|
I feel like I understand specific targeted boycotts. If someone does something and then something that makes them money comes out deliberately avoiding it to screw the person directly out of money. If JK rowling put out a book now, I think it would make sense for people to snub her and not buy it. Past that, I feel like the more generalized lists people make feel like part of the thing people do where they want to imagine what media they consume is very important and watching a movie or not watching a movie is important activism and has a big impact. Like I just don't think kevin spacey knows or cares if I do or don't watch a bugs life. Weinstein is a horrifically bad man but I just don't feel like he will be impacted enough to matter if I do or don't watch Inglourious Basterds. armie hammer might be literally an actual cannibal but watching or not watching 'sorry to bother you' seems like it just won't do anything to him or matter in any way at all to him. If the person is starring in something and it makes you not want to watch it that makes sense, if bill cosby got a role in a romantic comedy saying 'eh, that doesn't sound like something I want to watch at this point", or if something really directly is funneling money to someone specifically I get boycotting it. But just general "watching/not watching movies as activism" always seems dumb and self important and part of a general thing people do where they want the media they consume to be somehow very important. There feels like specific cases it does matter, or cases where it's direct enough support it's worth caring, but at some point it feels like eating some crackers and worrying if the guy who made the crackers at the factory is morally a good man. It's just crackers, not a vote for the morality or behavior of everyone that worked on it.
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Also, there's a HUGE chasm between "openly conservative" and "molests little kids". I know this is generally a left-leaning forum, but it's funny to me that those two things are mentioned in the same breath. I think it depends if the goal of avoiding media is some plan to punish the creator by avoiding his work or if the goal is to avoid work that might function in some way as propaganda for a position. Like if I found out Orson Scott Card ate a baby it wouldn't really in the end ultimately change how I felt about reading his books, although I wouldn't want him to get any more money from them. But finding out his lovely opinions really did ruin the books, because now I know they are all just awful metaphors for things he thinks and they feel very sour to read now.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
twerking on the railroad posted:More accurate would be "lovely dudes" (can't help but noting they are all men) There are some women, like roseanne barr or the weird lady that made forever twelve, or ellen.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:What about things like Last Tango In Paris where the bad thing done is literally part of the final product? What about it? What happens if you do or don’t watch it? None of the people directly involved are even alive anymore. What effect does your media consumption or non consumption even have on them?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:I don't know, I just think it's kinda lovely watching literal rape on my tv even if no one involved it still alive. Would you watch a snuff film? Is the idea that everyone who ever watched last tango in paris is a rape loving sicko?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2021 13:26
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:Not at all, especially considering Schneider wasn't really ready to talk about it for 30 years. But once you've been informed of what you're watching, I would think it would change your impression and I would think an average person wouldn't necessarily want to be up to watching that, no matter how much you argue "it's art." so would someone that watched it now be a rape loving sicko? It feels like a really famous movie that would be normal to hear someone watched. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Boy it sure would be embarrassing if someone specifically noted the distinction between a production where some below-the-line talent turned out to be a wife-beater and the top creative decision maker was a monster I feel like that describes like 90% of symphonies and operas that exist.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
Read the interview, it really seems like the problem wasn't kubrick being personally mean to her: ""No. He was very warm and friendly to me," she says. "He spent a lot of time with Jack and me. He just wanted to sit down and talk for hours while the crew waited. And the crew would say, 'Stanley, we have about 60 people waiting.' But it was very important work."" the difficulty was it being 56 weeks of filming and whole days of shoots of like, jack screaming at her in character. Which seems like a really different type of question.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2021 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Vince MechMahon posted:He's still an alleged pedo and proven cult leader creep. He probably is, but you also shouldn’t believe everything said to hype up movies is always literally true and the “tales of joker on set” stuff was very clearly intentional hype about how edgy and raw the joker is that even in real life he’s driving the actors mad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2021 05:16
|
|