It's canon:

The T-47 (Snowspeeder) was originally a cargo towing vehicle (which is why it has harpoons and tow cables), but was retrofit with blasters and pulled double-duty on Hoth as both a work vehicle and defensive craft.

Unless I missed it between part 1 and 2, how is The Man in the High Castle not in the top 40 shows? While I can't disagree with a lot of choices on this list, it's omission is pretty glaring.

Unless I missed it, how is The Man in the High Castle not in the top 40 shows between part 1 and 2? While I can't disagree with much of this list, it's omission is pretty glaring.

Losing "The Big Lebowski" from Netflix is painful to me. WHY IS THIS HAPPENING TO ME???

"…especially when it comes to underdog shows that really could use all the legitimate ratings they can get. "

As far as evidence, here's a couple of link to studies about the racial empathy gap. The racial and gender empathy gaps have been observed only in the last year or two, and most study thus far has gone to the racial empathy gap over the gender. Most research suggests the triggers are neurological and "hard-wired",…

So giving a man a leading role is automatically equal to sexism then? This goes back to my question: How can a movie studio ever cast a male again as the lead in an action film without being sexist?

So giving a man a leading role is automatically equal to sexism then? This goes back to my question: How can a movie studio ever cast a male again as the lead in an action film without being sexist?

Well, since you mention it, the data supports the claim that white audiences avoid movies with mostly black casts. Two Canadian universities found that the racial empathy gap (I apologize for using such offensive academic terminology) is responsible for low non-black turnouts for movies featuring majority-black…

So in other words, you want things to be the way you want them to be? You can't teach away innate human behaviors. You can bury them deep beneath layer after layer of training, but those traits will always be with us, whether you or I like them or not.

I am not arguing that movie studios are flawless at their craft. If that's what it sounds like I'm saying, then I have poorly argued my point, because I will agree with you that movie studios make mistakes all the time.

Boy I know I must be touching nerves because of all the name-calling and insults. So I'm going to do a hard reset here and try to change the tone of the conversation to one more civil.

The largest demographic group are young males. Women age 1-100 make up 51% of the population. So if your data is right, women as a whole are slightly more likely to go to the movies than men. But those who are most likely to go to the movies are males age 25-39. They are the bread-and-butter for movie studios.

You can speculate all you want. The movie industry has spent millions researching it's audience. They find time and again that young males are their biggest audience. Their research has also found that young males (for some strange reason) don't identify with female leads. In short, young males want to see movies…

If it's any "ism", then it's profit-ism. The studios have one goal: sell tickets. They give people what they'll pay to see. Period. If audiences want to see movies with male stars, are the studios sexist for selling a product consumers want?

I would highly recommend this article to anyone wanting to know why movies are they way they are. Most big-budget blockbusters follow a very simple formula designed to guarantee success. It's not sexism, racism, or whatever "ism" a critic may want to lay at the feet of the producer/director/studio. It's them…