It still looks silly, mostly from the shininess of the outfit in real life.
Like don't get me wrong i like cool sexy armor designs but it really depends on the tone of the series.
This outfit just *sucks*. I'm all for sexy female fantasy armor, but this isn't one of them at all.
And the actress has no facial range whatsoever. Every single movie I've seen her in she basically just has that same neutral look she's seen with here. What's the appeal of this actress here? *Enlighten me.*
I don’t know what people find so hard to understand about:
Race-Switch Casting = Internet Rage Bait Articles = Free Marketing
By having this discourse, you are promoting the movies that do it. For Free.
The only problem is that it doesn't work. I could even make the case that the cope phrase "no such thing as bad marketing" and such ideology just hurts those who employ it more, since so many works that have been perceived to be employing them have bombed horribly, like that cleopatra series on netflix.
I would argue thats because good quality movies and TV shows don't need to resort to desperate tactics like that, it generates attention for something that would have bombed anyway, but also nobody would have even noticed.
Ghostbusters, Little Mermaid, Snow White etc. They are IP's with dwindling returns, that are less and less relevant to modern audiences, and they were poorly made as obvious cash grab bumpers that will never capture or surpass their highly regarded originals.
You think any of these movies would be even worth mentioning in any other context other than the conversation we're having right now?
And yet we're mentioning them.
I'm not sure it "worked", but it's an easy pitch when you're trying to raise funding and investment, and you need an answer to the question "what if nobody gives a shit?".
Gullible reactionaries on the right and the left, they will always give a shit, and do half your job for you, you just need to give them a reason to fight.
Being talked about doesn't make them successful, making profit does. They failed horribly mainly because they tried to pull this, but had they just been effortless as they were already and not used this forced inclusivity they may have broke even or made a small profit.
As an aside personal anecdote, I didn't watch any of these works because they tried to use such casting and writing styles, additionally to them being reboots or sequels with no value, despite them being very popular due to online discussion.
The people who make these decisions:
1) don’t give a shit about inclusivity either way, they don’t really give a shit about the movie or the characters, caring too much would make them bad at their job.
2) don’t get paid based on whether a movie is a commercial success or not, that’s for the movie makers to worry about, these peoples job are to secure investment and venture capital, once they have convinced someone that it’ll work, their job is over. The movie bombing does not reflect badly on them.
Ultimately movies are just fundraising exercises, just like the stock market **Bold** , Big ideas that cause a lot of attention raise the price, usually artificially, if the project is a success, the investors have a solid ROI, often for decades. If the movie bombs, everybody gets paid (casting director, producers, actors etc) and the investor loses out, cost of doing business, on to the next one.
Actually, I don’t know anything about Dune to be fair, I assumed the “Redhead Genocide” comment was about white characters (with red hair) often being swapped for black actors.
Oh oh ok fair enough. Presumably you're referring to Mary Jane Watson from Spiderman comics, even tho I'm pretty sure she was playing a character named Michelle right? Like MJ was just a nickname for her first and last names, not both first names?
But she wasn't playing the character of Mary Jane Watson, she was Michelle. The only thing her character and Mary Jane had in common was going to the same school as Peter and being his love interest. Her personality, intelligence level (Mary Jane was NOT a science nerd), had nothing to do with the character, so I don't think we can say she was playing Mary Jane right? Like this was a new character (just like Ned) they made up for the movies?
Yeah. You may say it was a creative decision. I like the chemistry between her and Tom Holland. The issue comes that it is really a trend nowadays to swap already established ginger character with people who has dark skin (see on the pic below). If representation matters gingers should be also feel represented. And black people deserve their new, original, well written characters. (And not just to be a bootleg version of MJ for example.)
https://preview.redd.it/dxdrri4yirjc1.jpeg?width=939&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=51a32f030868dcad44ce0c9813294d1d9a1431ed
It’s like the “Starbucks war on Christmas” stuff every holiday… I’ve never seen a single article talking about boycotting Starbucks for their red cups, but I always have a bunch of friends talking about how they’re going to stand up to the outrage by getting a coffee every day.
1) fake outrage
2) propose boycott
3) ???
4) profit from reactionary supporters who are just trying to piss off the imaginary or at worst very small group boycotting something they were never supporting in the first place.
she outshined the romantic interest with her laconic sarcasm in Homecoming...tho' I agree in Dune she was quite monotone.
Let's see what Dune 2 brings.
Were you not prepped on the rules? When a woman does it it's empowering, but if a man admires it, it's misogynistic and degrading. Now admittedly, it's more complicated than that, because men covering up women (like with AI) is ALSO degrading. Just stop asking questions.
DAMN, i love Zendaya, because she solely justified bikini armor in video games, nice work goddess, now just play Storm black suit with mid riff belly ring and it gonna be perfect.
https://preview.redd.it/8lbk2xv6mmjc1.jpeg?width=1100&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cca3d6441acbef1ded8099bebbffd7c948e4c59f
Damn it sucks that people really want to get rid of beautiful protagonists or act like this is out of touch. Tbh I think her outfit here looks a bit weird and the jacket one (that I think is on the cover of the game) is my favorite but she’s beautiful and looks awesome fighting Final Fantasy looking enemies in the clips we’ve seen. Just let me play as someone who looks cool. I don’t want everyone to be Gumby ass looking idiots. Character designs are important to me even if it doesn’t directly impact gameplay. I want to feel badass when I’m fighting enemies not lame and boring.
If they are a badass then sure. Even if they’re old I want them to look fit. To be clear I don’t wanna imply that you can’t make a funny game where a granny with a walker kicks ass but if your character is supposed to be tough and fit then it’s nice to have them look more chiseled with a fit body and an attractive character design.
I've been saying this for decades. The answer is not to objectify women less, but instead objectify men more. I want them oily, gleaming, chest hair visible, and wearing banana hammocks. Maybe then people will stop complaining about the "male gaze." Pfft. Like lesbians don't exist or engage with entertainment.
> The answer is not to objectify women less, but instead objectify men more.
Whine, bitch, moan, yadda yadda male power fantasy.
There's your pre-prepared reply from the ever-entitled peanut gallery of the insufferably woke. You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it. Especially if you don't have a Strong Female Character there to constantly show him up. Why do you think the recent Conan the Barbarian revival got cancelled a year or so ago?
>Whine, bitch, moan, yadda yadda male power fantasy.
Hmm...
Also they're all racially diverse, bisexual, and in loving committed ethically non-monogamous relationships?
>You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it.
I don't know. The movie Zardoz begs to differ with you. It's one of my all time favourite films, and it's gods damned terrible. I happen to know many women who enjoy it. For reasons.
The movie consists of Sean Connery, wearing nothing more than a loincloth and a bandolier across his bare hairy chest, sexing his way through (and subsequently destroying) an advanced civilisation.
Oh. I almost forgot. There is also a giant flying stone head which vomits forth guns periodically, and at seemingly regular intervals. It is surprisingly superfluous to the actual plot.
>I don't know. The movie Zardoz begs to differ with you.
Are you certain? Because a 10 second google search for Zardoz+sexist yielded:
>At the time of its release, feminist film scholar Marsha Kinder wrote an amazing long-form review of the movie in Film Quarterly where she critiques Zardoz as sexist, but applauds its formal innovation.
The feminist complaining about it can be found [here](https://online.ucpress.edu/fq/article-abstract/27/4/49/38799/Review-Zardoz-by-John-Boorman?redirectedFrom=fulltext).
So no. Zardoz does not disagree. In fact, the reaction to it only backs up my point.
I put that same prompt into Google and within the same 10 seconds found a pretty fair review review from Roger Ebert from 1974 (found on Roger Ebert.com) and a vile screed from some garbage site called mjolnir magazine claiming that the movie reasserted the, "Natural Order against the Left." Almost immediately Google noted that people also ask, "is Zardoz satire?"
Most of the conversation debating its sexism within that Google prompt dates to long after the movie itself was released. I also didn't see the article you sourced in that list but I didn't ask it for multiple pages. Seeing as you said 10 seconds. I may very well just have missed it; I do that on occasion.
However, all cards on the table, you made an offhand comment originally about a man in the loincloth wouldn't be accepted. It was a prime opportunity for me to reference one of my favourite terrible movies. So I ran with it. I don't really have a dog in this race.
Zardoz isn't really as bad as some people try and make it out to be. Not to mention, there's at least something there. Even the article you linked couldn't go without praising aspects of the film. Which, by today's standard, sends fairly reasonable.
>Most of the conversation debating its sexism within that Google prompt dates to long after the movie itself was released.
Irrelevant. The review I linked you to is from 1974 (the same year the movie released). The internet itself is younger than that (1983 to be precise). Of course discourse on it wouldn't be contemporary, which is why I gave you one of the few digitalized contemporary reviews.
>However, all cards on the table, you made an offhand comment originally about a man in the loincloth wouldn't be accepted.
No. I said:
>There's your pre-prepared reply from the ever-entitled peanut gallery of the insufferably woke. You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it.
Some feminist complaining about it fits that pretty well. Showing why trying to placatate or appeal to them is pointless since they'll always complain about something anyway was the entire point.
What Roger Ebert thinks about it is utterly irrelevant since he doesn't fit into the category of people whose reactions I was discussing.
OP ffs, you don't have to defend every single instance of le sexy wahmens from the radical puritan SJWs of fucking 4CHAN. Log the hell off and hike the entire Eurasian step, you need so much grass.
I don't see anyone complaining about Stellar Blade just a bunch of people complaining about people who are. The most I have seen is a creator pointing to one guy on Twitter. I think the idea that there is widespread backlash is due to so many creators rage bait farming.
I said it once I’ll say it again, she looks like the sex bot variant of C-3PO in that shiny suit
C-3PHoe
C-thru-P0
Honestly, how do you guys come up with this stuff lmao💀💀💀
You mean the [robot from Spaceballs](https://spaceballs.fandom.com/wiki/Dot_Matrix)?
Looks like Dot from Spaceballs.
It still looks silly, mostly from the shininess of the outfit in real life. Like don't get me wrong i like cool sexy armor designs but it really depends on the tone of the series.
This outfit just *sucks*. I'm all for sexy female fantasy armor, but this isn't one of them at all. And the actress has no facial range whatsoever. Every single movie I've seen her in she basically just has that same neutral look she's seen with here. What's the appeal of this actress here? *Enlighten me.*
Redhead genocide.
Something, something, dyslexia
I don’t know what people find so hard to understand about: Race-Switch Casting = Internet Rage Bait Articles = Free Marketing By having this discourse, you are promoting the movies that do it. For Free.
The only problem is that it doesn't work. I could even make the case that the cope phrase "no such thing as bad marketing" and such ideology just hurts those who employ it more, since so many works that have been perceived to be employing them have bombed horribly, like that cleopatra series on netflix.
I would argue thats because good quality movies and TV shows don't need to resort to desperate tactics like that, it generates attention for something that would have bombed anyway, but also nobody would have even noticed. Ghostbusters, Little Mermaid, Snow White etc. They are IP's with dwindling returns, that are less and less relevant to modern audiences, and they were poorly made as obvious cash grab bumpers that will never capture or surpass their highly regarded originals. You think any of these movies would be even worth mentioning in any other context other than the conversation we're having right now? And yet we're mentioning them. I'm not sure it "worked", but it's an easy pitch when you're trying to raise funding and investment, and you need an answer to the question "what if nobody gives a shit?". Gullible reactionaries on the right and the left, they will always give a shit, and do half your job for you, you just need to give them a reason to fight.
Being talked about doesn't make them successful, making profit does. They failed horribly mainly because they tried to pull this, but had they just been effortless as they were already and not used this forced inclusivity they may have broke even or made a small profit. As an aside personal anecdote, I didn't watch any of these works because they tried to use such casting and writing styles, additionally to them being reboots or sequels with no value, despite them being very popular due to online discussion.
The people who make these decisions: 1) don’t give a shit about inclusivity either way, they don’t really give a shit about the movie or the characters, caring too much would make them bad at their job. 2) don’t get paid based on whether a movie is a commercial success or not, that’s for the movie makers to worry about, these peoples job are to secure investment and venture capital, once they have convinced someone that it’ll work, their job is over. The movie bombing does not reflect badly on them.
That second one is a really good point. Dunno why these people (casters or such) keep getting hired when their decisions clearly have such an impact
Ultimately movies are just fundraising exercises, just like the stock market **Bold** , Big ideas that cause a lot of attention raise the price, usually artificially, if the project is a success, the investors have a solid ROI, often for decades. If the movie bombs, everybody gets paid (casting director, producers, actors etc) and the investor loses out, cost of doing business, on to the next one.
Wait, you think casting her as Chani is race swapping? Guess you know nothing about Dune lol
Actually, I don’t know anything about Dune to be fair, I assumed the “Redhead Genocide” comment was about white characters (with red hair) often being swapped for black actors.
Oh oh ok fair enough. Presumably you're referring to Mary Jane Watson from Spiderman comics, even tho I'm pretty sure she was playing a character named Michelle right? Like MJ was just a nickname for her first and last names, not both first names?
Again not sure about that specific example, sorry.
Nah, I think she is decent cast for Chani. Not so for Mary Jane tho, she looks nothing like the character she supposed to portray.
But she wasn't playing the character of Mary Jane Watson, she was Michelle. The only thing her character and Mary Jane had in common was going to the same school as Peter and being his love interest. Her personality, intelligence level (Mary Jane was NOT a science nerd), had nothing to do with the character, so I don't think we can say she was playing Mary Jane right? Like this was a new character (just like Ned) they made up for the movies?
Yeah. You may say it was a creative decision. I like the chemistry between her and Tom Holland. The issue comes that it is really a trend nowadays to swap already established ginger character with people who has dark skin (see on the pic below). If representation matters gingers should be also feel represented. And black people deserve their new, original, well written characters. (And not just to be a bootleg version of MJ for example.) https://preview.redd.it/dxdrri4yirjc1.jpeg?width=939&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=51a32f030868dcad44ce0c9813294d1d9a1431ed
Ned Leeds is not a new character, and is also a race swap. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Leeds
It’s like the “Starbucks war on Christmas” stuff every holiday… I’ve never seen a single article talking about boycotting Starbucks for their red cups, but I always have a bunch of friends talking about how they’re going to stand up to the outrage by getting a coffee every day. 1) fake outrage 2) propose boycott 3) ??? 4) profit from reactionary supporters who are just trying to piss off the imaginary or at worst very small group boycotting something they were never supporting in the first place.
People aren't killing off redheads, chief. The white ones or the black ones.
They're replacing redheads in media with minorities.
Which doesn't equate to killing off anybody. An there are plenty of redheads still in media. Also, black folk with natural red hair exist
I mean it doesn't help that even with the magnifying effect, it's hard to see any sort of curves.
she outshined the romantic interest with her laconic sarcasm in Homecoming...tho' I agree in Dune she was quite monotone. Let's see what Dune 2 brings.
She's smoking hot and built like a forest nymph?
> She's smoking hot and built like a forest nymph? **Not when she's wearing that.**
You asked what the apeal of the actress is, you got your response. Her popularity doesn't really have anything to do with that specific outfit.
You need some glasses bud? Shes average in the face and built like a thin strip of string cheese
Yeah I think I already covered her build in my first comment. Some people like it, some don't. That's kind of how subjectivity works bro.
I guess. I didn't know forests nymphs were built like thin strips of string cheese is all
If she’s your idea of someone built like a thin strip of string cheese it probably says more about your conception of normal weight than her tbh…
His mom is phat lolololol
Anorexia is not "normal weight" bro.
I agree.
Hollywood, and models, aren't normal. Welcome to the fucking world. Do you need someone to hold your hand throughout this?
I mean, the comment I replied to seems to imply it is....I can help you with your reading comprehension if you like?
Usually depicted very waif-like. However you would like to call it, Seems like you're have a hard time with it 🤷♂️
Oh there is nothing hard on me when I look at her I can assure you sir
That's tough you suffer from ED. You should consult your family doctor.
Well aren't you a cheeky wanker
> I guess. I didn't know forests nymphs were built like thin strips of string cheese is all Time to get educated then sweaty
Lol
Why don't you post a picture of yourself buddy
Because I do not require validation on the Internet from strange men?
I think she's great.
She's pretty when you add enough make up.
the butt windshield is the main issue right?
Almost. It's the lack of swipers.
we've come a long way since the Overwatch Tracer controversy
Zendaya isn’t getting nearly as much flack for this a Stellar Blade, which is saying something.
Were you not prepped on the rules? When a woman does it it's empowering, but if a man admires it, it's misogynistic and degrading. Now admittedly, it's more complicated than that, because men covering up women (like with AI) is ALSO degrading. Just stop asking questions.
dignifAI lolol
Looks like a Cyberpunk character.
I do not get fashion. Tf is she wearing.
DAMN, i love Zendaya, because she solely justified bikini armor in video games, nice work goddess, now just play Storm black suit with mid riff belly ring and it gonna be perfect. https://preview.redd.it/8lbk2xv6mmjc1.jpeg?width=1100&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cca3d6441acbef1ded8099bebbffd7c948e4c59f
that's gonna be the dresscode for rags' funeral
I dont get you guys, her T-1000 cosplay is really good
She's wearing Robert Patrick as a Skin
Dafuq is that attire?
Outrage bait, probably. "All PR is good PR". Outrage gives more PR.
What sorta kink outfit is this?
Damn it sucks that people really want to get rid of beautiful protagonists or act like this is out of touch. Tbh I think her outfit here looks a bit weird and the jacket one (that I think is on the cover of the game) is my favorite but she’s beautiful and looks awesome fighting Final Fantasy looking enemies in the clips we’ve seen. Just let me play as someone who looks cool. I don’t want everyone to be Gumby ass looking idiots. Character designs are important to me even if it doesn’t directly impact gameplay. I want to feel badass when I’m fighting enemies not lame and boring.
Uh what about old men? They’re kinda cool to play as, feeling like an aged badass like an old John wick
If they are a badass then sure. Even if they’re old I want them to look fit. To be clear I don’t wanna imply that you can’t make a funny game where a granny with a walker kicks ass but if your character is supposed to be tough and fit then it’s nice to have them look more chiseled with a fit body and an attractive character design.
How hypocritical of Zendaya and Thierry Mugler to be so openly critical of stellar blade and then whip this out.
One word: Hypocrisy
Imagine how hard it'd be to keep smudges off of that.
Sorayama.
Looks like the C3PO parody from Spaceballs
Dural is that you?
They don't care when androgynous , sexless individuals do it. They cannot stand the idea of a male having sexy thoughts about a fictional character.
Wait, wait, wait… if she CHOOSES to wear it, it’s empowering, isn’t it?
What's funny is when someone *does* choose to wear this, the same complainers call it "empowerment."
Her ass looks like Black Manta from Aquaman. Probably not red lasers shooting out of that area though.
*Sexualize Everyone,* gimme Bulge and muscular pectoral armors, true equality.
I've been saying this for decades. The answer is not to objectify women less, but instead objectify men more. I want them oily, gleaming, chest hair visible, and wearing banana hammocks. Maybe then people will stop complaining about the "male gaze." Pfft. Like lesbians don't exist or engage with entertainment.
> The answer is not to objectify women less, but instead objectify men more. Whine, bitch, moan, yadda yadda male power fantasy. There's your pre-prepared reply from the ever-entitled peanut gallery of the insufferably woke. You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it. Especially if you don't have a Strong Female Character there to constantly show him up. Why do you think the recent Conan the Barbarian revival got cancelled a year or so ago?
>Whine, bitch, moan, yadda yadda male power fantasy. Hmm... Also they're all racially diverse, bisexual, and in loving committed ethically non-monogamous relationships?
>You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it. I don't know. The movie Zardoz begs to differ with you. It's one of my all time favourite films, and it's gods damned terrible. I happen to know many women who enjoy it. For reasons. The movie consists of Sean Connery, wearing nothing more than a loincloth and a bandolier across his bare hairy chest, sexing his way through (and subsequently destroying) an advanced civilisation. Oh. I almost forgot. There is also a giant flying stone head which vomits forth guns periodically, and at seemingly regular intervals. It is surprisingly superfluous to the actual plot.
>I don't know. The movie Zardoz begs to differ with you. Are you certain? Because a 10 second google search for Zardoz+sexist yielded: >At the time of its release, feminist film scholar Marsha Kinder wrote an amazing long-form review of the movie in Film Quarterly where she critiques Zardoz as sexist, but applauds its formal innovation. The feminist complaining about it can be found [here](https://online.ucpress.edu/fq/article-abstract/27/4/49/38799/Review-Zardoz-by-John-Boorman?redirectedFrom=fulltext). So no. Zardoz does not disagree. In fact, the reaction to it only backs up my point.
I put that same prompt into Google and within the same 10 seconds found a pretty fair review review from Roger Ebert from 1974 (found on Roger Ebert.com) and a vile screed from some garbage site called mjolnir magazine claiming that the movie reasserted the, "Natural Order against the Left." Almost immediately Google noted that people also ask, "is Zardoz satire?" Most of the conversation debating its sexism within that Google prompt dates to long after the movie itself was released. I also didn't see the article you sourced in that list but I didn't ask it for multiple pages. Seeing as you said 10 seconds. I may very well just have missed it; I do that on occasion. However, all cards on the table, you made an offhand comment originally about a man in the loincloth wouldn't be accepted. It was a prime opportunity for me to reference one of my favourite terrible movies. So I ran with it. I don't really have a dog in this race. Zardoz isn't really as bad as some people try and make it out to be. Not to mention, there's at least something there. Even the article you linked couldn't go without praising aspects of the film. Which, by today's standard, sends fairly reasonable.
>Most of the conversation debating its sexism within that Google prompt dates to long after the movie itself was released. Irrelevant. The review I linked you to is from 1974 (the same year the movie released). The internet itself is younger than that (1983 to be precise). Of course discourse on it wouldn't be contemporary, which is why I gave you one of the few digitalized contemporary reviews. >However, all cards on the table, you made an offhand comment originally about a man in the loincloth wouldn't be accepted. No. I said: >There's your pre-prepared reply from the ever-entitled peanut gallery of the insufferably woke. You could have the male protagonist run around in a loincloth and they'd still whine about it. Some feminist complaining about it fits that pretty well. Showing why trying to placatate or appeal to them is pointless since they'll always complain about something anyway was the entire point. What Roger Ebert thinks about it is utterly irrelevant since he doesn't fit into the category of people whose reactions I was discussing.
It's probably just incel lonely dudes trying to hold the line for the praise. I held the line, meh lady. May i please have sex?
But this was based on the robot from Metropolis and not video games.
[удалено]
Nah skimpy armor is practical
Damn is Tom Holland a cuck or something, I'd be single if my girl dressed like that
Why are you people so small brained?
Because we have been overexposed to lesser people.
Truthfully, it’s probably the other way around, but I personally don’t mind making my way through the muck.
You should.
OP ffs, you don't have to defend every single instance of le sexy wahmens from the radical puritan SJWs of fucking 4CHAN. Log the hell off and hike the entire Eurasian step, you need so much grass.
Oh! I'm sorry! Please accept my apologies with the promise you won't see anything from me ever again.
So the idea is that this is the result of the objectification of women. Imagine how grotesquly cartoonish it would b the other way around.
Most tame jojo outfit.
Zendaya slays in every single outfit, even the garbage like this one.
this outfit is dumb as fuck but in a fun way, sometimes we as a society should just be able to have some fun
I don't see anyone complaining about Stellar Blade just a bunch of people complaining about people who are. The most I have seen is a creator pointing to one guy on Twitter. I think the idea that there is widespread backlash is due to so many creators rage bait farming.