US anti-abortion film a surprise box office success

[Superfreak]

sperm preduction is a VERY simple process


pregnancy is highly complicated



Its VERY simple to control sperm production



why try to solve the problem at its most complex stage?



why?


because you asshole men ( not all men) want to control women

How about you idiots just use birth control and accept responsibility for your actions?

[evince]

America decided this one already idiot


FOLLOW THE LAWS and shut the fuck up

[evince]

How about you idiots just use birth control and accept responsibility for your actions?

how about you stop producing sperm until you want a baby



the sperm end is FAR easier to control

[evince]

SCIENCE

[Oneuli]

New York (AFP) - A movie produced by a Christian studio about a former employee of an organization that provides abortions who became a "pro-life" activist is proving to be a surprising box office hit.

"Unplanned," which was released in theaters on March 29, has pulled in more than 8.6 million dollars in North America, according to Box Office Mojo.

That put the film in an unexpected fourth place for the week behind the much bigger budget pictures "Dumbo," "Us," and "Captain Marvel."

"Unplanned" comes amid a resurgent campaign in the United States by opponents of abortion, which was legalized in the United States in a landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision.

Among those promoting the movie has been the deeply religious vice president, Mike Pence.

"So good to see movie theaters across the country showing @UnplannedMovie," Pence tweeted. "More & more Americans are embracing the sanctity of life because of powerful stories like this one."

https://news.yahoo.com/us-anti-abort...010603753.html


I like it. I like it a lot!

It's interesting that even with the US VP providing some priceless free promotion for the film, it's managed such a poor box office return. At this point, it's earned only a little over $17 million, total. The problem is that it had a relatively decent opening night (presumably based on the Christian-right hype machine and a relatively wide release), but then dropped like a rock -- in fact, according to Box Office Mojo, it had the 21st largest Friday to Saturday drop on an opening weekend of any film ever.

Based on the strong opening night, more theaters booked it -- a 43% increase in the numbers of theaters showing it between week one and week two. But they got burned. In week two, its weekly gross collapsed: falling by about half. And at this point, it's only earning $1,845 per screen. It turns out the anti-abortion audience is really enthusiastic, but not terribly large.

[Superfreak]

how about you stop producing sperm until you want a baby



the sperm end is FAR easier to control

Hey moron, I use birth control. Which is what rational adults do when they don't want kids.

[Superfreak]

SCIENCE

is what you ignore.

[Oneuli]

50 years from now the pro abortion crowd will be looked upon with the disdain they deserve

Historically speaking, the right almost never looks good with the benefit of hindsight, and the left almost always does. Two or three generations after ideas are considered radically liberal, they're considered self evidently wise. And the trend with reproductive choice has definitely been leftward -- as recently as 1970, legal abortion was extremely rare in the world, whereas now it's available in the large majority of advanced nations. So, a more reasonable bet, based on historical knowledge, is that 50 years from now the anti-choice crowd will be looked on with the disdain that most have when regarding prior generations of conservatives today (e.g., those who supported the monarchy, supported state-mandated religion, supported slavery, opposed women's suffrage, opposed desegretation, opposed marriage equality, etc.) It's hard to think of any historical cases where history ended up vindicating the positions taken by conservatives.

[Granule]

SCIENCE

You mean SEANCE

That's a much better descriptor for your idiot party.

[Granule]

America decided this one already idiot


FOLLOW THE LAWS and shut the fuck up

And now America's going to return to the right decision, pervert.

Yes, FOLLOW THE LAWS and shut the fuck up. And that includes immigration laws, too.

[Superfreak]

America decided this one already idiot


FOLLOW THE LAWS and shut the fuck up

tell that to the illegal immigrants!

[cawacko]

Historically speaking, the right almost never looks good with the benefit of hindsight, and the left almost always does. Two or three generations after ideas are considered radically liberal, they're considered self evidently wise. And the trend with reproductive choice has definitely been leftward -- as recently as 1970, legal abortion was extremely rare in the world, whereas now it's available in the large majority of advanced nations. So, a more reasonable bet, based on historical knowledge, is that 50 years from now the anti-choice crowd will be looked on with the disdain that most have when regarding prior generations of conservatives today (e.g., those who supported the monarchy, supported state-mandated religion, supported slavery, opposed women's suffrage, opposed desegretation, opposed marriage equality, etc.) It's hard to think of any historical cases where history ended up vindicating the positions taken by conservatives.

How do you think the communist/socialist supporting left looks today compared to the capitalist supporters on the right?

[Oneuli]

How do you think the communist/socialist supporting left looks today compared to the capitalist supporters on the right?

I think the conservatives look terrible both in the context of conservative, hard-line Soviets and conservative fascists. The liberals who fought for more freedom in those regimes look good. Within the US, and other advanced nations, you see something similar, where the benefit of hindsight makes the liberal advocates of social democratic change (e.g., Social Security, labor protections, Medicare, etc.) look good, while the reactionaries who fought to conserve the older and more primitive economic systems look bad.

[cawacko]

I think the conservatives look terrible both in the context of conservative, hard-line Soviets and conservative fascists. The liberals who fought for more freedom in those regimes look good. Within the US, and other advanced nations, you see something similar, where the benefit of hindsight makes the liberal advocates of social democratic change (e.g., Social Security, labor protections, Medicare, etc.) look good, while the reactionaries who fought to conserve the older and more primitive economic systems look bad.

A+ for spin but a big F for content. Capitalism i.e. the West, won the cold war and defeated communism. There were many on the left in the U.S. and around the world that supported communism (and socialism). Oh, they'll be quiet about it today for sure if they are still alive but that doesn't erase the history. Communism is in the dust bin of history. Capitalism (the right) won.

[Oneuli]

A+ for spin but a big F for content. Capitalism i.e. the West, won the cold war and defeated communism.

Social democracy beat both capitalism and communism. You won't find a purely capitalistic or communistic system anywhere in the world. The formula used by all the highly successful nations is similar: a mixed economy with capitalistic and socialistic aspects (e.g., government-regulated semi-free markets, with various social spending policies), with some form of representative democracy and protections of individual rights. The liberals overcame the conservatives in places like the US and the Soviet Union alike, with people like FDR and Gorbachev driving each towards a hybrid system that put greater emphasis on human rights and less emphasis on abstract economic absolutes. They had to overcome the conservatives who pushed for a more hard-line approach, but the liberals won, as they tend to do over any sufficiently extended timeline.