Jump to content

Welcome to The Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, and more. For easy entry, just sign in with your Twitter account.

Your Arrival

You've safely landed within Heartbreakers Community, home to the future of fandoms. If you're a fan with an open mind and an open heart, then you've reached your perfect destination.

Questions or Concerns

Need a guide through the new Heartbreakers Community? Don't hesitate to contact a member of staff for help. They'll be happy to assist you during your stay.

The Future of Fandoms

If you're an often silenced member of any particular fandom, you can find haven and community here. We welcome everyone. Connect your Twitter account for easy, instant access.

    An Evolution

    What began as a women's wrestling community, has exploded into something bigger. No longer will our voices be silenced in fandoms we love.

      For More Heartbreakers

      Join our Discord to chat with other members of the community, in real time.

      "Charlie's Angels" Flops; Elizabeth Banks Says "Wonder Woman", "Captain Marvel" Were Only Hits Because They Belong to the Male Genre

      Recommended Posts




      The well-reviewed “Charlie’s Angels” reboot is the latest studio box office bomb of the fall movie season, following in the footsteps of such disasters as “The Goldfinch,” “Gemini Man,” “Motherless Brooklyn,” and “Terminator: Dark Fate.” The Elizabeth Banks-directed action comedy failed to crack $9 million at the box office over its opening weekend. Box office tracking had “Charlie’s Angels” opening at an already-disappointing $10 million, but the final total came in well below that low mark. IndieWire’s box office expert Tom Brueggemann says the film “will be a significant loss” for Sony this season.

      Prior to the movie’s disastrous opening weekend, Banks gave an interview to the Herald Sun that is now proving to be somewhat controversial. The filmmaker, who also wrote and produced “Charlie’s Angels” and stars in the movie as Bosley, called out a potential box office bomb as being sexist. “Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money,” she said. “If this movie doesn’t make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t go see women do action movies.”

      As some moviegoers were quick to point out on social media, “Charlie’s Angels” bombing doesn’t exactly prove men will not go pay to see an action movie driven by women. Earlier this year, the Brie Larson-starring “Captain Marvel” grossed $426 million in the U.S. and over $1.1 billion at the worldwide box office. “Wonder Women” ended its summer 2017 run with $821 million worldwide. But Banks says these female-fronted comic book films are still tied to a large male genre.

      “They’ll go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre,” Banks told the Sun. “So even though those are movies about women, they put them in the context of feeding the larger comic book world, so it’s all about, yes, you’re watching a Wonder Woman movie but we’re setting up three other characters or we’re setting up ‘Justice League.’”

      “By the way, I’m happy for those characters to have box office success,” Banks adds, “but we need more women’s voices supported with money because that’s the power. The power is in the money.”

      In a second interview before the film’s opening weekend with the Wall Street Journal, Banks defended her decision to make another “Charlie’s Angels” movie. The last “Charlie’s Angels” films starred Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore, and Lucy Liu and were released in 2000 and 2003. Banks’ “Angels” stars Kristen Stewart, Naomi Scott, and Ella Balinska.

      “You’ve had 37 Spider-Man movies and you’re not complaining!” Banks said. “I think women are allowed to have one or two action franchises every 17 years — I feel totally fine with that.”

      Banks added she was interested in launching a big franchise driven by women characters because that’s often not the case in Hollywood. “Being in a big franchise allows you to have it all,” she said. “I recognize the same thing, it’s almost unfair for women. The best roles are usually in small movies, but then you don’t make any money. It’s okay to want to make money.”

      When IndieWire recently asked Banks if she was concerned about if she was concerned about the reaction of trolls who might balk at her feminist-leaning action movie, she was succinct. “‘Charlie’s Angels’ has always been about women, and the DNA of it is about women working together on this team,” she said. “We are not treading in a male space. I think that’s one of the big differences between these two things. I don’t know, I’m less concerned about that. Of course, those trolls are horrifying, but you know, I challenge them to get up and make a fucking movie action movie. I welcome any of them into my realm.”

      With its $8.6 million opening, it’s unlikely “Charlie’s Angels” is the franchise-starter Banks envisioned. The film is now playing nationwide.


      TL;DR: She thinks sexism is why "Charlie's Angels" isn't connecting or garnering hype/attention and that "Wonder Woman" and "Captain Marvel" were only supported by men because comic books are for men. Lest we forget the boycott for both movies, Brie Larson still getting heat to this day for no reason, the fact that women make up more than 50% of the comic book movie going audience, and that both movies were directed (or in "Captain Marvel's" case, co-directed) by women (which renders her plea to support women voices dumb and self-absorbed)

      Link to post
      Share on other sites

      she knew it was going to bomb based on how defensive and entitled that interview was. perhaps just admit that you had casting issues and that no one is interested in this franchise rather than ragging on comics, which have always had subversive and inclusive spirits to them. 


      Link to post
      Share on other sites
      1 minute ago, Katy said:

      1. how did the movie with Cameron and co do?
      2. maybe cast actresses who can... act? 'cause Kristen ain't it.

      It almost tripled its budget. Of course, those three actresses were at the peaks of their careers at that point, so it was destined to do well. I really just think this was a reboot that didn’t need to happen. All these Hollywood people are going for a quick cash grab (that doesn’t work, whoops) rather than actually being creative and coming up with a good, original idea and it’s so tired to me.


      Link to post
      Share on other sites

      I know this is probably rude and ignorant but I enjoy it when remakes flop. They have this mentality that they can just remake whatever hit classic they can and it will have the same effect as the original. Classics are classics for a reason leave them alone.


      Link to post
      Share on other sites

      Join the conversation

      You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

      Reply to this topic...

      ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

        Only 75 emoji are allowed.

      ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

      ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

      ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

      • Recently Browsing   0 members

        No registered users viewing this page.

      • Similar Content

        • By Mariah.
          Metacritic: 66
          Rotten Tomatoes: 79%
          "[I]t's also brimming with the same wonder and joy as the first film, the rare movie - of any stripe - that doesn't just want to believe in the goodness of people, but is willing to make them truly work for it. That's superheroic." - Kate Erbland, indieWire
          "A notable improvement on its already great predecessor, Wonder Woman 1984 is exactly the kind of bright and hopeful movie the character's legacy deserves." - Matt Purslow, IGN
          "In a year when the cinemagoing experience could be categorised as 'much too little', you can't really blame WW84 for giving us a bit too much." - Philip De Semlyen, Time Out
          "Director Patty Jenkins has followed that original film... with something much longer, cornier and wobblier, but which is energised with a streak of pure movie-star enchantment that recalls the sparkly-eyed uplift of the Christopher Reeve Superman films." - Robbie Collin, Daily Telegraph (UK)
          "Maybe Wonder Woman will be the one to save us, after all." - Mary Sollosi, Entertainment Weekly
          "[D]irector Patty Jenkins and her star, Gal Gadot, have mastered the art of cornball conviction." - Justin Lang, Los Angeles Times
          "There's still a lot to love." - David Rooney, Hollywood Reporter
          "Jenkins is an enormously talented filmmaker on whom the studio took a chance - one that's seldom questioned when conferred upon men - and she proves her worth by never letting the spectacle drown out the performances." - Peter Debruge, Variety
          "As candy-coloured and bright as the first film was all muddy dark-blues, Wonder Woman 1984 has an enlivening sense of bubbly pop to it." - Barry Hertz, Globe and Mail (Canada)
          "This is a throwback piece of pure pop entertainment." - Richard Roeper, Chicago Sun Times
          "The film's wickedly pungent social satire must occasionally step aside for superheroics, of course. And while the reteaming of Gadot and Jenkins provides the expected thrills and excitement, this sequel shares the significant flaw of its predecessor." - Alonso Duralde, The Wrap
          "A vibrant and virtuous adventure packed with all the heart and heroism we've come to expect from DC's shining light. Wonder Woman 1984 really is the hero 2020 needed all along." - Ben Travis, Empire Magazine
          "If WW84 can't quite reach the heights of the first film, it still soars beautifully when it matters most." - Angie Han, Mashable
          "Wonder Woman 1984 is solid where it counts, maudlin in the way its fans need it to be, and, similarly, just funny enough to be charming. For all that goes unsaid, the writing is even occasionally clever." - K. Austin Collins, Rolling Stone
          "The same elements that made "Wonder Woman" such a pleasure to watch are present in "WW84," including the supremely self-possessed Gadot, who plays the title character with the same grace and understatement she brought to the initial installment." - Ann Hornaday, Washington Post
          "The ambitions of "Wonder Woman 1984" may be just outside its grasp, but it seldom feels predestined or predictable - a preciously rare commodity in the genre." - Jack Coyle, Associated Press
          I'll update with more of the top critic reviews as they come in! Post any reviews you find here as well.
      • Create New...