. :-\

    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    But it still doesn't explain why they can't be really good, though FEW have been.
    Good acting, good plots, good dialog, good on-screen interrelationships to go with the $150M in
    special effects. "The Batman" was another one released not too long ago that was
    just dull. Ladle-on the brooding, the ever-present rain, the uber-sleaziness of fake
    New York that for some reasons leftists seem to pine for. It's overdone. It's like the writers
    and directors read one line in the propaganda playbook: "Beat people over the head endlessly
    with the same thing and you'll convince them of whatever you are trying to sell." It must work, on stupid people,
    since these movies do make money. Even the audience doesn't really care any more. The last time I saw
    a genuine reaction of audience pleasure at a Superhero movie was when Wolverine told someone to F--- off in a 3 second
    cameo.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From trotsky@21:1/5 to RichA on Sun Jul 24 03:57:51 2022
    On 7/24/2022 1:12 AM, RichA wrote:
    On Tuesday, 19 July 2022 at 05:29:16 UTC-4, gmsin...@gmail.com wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 4:47 PM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 17:10:10 +0000, T987654321 said:

    So is the new Thor: Love and Thunder any good?

    No ... it's just "Politically Correct" / "Equality" garbage with Natalie >>> Portman playing a female Thor. :-\

    What should have been about, rocket scientist? Obviously, even though
    the movie biz has been around for about a hundred years you seem to know
    what's bankable. "Bankable" means what will make them money, because
    it's a business, after all. Some movies are good but make no money,
    which apparently would make you happy in the Thor franchise's case.

    But it still doesn't explain why they can't be really good, though FEW have been.


    So your syphilitic mind thinks it's the final arbiter of what's "really
    good?" Movies are a business and if they make billions and billions of
    dollars as MCU movies have, that's "really good." They wouldn't make
    that money if people weren't paying to see them. You're a fucking brain
    dead eunuch on a dead social medium telling a handful of people what
    "really good" is, that couldn't be possibly be any more fucked in the
    head than it already is.


    Good acting, good plots, good dialog, good on-screen interrelationships to go with the $150M in
    special effects. "The Batman" was another one released not too long ago that was
    just dull. Ladle-on the brooding, the ever-present rain, the uber-sleaziness of fake
    New York that for some reasons leftists seem to pine for. It's overdone. It's like the writers
    and directors read one line in the propaganda playbook: "Beat people over the head endlessly
    with the same thing and you'll convince them of whatever you are trying to sell." It must work, on stupid people,
    since these movies do make money. Even the audience doesn't really care any more. The last time I saw
    a genuine reaction of audience pleasure at a Superhero movie was when Wolverine told someone to F--- off in a 3 second
    cameo.



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)