Yeah, you're right. You're so friendly and congenial to those you disagree with, it's easy to imagine that other Hollywood people higher up in the food chain are equally level-headed.

I didn't mention anything about you in my post. I was just expressing my view, but as usual, like on 90% of the threads on this forum, you came down from the rafters like Sting to defend Hollywood by acting like what everyone assumes Hollywood people are like.

Quote:

---

People also like to support companies/makers/industries they imaginekind of appreciate them, and anyone right of center knows that these studios, these actors, these executives utterly despise us, so we have better things to spend our time/money on.

---

Lol- if you don't think every studio head/executive appreciates you, you don't know what you're talking about. They want every single one of yours, and everyone else's, dollars.

You'll not find one single studio or executive saying they don't like people right of center.

You certainly will, as you just did, say it's "what you imagine".

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

People also like to support companies/makers/industries they imaginekind of appreciate them, and anyone right of center knows that these studios, these actors, these executives utterly despise us, so we have better things to spend our time/money on.

---

Lol- if you don't think every studio head/executive appreciates you, you don't know what you're talking about. They want every single one of yours, and everyone else's, dollars.

You'll not find one single studio or executive saying they don't like people right of center.

You certainly will, as you just did, say it's "what you imagine".

---

They might want my dollars, but they don't seem to make many movies aimed at getting them. The vast majority of decision makers in the industry don't know and don't want to know how average people in flyover states think. You'd have to actively wear blinders not to hear and see the contempt the industry has for those outside their weird bubble. There are thankfully some that put profitability and common sense ahead of their ideology and need for Hollywood approval who just make solid content, which I appreciate.

YouBet said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

Going back to the idea of the lack of A list actors…

I legitimately wonder if the dearth of studio standard bearers plays a role in the downturn of the number of tickets sold.

There are a lot of great actors working, so I'm not talking about a lack of talented actors, I'm talking about there not being many "movie stars" anymore.

Someone on a previous thread called Tom Cruise the "last movie star" and I'm not sure they are wrong. I can't think of any names working today that have the status that Bogart, Clark Gable, Marilyn Monroe and John Wayne had. Into the 1970's 80's and 90's you had Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford, Robin Williams, Julia Roberts and Tom Cruise.

I know a few of these names are still alive and working, but they're not at the level they were, and I'm not sure anyone has risen up to take their place.

---

Cruise and Pitt are probably the last generations biggest names and they are in their twilight. DiCaprio.

I would say Gosling and Austin Butler are probably the two biggest newer names that I would consider movie stars. Butler probably not at level of Gosling but feels like he's about to be.

---

Chris Pratt had the look and talent to be on that trajectory, but then he made the fatal mistake of being an outspoken Christian.

Quote:

---

The vast majority of decision makers in the industry don't know and don't want to know how average people in flyover states think. You'd have to actively wear blinders not to hear and see the contempt the industry has for those outside their weird bubble.

---

Again, as has been made common In this thread, but won't be answered, *exactly* which executives don't "want to know how average people in flyover country think?"

And what do "average people in flyover country think"?

That people that aren't white shouldn't exist? That females shouldn't exist? What is it?

Cliff.Booth said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

Going back to the idea of the lack of A list actors…

I legitimately wonder if the dearth of studio standard bearers plays a role in the downturn of the number of tickets sold.

There are a lot of great actors working, so I'm not talking about a lack of talented actors, I'm talking about there not being many "movie stars" anymore.

Someone on a previous thread called Tom Cruise the "last movie star" and I'm not sure they are wrong. I can't think of any names working today that have the status that Bogart, Clark Gable, Marilyn Monroe and John Wayne had. Into the 1970's 80's and 90's you had Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford, Robin Williams, Julia Roberts and Tom Cruise.

I know a few of these names are still alive and working, but they're not at the level they were, and I'm not sure anyone has risen up to take their place.

---

Cruise and Pitt are probably the last generations biggest names and they are in their twilight. DiCaprio.

I would say Gosling and Austin Butler are probably the two biggest newer names that I would consider movie stars. Butler probably not at level of Gosling but feels like he's about to be.

---

Chris Pratt had the look and talent to be on that trajectory, but then he made the fatal mistake of being an outspoken Christian.

---

In 2023 Pratt voiced the lead of a billion-dollar smash hit (The Super Mario Bros. Movie) and starred in one of the last Marvel movies to make over $800M (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3).

In 2025 he starred in the most expensive movie Netflix has ever made (The Electric State), which, even though it sucked, immediately landed at #1 in America and in the top-10 in 93 countries. While he makes an appearance in a prequel TV series (The Terminal List) that only exists because his first season was so popular.

In 2026 he has a big sci-fi movie (Mercy), is returning to voice Mario (Super Mario World, likely to make another billion), and is rumored to return in some capacity in yet another likely billion-dollar earner (Avengers: Doomsday).

The idea that Pratt is even remotely being blacklisted or persecuted in any tangible way for his faith is complete and utter, woe-is-us delusion. But this is what you guys always do. You exaggerate a kernel of truth into the most ridiculous, overblown nonsense, ascribe everyone on the side opposite you as holding said belief/grudge, and then get pissed at them for the thing you're exaggerating in the first place. Your entire pop culture existence is lived through this lens, and it's just the dumbest **** ever.

TCTTS said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

I didn't mention anything about you in my post. I was just expressing my view, but as usual, like on 90% of the threads on this forum, you came down from the rafters like Sting to defend Hollywood by acting like what everyone assumes Hollywood people are like.

---

I was of course talking about your interactions with me as a whole, considering you're never not just as smarmy, mocking, and condescending to me as you claim I'm being to others.

---

I'm really not, though. I disagree with you at times, often I say something counter to your view and it summons you even though I didn't even mention you or call you out. Several times youve hyped up and liked a movie I also enjoyed and I've agreed with you. Never been on a mission specifically to bother you. You're just a guy who gets his feathers ruffled too easily. I stand by my opinion that many Hollywood decision makers and actors have disdain for anyone center or right, but if you deny that, fair enough. Chill, brother.

Quote:

---

I stand by my opinion that many Hollywood decision makers and actors have disdain for anyone center or right, but if you deny that, fair enough.

---

But you can't, if asked, name one single one of who those decision- makers are.

Literally can't name one if asked. And you were asked. And you still did not name one, while you posted multiple times.

It's what the F16ers do. Circle jerk, no one asks questions. If you're asked to defend that opinion here, you literally can't do it or name a single name or project.

"Stuff and things and I stand by my opinion. But no actual answer."

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

The vast majority of decision makers in the industry don't know and don't want to know how average people in flyover states think. You'd have to actively wear blinders not to hear and see the contempt the industry has for those outside their weird bubble.

---

Again, as has been made common In this thread, but won't be answered, *exactly* which executives don't "want to know how average people in flyover country think?"

---

Quote:

---

According to Sheridan, Yellowstone almost never saw the light of daythanks to an unnamed HBO executive who didn't believe in the concept.

As Sheridan recalls, the V.P said, "Look, it just feels so Middle America. We're HBO, we're avant-garde, we're trendsetters. This feels like a step backward. And frankly, I've got to be honest, I don't think anyone should be living out there [in Montana]. It should be a park or something."

---

Another actor basically echoed something similar on Rogan or another podcast that I can't fully remember. Its why Angel studios is having so much success, despite being a "christian" production co

Was Yellowstone ever a movie? No it was not.

So why would it enter the chat?

Does HBO have a niche? Absolutely they do. And they can tell you the number of shows they've turned down. Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Yellowstone, etc, which all went on to be made at other places.

Does that mean Hollywood decision makers hate flyover America? Obviously not, because they went on to be successful other places. Does that mean they didn't fit in with what HBO was doing (quite well) and curating? Yes.

Does any of that have to do with box office? Nope.

AggieOO said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

https://texags.com/forums/13/topics/3551309

Called it.

---

but you didn't blame it on woke liberals. That's the texags way.

---

Only a complete moron cannot see the damage done by the woke echo chamber that is Hollywood. Tom Cruise is the only one remaining that can make a good movie.

To support your point there's also the inadvertent politics that come into play like the fall out from #metoo which gave 7-8 years of ridiculous action movies with women in the lead roles.

Maybe they shouldnt plan programs around leading into "John freaking Oliver". Seems like a losing proposition to me.

HBO seems to have made quite a bit of money doing that.

Again- HBO has never in your life been curated to "flyover folks".

There's a place called CBS and its parent company for that, which is where Yellowstone landed.

But again- none of that has to do with summer box office.

Quote:

---

To support your point there's also the inadvertent politics that come into play like the fall out from #metoo which gave 7-8 years of ridiculous action movies with women in the lead roles.

---

Name them. (Ya'll never do.)

"The Force is Female". One of 50 examples. Asking us to list people or movies isn't the finishing move you think it is. Being an expert and playing dumb simultaneously is strange.

Drinker says it best, covers a lot of examples plus some of the ones actually done well. But Im sure none of these count to you because otherwise you wouldn't have asked me to specify something obvious.

20ag07 said:

---

What did you see a woman cast in that a man should have been?

Name those.

(Apparently there were 50, shouldn't be hard to toss out 5).

---

How about the terrible reboot of Ghostbusters?

MIB where only one of the leads was M?

Ocean's Whatever Number that was all female.

This one, too. Take your pick.