Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

After the all female remakes of Ghostbusters only broke even at the Box office, Hollywood thought that they would give it another go with Ocean's 8, and then that only broke even.

Now I read they planning on doing an all female lead Terminator movie, as well a new all female remake of The Expendables.

https://metro.co.uk/2016/07/12/sylve...-name-6001860/

But I feel like now after the first couple of failures, that enough is enough, and it feels like if they go ahead with these movies, that they are just trying too hard.

I feel no one really wants to see a female lead Terminator or an all female Expendables. I don't want to, and I asked all my male and female friends and they all said no.

I think that making an all female Expendables is loosing the target audience.

Cause that's like making an all male remake of Pitch Perfect and hoping viewers will have a huge interest in seeing that.

But what do you think, am I being too hard or cynical perhaps?

Pretty sure The Terminator has been female led from the start.

I guarantee you that the target audience for The Expendables would be very interested in a movie that’s just chicks blowing **** up.

Or even **** blowing chicks up. Oh wait, that's actually prolly for a slightly different market even if there prolly is some crossover.

YASS!

Even "Evil Dead" (2013) - technically speaking - is a female-fronted remake.

I'm just so tired and bored.

Re: Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

Yes. The answer is yes.

I think the problem with them is that when cashing in on an old idea, you are not getting any supporters. I'm all for more female diversity, but it should be movies with ORIGINAL ideas. New heroes, new action stars. It's been done in the past, and it can be done again. This has all to do with Hollywood scrambling after excuses to still put out millions of remakes, and nothing to do with actual diversity.

They will reboot Dexter making him a black girl.

It's interesting reading all these reactions because my first thought, as an ex-Doctor Who fan, went to Jodie Whittaker's first female incarnation of the Doctor. I'm very interested to read viewers' reactions when the series airs, and ultimately whether the decision will produce results.

It's just a promotional stunt IMHO.
Why changing the Doctor into a woman? No real purpose or fun.

It's a very, very complicated subject to get into. While I personally disagree with the move I've come to the conclusion that there's no way the character can survive without diversifying.

Re: Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

In fairness, there's no real purpose in having this alien's supposedly random changes of appearance coincidentally make it look like a white man thirteen times in a row.

Re: Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

There are unnecessary remakes all the time. Are you saying remakes are not getting out hand, but remakes with female leads are getting out of hand?

Re: Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

I think that's a bit of a different case. Just like the James Bond franchise, they can do pretty much however the hell they want and it doesn't break the formula.

He is a timelord though and it's been established that there are timeladies. He can change his appearance but hasn't been established that he can change sex.

Re: Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?
 

Female remakes are just a lazy excuse for a remake, allowing the freedom to keep as much as they like or chuck what they want out of the window. No one can excuse them of just doing a knock-off because it’s got women in it so inevitably that will bring a different vibe.

Also, you will get people going out and supporting it and loads going to criticise it- either way, it is a talking point.

https://fandomfactory.files.wordpres...rs1.jpg?w=1280

There is a distinction though.

In Doctor Who, change is part of the narrative. Aside from the Peter Cushing films, which are separate to the TV series, it's never actually been rebooted. It's all one long, uninterrupted piece where every lead actor is playing the same person, albeit with a different face and personality.

In the Bond franchise we turn a blind eye when Bond is played by a different actor. Often M, Q and Moneypenny stay the same, so it's almost like a soft reboot. GoldenEye came the closest to a full one because everything was different apart from Q :).

Surely Casino Royale more than Goldeneye. In a significant way, I mean. Not just casting.

Oh I don't know, I was having this conversation a month or so ago about how different GoldenEye was at the time. New Bond, Moneypenny and M; very different music, updated graphics etc.