X-Men For Girls

ztoical

Over at MTV Avi Arad, who brought us the fantastic four and spiderman films, claims the reason he produced the new Bratz movie is because "the Bratz are like X-Men for girls".

Stupid comment yes, but then the question was asked "which bratz would wolervine be?" and the answer:


via Lea Hernandez's LJ

the Shades

That's so disturbing I can see Marvel working out a liscening deal already, first Marvel bears, now Marvel Bratz! (With an extra special side-line in X-babies)

Hitch-Hiker

Avi Arad is a very nice man and I won't say nasty things about him because that's rude and my mother taught me better than that.

Fysh sez:

Now now kids, play nice. And don't derail threads with pointless comments about persons x, y, and z being *insert colourful expression here* unless you can back it up and it has some relevance to the thread beyond their name being mentioned.

Jack B. Badd

I think I got sick a little bit in my mouth Needless to say, X-Men is now ruined for me...

Hitch-Hiker

Hitch-Hiker wrote:

Avi Arad is a very nice man and I won't say nasty things about him because that's rude and my mother taught me better than that.

Fysh sez:

Now now kids, play nice. And don't derail threads with pointless comments about persons x, y, and z being *insert colourful expression here* unless you can back it up and it has some relevance to the thread beyond their name being mentioned.

Oh good Christ :rolleyes:

Ok, Avi Arad is a twat (it's not that colourful) because he referred to Bratz as being X-Men for girls. I take issue with this because X-Men is considered to be one of the most important and enduring comic book franchises of all time. As well as being hugely entertaining from a purely fantastical perspective, the books, cartoon series and films (although arguably not the third) include poignant social commentary mainly on the subject of prejudice and minorities in society. The franchise has also provided some of the most memorable fantasy characters in history which are dear to millions of people, whereas Bratz are toys which teach young girls that dressing up and being popular are the most important things in life. The movie being made of Bratz is nothing more than a money spinner for the studio and has absolutely no artistic merit. It is for this reason that I take offense at the two being compared, and I view anyone who makes this comparison as an ignoramus of the highest order.

And furthermore, I don't think that voicing my opinion on the matter is derailing the thread, however brief my initial response may have been.

6th

I just think the comment is stupid because X-Men is the X-Men for girls. I mean it doesnt just appeal to guys.

Fysh

Hitch-Hiker wrote:

Oh good Christ :rolleyes:

Ok, Avi Arad is a twat (it's not that colourful) because he referred to Bratz as being X-Men for girls. I take issue with this because X-Men is considered to be one of the most important and enduring comic book franchises of all time. As well as being hugely entertaining from a purely fantastical perspective, the books, cartoon series and films (although arguably not the third) include poignant social commentary mainly on the subject of prejudice and minorities in society. The franchise has also provided some of the most memorable fantasy characters in history which are dear to millions of people, whereas Bratz are toys which teach young girls that dressing up and being popular are the most important things in life. The movie being made of Bratz is nothing more than a money spinner for the studio and has absolutely no artistic merit. It is for this reason that I take offense at the two being compared, and I view anyone who makes this comparison as an ignoramus of the highest order.

There we go, that's a bit more like it. While I don't personally agree with you on a couple of points, at least this way we can get to grips with a discussion about it.

I would say that yes, the Bratz movie is nothing more than a money-spinner. At the same time, Marvel optioned as many of their licenses as they could once they realised that the Blade movie did quite well and that thus, movie adaptations of their properties could be a way of crawling back into the land of profitable companies. So there was definitely a profit based angle to the films being made at all.

I'd also point out that popularity by itself doesn't necessarily have any bearing on artistic merit - Big Brother has consistently high viewing numbers and yet has no plot, storyline, or aesthetic merit. Similarly, the X-men comics have had some spectacular storylines and creator runs, but as with all long-term comics series there have also been some thoroughly shoddy installments.

I do get your main point though, that the comparison is devoid of any merit unless it carries the caveat of "in terms of popularity with the under-18 demographic". I do have to say, though... it's some no-name loser who's involved in a forgettable toy-franchise movie. Why let it get to you? It's not like his comment is going to in any way alter either the franchise you love or those people responsible for it.

(I'm also intrigued by the potential argument that Professor X is exactly like the Bratz, in that he makes his team wear extremely gaudy costumes and is trying to teach the world that mutants should not be feared, i.e. trying to make mutants in general and, by their involvement in the cause, the X-men in particular, more popular )

Hitch-Hiker wrote:

And furthermore, I don't think that voicing my opinion on the matter is derailing the thread, however brief my initial response may have been.

You're welcome and indeed encouraged to post your opinions on any thread in the forum. However, posting "<Name> is a <insult of some kind>" is not a useful contribution to anything (other than the Insult Thread in the Thunderdome). You may think it's a succint summary of your point, but the rest of us aren't privy to what goes on in your head so you have to explain. Please bear this in mind in future.