>>281150
How convenient that Dredd, the central character, doesn't suit the story for the movie about said central fucking character. This is a coherent argument in your mind.
>Female gang leaders exist
True.
>and exploit their vagina to get into positions of power.
Also true, but the character we are talking about didn't use her vagina. She out toughed the ruthless gang in a completely unrealistic way and somehow managed to keep control through fear. She was a feminist power icon lording over her underlings which were pretty much all men.
You would no doubt be aware of this, and how ludicrously unrealistic and forced Mama was. Yet you defend that and Dredd being a bit part while pretending to be a fan of Dredd.
Instead of pretending these messages aren't there, you should just be honest and admit that you don't care that they are there. The movies are well made technically and in the case of Dredd it isn't a feminist plotline even if it does have feminist elements and cucks Dredd to little screentime.
Is this supposed to be acceptable going into the future? Having sequels and remakes to properties with consistent main characters, even named directly after them, where said characters get barely any focus at all? When they are just making cameos in their own movies, will that be when you say enough?
>>281162
>implying feminism has only ever been pushed recently
Even if it wasn't for the feminism, that Mad Max is used as a vehicle to sell a shit character like Furiosa shouldn't be forgivable.