Would it have made 17 million if 2 of 3 had ZMH and 26 million if all three went for that great hairdo? Probably, but now we'll never know
shareMost of the audience was female. Males just avoided the movie. Too much politics and unattractive chicks are the most likely reason.
shareFor me, the marketing was a little odd. I haven’t seen the movie, but based on the marketing vs the trailer, here’s what confused me.share
A big deal was made, and rightly so, that it was not only a woman-fronted cast, but written, produced and directed by a woman.
Kristen Stewart’s presence reinforced the idea that this wasn’t going to just be “Jiggle TV 2.0.” Like, if she’s in it, AND Elizabeth Banks is taking the reins, even though it’s an action-comedy, it’s going to be a little smarter and less exploitative. I read articles that proclaimed as much.
Then the trailer comes out. Okay, there’s a joke about how these bad-ass super spies have this huge closet filled with designer clothes and shoes. Hmm. The women are still all dressed sexy and sparkly, with no hair out of place. Even Atomic Blonde had Charlize Theron looking bruised and bloodied. Of course, not a comedy, but still.
To top it all off, you’ve got Kristen Stewart slapping her ass with a riding crop and winking into the camera.
I know Stewart is something of a lesbian sex symbol, but the whole thing still seemed a little “male gazy.” Maybe not as bad as the McG film, where the women dressed in a different fetish outfit in each scene.
Anyway, I could be all wet on this thing, but the trailer felt like it was trying to have its cake and eat it, too.