Last month I wrote a post titled "Why Won't Hollywood Fund Lilly Wachowski's New Film?" in response to Wachowski's complaints that no one wanted to offer $10 million for a film about angry trans people.
Wachowski added that the script, which she co-wrote with her partner, Mickey Ray Mahoney, “was extremely important for me to write.” She continued, “It was a response to what is happening in the world for trans people, and it gave me a hugely cathartic receptacle to dump all of my anger and rage and frustration into.”
Sounds great! I'm sure dozens of people would flock to the theater to see it. But there are other reasons, besides anti-trans sentiment, why people might not be eager to fund this. As I pointed out, Wachowski hasn't exactly been a hit factory in this century.
The Wachowskis made The Matrix back in 1999 and it's an undeniably great film. That led to two sequels which were not great but which did well at the box office. What about since then?
Well, in 2006 they made V for Vendetta, a movie which did okay at the box office but not great. It finished with a worldwide box office total of $135 million on a budget of about $50 million. But in addition to the production costs, the studio also spends a lot to advertise, in this case it was probably $25 million or more. So add that up and you need about $135 million to break even since the box office money gets split with the theaters showing the film...
Then in 2008 they made Speed Racer. That film had a budget of around $120 million and advertising costs that were probably north of $80 million. And it was a bomb at the box office, released just a week after Iron Man. The studio probably lost $100 million on this one...
In 2012 the pair released Cloud Atlas. That one was independently financed and has a budget north of $100 million and a big cast including Tom Hanks and Halle Berry. Worldwide the film made $130 million. That means it would have lost money on the production budget alone. But if you add in the promotional costs, the film probably lost between $75 and $100 million...
In 2015, they released Jupiter Ascending. This one again had a star cast with Channing Tatum, Mila Kunis and Eddie Redmayne. The film was budgeted for $130 million but wound up costing closer to $200 million. Add in promotion and who knows. The film had a worldwide box office of $184 million. This one definitely lost at least $100 million.
In any case, Wachowski is convinced this is about trans repression not about a long history of failure. In an interview published over the weekend the director crashed out once again at all the people holding trans people back. Wachowski laments the cancellation of her last show and now plans a new studio called Anarchists United Studios.
There was something particularly special about working on “Work in Progress” to me: It was the first time I was able to cast as many trans and queer people as I did, and in all of that representation and seeing all these people onscreen who I’d never gotten to see before, I was like, This is something that makes sticking around in the business worthwhile. So, when Showtime turned around and canceled the show even though it was so critically acclaimed and really made for peanuts, it lit a fire under me. I saw all these windows closing and opportunities dwindling for marginalized voices, and I was like, “Somebody needs to do something about this. Somebody needs to make another attempt at the old United Artists model where it would be an artist-run studio.”
For those who don't know, United Artists was formed in 1919 by three leading actors of the time: Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, and Douglas Fairbanks, plus leading director D.W. Griffith. Pickford and Fairbanks were some of the biggest stars of developing Hollywood and Chaplin was arguably the biggest celebrity in the world. Not to be rude but Lilly Wachowski isn't in their league and the other two people she's starting this with are people no one outside of Hollywood has ever heard of.
Wachowski also reveals that public opinion on trans people hasn't really changed; it's just that billionaires are spreading propaganda.
...what happened was, it’s not that public opinion shifted, it’s that billionaires started pumping out negative propaganda against trans people. They started creating reports about kids with litter boxes, and the Cass report came out in the U.K. — that has since been debunked but has been used as this cudgel against trans people. This idea of “trans surgery for minors” — they’re still saying this shit. Jesse Watters was talking to the Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed about cutting kids’ tallywackers off. None of this is happening! This is all right-wing propaganda against trans people. That is what has caused the shift.
Well, no, that's not it. Kids with litter boxes isn't true but the Cass report has not been debunked at all. In fact, its recommendations have been fully adopted in the UK. Trans surgery for minors definitely has happened. There are several detransitioners who had their breasts removed when they were teens and now regret that choice. It's not all right-wing propaganda either. Just to pick an example, in Scotland they were on the verge of sending a trans woman rapist to a women's prison until public backlash caused a change of heart.
But Wachowski's big complaint is still that nobody wants to produce terrible shows about trans people.
I’ve said this before, but if I never make another movie again, I’m fine. I’m getting old. But in my experience of pitching stuff, I’ve pitched a lot of wonderful, cool queer stories and trans stories, and Hollywood didn’t want any of it. There was this TV show based on this comic book “Cosmoknights” that I was going to direct, and it was from me and Emily Andras, who made “Wynonna Earp.” It’s “Star Wars” with lesbians in space. Amy Poehler was producing it, and we pitched it all around town. We had a cool bible that Emily had written, and I put together a jazzy video for it, and everybody passed.
Again, this might have something to do with Wachowski's track record of failure. In any case, try pitching a show that is critical of trans rights and see what happens. Your chances of selling that project will be less than zero and all the progressives in Hollywood will badmouth you and blacklist you for trying. But never mind that, let's talk about J.K. Rowling.
She is funding trans genocide. J.K. Rowling funds trans genocide, full stop. So, if you support “Harry Potter,” you’re supporting trans genocide. The money that goes into you enjoying these products, a portion of that money goes to J.K. Rowling and that money goes into her funding anti-trans legislation all over the world. In the same way that if you are against Elon Musk, you boycott or don’t buy Tesla; and if you’re against global warming/climate change, you try not to buy as much gas, you try to mitigate your use of these products. It’s simple math. So, your enjoyment of these shows, and continued support of these shows, is supporting my eradication.
And her take on Elon Musk is... let's silence X because he's a Nazi.
I mean… these people are Nazis. They’re literal Nazis. There is a one-to-one connection between Elon Musk and the Nazi community. He did a full-blown Sieg Heil on a national stage. I think that the global community needs to firewall the U.S. from their populaces in a way because this country has allowed Nazi propaganda to proliferate at such a degree that it has become dangerous to the global population. As much as another country can, I think they need to be fighting back against hate speech and shutting those platforms down. They’ve had some success in Brazil and Europe, but it’s kind of over for the U.S. and the U.K. at the moment.
Hate speech. That's what this comes down to. Wachowski doesn't like what some people are saying and wants them silenced. Who is the authoritarian here? Seems to me it's the person calling herself an anarchist and trying to deny those who disagree their basic right to hold another opinion and verbalize it. Stuff like this. We can't have people pointing out how creepy this is, can we?
Every politician and celebrity still chanting ‘trans women are women’ should be asked how they square their loud commitment to ‘kindness’ with this inevitable end point. Explain how your ‘feminism’ led you here. Tell us why the abuse of these women is so unimportant to you. https://t.co/DBtRyk4uXv
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) September 13, 2026
It must especially suck for Wachowski that Rowling is a much better writer:
The stupidest move trans activism ever made was trying to make 'trans women are women' the beginning and end of all argument. If your flagship motto is a self-evidently a lie, don't be surprised if people have questions. But this one comes a close second in idiocy. Trans people…
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) September 14, 2026
Trans people already have human rights. The problem is that they're demanding that women surrender theirs.
Editor’s Note: Hollywood, academia, and liberal elites are out of touch with the average American.
Help us continue to report the truth about what 77 million patriots voted for by joining HotAir VIP and using promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member