Ghost in the Shell | March 31, 2017 | Scarlett Johansson | Paramount | New Trailer on page 43!!!

[Ozymandias]

5 hours ago, UrosepsisFace said:

I wonder how Blade Runner 2049 will do in comparison. Naked-Scarjo/Anime-inspired/PG-13 I would have thought had an advantage over Gosling/80's-nostalgia/R. I can't imagine Blade Runner 2049 looking better than this movie.

 

Theres no doubt in my mind that Bladerunner 2049 will look amazeballs.  But I don't expect it to make a lot of money no matter how good it is, especially if its anything like the original.

[Mulder]

1 hour ago, DamienRoc said:

 

Touche. 

[davincicode1]

https://atrl.net/forums/topic/26067-journalists-banned-from-asking-scarjo-about-whitewashing/

anyone surprised?

[Barnack]

21 minutes ago, davincicode1 said:

https://atrl.net/forums/topic/26067-journalists-banned-from-asking-scarjo-about-whitewashing/

anyone surprised?

 

Not really, big star can have a list of question they will refuse to answer (and it is way better to tell it to the interviewer in advance) for movie press junket, they will find enough people for who the access is worth it under those condition.

 

Those you disagree are free to refuse to give the movie any free publicity on their platform, it is a purely commercial transaction those movie promo tour, actor are not politician or executive of a public traded company that have to answer anything to anyone, just please their boss paying them millions to promote the movie.

 

It must be really common, and only the biggest name in "journalism" will get interview with actor during a promo tour without those conditions I would imagine.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Barnack

[Klingo]

13 minutes ago, davincicode1 said:

https://atrl.net/forums/topic/26067-journalists-banned-from-asking-scarjo-about-whitewashing/

anyone surprised?

I be annoyed being asked about it if i was promoting the movie.  In any case she should have gone full nude while fighting to boost box office numbers.

[RandomCat]

1 minute ago, Barnack said:

 

Not really, big star can have a list of question they will refuse to answer (and it is way better to tell it to the interviewer in advance) for movie press junket, they will find enough people for who the access is worth it under those condition.

 

Those you disagree are free to refuse to give the movie any free publicity on their platform, it is a purely commercial transaction those movie promo tour, actor are not politician are executive of a public traded company that have to answer anything to anyone, just please their boss paying them millions to promote the movie.

 

It must be really common, and only the biggest name in "journalism" will get interview with actor during a promo tour without those conditions I would imagine.

 

This is true of anyone giving an interview on camera, doesn't matter who. The interviewer is given a list of things they may not discuss, and the interviewee is usually given a gist of topics that will be brought up, if not specific questions. There is no TV interviewer that doesn't get these kinds of limitations put on them when sitting down with a interviewee.

[straggler]

I don't root against films. But something about this film was offputting. Not the PC stuff. Just you had a marketing campaign that consisted of pandering to stereotypical fanboys with the enticement of seeing Scarjo dressed provocatively. That was it.   

[Barnack]

7 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

This is true of anyone giving an interview on camera, doesn't matter who.

 

I think an exception should (and if often made) for politicians, most serious platform will refuse to discuss questions before hands, and politicians should be under pressure to do them like this by the public (that will refuse to vote for them if they do not do them).

 

But for actors, obviously it is not a big deal, they are only acting and just there to sell a product with media perfectly free to not participate if they disagree, their is close to 0 importance to that process.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Barnack

[RandomCat]

6 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

I think an exception should (and if often made) for politicians, most serious platform will refuse to discuss questions before hands, and politicians should be under pressure to do them like this by the public (that will refuse to vote for them if they do not do them).

 

But for actors, obviously it is not a big deal, they are only acting and just there to sell a product with media perfectly free to not participate if they disagree, their is close to 0 importance to that process.

 

I was very specific while saying TV interviews. And politicians aren't given the exception here in the States, if you're appearing on TV there is a list of things that you're there to talk about. There aren't exceptions, otherwise you will lose access to that politician, and potentially others, which will hurt ratings and revenue. But that's why I was conscious of saying TV interviews, which isn't the same as print interviews.

[Barnack]

5 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

 

And politicians aren't given the exception here in the States, if you're appearing on TV there is a list of things that you're there to talk about.

 

Wow, even on 60 minutes and stuff like that ? I knew they did for late night tv shows, but I thought serious journalist interview were different. Is it new ? In the 90's CBS told politicians they would never agree to give questions in advance to politicians, a list of broad topic at best.

 

Quote

There aren't exceptions, otherwise you will lose access to that politician, and potentially others, which will hurt ratings and revenue.

 

Sure but usually they must all stick together (serious platform) and loose credibility and ratings if they become junket and simple publicity platform for politicians.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Barnack

[Valonqar]

I never understood why, of all hard-bodied actresses, Hollywood decided to groom the most soft-bodied of them all for an action star. That had to break down somewhere and it didn't take long. Lucy was a fluke. It came at the right time - girl power fad was still big, low competition, fun marketing - and that was really it. 

[RandomCat]

Just now, Barnack said:

 

Wow, even on 60 minutes and stuff like that ? I knew they did for late night tv shows, but I thought serious journalist interview were different. Is it new ? In the 90's CBS told politicians they would never agree to give questions in advance to politicians, a list of broad topic at best.

 

Interviewers are rarely fed questions, they're fed topics to either discuss or avoid. Like Obama going into any interview, the interviewer was given what Obama wanted to talk about, like Healthcare, or whatever news topic of the day. They were probably also given things not to talk about, like birth certificates, or things like that. shows like 60 Minutes are issue oriented shows, you go on to discuss the issue of the day, so often any random side questions would be strongly discouraged.

[Dementeleus]

It's a mistake to equate entertainment journalism with actual journalism, especially during promotional campaigns.

 

This is all marketing, including the entertainment reporters. Their job is not to ask thoughtful or provocative questions or drive at the heart of something within a performance or a controversy. Their job is to lob softballs at the stars and let them shine. In return, they get lots of eyeballs on their column or site or video.

[Barnack]

28 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

I never understood why, of all hard-bodied actresses, Hollywood decided to groom the most soft-bodied of them all for an action star. That had to break down somewhere and it didn't take long. Lucy was a fluke. It came at the right time - girl power fad was still big, low competition, fun marketing - and that was really it. 

 

I think people tend to over analyse Hollywood has some entity that groom people, have long term plan (or any concerted plan at all) for them, Lucy for example had nothing to do with Hollywood, it was a 100% French production (at 49 million Euro one of the biggest ever) and still picked her.

 

Production company:

EuropaCorp

TF1 Films Production

Canal+

Ciné+

TF1

 

Has for Lucy, it had fun marketing of a proven movie trope and one of the biggest director of the planet in Besson. Besson has 4 of the 100 biggest french movie of all time (Lucy being the lowest ticket sellers of those 4), plus some critics/cult hit like Nikita and Leon the Professional, it certainly played in the movie massive overseas success, Besson had is name on the poster in many of them.

 

Has for why Johansson got pick for many action movie, there is the obvious vast acting experience and track record, acting chop for her age, but many has that, how ridiculously beautiful she is probably played a big part of that, specially for action movie that target male audience like Marvel and Ghost in the Shell.  Angelina Jolie almost retiring completely from acting leaved a bit of a hole in the female action movie star that Johansson picked up (and Theron with Madmax, Fast and Furious, Atomic Blonde).

Edited April 3, 2017 by Barnack

[Valonqar]

But didn't fill. Yeah, I get what you are saying. Good post. I just think she's completely wrong for the genre. Got away in a supporting role in MCU where everyone is more interesting than her and stands out far more. Lucy was a fluke. delusion is over. 

Edited April 3, 2017 by Valonqar

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, Valonqar said:

But didn't fill. Yeah, I get what you are saying. Good post. I just think she's completely wrong for the genre. Got away in a supporting role in MCU where everyone is more interesting than her and stands out far more. Lucy was a fluke. delusion is over. 

 

I don't buy this at all. There are a handful of other actresses who either are action stars or are becoming them, but ScarJo's right at the top with any of them.

[Marcus Cato]

1 hour ago, davincicode1 said:

https://atrl.net/forums/topic/26067-journalists-banned-from-asking-scarjo-about-whitewashing/

anyone surprised?

 

This story is old, it happened last year when they were shooting the film. There was a group of journalists that went to New Zealand to talk to her. This year, during the promotional tour for the film, she answered questions about whitewashing many times.

 

She talks about it at 1:05

Edited April 3, 2017 by Marcus Cato

[Nova]

13 minutes ago, Telerian said:

It's a mistake to equate entertainment journalism with actual journalism, especially during promotional campaigns.

 

This is all marketing, including the entertainment reporters. Their job is not to ask thoughtful or provocative questions or drive at the heart of something within a performance or a controversy. Their job is to lob softballs at the stars and let them shine. In return, they get lots of eyeballs on their column or site or video.

This is 100% true BUT I also want to point out that Rupert Sanders went out of his way to say that the whole white washing thing was only coming from America and that he got no questions about it during his international press tour. Of course the latter is very well true but it's true because the journalist were asked not to ask these type of questions. Paramount itself even said that the journalist were asked to not ask the questions so that they don't offend Scarlett and company. As if we didn't know that only certain topics are allowed to be discussed. So I think it's kind of stupid on his part to say it's only coming from the American media just because he wasn't asked about it during his international press tour. 

 

Anyways as you said when it comes to media related stuff, you'd be stupid to believe that the topics a journalist is allowed to ask aren't given before hand and that there are indeed limitations. This is no different. 

[Barnack]

3 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

But didn't fill. Yeah, I get what you are saying. Good post. I just think she's completely wrong for the genre. Got away in a supporting role in MCU where everyone is more interesting than her and stands out far more. Lucy was a fluke. delusion is over. 

 

I didn't saw many Johansson action movie (didn't saw any Iron Man, Lucy or Gits) so I will have to defer judgement on being wrong for the roles.

 

But Gits seem to be playing close to Oblivion/Elysium (2 of the best comparable for that movie) oversea, will see with the holdover and Japan/China, but even Damon and Cruise do not much more than Gits when the movie do not deliver big time and no one started to say they were wrong for the genre and over, obviously a different track record, but still example of what sci-fi on the colder side with mixed reaction tend to do.

[Valonqar]

18 minutes ago, Telerian said:

 

I don't buy this at all. There are a handful of other actresses who either are action stars or are becoming them, but ScarJo's right at the top with any of them.

 

I don't think that any of them opened enough movies to be called an opener or an action star. Lucy obviously wasn't enough and GitS barely retained any of that audience. So jury's out but, IMO, they should give action parts to someone who looks the part and at least blends well with her stunt double which Scarlett absolutely doesn't. 

 

It's good to see the press talking about this bomb. Not gonna get swept under the rug as quickly as they hope. 

Edited April 3, 2017 by Valonqar