Видео

That's correct, but the Bojack quote wasn't claiming that the women were weak, only that the story wasn't about them. That absolutely applies to inception too. She mostly exists in the plot to interrogate and challenge DiCaprio, and basically every meaningful conversation they have is about him and his wife. We really don't ever learn that much about her.

@@alexbrittonfilms I agree, but in that same vein, the other non-protagonists also got the same non-level of detail. What do we know about anyone else in the crew besides "He's a guy DiCaprio knows who has a skill DiCaprio needs for his heist"? If Page's role were male and Hardy's role were female, wouldn't that have been even worse? We should compare side characters to side characters, not to main characters. Compare Hermione to Ron, not Hermione to Harry. In most cases I think Bojak's point still stands... but I'd argue that Inception isn't a good case to prove it.

@@SomeRUclipsTraveler I'd disagree in the sense that Cillian Murphy and DiCaprio's boss are side characters who are centered in the narrative, but I also recognize this criticism is kind of dumb if we're looking at Inception as a stand alone movie. I guess while I don't think Inception doesn't actively prove the theory, it doesn't contradict it either.

@@alexbrittonfilms you forget, she also exists to be the catalyst for info dumps to the audience, because she’s new to the inception stuff

Whose Rachel?

Yeah mr pb is just Chris traeger if he was a moron

That's the part who makes me laugh

Mr. Peanutbutter was starring in a TV show called “Birthday Dad”

Roundabout

It's not really anti-man. It's anti-strict gender roles and needing validation from the opposite sex. Remember, Ken's whole arc is that he's desperate for Barbie to validate his identity. He becomes a patriarchal macho man but it still doesn't fulfill him because he's still dependent on Barbie's approval, just now he feels entitled to it. In the end he is freed by realizing he's Kenough and that he doesn't need Barbie to be himself

How to tell a mf didn't watch either movie and just let some other mf from RUclips tell him what to think.

@@lazaroskarmaniolas7410 I’ll be honest I didn’t watch Barbie so I just listened to the director, writer and lead actress who all clearly stated it’s an anti-men movie pushing the message that men must be discriminated against. On the contrary I did not listen to anti-woke grifters on RUclips who pathetically cope that "it’s satirical". No it’s an anti-men movie and it’s the biggest success of the year. There’s a market for that, kudos to them. And I’ve seen a few Nolan movies. The protagonist is always a man. Who cares? There is a market for that also. I disagree with BoJack Simpman that Nolan should be forced to make movies about women, just like Gerwig should not be forced to make movies about men.

​@@thibaud1832You know one of the 2 writers was a man? (And the other was the director) But anyway, my why not watch it for yourself and then decide how satirical and man hating it is?

@@MichaelHayes_s6 Irrelevant. Many men are in favor of discrimination against men, just like many white people are in favor of discrimination against white people. It is true that many of those don’t realize this would mean discriminating against themselves and change their tune once they realize it but it is also true that many (like, I believe and the director and the writer) are true believers of the Woke Religion and are perfectly willing to martyr themselves to pay for the sin of being a man / white. Thanks for the offer but I will not give money to a movie that (1) explicitly calls for discrimination against men and (2) does not look like I would enjoy anyway. (2) is my original point. Unlike Crybaby BJ Simpman, I have no issue with people enjoying a movie not made for me, unlike those terrible writers who whine that Nolan should be forced to make movies that appeal to childless 18 to 34 liberal women for some reason.

What? This what you found to criticize about Inception😂

@@mahbubulhaque735 Well of course it has issues with exposition too but we're talking people's dreams here. We should have gotten way more crazy imagery and scenarios. The upside down buildings were a good start but then they're all just fighting with conventional weapons in conventional settings.

@@claydogg234I disagree. In fact if I remember correctly, they built the dreams, and did so in a way that the guy they wanted to “Incept” wouldn’t suspect it’s a dream. So they had to build on what he knows is real.

@@RealAlxBrz That makes me dislike it even more so basically they did a cop out at the beginning to avoid fantastical content. Fuck that is so Nolan.

Idk I can dig cold and metallic sometimes

Oppenheimer is about Oppenheimer

Exactly! That’s kinda where I fell on it too. It’s like, “Bruh, it’s a movie about him VERY MUCH from his perspective.” I guess it just seems disappointing that Florence Pugh and Emily Blunt - two amazing actresses - just feel a little bit wasted in here… At least, they did to me, @@rahamedstechnicalologyguid3613

Oppenheimer is about oppenheimer you genius. If the director doesnt want to concentrate on a certain characters in one's life, then so be it. How is that a complaint? Its like pet lovers one day will complain that mainstream movies dont care about the pets in protagonist's life?

When he stops making entertaining movies

You make something better than Inception and I'll accept your assessment of Nolan as a hack

When you grow a double digit braincells probably which aint gonna happen.

He's a great director but a shit writer so... Half a hack? Kind of like if Zack Snyder had a bigger ego

when are people gonna stop calling people hacks?

Sometimes. Sometimes

Women are half of the world. Only makes sense that half the movies would be about women

They don't he just keeps writing movies where women aren't real fleshed out people. For some reason Greta gerwig can give ken a real character and arc in barbie but Nolan kept the female characters surface level and mostly ignored the huge and revolutionary input of women in the Manhattan project. We don't even see oak ridge at all which was kinda lame. That's where women were employed in massive numbers enriching radioactive ore

@@MichaelSotoCE Let's be real the Manhattan Project and Most physics and STEM undertakings are overwhelmingly male. The film isn't particularly concerned with the nuances, but largely is about a character study of Oppenheimer himself and the effects of the Bomb on his mind.

50% of the population

@@shoxy-the-pinecone6113 and there are plenty of stories that can be about them. My question is why a movie about a man (in the title) has to fill a certain quota about women? Why does every time there's a successful piece of media, we HAVE to surrender ourselves to make it equal in representation?

Love me some birthday dad

What is this, a crossover series?!

was a great day. I went out to be enormously entertained, I ended up having a mirror way bigger than I ever could have expected held up to me. Twice.

Barbie was WAY too in your face about it, other movies and shows center around women a lot better without making it basically integral to the plot and so on the nose

@@thepocketlion6470Barbie had to be like that because the doll/character itself has been the subject of debate on whether it was aspirational or detrimental so there was no way to be subtle about it in the story

@@thepocketlion6470 I understand that to some degree, but I feel like it was almost refreshing that it was so in your face. A lot of the time when women try to complain about issues involving them or call things out we try to be subtle about it so as not to be "those women" who hate men and complain about everything. We make ourselves smaller and accept things we don't want to so that men won't hate us. But the barbie movie said fuck that, this is about women and feminism and we're not going to bury it or sneak it in with a more tolerable story. And I love that

@@nextgr8test That's probably the best explanation yet, I kinda get it now.

What a sexist

why would a movie about the 1940s USA be about women?

@@endhel_ It is a well documented fact, that there were indeed no women during 1940s USA

@@AmunSunrise-uw9qp there were also horses; did you expect the movie to be about horses?

​@@endhel_🤓

@@endhel_ had to add some female nude scenes tho

Alice in chainss

​@@Woaooa-fq5ei YEEEEAAAAH ALICE IN CHAINS

One is toxic positivity, the other toxic pessimism. They're both quite problematic and cling on their past but show very different sides of egocentric personality. Two sides of the same coin really..

I guess. They both hurt the people they love because they refuse to evolve as people and have a general obliviousness to other people's feelings or desires.

Peanutbutter didn't choke a friend over drugs so they don't belong in the same sentence.

@@beback_ over drugs? Bro couldn't even differentiate between what was the character and what was real life. So I guess you're not wrong

@@beback_ But Peanutbutter would not have hesited at all with Penny Carson 💀