To be clear: there are articles describing both movies’ openings as ‘solid’. But there’s basically no one calling Beyond worrying or Ghostbusters a big win.

—

Star Trek Beyond fails to boldly go where no other film has gone before - The Telegraph

Star Trek Beyond fails to prosper -The Guardian.

“here we now have “Star Trek Beyond,” a tepid, bland exercise that recycles some familiar Trek tropes but is, in the end, just another sophomoric action movie” - The Washington Times.

It’s almost like *gasp* BAD FILMS GET BAD REVIEWS REGARDLESS OF THE CAST’S GENDER!!!

Is it so fucking hard to put “Star Trek Fails” in the Google search?!

@manfeels-park, i’m asking you, shameless liar. What held you from typing “Star Trek Fails” into Google search before jumping to conclusions about a worldwide conspiracy against women?!

And the last one, how could I forget.

ST Beyond, Captain America: Civil War, Dark Knight; Amazing Spider Man; Batman vs Superman - none of these are all-male cast with a token female. The last one that can be described as such that I’m aware of is The Revenant, that had ONE named female character in it, who had ONE speaking moment in the whole film, and the only thing she said was “I’ll chop your balls off”.

Hokay, kiddo, my post doesn’t reference reviews; it references reporting on first weekend figures. As it happens I haven’t read any Trek reviews, partly because word of mouth tells me I’m gonna like it so I feel no need to check them - oddly enough I don’t put a great deal of stock in reviews… And I didn’t search for reviews for this post because that isn’t what the post is about. The post is - again - about initial reporting on first weekend box office performance, which at time of writing I found to be skewed.

Believe me or don’t, but I reported what I found. Is it exhaustive? Not remotely - if I’m honest I didn’t expect it to get over 20k notes - nothing I have EVER posted has been reblogged like this; I am terrible at tumblr. It was just a trend is noticed on my first searches on the two movies for my own information. It was what I saw. It was the stuff coming top on Google. That doesn’t make it pointless, only qualitative. It’s a quick overview, not an extensive corpus analysis. On my Facebook post of this there was even some healthy debate with a film industry professional about how well the comparison held up. I’m not ignorant to nuance, but I certainly won’t be debating it with someone who can’t tell the difference between a review and a box office report.

What kept me from typing “star trek fails” into Google? Well the fact I wasn’t trying to lead my search results OR look for reviews. My Google searches were “star trek beyond box office” and “star trek beyond first weekend” - no positive or negative adjectives attached, and I took the first few posts on the page as indicative for my purposes.

I didn’t post the one link you included that DOES talk about box office take - and negatively too, interesting and thank you - because… *drumroll*…it was posted the day AFTER I wrote this post. Woops. I’ll admit happily to not being able to see into the future.

(PS: Where did I say anything about the movies I listed having only male characters in them? They’re certainly all male led and having seen all of them I’d be surprised if they all passed the Bechdel test, but I just used them as a quickie example of second week drop off figures for typical big budget action movies. I didn’t make any comment about the level to which they sidelined women.)

“Is it exhaustive? Not remotely … It was just a trend is noticed on MY first searches on the two movies for MY own information.”

I really appreciate that the original post was nothing but your personal opinion based on your personal searches that Google gives with accordance to your previous searches (unless you deliberately turn off Personal Results), and that the results you presented in the original post where not exhaustive, therefore…

they don’t count as a “lesson in institutionalised misogyny” (quoted from the original post).

Especially taking into account that you made this post 3 days after ST Beyond release and 16 days after Ghostbusters release.

Your sources on Ghostbusters relative to release date of Ghostbusters:

Hollywood Reporter - 9 days after release;

Deadline - 9 days after release;

Breitbart - 15 days after release;

Forbes - 15 days after release.

And you dare to whine and claim that asymmetrical media coverage of “Star Trek Beyond” THREE FUCKING DAYS after release is somehow “lesson in institutionalised misogyny”? You know, taking a journey to fuck yourself would be a better lesson.

Don’t you “kiddo” me, kiddo.

UPD: Major self-fix: yes, official domestic release of Ghostbusters was on 15th and not on 9th as IMDB misinformed me with its tiny font, which still leaves us with ONE source (Hollywood Reporter) that made a report on the third day after premiere on early morning. Do I need to explain why one source is statistically insignificant?

And since you admitted that one of the sources I provided is a negative box office report on ST Beyond, are we done with “Institutionalized Misogyny” argument?