MovieChat Forums > Stargirl (2020) Discussion > This show is for 10 year olds

This show is for 10 year olds


It's silly, stupid and inconsistent...
I'm not that old but I think I'm too old for this s#it...

reply

So far, it's not bad. I think teens and adults can enjoy it too.

reply

What's not bad about a little teen going after murderers with a magical staff she found a couple of days ago to seek justice for her alleged father whom she only met a few times in her life...
Oh... i almost forgot, Her step father is her sidekick and he made a flying robot from old car parts🤦

reply

It is a comic book/superhero show. I don't think it needs to be 100 % realistic. It's entertaining so far.

reply

It doesn't need to be realistic it just needs to make sense... With your logic I'd really like to know which series you think is "bad"

reply

UH...YEAH...WHAT MISLEAD YOU ABOUT THIS CARTOON?

reply

Hope....

reply

This show is fine and the lead is cute as hell.
Get a life dude.

reply

You are so gullible...

reply

Imdb viewers in their 20s rate it highest at 8.1. Old guys lowest.

reply

What do you expect from CW... the are woke network around continually pushing agendas first with actual entertainment value at the bottom of the list of what a show needs to be... I suspect their list of requirement for a show is more like Token minority character, gender swap of a female for a male, throw in a homosexual or lesbian, if possible get a tranny somewhere, now make every villain a white male, now find a way to bash Trump... Okay.. Now they can think about what story or characters they can throw in around those points... But don't ever let the story get in the way of the agenda.

reply

Shut up.

reply

That's the problem with woke Hollywood.

It's true that they didn't blackwashed her this time, or made her a brunette (for some reason, it seems that blonde and gingerhair are the new nazi in Hollywood). I guess they thought that was enough.

The problem is once you fired every writer that didn't fall into (the woke) line, what remains are the yes-men and the true converted wokes. None of those guys are gonna write a good story. The first ones have no spark, the second ones see the world in terms of good and evil, they can't portray the depth and complexity of human behavior.

And it happens something similar with actors: once you only cast white males that look either like cucks or psychos, if someday you wanna go back to normal, you have no valid experienced actors out of those two ranges.

reply

I'm a fairly conservative guy. Just for information (and I haven't read many comics for the past 15 years of so), Stargirl as a character has been around since 1999 or so.

So far this show has followed the beginning of the Stargirl character relatively closely.

What happens with the rest of the new JSA remains to be seen.

reply

As entertaining as it is to watch the anti-SJWs froth at the mouth, I may as well point out: this series is based on a comic (series) that's relatively old. So the gender/race decisions have NOTHING to do w/the showrunners; they're just following an existing story.

Sorry to bust your bubblerant.

reply

I am amused you call the comic series old, unless you are referring to the original JSA. 1999 is hardly old.

reply

I GRADUATED H.S. IN 99...IM PUSHING 40 WITH A KID NOW...IT WAS A WHILE AGO.

reply

I'm in my sixties, so was born in the 50's. I'm afraid I don't call a movie old unless it is pre 40's.

reply

We are in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Age_of_Comic_Books

The Modern Age of Comic Books is a period in the history of American superhero comic books which is generally considered to have begun in the mid-1980s and continues through the present day.[1][2] During approximately the first 15 years of this period, many comic book characters were redesigned, creators gained prominence in the industry, independent comics flourished, and larger publishing houses became more commercialized.[3]

reply

You missed the "relatively" part, champ. Which is there Specifically to forestall replies like yours.
In any case: 20 years ago is longer than some of the people reading this have been alive. So: Yeah. Relatively old.

It's also interesting that Every reply deals w/that, rather than the point I was making.

Ah well.

reply

Sorry, no. Relatively should not apply to yours or my age. It should apply to the medium. Films have been around since the end of the 19th century. Twenty years is only 16% of that period.

Even so, while I did say 40's for what I consider old, that is it far closer to their origins.

And whatever little qualifiers you want to put in don't forestall comments. And don't call me "champ". It is an attempt to be condescending. I try not to be condescending (I don't always succeed; I'm human) and I would appreciate the same courtesy.

reply

I won't apologize for saying "champ," I'll just assure you I wasn't trying to be condescending. You can believe me or not; in this inflectionless mode of dialogue, I can understand people taking things the wrong way. . .so feel free to feel however you want about it.

Anyway:

You seem to be having trouble w/the concept of "relatively." Nothing you said indicates you understand the word, or its usage. Bottom line: whether you apply it to your age, my age, the medium, or the spiciness of a given pepper, the meaning is the same. And that meaning makes your point moot. I'll repeat: 20 years is a RELATIVELY long time. If it helps you, parse the concept: "20 years is a long time, relative to a teenager's life experience."

Also: 20 years is a relatively short time. If you're talking about how long it takes that same kid's hair to turn grey. See how that works?

There's a great quote from Chiun, along these lines: "Old? For a mountain, no. For a head of lettuce? Yes. For a Master of Sinanju? Just right."

reply

I'll accept you statement that you didn't mean to be condescending; however, DO NOT CALL ME CHAMP!!

Again, for films 20 years is not a long time! 16% of the total span of a lifetime does not qualify as old or a long time.

I have no idea how old you are, but lets assume 40. The equivalent would be 6.4 years. Do you consider that a long time?

reply

I promise to never, ever, Ever call you champ again.

I'm also gonna bow out of this conversation. You seem incapable of understanding "relatively," as a concept. Which is fine, but makes the attempt to explain anything redundant, and useless. Be well.

reply

I do understand it. I don't think you do. But its best we stop.

reply

I thought I was old. This is before my time!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Age_of_Comic_Books

The Golden Age of Comic Books describes an era of American comic books from 1938 to 1956. During this time, modern comic books were first published and rapidly increased in popularity. The superhero archetype was created and many well-known characters were introduced, including Superman, Batman, Captain Marvel, Captain America, and Wonder Woman.

reply

Don't be stupid, 10 year-olds watch The Simpsons. Have you ever heard of teenagers?

Imdb vote breakdown shows flat viewership from 18-44. Teens don't even know about web sites.

reply

Everything Marvel and DC produce is for 10 year olds

reply