Alright, I'm getting a bit annoyed with these shenanigans.
So first of all, what Fortuitous Jinx said: that was a joke trailer. Sofia Coppola is not making a live action Little Mermaid trailer. Maybe you saw an edited version with the Funny or Die intro cut out, but even then...
Secondly, even if she was making a Little Mermaid movie, it sounds weird and entitled to insist that it should have full frontal nudity. Go to FurAffinity, enter "mermaid" in the search bar, and have yourself a merry little wank. Now we're all happy! Hypothetical Sofia Coppola can make the movie the way she would want to make it (except she won't because it's not a real movie), and you get to see mermaid tits (and probably some weird futa tentacle panda mermaids if you go too far down the rabbit hole, but if you're into that, that's totally fine). We all win!
Quote:
|
why not give people what they want and fulfill a dream that pisses off women
|
It feels odd saying this considering that this is a forum in which women are routinely objectified (sometimes literally!) but women are people. You can't "give people what they want" and "fulfill a dream that pisses off women". Contradictory statement, there. Also, full frontal nudity does not piss off women. It pisses off cultural conservatives who think the only acceptable form of sex involves punching holes in bedsheets while apologizing to Jesus between moans of pleasure. It might also piss off feminists...
if the full frontal nudity is entirely gratuitous and the character has nothing going for her other than her ability to give a straight teenage male audience boners.
As for your collage, okay we get it. You don't find these movies made for a general audience wankworthy. How dare they not cater to your fetish!