Sunshine, Light, and Joy


This is a post that I've been thinking about for awhile. Recently, I opened up the discussion to other members of the staff to get their feelings on the matter, and their opinions generally matched mine, which is this:

Within the last year or so, there's been a steady increase of negative posts in movie threads. We've always had some heated discussions for some movies, but recently things have not only gotten more histrionic in those threads (generally speaking, the CBM ones), but they've started to spread to other franchises and other movies as well. I'm not talking about out-and-out trolling, I'm talking about members feeling they have to consistently shit on a movie (or studio, or star) simply because they aren't interested in the current project or projects. With every piece of news about a movie, it's now a virtual guarantee that there's a flood of people rushing to say they think it sucks, they don't like the current trailer/tv spot/actor/actress/director/concept. And I get it -- we all have movies we don't like, movies which we think are bad ideas, industry people that just don't appeal to us. But there's a fine line between expressing your opinion about this and doing it so often, with such consistency, that the collective emphasis of all of it basically brings down the entire thread and thus the entire forum.

There's no easy answer to this. We don't want to crush freedom of expression here. But at the same time, the spirit of this forum is for people to have fun talking about the movies they love and the box-office runs they love.

To have fun.

And while it may be fun -- in a sense -- to personally vent about a movie, or to vent at people who dare to enjoy something you don't, it doesn't bring fun to our community. In fact, it generally drags down the overall fun for everyone else. We've had people repeatedly mention to us over the last several months or so that in some cases they don't even bother going into some threads -- even for movies they're curious about! -- because they just don't want to deal with the overall mess those threads contain. And frankly, that matches the personal opinion of most of the staff as well.

So this post is both a request and a warning. 

The request: Next time you feel like taking a dump on a movie (or a topic) for the dozenth time, take a moment to consider whether it's really worth it. People probably already have a good idea of what your attitude about the project is. Maybe just put your posting energy into a movie that you enjoy and love or are excited about.

The warning: The staff is going to be taking a closer look at some of these threads and we'll be more active with temp thread-bans if we think it'll help the overall vibe of the forum. I'd rather we don't have to, but it's not going to constrain any of you too much if you aren't allowed to post about a movie you supposedly don't care about anyway.

Remember the words of Bill and Ted: "Be Excellent to Each Other".

They're just movies, guys. It's about having fun.

Welcome to The Box Office Theory — Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Mikasa Ackerman

Free Account
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About Mikasa Ackerman

  • Rank
    Sleeper Hit
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. He was supposed to be clearly flawed and kind of a dick, but not see himself as that way at all. Which the movie accomplishes very well. Whether or not you personally like or hate him as a protagonist is more subjective; we clearly disagree about that, but that's probably just taste.
  2. Mate he has killer line delivery in that movie, perfect for the tone and story they were going for. He doesn't seem like Nathan Drake to me at all, but that has nothing to do with how good he'd be as Spider-Man.
  3. Sure, he was the lead in one of the greatest comic book movies ever.
  4. I doubt it. As unexcited as I am, this still looks to be at least on par with Doctor Strange. This will be certified fresh and it'll make bank, I think I'm just kinda over the MCU's sameness. Give me genius or give me a disaster, but I don't wanna pay for flawless competence.
  5. As much as I loved GOTG2, and as hyped as I am for Ragnarok, I'm just not getting into this. This will probably be the first comic book movie I skip at the theater since Thor: The Dark World.
  6. Everyone stressed pretty strongly that this is Whedon completing and staying faithful to Snyder's vision, so there might be less writing on the fly than you'd expect.
  7. I think what Tele is saying is that that part has already been done, while Snyder was still working and in charge. Everything that Whedon is doing from now on isn't writing.
  8. I'm so tempted to check it out, but I've gone dark on all promo material until I see this. I regret even watching the Superman homage in the alley scene, should have saved it for the full experience in theaters.
  9. So, which of these gets knocked out by Baby Driver?
  10. So bad. I think Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart did a bit that highlighted this on an American Ultra promo.
  11. I don't dispute any of that, I was just adding a disclaimer about the Pine situation specifically. And although I agree that the Johansson and Adams criticisms were bullshit, it was pretty reasonable to question Gadot's acting and screen presence when she was cast.