View Single Post
Old 04-22-2013, 02:10 AM   #96
Loose Seal
flickchick85's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,854
Default Re: All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 50

Originally Posted by AntMan View Post

I don't disagree with you. I just think it's a matter of if the audience wil support it. The American public has a history of not going to female lead action films. The Hunger Games kind od fits the action mould though, and the Underworld films are a moderate success, so a Wonder Woman film could make money. I just don't know if WB would take a chance on it.
That's the thing, though - this lack of audience support is a myth that's subscribed to by the execs. The truth is that the audience doesn't support them when they're obviously crap movies. Just like with most films with any type of lead. The audience supported Ellen Ripley and Sarah Connor and Katniss Everdeen (and like you said, even Kate Beckinsale on a smaller scale). They didn't support Elektra and Catwoman because you could tell from the get-go that they were godawful. Tomb Raider got mild support befitting such mediocre movies. Salt did fine if not spectacular, for a fine but far from spectacular movie.

Make a product that at least looks good, market it well, and people will show up to see it - that principle's not specific to movies with female leads. The studios just need to show these characters the same kind of care and respect they show their heavy-hitters if they want the quality of product that becomes a hit.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

01000110011011110111001000100000011001010111011001 10010101110010011110010010000001100001011101000110 11110110110100100000011000100110010101101100011011 11011011100110011101101001011011100110011100100000 01110100011011110010000001101101011001010010000001 10000101110011001000000110011101101111011011110110 01000010000001100010011001010110110001101111011011 10011001110111001100100000011101000110111100100000 01111001011011110111010100101110
flickchick85 is offline