(Thread IKs:
Nuns with Guns)
|
Grondoth posted:They loved Annihilation and went "look, this film is full of intelligent female characters, two of them are minorities, it treats everyone with respect and takes them seriously, and no one has talked about it so we're making a video on it" Some of my favorite films are women!
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
Sudden Loud Noise posted:Some of my favorite films are women! This was in direct response to someone saying "they don't boost the type of diversity they want to see" as an example of them literally doing just that
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
i mean if youre actively using your large platform to promote a female-led film on the basis of its female characters thats a bit better of a defense than just 'some of my favorite films have women in them,' yes the rlm guys are morons who say weird stuff sometimes but they can be that without being crypto sexists or something
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:25
|
|
|
Endorph posted:the rlm guys are morons who say weird stuff sometimes but they can be that without being crypto sexists or something Pretty much same thought, I like Jay and Rich, Mike is fine when they're actually talking about something like Re:View where they have something more to say about a fun or interesting movie but annoys me otherwise lol. Rich can be dumb sometimes, but seems like a decent dude mainly. I remember when him and Jack were playing Dead Rising 3, they got to the leather cowboy flamethrower dick boss who's a gay or bisexual guy, after beating them Rich says something like "Huh, chat's saying that character is homophobic? I mean how so?" and he saw my message in chat simple enough to the effect of "It's easy to put non-straight characters into 'Woah they're a crazy pervert!' framing because that's been a deal of the propaganda forever and it's still ugly to do that" and he actually responded well like oooh that makes sense actually, I get it now, thank you for that. Yardbomb fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Sep 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
There’s no reason to ever review a big studio action release, really.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
Man, this thread has a recurring problem with devolving into binary arguments of "reviewer bad" or "reviewer good".Grondoth posted:They loved Annihilation and went "look, this film is full of intelligent female characters, two of them are minorities, it treats everyone with respect and takes them seriously, and no one has talked about it so we're making a video on it" So I don't actually watch RLM and so don't know if this is something that's on them or the poster paraphrasing them, but this statement here kind of stood out to me and I wanted to comment on it, because I feel like it's kind of demonstratory of the weird relationship a lot of male reviewers tend to have towards women in media: That is a lot of importance is placed on the idea of the competence of female characters. The behavior of fictional women tends to come under a lot more scrutiny than their male counterparts and so the idea of a movie being praised as progressive for featuring only competent women as characters feels almost like a bit of back-handed praise. It's like saying "Yeah, I'm cool with a movie having women in it, just so long as they competent to a higher standard than their male counterparts". Like, to be honest, I find that the most progressive portrayals of women in media are the ones that aren't afraid to make their characters deeply flawed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:02
|
|
|
Garrand posted:The extended discussion about Larson's comments is cringe, especially when Mike does bring up "virtue signalling", but this didn't happen It's been a while since I watched that video but my impression with the way they were ragging about Brie Larson's comments is that they felt like they were fed to her in a really inauthentic way, like her Disney handlers or agent or whatever were pressing her to look for points where she could inject some bland Girl Power Feminism-isms into press junkets and interviews. Because Wooo First Woman Headlining an MCU Movie!!!! I don't know if that really was the case for her. It was certainly awkward enough that it felt unscripted? Still, Disney certainly demonstrated in Captain Marvel and subsequent movies that it's happy to do some shallow Girl Power pandering so who knows. Jay and Mike can still be pretty peak 40 year old white guy nerds sometimes (like when they dismissed all the people offended by Borat in the Borat 2 review.) But so much of the reactionary discourse around Star Wars or superhero poo poo is about taking kernels of valid concerns and running with them, and it can really make the points where one of the RLM guys saying the same thing look like a big red flags. Funnily enough though, for the RLM video on Rogue One basically they basically agree point-by-point with everything Jenny Nicholson disliked about the movie. And both those videos came out when people generally seemed to agree Rogue One was pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:06
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Man, this thread has a recurring problem with devolving into binary arguments of "reviewer bad" or "reviewer good". It's cause at the time there was a lot of noise about there being female role models in cinema that were scientists, and this was a film with 4 scientists and a paramedic and no one talked at all about it. It was specifically everything that people said they were looking for and yet no one paid any attention to it. There's all sorts of criticism about how roles for women are limited and they're not scientists or allowed to be smart or whatever the hell discourse was around ghostbusters and STEM and why it was so important that there were female ghostbusters now, and yet no one promoted or talked about this movie where 5 women figure out an alien phenomenon through their knowledge and intelligence. It was them doing the exact thing that someone said they didn't do, which is why I brought it up. They're not bad faith actors using a smokescreen of potentially acceptable actions that explain why they just never like the actions people are taking to try and make things better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
The "competent women" angle of progressive works stems a lot from how media can have an incompetent male lead who is absolved of his faults because he's just so darn plucky/handsome/charismatic while faults in a female character aren't so easily forgiven and those flaws become the focus for the sake of prestige drama. It's more double standards as usual
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:28
|
|
|
heartwarming: this fictional character who was cgi'd together by an under- or unpaid studio that folds after release is basque!
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:30
|
|
|
Marvel's First Maybe Gay Female Character Played By Maybe Gay Actress Gets to Say The Word "Gay" When Mentioning Favorite Motown Singers
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
no one was talking about annihilation because it wasn't marketed as strongly as the much, much bigger blockbusters that come out around the year. word of mouth only helps so much, but at least a few videos came out about it due to the ending being ambiguous so I dunno if it was like unknown or anything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:37
|
|
|
RLM guys can be hit or miss and have bad takes, but it always seemed to me that their main peeve was the faux-progressive stuff big studios and stars do to seek attention. Stuff like the "let's put all of our women heroines in a poster shot during the final battle of Infinity endgame just because", or the easily-clipped lesbian kiss in Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker. That, plus cynicism poisoning, explains the Brie Larson thing. "Ehh, rich, hot white woman going on about being oppressed, Hollywood amirite?" They liked (and gush about) things like Suspiria and Annilation, which is kryptonite to the Quartering crowd. Rich is on record in a video listing armored Skeptic and other chudmeisters as bleating assholes. I don't even thing Mike was really joking in his "MAKE PICARD GAY" bit in the post-mortem of Star Trek: Picard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:38
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Man, this thread has a recurring problem with devolving into binary arguments of "reviewer bad" or "reviewer good". like if a male character has a couple bits where their writing gets a bit wonky thats just a bump in the road narratively but if a female character has that theyre ruined forever
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:40
|
|
|
fukc the suspiria remake was so good go watch that if you haven't and can handle a lot of nudity and blood
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:41
|
|
|
I can feel rather... meh about Star Trek's progressiveness throughout the years while still admitting that there's basically not a lot I can say about MLJ telling Nichelle Nichols how meaningful it was to have her appear in Star Trek. I enjoy Rogue One but it's kind of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 03:53
|
|
|
fun hater posted:heartwarming: this fictional character who was cgi'd together by an under- or unpaid studio that folds after release is basque! makes sense that they were cgi'd together since the basque are a fantasy race they speak a fake language that has no known relatives filled with ks and xs and drink red wine mixed with coca cola Alaois fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Sep 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 04:20
|
|
|
Alaois posted:red wine mixed with coca cola I've had it it sucks but after the 3rd can it's pretty fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
Kalimotxo is the loving poo poo. The darker the red wine the better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
Gwen posted:fukc the suspiria remake was so good go watch that if you haven't and can handle a lot of nudity and blood THe original is really good too! Watch both imho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 04:48
|
|
|
I think part of the issue here is that we've gotten into a headspace where we're thinking of people as either CHUDS or COOL PEOPLE when in reality human behaviour and opinion is complex, sometimes contradictory and people can hold misogynistic or problematic opinions and not even realize it. I know I have done, as have people I know, and it requires constant introspection in order to grow and shake loose the toxic things we internalize. There's no doubt that the team at RLM are not militant CHUDS, they are leagues away from someone like The Quartering, but that also doesn't mean that they haven't expressed dodgy opinions now and again, and frankly some of their weird hate segments for certain actresses do have a bit of an unpleasant edge to them. Jennifer Lawrence was another one they got mad at alongside Larson, and their argument is always along the lines of that they seem like a "nasty person" whereas there are male actors that are several times more grumpy in interviews like Harrison Ford but whose grumpiness they see as charming. That doesn't mean RLM are monsters, or bad people, but it does mean they've probably got some issues that seep into their work and which they've not really reckoned with. A good example is their Mr Plinkett Force Awakens review where they discuss the diversity of the film. They say it's "good", but then claim that no one, especially kids, care about diversity and that the filmmakers shouldn't have bothered. I think most know that diversity DOES have an effect on children, but aside from that, I get suspicious of this line of argument - the idea that diversity is cynical and done for corporate reasons, therefore it is bad. It very well may be done for corporate reasons BUT so are a whole bunch of decisions in the film, including the decision to make a Star Wars film in the first place. Corporate decisions should be called out when they lead to a bad result, like distracting product placement, or a plot that's more about setting up sequels to the detriment of its own story. But many corporate decisions result in neutral or even good results. For example, most blockbusters have three or more large scale action sequences. This is normally a corporate mandate, No one calls that out for being cynical though because they are mostly satisfied by and enjoy those action sequences. But suddenly when there's a diverse cast it needs to be criticised because "oh they're just doing it to diversify their audience and attract more viewers". Of course they are! Why's that bad? That's not to say cynicism shouldn't be called out when it does lead to a bad result. The woman of Marvel shot in Avengers: Endgame is a good example, because it's contrived and self-congratulatory and doesn't make sense within the scene. But the decision to make a Captain Marvel film, and to build the narrative and themes around feminism, isn't a bad idea that needs to be taken down even if it there was a corporate reason behind it. Most of the MCU films were made for corporate reasons but no one questioned Iron Man 3's right to exist. IShallRiseAgain posted:Also, saying a movie just isn't for critics is a pretty common defense for bad movies that get slammed by critics. Brie Larson just upped the ante by accusing the critics of being sexist/racist for not liking a movie. (I thought that Captain Marvel wasn't bad, but I felt it was pretty mediocre, because we never really got to know what she was like when she a normal human being, despite the entire premise being that her human identity was taken away from her). Neither Ghostbusters 16 nor Captain Marvel were slammed by critics, both received moderate to positive reviews. But also, this post is interesting, because it displays how what she said got chewed up in the internet machine and misrepresented because Brie Larson didn't say that. She referred to a Wrinkle In Time, which was poorly reviewed, and said that she didn't need to hear from a 40 year old white male critic about why it didn't work because the film wasn't made for him. This was amidst a larger speech about how the diversity of film critics does not match the diversity of society and therefore a lot of reviews will inevitably be written from a white male perspective. She was NOT saying that they were sexist or racist for disliking a film, just that not all films are made for an audience of white critics, and that a diversity of critics may provide a diversity of opinion and give films aimed at diverse audiences a fairer shake. It was a sensible opinion that I agree with. It should have been a non-controversial opinion but the internet is insane. Karloff fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Sep 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 04:57
|
|
|
do I contradict myself? very well then I contradict myself, (i am large, i contain multitudes.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:00
|
|
|
Karloff posted:A good example is their Mr Plinkett Force Awakens review where they discuss the diversity of the film. They say it's "good", but then claim that no one, especially kids, care about diversity and that they shouldn't have bothered. That's also the part where they drop the line "They did a good job, it's diverse without being annoyingly diverse"
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:13
|
|
|
What even is "annoyingly diverse"
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:16
|
|
|
tokenism
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:26
|
|
|
I'd assume the idea of like, the old kids shows kinda deal of "We gotta have a white kid, a black kid, an asian kid, a hispanic kid, a vaguely native kid, a ginger kid etc." with it done just to check off a list if I had to guess? Benefit of the doubt is that idea where it's like "Super rainbow cast but was done with cynical marketing types by a studio/company that doesn't really give a poo poo" I guess.Alaois posted:tokenism Yeah, was forgetting the word.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:28
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:What even is "annoyingly diverse" Does the Burger King Kids Club count? I feel if anything is going to count, it's that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:29
|
|
|
secretly best girl posted:Does the Burger King Kids Club count? I feel if anything is going to count, it's that. i thought about just posting that picture but felt saying the word got it across better
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:30
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:What even is "annoyingly diverse" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:30
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:What even is "annoyingly diverse" minority inclusion for the purpose of shallow appeal to peoples wallets
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 05:41
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Be on the lookout for Simu Liu to join her in their brain real estate after what happened this weekend. https://twitter.com/SjwSpiderman/status/1435777527751061505 The internet's number 1 or number 2 (depending on the day) most-hateable Jeremy is amazingly predictable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 06:18
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:
Same here. Though I sometimes feel that medias scared to portray their female characters with any real flaws which is kinda boring. Whether its due to bad writing or fear of a backlash, I dunno, but I noticed it often enough to be bugged by it. (also Annihilation was a pretty dope film)
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 06:52
|
|
|
Karloff posted:Neither Ghostbusters 16 nor Captain Marvel were slammed by critics, both received moderate to positive reviews. But also, this post is interesting, because it displays how what she said got chewed up in the internet machine and misrepresented because Brie Larson didn't say that. She referred to a Wrinkle In Time, which was poorly reviewed, and said that she didn't need to hear from a 40 year old white male critic about why it didn't work because the film wasn't made for him. This was amidst a larger speech about how the diversity of film critics does not match the diversity of society and therefore a lot of reviews will inevitably be written from a white male perspective. She was NOT saying that they were sexist or racist for disliking a film, just that not all films are made for an audience of white critics, and that a diversity of critics may provide a diversity of opinion and give films aimed at diverse audience a fairer shake. It was a sensible opinion that I agree with. It should have been a non-controversial opinion but the internet is insane. No way, Brie Larson is the uber feminist who said she hates all men.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 07:11
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Like, to be honest, I find that the most progressive portrayals of women in media are the ones that aren't afraid to make their characters deeply flawed. At the risk of sounding odd, I always really liked the portrayal of Wendy Torrance in the Shining, even if the treatment of DuVall on set was beyond the pale.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 07:36
|
|
|
half this discussion has been arguing about people saying stuff they apparently didn't actually say
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 08:23
|
|
|
Andrast posted:half this discussion has been arguing about people saying stuff they apparently didn't actually say Sounds like an average internet discussion, yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 08:26
|
|
|
*loops back around* A Wrinkle in Time is a bad movie tho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 10:06
|
|
Samovar posted:At the risk of sounding odd, I always really liked the portrayal of Wendy Torrance in the Shining, even if the treatment of DuVall on set was beyond the pale. The idea that kubrick and nicholson abused Shelley Duvall into having a mental breakdown is kind of a myth based on a story about one specific day of hard shooting, that both is refuted by Duvall itself and also kind of erases her entire post-Shining career as a successful television producer before retiring 20 years later for largely unrelated reasons.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 11:14
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:The idea that kubrick and nicholson abused Shelley Duvall into having a mental breakdown is kind of a myth based on a story about one specific day of hard shooting, that both is refuted by Duvall itself and also kind of erases her entire post-Shining career as a successful television producer before retiring 20 years later for largely unrelated reasons. We need a mythbusting thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 11:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Jack is unironically the best (and only good) member of RLM now. https://youtu.be/CJP8J84vzTA
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 12:35
|
|
