These days it is not enough we have to endure the political and socialist rantings from celebrities. (And gird yourself, with the entertainment awards season kicking off this weekend we’ll be subjected to plenty of these in the coming weeks.) The entertainment media is insistent on making social commentary a part of the coverage and the interpretation of activities in the entertainment industry.
The latest surrounds the Christmastime release of ”Little Women”. The film is performing reasonably well, especially considering the massive amount of movie competition this time of year. However, the cultured minds at WaPo sees a grave problem.
Perspective: Dear men who are afraid to see "Little Women": You can do this. https://t.co/MAvIolpndW
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 1, 2020
We are afraid, you see. It has nothing to with the fact that this is based on a book that was specifically written by Louisa May Alcott for young girls, or that the origin story is 150 years old. No — we males were terrified to see a centuries-old meandering tale of preteen girls doing farm work.
Is there anything more pathetic than a hot take article riding on the coattails of last week's hot take?
No rage click for you.
— Cranky Gordon (@StillCrankyAF) January 2, 2020
Yawning isn't a sign of fear, you know.
Let me understand: men not wanting to see a movie about a 19th Century woman writing a book for little girls is bad, but men wanting to see an action movie with a female hero were supposed to stay home so there could be "women-only" shows?
— Boris_Badenoff (@Boris_Badenoff) January 2, 2020
Dear people who write crap like this op ed:
Everyone with a brain
— The Velvet Sugar Queen (@TMIWITW) January 2, 2020
— General Hardsalami ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (@Machovell1an) January 2, 2020
Also, are they really gender shaming us?
— TugboatPhil (@TugboatPhil) January 2, 2020
Whoah, there is a snag in the crankiness.
The thrust of this piece is that men are conditioned by society to not go see a movie like this…despite the reality that we have most likely been exposed to this story before…? That audience composites show only 40% of the audience is male is a problem, not a result of this being a bit of a tired premise.
Dear Op Ed Writer,
We read it in school and have seen countless adaptations already.
Approach us with something original for a change and maybe we'll talk.
— Bohemio of the Reeeeing Twenties (@El__Bohemio) January 2, 2020
Dear WP. Tell Hollywood to make a movie that hasn’t been redone several times over the last decade. James Norton is the ONLY good thing about this latest version.
— Silvia ??⛄️???? (@slysil61) January 3, 2020
Not to mention that you can always rent or stream the 2018 version of the adaptation.
Or the 2017 version.
Or the 1994 version.
Or the 1987 version.
Or the 1978 version.
Or the 1958 version.
Or the 1949 version.
Or the 1933 version.
Or the 1918 version.
— Brad Slager: Tossing Others Under the Sleigh ? ? (@MartiniShark) January 3, 2020
Here is all you need to know bout the manufactured ”problem” behind this piece; When it is women who do not attend a film at a properly sufficient level there is no outrage. Note how you never hear about the gender imbalance of the audience when it comes to action movies, for example.
Is the "Dear Women who are afraid to see Expendables 3" article behind the paywall??
— Rick_G_MBA (@rick_g_cle) January 2, 2020
This summer when ”Hobbs & Shaw” was released the audience figures were predominantly male. Were womens afraid of ‘splosions and car chases???
Aren't they allowed to just not be interested in seeing this one?
I don't ever want to see a Fast & Furious movie EVER and nobody shames me about that.
— Vanessa Santos (@VanessaOblinger) January 2, 2020
Perspective: Dear women who are afraid to see "Rambo, Last Blood": You can do this.
— David (@DSmykal) January 2, 2020
Sure, that is bound to be the next one to come out — except that would go against the Outrage Editorial Guidebook. The editor will likely spike that piece.
Love writing op eds specifically tailored to strawmen
— Ahab the whaler (@Ahab_the_Whaler) January 2, 2020
You've got that one editor you can just go to who yells "run with it!" regardless of the story, don't you?
— Funky Code Medina ✝️ (@spazafraz) January 2, 2020
Will someone be outraged? Can we target a privileged group? Will this make us sound so pompous that they might overlook the idiocy of our content? RUN THAT BABY!!!