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

Lions for Lambs: the definitive anti-war movie.

You would think so given how they are viewed by the Left, but, no, they are not evil as a whole (a few are, but the vast majority are not, just like every single other demographic).

This big Doctor Who fan (who has three separate, weekly watching groups came within a hair's breadth of quitting the show over them changing the gender of The Doctor to female. I own every single Doctor Who DVD/Blu-Ray, I own every single episode of all of the spin-off shows (even K-9 and (ugh!) Class) and I even have a YouTube podcast where a friend and I watch a Doctor Who serial every week while drinking and then we discuss it while we are drunk. I have been a fan of the show for the last 36 years (since I was 13). Don't tell me that I may not be a big enough fan of the show.



I have watched all of my male childhood TV and movie heroes be turned into women: first Starbuck, then The Ghostbusters and finally The Doctor. It is disheartening to men to watch everybody that they emulate be turned into a female. (Notice that these changes only seem to go one direction.) Everybody wants a hero with whom to identify. That is why Black Panther is the biggest superhero movie of all time domestically and the 3rd biggest movie of all time domestically, because (excepting Blade), Black Panther was the first really good superhero movie centered around a black superhero with whom black people could identify.





A fan who loves something with all of his heart and who dedicates a large portion of his life to that something does so with the understanding that, while some change is inevitable, that the basic tenants of that thing will remain the same. If that thing changes so much that it is basically a nearly completely different thing than what it was originally, then even lifelong fans will walk away. That is why many people, myself included, have walked away from Star Wars to the point where the most recent Star Wars film lost money!



Basically, people don't mind a bit of change, but don't change the things that they love too much or they will stop loving them. They want to know that the same hero, food or activity that they have always known will always be the same for them. That is why there was so much blowback over New Coke, so much blowback over the gender change of The Doctor and so much blowback over certain sports franchises who have moved out of the city where they were founded and with whom they have always been identified (like the Baltimore Colts moving to Indianapolis or the Cleveland Browns moving to Baltimore and becoming the Baltimore Ravens).


And the longer that something was the same (55 years in the case of Doctor Who), the more jarring the change is. All you do is anger the fans who buy and/or consume your product without guaranteeing yourself a single new fan. That is why these changes will almost always end in disaster (a la Ghostbusters).

The term that I have heard is "Get Woke, Go Broke". There are lots of examples this century of companies, political organizations, etc. taking a hard left turn and then completely going bankrupt. They do this because they put Leftist PC politics ahead or profit and logic and, thus, they turn off a _lot_ of customers and fans.

Yeah, good example and good movie. I actually have a "thing" for John Carpenter movies. One of my favorite directors and score makers.




It is interesting to see where the show will go now. Will they continue to have new female incarnations or will it revert back to male or something else? We'll see. I actually haven't kept up with the Doctor since David Tennant left. He was the best Doc in the new reboot, but Tom Baker will always BE the Doctor to me.

Oh me too . I really enjoyed the commentaries he did with Kurt Russell for all their films together.

The obvious next step is to change race isn't it? I would imagine they'll stick with a female Doctor though after Jodie Whittaker.

I remember reading Steven Moffat saying that it made much more sense to decide what the Doctor would be before even getting to the casting stage – from a writer's perspective I can imagine it's even more important. Chris Chibnall seems to have taken that approach. He pitched a female Doctor to the executives, they approved it, then they auditioned actresses.

Tennant was good – I got cheesed off with him towards the end but as usual more because of the writing than the actor. Matt Smith has been my favourite of the new series .


Well he said himself didn't he "the best way to [play the Doctor] is just to be Tom Baker" . Sylvester McCoy, Tom Baker, Paul McGann and Jon Pertwee are my top four.

Yeah — beat you ! Well, as I said earlier in the thread, I quit over the female Master.

To be fair to the other two though, they were proper reboots weren't they? Not intended to be a direct continuation.

I still wonder why the hell everybody's forgotten about Blade ! I loved that film when it came out.

Peter Davison, as far as I know, is the only former Doctor who was against having females playing the part. He put forward the role model argument, especially citing the non-violent, thinking male hero aspect. But I don't think we are limited to role models who resemble us – I don't feel that way personally. There was a brilliant comment from a transgender fan who was watching Peter Capaldi's first Doctor Who story. They mentioned the scene where the Doctor is appealing to Clara to understand that it's still him even though he looks different, and says "Just see me", which is all this fan wanted from people – to be accepted. So not a carbon copy of that fan's experience but it was still relevant to them, without actually changing the sex of the character.

That's how I feel too. It's probably not true for the majority of the audience, fans or otherwise, but the success of this creative decision is unproven and we'll have to see what happens.

The agenda is to make money as easily as possible.

Some people are and some people are not; I would argue that young children are especially limited to people who resemble them (because familiarity and similarity are such key aspects for them) and they are also a group who needs good role models the most so that they can aspire to and learn good habits, life choices and character traits early on while they are still forming their ideas, personality and outlook on life.

Yeah, I think you're on the right track that they'll probably next try to change his race and then turn the Doc into a gender fluid non-binary pan sexual.

I don't think children need their role models to be that much like them. I can recall role models who were not of my own race, ethnic background or religion. Most were men, not my own age. I guess you could argue they were like me because they were males. Anyone out there have a role model who was the opposite sex outside of one's mother?

Yeah, unfortunately not in my own life but many women in the public eye.

"God willing we'll all meet again in Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money"'

You certainly wouldn't think so via Hollywood were they still make up the majority of the heroic characters whilst foreigners are still more likely to be cast as badguys.

I wish.


Just look at the press situation. The easiest solution is for studios and streamers is to cartel up and deny access to the social agenda waging parts of the press maximizing good PR.

Well the subject of sex, "or terrifying things like that" as Tom Baker put it , was avoided for a long time. Even romance, where it cropped up, was relatively vague. Peter Capaldi had a line towards the end about the Time Lords having moved beyond the human idea of "gender" but I thought how unimaginative and lacking in scope that sounded. In the classic series it was like they'd moved past thinking about gender or sex at all, and were on a different plane of existence.

I believe that this stuff can actually be detrimental to the goal of diversity.

A lot of people seem to be annoyed by these in-your-face diversity pushes. The craziest examples are remakes of movies of which the characters were male and are just being afforded a sex change for apparently no reason but diversity.

Now let's look at this psychologically - I think annoying people with showing unnatural female leads in their face can make them more negative towards female leads in general.
It could lead to people to think, every time even an original now movie features a female lead - "Is this another one of these diversity pushes?" rather than - "Is this a good movie?".
That's exactly what you don't want!
You want it to be natural. You want female leads to be more NORMAL - not oddities like original characters with sex changes. People could well become more negative (and if just subconsciously) towards ALL female leads because they are being annoyed all the time with this "tokenism". That's not normalization.
That's politics and unnatural. Not enjoyable and thus to be rejected by people. Diversity goal fail + negative consequences for all female characters. The latter in theory.

Just imagine 12 Angry Women. All in this small room, sweating...

__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.

They have a tv adaption. It’s called The View.

Not enough sweat, if you know what I mean.