I don't care. What matters is if the movie is good. If she's a good actress and the movie is written well with a good story and plot and action. And it is a good movie. The sex of the main character will be irrelevant or not matter to me.
The franchise should've stopped with The Last Crusade, as that was the last good story and script. A female becoming Indiana is an admission of Cultural trend, and a possible spin-off of Tomb Raider.
I think these kinds of stories are done. But then, the 70s was rife with futuristic tropes of how the world could and perhaps should be, and look where we are now...
Fucking stupid. Feminist women are ruining EVERYTHING. They think that females have to do every little thing a man does. THIS IS A MALE CHARACTER FOR GODS SAKE! You know what women remind me of when they try to do everything men do? They remind me of the younger brother who whines to his mom because his older brother gets to do certain things. “But mooooooooommmmm, why does HE get to do *fill in the blank* but I canttttt?”
I personally liked the female version of Ghostbusters, but the Indiana Jones movies has had a male main character in all of the movies. I think it would ruin the movies. Hollywood needs to know when and when not to replace male characters with female ones
I'd say just don't switch the gender for established characters in established movies. Just saying, strong female leads aren't exactly that hard to find in the movies these days.
And if there's a series that is lacking strong female characters, then they can always write some in. Grow an imagination Hollywood, don't change history.
I dont give a damn who plays a role. So long as it is done well and is entertainung what does it matter. It's fiction. Things change. Its a nrw spin on something
Damn, we complain about stupid things these days -_-
I can see that, let’s not forget of real life women such as Amelia Earhart, Jane Goodall or Margret Mead who basically have done things, adventurers, explorers and just as daring as their male counterparts. It’s not a far-fetched idea
Not exactly groundbreaking, it would be a remake of Indiana Jones and a copy of Tomb Raider rolled into one. It's just for the money, any other justification is ridiculous.
3.7K opinions shared on Entertainment & Arts topic.
I think its alright. Indiana sound like a girls name anyways. Maybe they’ll be the next Alice from Resident Evil or Lara Croft (think Angelina, not this new girl).
Take ghost busters for example. They fucked it up. That's what happens when you take a character and change their gender (yes fucking gender). Same thing also happened with Doctor Who. 50 years of series tossed away by changing the main character's gender. And all that for stupid politics
@MidnightCowboy Fish - maybe, but I've never heard of such fish. If you mean Seahorse - nope, they just have the reverse sex roles (males give birth instead of females). Lizards - no, some lizards are unisexual (they have only one biological gender, usually female, they reproduce by parthenogenesis). Slugs and snails are hermaphroditic (each slug is both male and female at the same time, they don't need to change sex).
@MidnightCowboy Interesting, Clownfish and Wrasses, good to know and the only accurate example in the article. Corals are not much of an animals, they look more like plants, but ok. As for the slugs, it just comfirms what I said: Slugs are hermaphrodites, they don't change sex, they have both male and female organs, and they use them simultaneously. Snakes are reptilians, just like lizards, so it's not unusual for some species of snakes to reproduce by parthenogenesis, but that's not "changing the sex", it's just unisexualism (aka Gonochorism). Some birds can be both sexes simultaneously - that's not changing the sex, is't hermaphroditism. Lobsters and butterflies - it's possible because they are arthropods.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
95Opinion
Lara Croft comes to mind first.
Not like he’s bringing to the table something unique so I’d probably just check out. Spielberg is sometimes so far off base it’s ridiculous.
Yeah let's make the next "Lara Croft" into a guy. But still call him Lara Croft.
Most guys would hate that, me too actually. I don't see the point in this, it's a male character.
I don't care. What matters is if the movie is good. If she's a good actress and the movie is written well with a good story and plot and action. And it is a good movie. The sex of the main character will be irrelevant or not matter to me.
The PC pressure in Hollywood is obviously very strong!
The franchise should've stopped with The Last Crusade, as that was the last good story and script. A female becoming Indiana is an admission of Cultural trend, and a possible spin-off of Tomb Raider.
I think these kinds of stories are done. But then, the 70s was rife with futuristic tropes of how the world could and perhaps should be, and look where we are now...
Fucking stupid. Feminist women are ruining EVERYTHING. They think that females have to do every little thing a man does. THIS IS A MALE CHARACTER FOR GODS SAKE! You know what women remind me of when they try to do everything men do? They remind me of the younger brother who whines to his mom because his older brother gets to do certain things. “But mooooooooommmmm, why does HE get to do *fill in the blank* but I canttttt?”
I personally liked the female version of Ghostbusters, but the Indiana Jones movies has had a male main character in all of the movies. I think it would ruin the movies. Hollywood needs to know when and when not to replace male characters with female ones
I'd say just don't switch the gender for established characters in established movies. Just saying, strong female leads aren't exactly that hard to find in the movies these days.
And if there's a series that is lacking strong female characters, then they can always write some in. Grow an imagination Hollywood, don't change history.
In summary, I kinda agree with you, but they should make new characters rather than messing with history and continuity.
That's exactly what I was trying to get at
They already have a female in a similar type role, it’s called “Tomb Raider” no reason to change Indiana Jones like what happened to Ghost Busters
as some sort of spin-off of perhaps the off-spring or relative or simply indiana jones-esque person i understand it and i'm fine with it
but simply putting a female in the character role seems incongruous to the story
I dont give a damn who plays a role. So long as it is done well and is entertainung what does it matter. It's fiction. Things change. Its a nrw spin on something
Damn, we complain about stupid things these days -_-
I can see that, let’s not forget of real life women such as Amelia Earhart, Jane Goodall or Margret Mead who basically have done things, adventurers, explorers and just as daring as their male counterparts. It’s not a far-fetched idea
Gender bender reboots are dumb as fuck. I'd rather see new stuff with female leads
Not exactly groundbreaking, it would be a remake of Indiana Jones and a copy of Tomb Raider rolled into one. It's just for the money, any other justification is ridiculous.
I am heartbroken!
https://m.popkey.co/e7e69a/ed3xg.gif
I think its alright. Indiana sound like a girls name anyways. Maybe they’ll be the next Alice from Resident Evil or Lara Croft (think Angelina, not this new girl).
Take ghost busters for example. They fucked it up. That's what happens when you take a character and change their gender (yes fucking gender). Same thing also happened with Doctor Who. 50 years of series tossed away by changing the main character's gender. And all that for stupid politics
As long as a man gets to play Bridget Jones then cool. And Lara Croft. And Wonder Woman.
I think they should just stop rebooting and come up with something new, it’s about fucking time
I thought we have Lara Croft for that. The last movie was terrible. end the Serie already
What's the point? Humans can't change sex, only some frogs can do that.
Just frogs? There are also fish, snakes, lizards, and slugs that can as well
@MidnightCowboy Fish - maybe, but I've never heard of such fish. If you mean Seahorse - nope, they just have the reverse sex roles (males give birth instead of females).
Lizards - no, some lizards are unisexual (they have only one biological gender, usually female, they reproduce by parthenogenesis).
Slugs and snails are hermaphroditic (each slug is both male and female at the same time, they don't need to change sex).
This article proves otherwise
animalogic.ca/.../6-surprising-animals-that-can-change-sex
@MidnightCowboy Interesting, Clownfish and Wrasses, good to know and the only accurate example in the article.
Corals are not much of an animals, they look more like plants, but ok.
As for the slugs, it just comfirms what I said: Slugs are hermaphrodites, they don't change sex, they have both male and female organs, and they use them simultaneously.
Snakes are reptilians, just like lizards, so it's not unusual for some species of snakes to reproduce by parthenogenesis, but that's not "changing the sex", it's just unisexualism (aka Gonochorism).
Some birds can be both sexes simultaneously - that's not changing the sex, is't hermaphroditism.
Lobsters and butterflies - it's possible because they are arthropods.