I see your point about Oppenheimer though I disagree about your take on perception. There just wasn't any representation of women in the movie (again from what I understand having not actually seen it yet). Word out is what little representation there was, was the same old bullshit male view of women being pathetic that we're all so very very goddamned tired of.

At this point, it's a turn off for women coming to see films.

Otherwise, you'd have had more positive viewership from women. After all, women typically love historical pieces, more so than men, who tend to prefer action/adventures like Mission Impossible. This time frame.was a profound moment for all of us, for women it coincided the push for more equality and representation. For those of us who are coming into our grandmother years, it's a look at life during our grandmother's time so there was an missed opportunity for nostalgia here too.

There were a lot of really good reasons for women to want to see that film and for it to resonate for them. But the filmmakers made those turn off choices that they made and the fallout of those choices was what it was.

And it's not like anyone is saying there can never be male centered movies. There's certaonly a place for them, Oppenheimer included.

But does a movie have to diss on women and make women out to be so freaking pathetic all the time to be entertaining to men? Can't it just stand on its own merits without the constant fucking cheap shots? Including the ones against "lesser men"? Whatever the fuck that's supposed to even mean.