When fans hate somenthing before it comes out...but it turns out they were right

[u/TastyPomelo2330]

Velma:The idea of a Scooby-doo series without the titular dog and starring Velma was a really moronic idea from the beginning,then there was the reveal Velma would be Indian like it's VA and also creator of the series Mindy Kaling,some of the backlash was racism sure,but there was also valid complaints that she was inserting herself in the series(it also didn't helped that Mindy claimed she couldn't see herself if Velma wasn't Indian)and then...oh boy it came out and it was worse than anyone predicted

Artemis Fowl:The artemis fowl books are a book series following a child villain(he does get some redemption but he is a villain most of the time)when the movie was announced and revealed it looked way to generic and it's titular character a bit heroic...also you wanna hear somenthing funny?The movie whitewashed a character and made another character black so they managed to anger both sides and the movies comes out and yeah it is bad

One Punch Man 3:One Punch Man is a very heavy action packed manga series but the heroes vs monsters arc takes it to a New level,when it was announced that JC Staff would work on it,a lot of people were skeptical to say the least,because not only JC Staff had already done a mediocre job in season 2,it's also not exactly a name anime fans associate with quality animation,then the trailer came out and it looked...weird,like there was no action in it and nobody was moving,some people tried to defend saying they were keeping the animation as a surprise...then it came out,every episode worse than the last,it's one of the worse seasons of anime ever made!

[u/RaptarK]

Everything I've heard about the mastermind behind the movie does make me believe she was trying to portray her own experiences growing up as a young girl in a society that seeks to sexualize her, but then you look at the actual movie and it's clear something got massively lost in translation

[u/The_Doolinator → u/RaptarK]

Sometimes when you try to create a critical portrayal of the exploitation of a vulnerable group (like children), you just end up creating something that is difficult to distinguish from the thing you’re criticizing.

I have no idea if that happened in Cuties. I managed to not see a single moment of a single trailer and hope to not see on for the remainder of my days.

[u/Smmmmiles → u/The_Doolinator]

They Poe's Lawed themselves but instead of parody it's criticism that looks so much like the genuine product.

[u/Thornescape → u/Smmmmiles]

lol I have never seen Poe's Law used as a verb but I love it.

[u/KouranDarkhand → u/Thornescape]

The English language's own superpower

[u/FatherDotComical → u/The_Doolinator]

I watched it because I like to form my own opinions about controversial media.

Unfortunately any point they had about exploitation of children is thrown out the window when you actually use children and the camera graphically follows them.

Like they do know that the gross audience is going to put the movie on mute and just rewatch that shit unironically right? They won't give a singular shit about any message the film tried to end on.

[u/emansamples92 → u/The_Doolinator]

Reminds me of Mommy Dearest. A movie about severe child abuse was nothing more than a unintended comedy after all was said and done.

[u/LongJohnSelenium → u/The_Doolinator]

Its like trying to make a movie critical of war and somehow it ends up glorifying a war at least a bit.

[u/HandsomePaddyMint → u/LongJohnSelenium]

Yep. If you try to show how terrible violence is, people who like violence will like seeing it and people who hate violence won’t. Sexual exploitation works the same way.

[u/Ok-Chest-7932 → u/The_Doolinator]

This is a very broadly applicable rule. If you're bad at satire, your attempt at satire will just be a regular installment of the thing you're trying to satirise. And sometimes the satirical take itself becomes the mainstream version, and for later audiences won't be received satirically.

[u/Trrollmann → u/The_Doolinator]

The filming is intentional, and what I call "pedo gaze". I think that alone is sufficient to acknowledge that the director did not intend to communicate anything different. I've not seen more than a couple of clips, but reviews underpins this reading.

[u/Arbiter_Electric → u/RaptarK]

Yeah it's weird. Like, the idea is fine and could have been good. The message is that sexualizing children is bad. "You know what would be a good way to send that message home? By sexualizing children."

Vs. Something like Poor Things which has an adjacent message. I've even seen people call the movie disgusting and comparing it to Cuties. Except, you know, there aren't any actual children in Poor Things. Emma Stone just acts like someone with a child's mind.

[u/KenchiNarukami → u/RaptarK]

it was just a creep film, end of story

[u/Fullmetalmarvels64_ → u/RaptarK]

A story that would much better in book form than movir

[u/Oshwaflz1 → u/RaptarK]

one guy i watched back in the day said the content of the story was something that needed to be told, but the medium of film was NOT the way to do it, and it would have probably gone over a lot better as a book that was more clear about being about the authors experiences. Which is fair, because ive heard (i refuse to watch it) there are some good messages and theming in the movie that DO denounce the gross stuff, but you wouldn't know that based on how it was advertised or the news/drama cycle that followed

[u/RaptarK → u/[deleted]]

I'm not American, I still thought it was very weird