Listen, if you're gonna openly seethe about it every time people mock something as foundationally ridiculous as "Cruella de Ville's backstory is that the Dalmatians shot first, holy shit that one used Enemy Step to jump-cancel a Stinger and launch her mother off a fucking cliff" because they're not meeting your personal standards of critique, you're gonna be in for a very long and draining thread.
Wow look at this asshole, he completely failed to consider the fact that Disney would, in fact, do something like this.
I mean yeah, a lot of people *will* like Cruella if you arbitrarily discount a bunch of people who did see it and don't like it because "they formed their opinions in the wrong way"
This argument is and will always be BS. Movies are marketed heavily to sell viewers on the movie, in other words, to create prejudgment on whether the movie's worth a viewer's time. If advertisers are going to try and manipulate my opinion positively, they can just live with it if their efforts backfire.
I checked the Reddit thread on it and lots of people there, who are expected to have watched the movie, like it. Meanwhile on Tumblr, people who admit to only reading the plot summaries and spoilers fill up the ranks of those who say it's terrible. Course, there are people who have seen and didn't like it, but those who out right dislike it are a minority. The consensus right now is that it's not terrible, but not a masterpiece and is better then expected and pretty fun in a sort of turn off your brain way.
What I essentially said, is that you should watch a movie, before making a real judgement on it. If I were to say that Avengers is just a dumb superhero movie full of brainless action or that Toy Story was a dumb cartoon not worth my time, based solely on the trailers, would I not be wrong to have judged them without watching them?
It would be foolish of you to try and summarize a movie's plot from a trailer without having watched it, or to presume to dispute facts about what's in the movie with people who've seen it if you haven't, but the trailer and other marketing exists to sell you on the movie, and if it fails you are perfectly justified in thinking you wouldn't like the movie, and not watching it, and expressing your dislike anyway.
But, if I didn't watch the movie, how could I say I didn't like it? This sounds like trying to justify not liking a book I didn't read because it's cover is ugly or boring.
I'm suspecting that in that case it was put more in place for the audience than to have any impact on the movie or it's character. I would be surprised if the entire thought process was "Oh shit, cruella is practiclly irredeemable, what do we do to make it so our movie is profitable (unlike dumbo)" *random out of touch puppy kicking exeutive from disney* "Have cruella's mother killed by dalmations, that'll be a surefire way to get the audience on board with those little shits dying"
Book covers have come quite a long way since the days of hand-binding in nondescript leather. They have visual art, reviewer quotes, summary blurbs, and other information. Movie marketing contains by far more information. All of this is designed to make you prejudge the thing - and indeed, to get you to like it before you see it, so that you will see it. You're arguing that marketers are entitled to provoke prejudgments, but that the audience is not entitled to make negative prejudgments - in other words, that we are entitled to feel or think about the movie only what the marketers want us to think or feel, and that we get the right to a different judgment back only by paying for a ticket. Screw that. If I'm invited to a prejudgment, it can well be negative.
I mean, when Soul came out, the trailers were pretty dumb. Big emphasis on comedy over story and drama. Indeed the marketing for lots of cartoons is still pure focus on comedy. Would you think a person still be justified in thinking that cartoons are all dumb and childish, even though the marketing presents it as that? I mean I myself had no interest in Soul because of the marketing. But, I decided to watch on a whim one day, and saw it was good. But, prior to that, I wasn't going on about how terrible it was solely because of the trailers. I just didn't care for it. Thought it was dumb. Same with Zootopia. And most Pixar movies, really.
Yes, they would be entirely justified - especially but not solely if the thing being advertised hasn't come out yet and they have nothing to compare the advertising with, but even afterwards, assuming they take in other information about the thing (reviews, word of mouth, snippets they happen to catch while browsing (though the last one is becoming rarer with the move toward streaming and the need for viewers to affirmatively choose what they'll watch)). Marketing is supposed to influence you. You are justified in being influenced.
So I kinda think that while making fun of this film is fine and frankly hilarious, the endless wailing and gnashing of teeth about death of risk taking is kinda pointless, because it pretends that before the current era Hollywood was always full of new ideas and innovation, and not that being a relative blip in the actual history of cinema that was the New Hollywood movement.
babylonbee.com
Checked out the article... And remembered its babylonbee one of the many victims of conservative "brainworms" in 2020 where they went from a sorta "both sides need self reflection, hence we shall satarize them" to STEVEN CROWDER the website... What I'm getting at is you sent me down a rabbithole filled with extreme sexism and transphobia. "Hijinks Ensued"*LOL*
Disney Announces New Movie Telling Sympathetic Feminist Origin Story Of Xenomorph Queen
BURBANK, CA—Disney announced today a new standalone Alien prequel that tells the sympathetic origin story of the Xenomorph Queen.
