Otter said:
LMAO what kind of logic is this. I guess because Obama was president racism can't be a problem either? I guess if a man marries a woman, he can't be a sexist pig? |
Actually, it does. Considering how many people voted for him, then add in the people who voted against him because of his policies, not his race, and you'll see it's not even close to the problem it was. Sure, there will always be a minority who are actual racists or sexists, but that's something that will always be true. Nor can it be policed/regulated away.
And for people to act like it's just as bad as it was in the early 1900s just for political points, as well as call someone who disagrees with their politics a racist or sexist, does nothing but harm the situation. It also turns a lot of people who disagree with you off from whatever cause you may have been trying to accomplish.
@ OP
I really hate looking at these movies in this ridiculous spectrum. Especially when you can find many examples of "female lead" movies doing well in the past. These new examples are pretty silly, as they are mostly co-leads.
The Beast/Prince is just as important in Beauty and the Beast. Really, he's the only one given a real character arc. In SW, we focus just as much on Finn as we do on Rey. In fact, in TFA he's the first one we're introduced to. Hunger Games may a true example, though I haven't watched it, so I'm not sure how much they focus on the other characters. Frozen is the only one I know for sure.
I think this just shows that if you have good movie, or even a really hyped up one, like SW, you can make a boatload, at least early on.
