Is there a way to get woke without going broke?

[Groverman62]

Like is there a right way of including non-straight non-white people that isn't pandering agenda-pushing or any of those usual critcisms that get tossed around when these things come up

[IndigoErth]

I suppose don't trample existing characters by altering them and ignore idiots who cry against inclusion as being an "agenda" when new ones are created and help to expand an existing franchise.

[ZariusTwo]

Exactly, less cultural vandalism/appropriation and more balanced cultural integration.

Also try not to diminish and put down all straight white people when doing so. It's equality we're working towards, not superiority.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

First and foremost, write good stories and write good characters.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

Here's an example. Which sounds more pandering?

This example is using a character I'm including in a novel I'm writing

1. Gaenli is a female Dracolloc Assassin

or

2. Gaenli is an assassin, who is also a female Dracolloc

[IndigoErth]

Neither imo, the first wording just sounds more natural and less clunky.



People in general just need to get over this stupid thought that a character different from them or not aimed at them is an attempt to pander to someone else, and trying to invalidate that character, as if they are an entitled default audience.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Exactly, less cultural vandalism/appropriation and more balanced cultural integration.

Also try not to diminish and put down all straight white people when doing so. It's equality we're working towards, not superiority.

Yep. The problem is that most of the "oppressed" groups are using "equality" as code word for "getting revenge", and anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Inb4 Thread Lock.

[Galactus]

This thread will certainly end well. For anyone that is interested in debating this before the inevitable lock down here we go...

First thing everyone should acknowledge is that the corporations that own all the intellectual properties will never go 'woke'. If they are ever seen to be going in a direction that follows a particular social or political agenda it's because there's significant market research that shows that will be commercially successful.

With all the talk of the comic industries problems with Covid-19 and how this will lead to a greater emphasis on digital distribution and trade it strikes me that not long ago when Marvel went that route it caused a lot of division by virtue of the fact that the characters that sold well in those mediums were the diverse heroes (Ms Marvel. Squirrel Girl, Moon Girl, Jane Foster, Miles Morales etc).

To this day it's still baffles me that they belatedly listened to a bunch of mouth breathers most of which didn't even read comics to roll back this direction. Complete creative cowardice on their part and perhaps more relevant commercial ignorance. Digital and trade make more money than physical floppies so certainly concentrating on that for a few years certainly didn't make them 'go broke'. Quite the opposite and the reversal of this direction hasn't made them any more successful in the direct market than they were before.

That's why the movies are starting in their own way to actually correct what the comics did wrong in that regard by making Jane Foster Thor and Sam Wilson Captain America. Speaking of which Black Panther was a huge pop culture phenomenon and Captain Marvel was another success for Marvel Studios.

All the new Star Wars movies have made either close to or over a billion dollars. Clearly black and female leads did zilch to dampen enthusiasm for those movies. Ironically the only one that that flopped is Solo which revolved around a the white guy.

I guess the question is whether any of these projects that were successful were that because they were 'woke' or whether that was incidental? In some cases it was definitely vital; The idea of a female Muslim super hero was a huge draw for people to see how Marvel would pull it off, the success of the Black Panther movie was 100% about being not just being a black dominated film but were everything down to music and visual design was based on African culture of course that drew people in but they stayed because they are good products. Main series Star Wars movies no so much. They were always going to make huge money no matter what but it's not like having black and female leads hurt their box office in anyway.

Sure there is stuff like the all female Ghostbusters and the revived Men In Black but well they are notable for being outliers and again did they fail specifically because they were seen as 'woke' or simply because they weren't very good or no one is really interested in anyone but the originals in those roles or that they were not necessarily big franchises to begin with etc.

[sdp]

my problem with "get woke go broke" is that it's usually racists or generally narrow minded people who say it and boy are there a lot of them now that they think it's ok to be a generally sh-tty person. I've always wanted a more diverse cast, strong female leads in my media and have written about it for years. Instead we've gotten bad writing and being told we need to like it or else we're bad.

But it's what makes people talk either because of they hate it or love it so that is why big companies approve of these bad stories as long as they generate controversy and people talk about it because they hate it or love it just because of what it's doing. And both sides of the coin fall and do free marketing for the big media companies. Hopefully this trend ends soon but if you think the "go woke go broke" thing is true, it really isn't, brands are making more money because of it, that's why everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I can't take anyone seriously who uses that phrase by the way.

[Leo656]

I don't know if it's ALL as simple as "just business". Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Hallmark Channel, for example, recently said they's openly going to push for more strong LGBTQ content on their network, especially around Christmas this year. This despite the fact that it's been proven time and again exactly who that channel caters to: Conservative Christians Who hate That Sh*t. For better or worse, THAT is who cares about Hallmark Channel and pretty much nobody else even watches it. They make nothing but crap anyway, so no sane person or "woke" Person WOULD watch it, they have better things to do.

So, you have a channel that presents programming 100% for pearl-clutching Soccer Mommies and their equally out-of-touch elderly parents and their too-young-to-care young children. Not one person watching this network cares about or wants to see two dudes kiss (Dudes are gross, so why anyone would wanna see that is beyond me in the first place, but I don't wanna digress ). But the network says, "Well, we're gonna do it. And we're REALLY gonna ramp it up right before Christmas, which is when you sweater-wearing nitwits mostly gather around with hot cocoa to watch Candace Cameron get weepy over shoes or some such nonsense." Even though their entire audience is right this moment telling them NOT to do that.

SO, you have a Network that's about to shoot themselves in the foot and lose 100% of their audience. Good business? Hardly. Someone in "Corporate" TOLD them to do it, otherwise it wouldn't happen. "Everyone else is getting on the Gay Pride parade float. So we have to, or else people are gonna call us names." It's a political decision, not a business one. Gay people don't watch Hallmark Channel. Liberals don't watch Hallmark Channel. And they wouldn't/shouldn't even if it were non-stop Gay Kissing or whatever. It's JUST a channel for Conservatives Who Like Awful Television. Changing that network into the opposite of what it exists to be, isn't going to do anything but put them OUT of business. There might be one or two people at "Corporate" who think they're suddenly gonna attract a ton of New Audience Members to their sh*tty channel this way, but they simply are not going to.

Pretty sure they know it's a bad idea for their bottom line. They simply don't have any choice, because to NOT "go there" in 2020 is to be called a bigot. That's ALL it's about. So they're gonna go out of business because they'd rather do that than admit who their base audience is.

So yeah, I'm pretty sure that at least some of the time, it's not at all about business, but 100% politics.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by sdp

my problem with "get woke go broke" is that it's usually racists or generally narrow minded people who say it and boy are there a lot of them now that they think it's ok to be a generally sh-tty person. I've always wanted a more diverse cast, strong female leads in my media and have written about it for years. Instead we've gotten bad writing and being told we need to like it or else we're bad.

But it's what makes people talk either because of they hate it or love it so that is why big companies approve of these bad stories as long as they generate controversy and people talk about it because they hate it or love it just because of what it's doing. And both sides of the coin fall and do free marketing for the big media companies. Hopefully this trend ends soon but if you think the "go woke go broke" thing is true, it really isn't, brands are making more money because of it, that's why everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I can't take anyone seriously who uses that phrase by the way.

Sadly there's a lot of them on Youtube spewing all sorts of misinformation and stuff about our favorite franchises. Every time you see a youtube video talking about something woke, you should never take them seriously.

[Leo656]

I personally don't really like or prefer the "woke" term. I'm just at a loss as to how better describe and identify a Very Particular Type of Idiocy and Hyper-Sensitivity.

It's admittedly not a good descriptor and like "manchild", "snowflake", "neckbeard", "chud", etc. etc., it mostly just makes the person using the term sound like a moron.

But at the same time... I know the certain type of dumbass thinking when I see it. I just don't know what else to call them in less than ___ words. So "woke" is what I guess it's gonna be until I find a better one. "Heart in the right place, Head up the ass" is just way, WAY too long, y'know?

[ssjup81]

To me, people need to stop focusing on junk like that. A writer should focus on the character first. Personality, stuff like that. If the character one had in mind was as a person of color, that's fine, but, it shouldn't come across as forced. The person should always be the character first...the gender or orientation should be secondary and not used to define the character I feel.

For example, you can have a female character, but it should be that it's a character who just happens to be female, meaning her gender isn't the focus. All the other aspects that rounds out the character is the focus.

I personally hate when people are obviously pandering and we're seeing this more and more lately to the point of its being an annoyance.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

The problem is that most of the "oppressed" groups are using "equality" as code word for "getting revenge", and anyone who says otherwise is lying.

It really is. It's "settling the score."

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Galactus

That's why the movies are starting in their own way to actually correct what the comics did wrong in that regard by making Jane Foster Thor and Sam Wilson Captain America. Speaking of which Black Panther was a huge pop culture phenomenon and Captain Marvel was another success for Marvel Studios.

It's less 'course correcting' as just Marvel Studios doing what Marvel comics essentially can't afford to do with their more iconic characters after a certain amount of time has elapsed...i.e replace them permanently. Marvel Studios are under no obligation to keep characters alive or active because reality dictates the course of their films. Actors get restless or bored, they age out of their roles, so the Studios have to accommodate those changes.

Also keep in mind that Sam is not getting a movie all his own, just a maxi-series on Disney+. Jane will also be a co-lead on Thor: Love and Thunder and the film is set to be a rom-com that celebrates Jane and Thor's relationship, she isn't getting all of the spotlight shone on her.

It also had nothing to do with diversive heroes and everything to do with radical left ideology plaguing those books to the point of distraction, Spencer's Secret Empire saga is a textbook example of that. Miles Morales never had any political garbage in it

Ever notice how Spencer did a complete 180 with Amazing Spider-Man and now writes fun and engaging stories with the most minimalist political or social commentary? It's actually saved his career and helped redeem and readdress the entire core Spider-Man line

And Captain Marvel made money despite itself. People tuned in for that only to see how it linked to Endgame. On it's own terms it's a terribly made movie with an intolerant wooden actress

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

And Captain Marvel made money despite itself. People tuned in for that only to see how it linked to Endgame. On it's own terms it's a terribly made movie with an intolerant wooden actress

Agreed. And the sequel will only do well cause X-Men. Even Brie has been discussing how she's afraid she's gonna get overshadowed in her own sequel. Honestly, you were pretty much overshadowed by Nick Fury in your first movie.

There are 4 proper ways to do the woke-ness without the broke-ness.

1- CREATE YOUR OWN CHARACTERS. Don't turn existing ones gay, trans, some other race, what-have-you. Create your own characters.

2- CREATE GOOD CHARACTERS. No mary sues. Have them struggle. Have them earn it. This notion that a woman's movie has to have the 'let's show the guys how it's really done' subtext has got to go. Notice how Captain Marvel's advertising is 'woman, woman, woman', while Black Widow's advertisement is about finding family and settling old scores. Based on what CM movie was about, the advertising could have gone more with a 'who am I? what am I? Am I a hero or the villain?" but the powers at be were high off the Wonder Woman train and decided to go with 'woman roar' We need struggle and suffering, just like male leads have to overcome adversity to become heroes. Don't mary sue them. And also, gay and trans characters, give them full-on multi-faceted personalities. Don't revolve their entire personality around 'gay/trans'. They're people. Not plot devices. I have gay and trans friends. It might surprise the wokers to know that I can have full conversations with them without 'btw I'm gay' or 'don't forget, I was born a dude' ever coming up.

3- STAY IN YOUR LANE/DON'T PANDER. If you can't find a way to sneak in a gay character, an extra bi-racial woman or whatever... don't. Don't hijack the story for woke points. Don't follow trends for the sake of it 'everyone is using gay characters, we have no choice but to do so', if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Also, if your movie, especially if it's part of an existing franchise, doesn't really cater to the woke crowd, then don't make it woke. They're not gonna see it anyway and you give your loyal fans the middle finger. Charlie's Angels basically bombed because it tried to be a feminist action movie for women... but women don't watch action movies so the intended audience didn't even go to see it. Women were blaming men for it bombing and I'm here thinking "IT WAS A MOVIE MADE FOR YOU, YOU DIDN'T SUPPORT YOUR OWN MOVIE". Nowadays it seems the Powers at Be care more about all the woke points, hashtags and virtue signaling they earn around the movie's general premise and advertising/taglines than if their intended audience actually goes to see it.

4- STAY THE **** OFF OF TWITTER. I swear if I ever ran a movie company my biggest rule would be everyone involved is to close their accounts until the movie is days away from premiering. Way too many people put way too much stock on whatever Twitter thinks that they hijack and ruin their movies just to please those idiots. And then all the cancel culture attempts over actors they don't like or because if they can't ruin the movie, well then ruin the stars, like they were trying to so desperately get Joker to bomb.

If one of my peeps came up to me "Director Yagami, Twitter is blowing up saying your movie is sexist/transphobic because the main character isn't trans', I'll say "So what? By the way, you know the rules. You're docked this week's pay. Check Twitter again and you're fired".

So bottom line, make interesting compelling flawed real characters that don't revolve their personalities around just being gay or whatever, don't make them super-perfect in every way, don't change existing characters for the sake of it. Don't like that the Fantastic Four is a team of 4 white heroes? Great, either cancel production or you're fired and I'll have someone else do it. Next? And ignore whatever the idiots at Twitter are saying.

Keep politics out of movies unless they're made up ones like from the future or other planets or whatever.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Galactus

That's why the movies are starting in their own way to actually correct what the comics did wrong in that regard by making Jane Foster Thor and Sam Wilson Captain America. Speaking of which Black Panther was a huge pop culture phenomenon and Captain Marvel was another success for Marvel Studios.

There was nothing to fix. I seriously hope you're not implying that Captain America and Thor being white guys needed 'fixing'.

Black Panther doesn't count, he was always black. He wasn't some white dude that the producers decided to turn black just because. His movie was awesome though. This was one of those times the media tried to really play up the whole 'btw did you know the main character and most of the movie is black people' angle but the movie in itself was a lot of fun and ****ing awesome. I'm really positive after Black Panther's portrayal in Civil War, his movie would have done just as well without the woke marketing, but you know, woke gotta woke. They can't help themselves but brag about making the first black superhero movie, even though Blade beat them to it.

[Leo656]

You make a lot of good points and I would be interested in subscribing to your newsletter.

[CyberCubed]

I don't know, if old movies or shows came out today, would they be considered, "woke?"

Buffy the Vampire Slayer came out in 1997 with a strong female lead, the secondary female character became a lesbian as the show went on (Willow), and the show was all about females taking charge. If the show came out a decade or two later, people would consider it "woke."

There's also stuff like Dax in Deep Space Nine. She was basically an allegory for transgender people (for those who don't know, she was an alien species that had a man (or memories of previous aliens) in her body as a host, so she was a female but she also had memories and the past life of a man), in her body. She also has a lesbian kiss as the show went on.

Next there were tons of shows that had major black characters or gay characters as it went on, but they all aired in the late 90's or early 2000's so they didn't register as much. One of the most popular shows of all time like The Sopranos had a whole gay plotline.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I don't know, if old movies or shows came out today, would they be considered, "woke?"

Buffy the Vampire Slayer came out in 1997 with a strong female lead, the secondary female character became a lesbian as the show went on (Willow), and the show was all about females taking charge. If the show came out a decade or two later, people would consider it "woke."

There's also stuff like Dax in Deep Space Nine. She was basically an allegory for transgender people (for those who don't know, she was an alien species that had a man (or memories of previous aliens) in her body as a host, so she was a female but she also had memories and the past life of a man), in her body. She also has a lesbian kiss as the show went on.

Next there were tons of shows that had major black characters or gay characters as it went on, but they all aired in the late 90's or early 2000's so they didn't register as much. One of the most popular shows of all time like The Sopranos had a whole gay plotline.

It depends. Buffy was always a female-led action show. It wasn't some guy show that someone else decided to remake as a female version. I haven't seen the seasons is so long but I think as long as Willow wasn't like, all gay all the time, as in, her only personality trait, and still maintained her personality she had before, she woulda been the proper way to have a gay character on the show.

I'm pretty sure Drax is a very well written and deep character and didn't just define themselves by their gender.

Pretty sure those examples you listed are pretty much going 'woke, the right way'. If we went by today's standards, Buffy would have been the gay one since she's the lead character, or she would have died and Willow would have been the lead character, cause gay. Drax would be always talking about gender and have episodes devoted (wasted) to them angsting about it.