|
Old School is a classic so Todd Phillips can do whatever he wants.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
site posted:i would ask if you had any self awareness at all when youre down to attempting to redefine the word incel regarding angry white men who go on to murder people, but i read your rap sheet and the last time the joker (while you were going by the handle, thejoker incidentally) was in a movie you framed harley quinn as a oval office who had her pussy lips out so im not sure if theres much if any good faith argument to be had with you Your reading comprehension of that post shows you're either arguing in bad faith or are dumb. A hypothetical fake quote of what a Weinstein like exec would say to justify her horrible loving outfit that's only purpose was to objectify her is clearly exactly my real thoughts on the character. Maybe you're right, and people are too dumb to understand this movie or any movie that's not blunt. You just have the people it is wrong. Spoilers: it's you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
Roth posted:Vince do you have anything to add to conversations other than pearl clutching about out of control leftists? Do you have anything to add other the pearl clutching about how a movie is going to make people kill and "think of the children!!!" nonsense? E: BTW, I don't think any of you are out of control leftists because you're all using right wing, fascist adjacent talking points to take down a movie none of you have seen. So I don't think any of you are actually leftists because you know, you're not acting like it. You're acting like the right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Do you have anything to add other the pearl clutching about how a movie is going to make people kill and "think of the children!!!" nonsense? Yes! In fact we have a lot of posts about it, you should check them out!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
zoux posted:Taxi Driver actually inspired a shooting, should that have been shelved Hinckley did nothing wrong
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
zoux posted:Taxi Driver actually inspired a shooting, should that have been shelved Is your answer yes, zoux, if you seem to believe that the *only* conclusion to Joker possibly inspiring murder is to ban it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Rev. Bleech_ posted:Hinckley did nothing wrong He could've used some more range time ¬_¬
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:
I regret to inform you all that the "allies" are at it again
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Your reading comprehension of that post shows you're either arguing in bad faith or are dumb. A hypothetical fake quote of what a Weinstein like exec would say to justify her horrible loving outfit that's only purpose was to objectify her is clearly exactly my real thoughts on the character. Maybe you're right, and people are too dumb to understand this movie or any movie that's not blunt. You just have the people it is wrong. Spoilers: it's you. youre the one who had the thought and decided to call her a oval office in your imaginary quote and figured that was a thing to publish on a public forum my giant lefty dude
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
Archyduchess posted:Yes! In fact we have a lot of posts about it, you should check them out! Every post here from the "this movie is dangerous" side is either based on fallacy about everyone else being too stupid to understand complex and subtle themes in film (made by people who probably also talk a lot about how advertising doesn't work on them), based on fallacy that because people might misinterpret a work that it is the works fault, or just whatever nonsense site keeps saying. And the only answer to what we do if the movie is in fact "dangerous" is "uhh don't give it awards," which like... If you really think the movie is going to lead to deaths, what difference does it getting a golden globe or not make?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
site posted:youre the one who had the thought and decided to call her a oval office in your imaginary quote and fiogured that was a thing to publish on a public forum my giant lefty dude Ah yes, I'm sorry the horrible person I was portraying wasn't actually a good person. Again, see the last point of my previous post in reply to you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
Toot, beep. Beep, honk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
Roth posted:I regret to inform you all that the "allies" are at it again Cool of you to call a guy who has mental illness issue, and most of the right would consider queer due to having dated and been with trans people to be your facetious version of a bad ally, but go off. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
You guys are just having the video game violence argument you know?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Every post here from the "this movie is dangerous" side is either based on fallacy about everyone else being too stupid to understand complex and subtle themes in film (made by people who probably also talk a lot about how advertising doesn't work on them), based on fallacy that because people might misinterpret a work that it is the works fault, or just whatever nonsense site keeps saying. Hey, do you think advertising works? I think advertising works. On me. And like holy crap so many strawmen. I am not even saying This Film Is Dangerous, not all that many people are. No one is saying that "everyone else" is an idiot. People are saying that it is legitimate to criticize a work in such terms! That's it! quote:And the only answer to what we do if the movie is in fact "dangerous" is "uhh don't give it awards," which like... If you really think the movie is going to lead to deaths, what difference does it getting a golden globe or not make?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:You guys are just having the video game violence argument you know? I'm fully aware and it's why I'm so confused by it all. We have already had these discussions and I thought they were settled, but now the same arguments are coming back and it's incredibly frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
On second thought, I'm just goign to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:or just whatever nonsense site keeps saying. oh sorry, maybe i wasnt clear: since the beginning your portrayal of yourself as a GIANT LEFTY has been betrayed by every other line youve written where you belittle every poster and every person on the internet who doesnt look like you who has concerns over a movie. you are evidently very anxious to see it and are extremely mad that anyone would have an opinion that doesnt align with yours and you are completely unwilling to entertain the notion that something you are interested in may be in some way problematic. also, since archy has been making very well thought out posts refuting your stances, and your responses to each have been to just pretend you never made them in the first place (see: your art meltdown) or just go nuh-uh and keep being mad, i see no reason not to just call out you out on your bad posting with low effort posts myself Vince MechMahon posted:Cool of you to call a guy who has mental illness issue, and most of the right would consider queer due to having dated and been with trans people to be your facetious version of a bad ally, but go off. bro are you loving for real right now lmao just stop site fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Hey, do you think advertising works? I think advertising works. On me. If you're not saying that then I am not and never was arguing with you. Again, please to and read the actual post that started this and who I saw replying to. Or you and everyone else could continue to pretend I'm some kind of right wing idiot who thinks that mass shooters are great, or whatever the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
If you want to talk about the substance or validity of the reviews of the Joker movie because you've read the reviews please go ahead. If you want to blindly defend the movie and blindly make claims about what the movie's message is then please wait until you can actually make informed posts either way. We don't need more pages of people arguing over things that are in reviews as if they've already seen the film though. If you don't plan on watching the film at all you're probably the smartest among us and I'm going to assume you'll just not post about it at all as you live a better life than those of us that will probably eventually see it in some form.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Cool of you to call a guy who has mental illness issue, and most of the right would consider queer due to having dated and been with trans people to be your facetious version of a bad ally, but go off. Having mental health issues doesn't excuse talking over PoC and the multiple trans people who are voicing concerns over a movie by calling them nazis, and neither does dating trans people for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:If you're not saying that then I am not and never was arguing with you. Again, please to and read the actual post that started this and who I saw replying to. Or you and everyone else could continue to pretend I'm some kind of right wing idiot who thinks that mass shooters are great, or whatever the gently caress. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3875937&pagenumber=311&perpage=40#post497991453 This is the original post no?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:00
|
|
|
I'm sorry we're not being nice enough to your favorite clown, but so much of your posting presence on here is getting extremely furious at people who disagree with you about art. If you're not seeing a therapist you should consider it, and I'm being totally serious here, because you're acting legitimately alarming and if this was a real life conversation I'd be backing slowly to the nearest exit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
Fangz posted:https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3875937&pagenumber=311&perpage=40#post497991453 Yes. By a poster who did a lovely hit and run post with a loving awful point. I'll say this one more time, then I'm done here: The movie very well might suck rear end. Maybe it really does glorify lovely people. However most reviews are saying neither of these is the case, including the one in that post. It's saying that the movie is complex and subtle. The poster then made a sweeping generalization implying that a movie being subtle and complex is somehow bad (literally going lmao at the very idea of it) and saying that most people won't get it. The implication being that complexity and subtlety is bad. This is stupid. Now, when the movie comes out, and more than a few dozen people, none of whom are currently here, have actually seen it, I'm all for discussing it. Bad parts, good parts, whether it has any cultural value, if it portrays any groups as negative in lovely ways, etc. But having discourse of this nature about a hypothetical movie that only exists in people's heads currently, and people like that poster (not archydusses, you, or several others, but definitely site) making arguments are are literally the same ones that have been used since Seduction of the Innocent, is maddening. And as I said last time this came up, I may be projecting some of this because the bad take train on Twitter has been going for a month already, and has resulted in things like people saying Starship Troopers isn't actually satire and is also "dangerous." So I'm sorry if I'm overreacting, it's just been super tiring seeing people who just a month ago were laughing at the bullshit "ban violent video games" poo poo using the same rhetoric about, again, a movie they haven't even seen. Archyduchess posted:I'm sorry we're not being nice enough to your favorite clown, but so much of your posting presence on here is getting extremely furious at people who disagree with you about art. If you're not seeing a therapist you should consider it, and I'm being totally serious here, because you're acting legitimately alarming and if this was a real life conversation I'd be backing slowly to the nearest exit. I'm sorry, you're right and some of my posting has been overly aggressive. Please see above. I'm just tired and baffled by a lot of these hot takes, which are again not even from you in particular. I sincerely apologise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Vince I think maybe you should take some time away from this thread and rethink some things. Everyone else maybe hold your thoughts on the film until you have a more informed view.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Cool of you to call a guy who has mental illness issue, and most of the right would consider queer due to having dated and been with trans people to be your facetious version of a bad ally, but go off. my last thought it that if this was posted as "i cant be racist because ive dated a black girl" this would have received more scrutiny and more punishment than a "walk it off" site fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:Cool of you to call a guy who has mental illness issue, and most of the right would consider queer due to having dated and been with trans people to be your facetious version of a bad ally, but go off. "I dated a black girl once. I can't be racist."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
Covok posted:"I dated a black girl once. I can't be racist." What am I supposed to even say to this? Assuming I hate people of color, LGBTQ people, etc. because I don't think a movie being complex is bad, and don't think we should be talking about a movie none of us have even seen is "dangerous." Like, I honestly don't know what to even say here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
site posted:my last thought it that if this was posted as "i cant be racist because ive dated a black girl" this would have received more scrutiny and more punishment than a "walk it off" I didn't actually see this lovely post until you quoted it just now Vince MechMahon posted:What am I supposed to even say to this? Assuming I hate people of color, LGBTQ people, etc. because I don't think a movie being complex is bad, and don't think we should be talking about a movie none of us have even seen is "dangerous." Like, I honestly don't know what to even say here. It's not what you should say, it's what you shouldn't have said. Christ. How did that post even leave your brain with you thinking it's ok?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
X-O posted:It's not what you should say, it's what you shouldn't have said. Christ. How did that post even leave your brain with you thinking it's ok? You're right, it was a dumb thing to say, and it was because I was upset at what was the third or fourth implication that I'm a Nazi, and was pissed and not thinking. Anything I've experienced while dating trans people is only a fraction of what they experience every day. I apologise again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
I don't think Joker is going to turn anyone into an alt right chud, but it will be, like Rick and Morty, be something that people like that will look too as being "them". Even if Joker shows him being utterly iredeemable and completely crushed by society in every way, lovely guys will latch onto the film as being their anthem. These are guys that will look at any justification for support their stupid, moronic and evil views.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
Lotta new posts, must be a new trailer for something big. Oh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I don't think Joker is going to turn anyone into an alt right chud, but it will be, like Rick and Morty, be something that people like that will look too as being "them". Even if Joker shows him being utterly iredeemable and completely crushed by society in every way, lovely guys will latch onto the film as being their anthem. That's kinda inevitable, even good satire can be misunderstood and misrepresented - Rick and Morty is a decent example, seeing that a season ends with Rick almost committing suicide because he realizes he's a broken human being and he's still seen as "the cool guy" by a lot of people. I'unno if Joker is going to be good enough to justify dealing with what is a pretty dangerous subject matter in the current political landscape. I think it's worth waiting to see if it's actively harmful, if it has some merit or if, hey, maybe it has a fresh take on the "broken middle-class white man" for a change? The reviews that have come out paint a weird picture and I kinda fear it's gonna be too shallow to be worth it, but can you even write that sort of movie nowadays without it fully condemnning the protagonist - and is that even an interesting movie? To give him any sort of sympathy is automatically a bad thing? Frankly I'm starting to think maybe they should've sat on that concept. I'll go see it outta curiosity though, so I guess they got the reaction they intended. One of the things that's kinda sounding shallow is that the story feels too...70's mental breakdown. Like, we've seen that before and we have a different kind of "broken middle-class white man" that actually hasn't been explored all that much in media? Dias fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:I mean, I don't think it should exist but that has nothing to do with the content. Touche.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:The problem, as always, is Americans. Yep.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Queer_Kara/status/1168547043209596928?s=20
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
The main issue here is that we're trying to split the difference between the idea that art has incredible influence on the world and needs to be scrutinized for that influence, and the idea that artists need the freedom to be able to express whatever they want about anything they want without having to worry about moral judgment or castigation or, at worst, censorship from the lowest common denominators of humanity. And it's actually a tough issue. There's not a lot of easy answers here. Art can clearly change or strengthen someone's views of something, and yet grown rear end humans also have to be responsible for the things that they take away, or reject, from the media they consume. For all that I complain about grimdark tendencies (in superhero stories particularly) for instance, I personally enjoy a ton of dark and unsanitary content; gross, vulgar, loathsome fiction about stuff that SomethingAwful, even in its most reddit-like heyday, would find outrageously obscene. And when I'm done experiencing those stories for their catharsis or fantasy value or sheer edginess, I simply pack up those experiences and go about the rest of my life no more or less the person that I was, other than being a bit more entertained than I was before. I think that's a mindset that's a bit absent from the current conversation, that our taste in art does not dictate our morality. Power Rangers was the single most violent TV show in its day and a hundred thousand children watched it week after week. Every single one of those children did not turn into violent people. You can enjoy the Joker film without being a lovely person, even if it might have lovely messages (and we're still not even sure if it does yet). Just like you can enjoy a completely "sanitary" or even progressive film and still be kind of a toxic rear end in a top hat. It's one thing to be mindful of media content, and it's another to put on your "I'd like to speak with the manager" voice to shout down content because won't someone please think of the children. Your taste in art does not dictate your morality. And yet you still have to be able to recognize when art instigates, or reinforces, harmful mindsets. Particular if that art reaches a wide swath of audiences. If you're not cognizant of the fact that your story about a mentally ill white man killing a bunch of others is going to be seen by multiple countries' worth of viewers instead of the, like, forty or fifty followers of your blog, you are being completely disingenuous as an artist. And moreover...the fact is that film criticism -- being savvy about film ideas, being able to see the nuances and the subtexts and the complexities of film language -- is a learned, academic skillset, and a privileged one at that. Yes, ideally your audience of adults is responsible for their own media interpretation, but you just spent two and a half hours glorifying a serial killer and not everyone has the acumen or education to parse the secret cheat codes of your nuanced masterwork, so to constantly blame audiences for their lack of intelligence if they "misunderstand" your work is not only the height of pretentious classism, but the exact sort of worthless disassociation from societal mindsets that afflicts bad artists. Artists without anything new or meaningful to say because they're not actually examining their own work in any way and instead just regurgitating some of the most tired takes that the world en masse should be trying its darndest to move away from, and then saying "Whatever, you're just not smart enough to get it" in the face of disapproval. Like I said, it's not an easy issue and there's not an easy takeaway here. I only know that my takeaway is that I have nothing against dark or twisted fiction as a concept, and also that I'm concerned about how elements of this film are going to influence the world. These aren't mutually-exclusive states of mind. Because we live in a society, after all... BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Sep 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 05:41
|
|
|
Remember how in the first Spider-Man movie, they felt the need to explain how Peter could stick to things by showing these weird gross barbed hairs growing from his fingers, but that just raised even more questions?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:Remember how in the first Spider-Man movie, they felt the need to explain how Peter could stick to things by showing these weird gross barbed hairs growing from his fingers, but that just raised even more questions? This is like 100% of times where they try to explain powers in any way beyond "a wizard did it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 17:03 |
|
Jamesman posted:Remember how in the first Spider-Man movie, they felt the need to explain how Peter could stick to things by showing these weird gross barbed hairs growing from his fingers, but that just raised even more questions? In the comics the explanation is technically that he has static cling on his extremities, because that's the closest to something that makes any sense the marvel handbook people could come up with. Even though that has nothing to do with spiders.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 20:36
|
|
