What is wrong with having a show that appeals to boys/men, or having a strong male hero?
Thankfully I cancelled Netflix over a year ago, but of course I heard about the bait and switch which is pretty commonplace now. The shill websites are doing the usual fan attacks as well as praising the "stunning and brave" direction. One even called it a "radical reimaging". Netflix obviously should've just openly stated that it would be a show about Teela but they know there wouldn't be an audience for it (outside of the sycophants in media). They knew that people who grew up watching He-Man would want a show about He-Man. Although I would rather market to them because they would most likely have kids and buy merchandise, but it makes much more sense to market to blue haired feminists on twitter.
You would think what has happened with comic books over the last 7 years would wake some people up.
I'm glad Anime and Manga are doing well and I hope that Japan never bends the knee. I recently bought some Conan comic books and novels, as well as the complete Robert Howard collection. I know Netflix is doing a Conan show, but I am pretty sure he will be upstaged or he will learn everything from women.
But I will close with my question from above. What is wrong with having entertainment that appeals to boys/men? Or as Yellowflash put it "nothing wrong with having something that appeals to women/girls but why is it that something that generally appeals to men have to appeal to everybody"
I was leaning a bit away from venture capitalists. As you say, they expect a return on their investment. Any person making a similar investment without expecting a financial return is either pulling some investment trickery or is engaging deliberate sabotage - both of which can be considered a form of financial return, I suppose.
This is a bit more of a stretch, but what if it's a foreign government? There's plenty of governments that bleed money freely. This becomes a lot more plausible if it's not concerning consumer media, like if someone were to influence our nation's military leadership into making terrible policy decisions for the purpose of weakening our strength. That's an easy write-off to a foreign nation's military budget.
Explaining such a thing for vidya or movies is more difficult, as I can barely grasp the required belief systems. I know people exist that believe you can force cultural change by manipulating media (because they think culture is a product of media when media is actually a product of culture). I do not know how this belief develops, so I can't guess as to what countries might be stuck with it in their leadership.
From there, it'd be a matter of how much of a threat a nation (or western society as a whole) is to some global power player, and them trying to put a price to the destabilization of their enemy. It certainly sounds laughable like this, though, because it's so weak and petty.
Regardless, I do agree that it cannot be done forever. If it's done for the purpose of sabotage, it won't need forever. I just find it troubling because not many seem to be prepared for actions that betray expectations.