|
Drunkboxer posted:Stephen Roots good at playing blind guys He really is.
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Yeah, so Armond White is a Respectability Politics, "Welfare state is slavery!" conservative, and THAT'S why he's writing for NR. He's always come off as anti-respectability politics.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Punch Drunk Drewsky posted:One of the many things I've gleaned from reading White's writing is that he is dead-set against the idea of noble suffering under oppression or some kind of inherent strength from living a dignified life in menial jobs or whatever. I loved The Butler, but get where White is coming from in criticizing the way Daniels presents Gaines as a sort of passive saint. Or his oft-repeated targets - fetishized victimhood and "talented tenth" blackness, both of which are hand in glove with elitism and class heirarchy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
I gotta be honest, right away I "knew" because they weren't remotely convincing as a couple. They don't even kiss with tongue!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Cacator posted:What's the significance of the Japanese man at the party? Something about the model minority stereotype maybe? That, and a direct reference to the final scenes of Rosemary's Baby.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
Grandpa is pretty blatantly Brian O'Blivion.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:wasn't the guy japanese. it's a pretty racist country. As a nod to Rosemary's Baby, which has the same peculiar, American anxiety:  The point of this character in Rosemary's Baby is to highlight the cosmopolitanism of the ginchy, leisure suit wearing Satanists. The Castavets are coded Jewish (they lead a secret cabal of power behind their changed names) but the other Satanists are pretty WASPy. Rosemary is Catholic, possibly a hippie, "Guy Woodhouse" is noveau riche (obviously). They both need to be "promoted" in class and racial status. By making the pact, Guy knows exactly what he's after. However, the stereotype Japanese tourist shutterbug isn't there yet. He's still a curiosity. In 30 years, he'll get his promotion. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:People are mistaken about racism existing because the real problem is social class is a running theme across his posts. SMG would have voted for Obama a third time. Interesting that this makes me think you did not see the movie.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
What would be the cigar in this case.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Racism. Racism, particularly the very idosyncratic kind we have in the US where nothing matters other than Black and White, is economically motivated. Racialization is a justifcation for conquest and domination. I have no clue why people are acting like it's just gratuitous cruelty.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:If it's the latter I'm innocent and it's just bad racists that do racisms. Not anyone in particular, I just mean in general, what do people think the point of racism is? Hat Thoughts posted:Hell, Stephen Root's character is a literal blind man who denies any racism while using his $$ to get a black guy murked He doesn't see color. He sees value. It's nothing personal, of course. This is much more insidious.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
VROOM VROOM posted:Rate the sketchiness of saying racism reduces entirely to classism in the Get Out thread out of 10. Alternate view: it's not entirely economically motivated. Even "conquest and domination" mean more than profit. Any antiracist critique must begin from examining what motivated racial and racist classification, which are mostly but not entirely materialist. Otherwise, that explanation tends to come in other flavors, like "human nature" (no) and pathological pettiness (also no).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
Darko posted:Tribalism is a huge part of it to. In fact, the economic part works so well because of the natural inclination of tribalism. "Tribalism" is just as likely to promote cooperation and trade. Tribalism, for example, is useful socially when you can use it to join two peoples together through a series of marriages. Racism specifically originates from justifying inequity. It's a reification of an advantageous social and economic arrangement. What stokes racism is arguably irrational, but you can track the development of racism over the past half millenium and it's remarkably consistent despite the fluidity of its categories. Hat Thoughts posted:still obsessed with the guy i heard saying the problem with the movie was that "once again scientists are the bad guy" That guy owns.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Darko posted:Racism is sourced in justifying colonial dominance over groups, but it perpetuates today, outside of all common sense, because of how well it fits into how people generally like to group things. It crosses over into resources a ton, but it also exists outside of those considerations because it aligns with where people generally fall back into on "instinct." Yes, but there's a reason racism is concieved of as distinct from prejudice. The world is full of petty prejudices, cultural and otherwise. Individuals invariably filter their own prejudice through their own pathologies. Racism, however, is about the levering of power. We can catalog symptoms all day but if you wanna understand it, you have to talk about the whole phenomenon, and it's not just pathology. Overcoming it has got to go beyond individual diagnosis.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
VROOM VROOM posted:You'll want to make very clear that you only use the term "racism" in the systemic sense, and you don't really get to declare that everyone else has to do the same. Without belaboring it, personal anecdotes about racism are interesting insofar as they contribute to an understanding. Without it, the concept of racism is very abstract and "essentializing". For example, the tendency to treat Chris and his boy in the TSA as one in the same. Chris "made it", he's a rising star in the arts, has a white girlfriend, a neat 1 BR in a nice part of town, a toy dog, etc. He already has the tastes of someone upwardly mobile. His specific anxiety is how he will fit within his girlfriend's lifestyle, if he's ready to get "sunk in" with corny, bougie people. It comes as a relief when the mask comes off and they're squeezing his muscles, asking him about basketball and winking about big black dicks. It's easy to reject and distance yourself these people, it's awkward, tired poo poo. It's not shocking, whether or not you've met some white girl's parents. That's his enforced blackness and it's not new. What's appaling to him is what he'll be asked to give up to buy into that life, because giving himself up is something he hadn't even considered. That's what Rod is worried about when he's sitting alone bored as hell dogsitting in Chris' apartment, soul deadness. No life, no energy, just conformity. The funniest joke in the movie is Rod immediately shutting Rose down because he's prejudiced. She's supposed to be kryptonite for black men, but she's basic. He's not a social climber, so he sees right through her.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Of course, white people are extremely goofy, this could just as easily be a film about getting tricked into going to a Christian pizza party. It's basically the same premise as The Invitation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:err no. Why do you think Peele cited Rosemary's Baby and The Stepford Wives as influences? Do you think he saw these films and didn't grasp what they were about?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:rosemary's baby and stepford wives weren't "it's all in their head". just like the twilight zone episode improperly cited. do you folks even follow the posts you're defending. Hmm. DeimosRising posted:I think this is a good thread ATM and the arguement that the movie is about Chris's struggle with his own sense of "blackness" didn't originate with SMG iirc It originates from the film itself, with his studio photography set to neo-soul. This whole idea that either you're authentically black, or you're a white person trapped in a black person's body is odd, to say the least, because it doesn't even take into account the differences between the black characters. It's as if they're just "black" and the threat is "turning white". It's somewhat more complex than that. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Mar 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
mary had a little clam posted:I had an interesting experience watching the film where as Chris was meeting Georgina and the groundskeeper and Andre/Logan, I was like "Man, they're acting so weird" when, even though yes it was extra weird in the text of the film, I was falling into that trap of "Hmm they're acting really white... suspicious!" and reducing blackness/whiteness to really unfair broad brush behavior patterns. So, having brought my own lovely internal baggage into it, Chris being the audience surrogate has me appreciating the more paranoiac readings of Chris. One of the more interesting things in the movie is Georgina's wig covering up a scar. If you wanted to hit on something particularly metaphorical you'd say, 'ah, assimilation. she is ashamed of her natural hair.' Yet what does that say about Erika Alexander's detective character? (love her btw and haven't seen her in a million years) She has straightened hair and doesn't believe Rod's story. Is she a white person in a black person's skin? She doesn't talk like it. Is Rod's story believable? Or is she condescending to him because she's a real cop and he's a security guard?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Wesley Snipes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:She's an interesting example, too, because of how many outlets published stories about how beautiful, dark, and 'exotic' she was after the release of 12 Years A Slave. But didn't cast her in any films. She got more modeling work out of that than film work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:I don't know how anyone could think that after seeing his goofy millennial yuppie fuckboy apartment. It's a big clue! Like Peele himself points out, the parents in Get Out would've also loved Get Out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:I'm 100% sure this was an intentional choice for the character. A lot of low level government positions like TSA, DMV, USPS, etc are filled by black people at higher rates than in the public sector and they offer good wages, job security and health/pension benefits for people of color. They also carry a small amount of bureaucratic authority and this makes white people very very angry. Its awesome that Peele was able to put the TSA in a positive light since a lot of the hate that the TSA gets is, at the very least, exacerbated by racist undertones. All the ire at damaging policies has been laid at the feet of the TSA, when as recent events prove, apparently other three letter agencies that operate out of the airport couldn't wait to get in on the action. TSA are much more likely to just follow stupid directives for fear of losing a good job. DHS, on the other hand, is exclusively staffed by Dennis Rader types who get off on snatching people out of lines to pretend they're in an episode of 24. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Mar 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Martman posted:If the movie has anything meaningful to say about racism, shouldn't that message be true without needing to rely on the literal truth of brain-stealing (something that doesn't actually go on in the real world)? Absolutely. Otherwise, you can reach a strange conclusion, like "black men shouldn't date white women".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Annointed posted:They welcome him as bait and consistently use backhanded compliments to degrade and dehumanize him without even fully realizing it. You don't have to be a minority to know something like that. Yes, they want to degrade him in order to literally make him like them. That's what's meant by "belonging in this neighborhood". Not that "black people shouldn't socialize with white people". This is also why John Nada wants Frank Armitage to put on the glasses. He doesn't have a vocabulary to describe what Frank Armitage likely already knows. (In the short story They Live is based on, it's literally a botched hypnotic trigger that wakes John Nada up.)The trauma of seeing for the first time is compensated for with with a totally fleshed out, internally consistent conspiracy theory. This isn't a plot description of what happens in the film, this is describing the experience of the POV character. This is also crucial to the sister films about resistance to assimilatory elitism, Rosemary's Baby, The Stepford Wives, They Live, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Tales From The Hood isn't on that list, as it's a much more radical movie, but still.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Hell yeah The Burbs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:You're gonna have to derive that equation, professor. Not a joke in the slightest, that is what some people are indeed taking away from the movie, which is a shame. If the villain of the piece is well meaning white folks, what would you say to the fact that Chris' greatest fear is being tricked into consenting to their lifestyle? What's to be rejected is the false utopia of people as economic units, partnership as "recruitment", "rejuvenation" of the elderly, etc. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Critical race theory is specifically about the intersection of race and power. I don't need to tell you what "power" is in the United States of America.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Actually, I'll say it's unfair to say you don't know what you're talking about in conjunction with SMG (who does not know what he's talking about) because I'm on board with your earlier posts. I don't understand for a second how you can so carelessly dismiss the antagonists as "well meaning white folks" or that people are reading the movie as anti-miscegenation. Because that's literally the point of tension. They're well meaning white folks. They don't wear hoods. They want Chris to be comfortable with the idea of joining their community.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Darko posted:They aren't actually well meaning white folks in the sense of the plot of the movie (they come off that way at first, but are obviously not), but represent real life well meaning white folks that actually perpetuate racism in ways they don't even realize. What's the difference? K. Waste posted:Ignoring intersectional readings of Get Out is discrediting to the filmmakers. The quoted tweets from Jordan Peele say that "we" are in the sunken place. Marginalized people. Who does "we" exclude? HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:No, they don't. They don't want Chris. They want Chris's body. Critical Race Theory would say that there are particular ways black people (and black men specifically) are commodified. What critical race theory would not say is that commodification is exclusive to "white brains" and "black bodies", because that's essentializing. That's Yakubian wokeness. That's Red Pill Philosophy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
Darko posted:Black people are some of the people most defendable for being conspiracy theorists since so many literal otherwise ridiculous conspiracy theories have been proven true about black people. Voting laws and zoning, drug laws and possibly some drug community leaking, zoning, and literal experimentation have all happened to black people, many of which particularly to keep black people from amassing too much power. A ridiculous brain swap conspiracy actually being true just plays along with what other ridiculous stuff has been done to black people by white people already, and while laughable on its surface, is really just par for the course. Also true, however, we have innumerable examples of what comes from belief in conspiracies without a positive program for change. Awfully strange conclusions and a predictable tendency to support the most reactionary impulses. Magic Hate Ball posted:e.g., the poet literally wants Chris's eyes because he thinks his photos, which he literally hasn't seen, have "soul". His conclusions are motivated by belief and nothing more. Despite the fact that the program "works", he could've just gotten an eye donor. Armitage's program is ideological with a very thin scientific premise. Otherwise, why the direct reference to Videodrome? HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Neo was woke when he decided to shoot up the lobby of an office building. White Hotep Neo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:It's flavor of the month appropriation. It's like Dr. Nyle in Beyond The Black Rainbow trying to harness the power of the yonis or whatever, when in actuality, he's just molesting his daughter. His ideology is cover for the fact that not only does he not know what he's doing (he doesn't know what comes after the Black Rainbow), but also convienently allows him to do whatever strikes his fancy. The fact that the Armitage Program (I already forget the name) is promoted via infomercial like Herbalife adds another layer to what's simply "going on" on the surface. The first black victim we see is kidnapped, the second we follow is seduced. He has to be convinced. He also has to believe for it to work. A conspiracy theory is potentially damaging here, because it presupposes that nothing can be done. The forces arrayed against you are simply too cool, too organized. It's too big for you to fathom, behind the Wizard of Oz is another Wizard of Oz, and on and on. This is relevant right now for marginalized people.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Root dismisses the ideology in that chat so I don't know that he cares so much about Chris's race. It just so happens that he, as a rich white man, has access to the black slave auction. That's one aspect of the colorblind liberal racism on display. See, if he did a sequel that was the reverse, it would have to be Brother From Another Planet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Paternal racism helps shield a racist from their own monstrous activity. That's for their benefit; not Chris's. "Paternal" racism doesn't work outside the conception of a nuclear family. Chris is a "junior".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Paternal racism describes the entirety of Progressive Era racial social programs. It's white-man's-burden poo poo. That's the exact language being used by the white family. "Paternal" implies that there are children. The white father provides for and trains up his children/inferiors. Not that it is tough love, not that he is doing you a favor, but that you should accept this order (the nuclear family, no more "natural" than a racial heirarchy) because this is the way things "should be". This is obviously grossly offensive. However, if you subscribe to the conspiracy theory (that is to say, rationalize it to yourself rather than understanding it), one logical conclusion is that ultimately, all such social programs are paternal. Any social program becomes patronizing and dependent. Well meaning liberals are, strangely, not only not threatened by this - they are completely comfortable with this worldview.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:But they don't feel bad about it. Everything in the movie points to them believing that this is the best not just for black people, but for themselves as well. In their mind, it's a win-win situation, not unlike how westerners perceive that other cultures aren't "good" until it's heavily influenced and homogenized by their influence. Yup. Post-hoc rationalizations do more than make people feel better. They harden and reinforce themselves and take on a life of their own.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
i am the bird posted:And yes, that is the obvious critique of liberalism. Social programs tend to be paternalistic because they dictate, in some form or another, how a person should act in order to receive benefits. That's not a logical argument against social programs because it ignores the context of inequality, but plenty of people are materially dependent on social programs. It's an illogical leap to argue that it makes them psychologically dependent, however, or to argue that benefitting from a social program makes someone a metaphorical child. It is a justification for inequality and furthermore, a paternalistic heirarchy. This is why the concept of human rights exists and has to be argued for, as opposed to the "natural" system of treats bestowed on good little boys and girls. Social programs don't "tend" to be anything, because again, the current order is a condition.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 21:34
|
|