Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

«‹›106 »

JoshTheStampede: Sep 8, 2004; come at me bro

Bruce Leroy posted:

Are these people so blinded by their love of Penn State football that they don't think Paterno had a responsibility to at the very least follow up on the incident or, better yet, actually go to the police with the graduate student who witnessed the crime?

Yes, that is pretty much the crux of it.

# ? Nov 10, 2011 00:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 13:22

Fuckt Tupp: Apr 19, 2007; Science

The whole Penn St. thing reminds me of the movie Big Fan. I don't want to spell out the whole plot, but it goes into the emotional hurdles these people have to get past if they want moral justice instead of just having THEIR TEAM be the best.

# ? Nov 10, 2011 00:47

Bruce Leroy: Jun 10, 2010

Internet Webguy posted:

The whole Penn St. thing reminds me of the movie Big Fan. I don't want to spell out the whole plot, but it goes into the emotional hurdles these people have to get past if they want moral justice instead of just having THEIR TEAM be the best.

I've heard very good things about that movie, especially Patton Oswalt's performance.

As to the Penn State controversy, the other thing that bothers me is Paterno's fake humility and guilt. He really doesn't seem to care about what actually happened, he only seems to care that he got into trouble and has ruined his own reputation, which is why he's been so insistent that he gets to coach four more games this season before "retiring." It just smacks of "Yeah, I got caught abdicating responsibility (and even human decency) in my role as a leader in the football program, but that shouldn't mean that I suffer any kind of punishment or tangible consequences for my own actions, especially in the very position in which I hosed up." It's the sports version of an irresponsible, unethical corporate executive's golden parachute.

# ? Nov 10, 2011 01:35

Lee Harvey Oswald: Mar 17, 2007; by exmarx

A Letter to the editor:

quote:

Protesters deny rights of others

America, enough is enough. To let a bunch of America-hating freeloaders disrupt private businesses is a disgrace.

They want their rights but do not consider the rights of others.

Who feeds and finances this bunch that does not work and disrupts others from working?

We can stand by and let a bunch of liberals take our freedoms away or speak out about how you feel. Too much has been sacrificed for our freedom to let a bunch that doesn't even know why they are protesting to cause the trouble they are causing.

If they really cared, they would be protesting the wealthy media tycoons in our nation. The law needs to stop this situation before people get hurt.

If the people in Washington would quit worrying about their next golf game or big party bash, maybe they could find time to run the country.

FRED R. GASTON

# ? Nov 10, 2011 14:30

Dr. Tough: Oct 22, 2007

Your letter to the editor is too sane, Oswald. Try this one on for size:

quote:

Triangulation In Political Warfare
First of all, a disclaimer: I am an independent voter, to the right of Attila the Hun, George S. Patton, Curtis LeMay and John Wayne. I vote for the best person, regardless of political affiliation, but, most of all, I tend to vote against candidates (the last candidate to receive my vote for the presidency was Ronald Reagan. Since then, I have written in �NONE OF THE ABOVE,� rather than voting for the evil of two lessers).

We are now faced with the phenomenon of triangulation in politics. ObaMarxists, funded and encouraged by communist multibillionaire George Soros, are committed to the discrediting of any conservative candidate who could oppose Glorious Leader. The present target is Herman Cain, who poses the greatest danger to Glorious Leader�s re-election. Why? Those who voted for Obama in 2008 to show they were not racists may have another black choice, this time on the pro-American, conservative, pro-business side. Most intact black families tend to be religious, patriotic and conservative. Obama may have already lost their support.
This is where triangulation comes in. By eliminating Cain via unfunded allegations of sexual impropriety, the next logical opponent to the Democrats would be Mitt Romney, by default. Then, the evangelical Christians who back Texan Rick Perry could be swayed into staying at home or voting for a third party candidate, just to avoid electing a Mormon, who, in their eyes, is a �cultist.� This would split the opposition, to the benefit of Puppet-Master George Soros and his bought and paid-for figurehead president.

We have one chance to snatch our moribund republic from the grave. We can succeed by electing the NoBama, whoever he may be. At this point, the only viable candidate seems to be Cain, who has had a real job and has had people working for him in very successful business enterprises. We are at the �fourth down on the opponent�s 20-yard line, score tied, four seconds left� stage of the game. Victory depends on the last-second field goal� except that there is no next season for us if we lose. Obama, who lately has been ruling by fiat, with one executive order after another without any congressional participation, is already transforming the USA into the USSA. Past is prologue. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pol Pot, Per�n, Allende, Castro, Ch�vez, etc. are the past. Let us learn from it!

J-P. A. Maldonado
(Hitler and Per�n r�gime survivor)

P.S. If we fail, see you at the FEMA political re-education facility!

# ? Nov 10, 2011 23:46

Riptor: Apr 13, 2003; here's to feelin' good all the time

I vote for the best person sidenote I never vote for anyone

# ? Nov 11, 2011 04:36

Riptor: Apr 13, 2003; here's to feelin' good all the time

Also if I were a Republican I would be careful about the proximity with which I use the words "Rick Perry" and "figurehead"

# ? Nov 11, 2011 04:38

JoshTheStampede: Sep 8, 2004; come at me bro

Victory depends on a last second field goal. Your team has 7 kickers. One is pretty bad and only hits 50 percent of his tries. The other 6 are blind and have 1 leg.

# ? Nov 11, 2011 04:42

Bruce Leroy: Jun 10, 2010

Dr. Tough posted:

Your letter to the editor is too sane, Oswald. Try this one on for size:

quote:
Obama, who lately has been ruling by fiat, with one executive order after another without any congressional participation, is already transforming the USA into the USSA.

So, was this person in a coma from 2001 to 2009 or something? How exactly did he miss Bush writing all those signing statements to legislation he didn't like, basically saying that he would do whatever he wanted with it so that he didn't have to veto the legislation and send it back to Congress, which would override his veto?

E.g.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement#Controversy_over_George_W._Bush.27s_use_of_signing_statements

Wikipedia posted:

The signing statement associated with the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, prohibiting cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees in U.S. custody attracted controversy:

"The executive branch shall construe... the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power...."

Also,

quote:

Past is prologue. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pol Pot, Per�n, Allende, Castro, Ch�vez, etc. are the past. Let us learn from it!

One of these things is not like the others, One of these things just doesn't belong...

# ? Nov 11, 2011 13:12

Amarkov: Jun 21, 2010

At least he's actually in the past, unlike Chavez...

# ? Nov 11, 2011 15:17

GottaPayDaTrollToll: Dec 3, 2009; by Lowtax

Bruce Leroy posted:

So, was this person in a coma from 2001 to 2009 or something? How exactly did he miss Bush writing all those signing statements to legislation he didn't like, basically saying that he would do whatever he wanted with it so that he didn't have to veto the legislation and send it back to Congress, which would override his veto?

E.g.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement#Controversy_over_George_W._Bush.27s_use_of_signing_statements

It's classic Rove Doctrine: Take everything bad that's actually true about your guy and claim that it's actually what's bad about the other guy until people start to believe it. I predict that sometime around 2014 conservatives will start making jokes about that time Obama choked on a pretzel.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:23

Friends Are Evil: Oct 25, 2010; cats cats cats

Not sure if this fits, but Frank Miller wrote a very terrible editorial on the Occupy movement:

quote:

The �Occupy� movement, whether displaying itself on Wall Street or in the streets of Oakland (which has, with unspeakable cowardice, embraced it) is anything but an exercise of our blessed First Amendment. �Occupy� is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness. These clowns can do nothing but harm America.

�Occupy� is nothing short of a clumsy, poorly-expressed attempt at anarchy, to the extent that the �movement� � HAH! Some �movement�, except if the word �bowel� is attached - is anything more than an ugly fashion statement by a bunch of iPhone, iPad wielding spoiled brats who should stop getting in the way of working people and find jobs for themselves.

This is no popular uprising. This is garbage. And goodness knows they�re spewing their garbage � both politically and physically � every which way they can find.

Wake up, pond scum. America is at war against a ruthless enemy.

Maybe, between bouts of self-pity and all the other tasty tidbits of narcissism you�ve been served up in your sheltered, comfy little worlds, you�ve heard terms like al-Qaeda and Islamicism.

And this enemy of mine � not of yours, apparently - must be getting a dark chuckle, if not an outright horselaugh - out of your vain, childish, self-destructive spectacle.

In the name of decency, go home to your parents, you losers. Go back to your mommas� basements and play with your Lords Of Warcraft.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:29

Saint Sputnik: Apr 1, 2007; Tyrannosaurs in P-51 Volkswagens!

Lords of Warcraft, GOTY 2012

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:32

quadrophrenic: Feb 4, 2011; WIN MARNIE WIN

Friends Are Evil posted:

Not sure if this fits, but Frank Miller wrote a very terrible editorial on the Occupy movement:

I think the first comment on that article is post-worthy:

Daniel Calvisi 18 hours ago posted:

Dear Frank,
I used to be your biggest fan.

You're now dead to me.

After reading your blog and suffering through "Holy Terror," I don't ever need to pay money for your entertainment, again.

Holy Terror is a MESS. It's sloppy, pedantic, on the nose, silly and confusing. It doesn't make a clear point, at all, which is odd because it was obviously your purposed to make a point, not to tell a good story.

Remind me again which regiment you served with? Oh, right, you were drawing cartoons at the age of those Occupy folks you suggest should enlist. Because if there's one thing a soldier can look forward to these days, it's trusting that his/her superiors will send them to do the right thing and really get the job done.

Like eliminate Al Quaeda overseas. Good mission. The Marines and Army have done that.

Root out sleeper terrorists on American soil. Good idea. The FBI does that, and they do it, well.

So how should the rest of us fight terror? Oh, right, by not rocking the boat. Never complaining, just stewing in our anger and writing angry screeds online and in comic books. Gettin' the ol' job done, aren't we, Frank? Thank God we've got you on that wall, because we need you on that wall.

Remember the Frank Miller who donated to groups that supported creator-owned companies? The guy who printed "Give 'em an inch, they'll take a Mile" in big bold letters on the back cover of one of his books? He was talking about CORPORATIONS, not big government.

He was protesting corporations that exploit their workers.

Remember the Frank Miller that co-founded his own comic publishing company, Legend, and extolled the accomplishment of the Image comics founders who left the big bad Marvel all at the same time? You know, those guys who staged a...let's see, what's the term for it...oh, yeah, a...walkout. Just walked off their jobs, the lazy fucks! Gave the finger to that gracious corporation that so generously employed them and thousands of others, to go..."freelance." Yeccch. Just the word itself makes me feel grimy.

In short, just to be as clear as propaganda: the young Frank Miller would look at what you've aged into and be sick.

On a personal note, I've been trying to decide for months if I should sell my old Frank Miller comics to make some decent cash or save them to give to my nephew when he's old enough to appreciate them. I'd like to think that he would be as inspired by them as I was, that they might even change the course of his creative ambitions as they did for me.

gently caress it, I'm going to Ebay right now and unloading these tainted piles of crap. And I hope you're currently working on some new lunatic book so I can scoff at it as I buy other books by still relevant artists.

I wonder if John Byrne has become a right-wing psycho nutjob, too? Nah, he's Canadian and wayyy too nice a guy for that. But you never know, these days, you never know.

Bolded line put a smile on my face.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:35

GottaPayDaTrollToll: Dec 3, 2009; by Lowtax

Friends Are Evil posted:

Not sure if this fits, but Frank Miller wrote a very terrible editorial on the Occupy movement:

Batman stood 5 feet 6 inches and had a massive, handsome head.... Batman liked to interrupt his working day several times with sexual intercourse, often standing up and in his uniform, a very rapid performance

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:40

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

My only exposure to Frank Miller has been Sin City and The Dark Knight Returns, along with reading about Holy Terror, and he's never struck me as anything but a deeply unpleasant person.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:48

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

Hahahaha, Holy poo poo, I didn't realize that Frank Miller's comic books were actually a representation of his world view. There is seriously a lot of cross over between being a huge sci-fi / comic book nerd and having fascist sympathies. This piece is actually even funnier.

A crazy person posted:

My new comic book (or �graphic novel�, I suppose it should be called, because it�s square bound) is naked propaganda.

�Propaganda� has, over time, become a pejorative term. This is curious, since most of our MSM is precisely that: propaganda. One need only read the front page of the sacred New York Times, that Gray, Senile Old Lady, let alone explore the serpentine chasm that is its editorial page, to read news so slanted as to be beyond recognition of the facts on the ground.

So when I say that my new book, HOLY TERROR, is propaganda, I mean so in all the ways that the virtuous works of Thomas Paine practiced it, through to the ways that the current, shameless MSNBC practice it. I employ propaganda in HOLY TERROR as such. Without apology.

Let�s keep in mind that, back in the forties, Superman punched out Adolf Hitler. Or that the O�Neil/Adams Green Lantern/Green Arrow series in the seventies was a left-wing screed that climaxed with Jesus strung up on the head of a jumbo jet. Subtle stuff, all of it.

Come on. Propaganda is rampant. News objectivity is a twentieth-century myth. We only complain about propaganda when we don�t agree with it.

3000 of my neighbors were murdered. My country was, utterly unprovoked, savagely attacked. I wish all those responsible for the Atrocity of 9/11 to burn in hell.

I�m too old to serve my country in any other way. Otherwise, I�d gladly be pulling the trigger myself.

FM

I understand that a lot of Americans, especially fat crusty old men who would never actually get involved in a real war, used 9/11 and the War on Terror to pump themselves up so that they could posture and act all macho. I didn't quite realize that it was still happening 10 years later. Did Miller just fall out of a time capsul or something? Where the gently caress is this coming from 10 years after the fact?

Perhaps more importantly - does Miller have any idea how artistically uninteresting he's making his book sound right now? "Yeah, I didn't really give a poo poo about the plot or the characters in this one, I just wanted to grind my axe. Please pay money to read it!"

# ? Nov 13, 2011 01:54

sub supau: Aug 28, 2007

Miller's been trying to get Holy ~~poo poo~~Terror done for like five or six years now, after first declaring it'd be another Batman thing, which prompted this response:

Grant Morrison posted:

Batman vs. Al Qaeda! It might as well be Bin Laden vs. King Kong! Or how about the sinister Al Qaeda mastermind up against a hungry Hannibal Lecter! For all the good it's likely to do. Cheering on a fictional character as he beats up fictionalized terrorists seems like a decadent indulgence when real terrorists are killing real people in the real world. I'd be so much more impressed if Frank Miller gave up all this graphic novel nonsense, joined the Army and, with a howl of undying hate, rushed headlong onto the front lines with the young soldiers who are actually risking life and limb 'vs.' Al Qaeda.

But yeah, Frank Miller basically lost his loving mind, quite possibly thanks to 9/11, but also quite probably just because he's always been a fascist and misogynist and 9/11 gave him an excuse to be a racist as well.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 12:01

AndyP: Nov 7, 2011

quadrophrenic posted:

I think the first comment on that article is post-worthy:

Bolded line put a smile on my face.

A thing of beauty.

On a somewhat related note, I honestly didn't know that Holy Terror was finally released. Completely slipped past my radar.

Let me just Google that real quick.

Oh good lord.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 12:20

Bruce Leroy: Jun 10, 2010

Friends Are Evil posted:

Not sure if this fits, but Frank Miller wrote a very terrible editorial on the Occupy movement:

Frank Miller posted:
�Occupy� is nothing short of a clumsy, poorly-expressed attempt at anarchy, to the extent that the �movement� � HAH! Some �movement�, except if the word �bowel� is attached - is anything more than an ugly fashion statement by a bunch of iPhone, iPad wielding spoiled brats who should stop getting in the way of working people and find jobs for themselves.

I'm a bit confused about the accusations of anarchism against the Occupy movement, especially since they seem so common in conservative editorials.

One of the most consistent beliefs across the various Occupy groups is that corporations (especially big banks) and wealthy individuals are harming the rest of the population for their own enrichment and power. Generally, the solution offered for this problem is for the government to increase taxes and regulations on the wealthy and corporations.

How is it an anarchist position to promote greater government regulation and involvement in the business sector and our overall society?

Do conservatives actually understand that words have meanings, or do they think that words like Marxist, communist, fascist, socialist, and anarchist are simply general pejoratives they can lob at anyone with whom they disagree?

# ? Nov 13, 2011 12:41

John Charity Spring: Nov 4, 2009; SCREEEEE

Bruce Leroy posted:

Do conservatives actually understand that words have meanings, or do they think that words like Marxist, communist, fascist, socialist, and anarchist are simply general pejoratives they can lob at anyone with whom they disagree?

I think a fairly large section of the people who use these words with abandon are convinced that they're synonyms.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 12:46

Bruce Leroy: Jun 10, 2010

John Charity Spring posted:

I think a fairly large section of the people who use these words with abandon are convinced that they're synonyms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g6ctonQoGA

# ? Nov 13, 2011 13:30

sub supau: Aug 28, 2007

Bruce Leroy posted:

I'm a bit confused about the accusations of anarchism against the Occupy movement, especially since they seem so common in conservative editorials.

To them, anarchy just means having no leader and/or upsetting the status quo. Never mind that that was also the case with the Tea Party, the Tea Party are the Good Guys.

quote:

Do conservatives actually understand that words have meanings, or do they think that words like Marxist, communist, fascist, socialist, and anarchist are simply general pejoratives they can lob at anyone with whom they disagree?

The Right has an amazing mastery of the media. They know how to construct a narrative, and that words will mean whatever you want them to mean if you repeat them often enough in their desired context. When they come from the talking points generators, they're used in a very calculated manner - they're dog-whistles that immediately conjure up the Big Bads of the Soviets and the Nazis. What they mean is less important than what they represent.

There's also an element of Rovian politics to it - if you get in first, get in often, and paint your enemies as possessing the exact negative traits you actually possess, when you get called out for those exact traits (however accurately), it comes off as petty "I know you are but what am I"-ing while simultaneously controlling the narrative.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 14:29

EngineerSean: Feb 9, 2004; by zen death robot

TetsuoTW posted:

But yeah, Frank Miller basically lost his loving mind, quite possibly thanks to 9/11, but also quite probably just because he's always been a fascist and misogynist and 9/11 gave him an excuse to be a racist as well.

I don't know much about Frank Miller but it seems funny that the exact same thing happened to another Miller, Dennis Miller.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 15:11

Orange Devil: Oct 1, 2010; Wullie's reign cannae smother the flames o' equality!

quote:

Frank Miller

I loving knew 300 was a racist and fascist piece of poo poo. But no, people had to defend that crap, talk about artistic license and that I was reading too much into it. I need to go find these idiots who defended that crap and rub this in their faces.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 15:22

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Orange Devil posted:

I loving knew 300 was a racist and fascist piece of poo poo. But no, people had to defend that crap, talk about artistic license and that I was reading too much into it. I need to go find these idiots who defended that crap and rub this in their faces.

Perhaps you were confusing people talking about the movie version with the ones talking about the comic? Although the movie is often quite "faithful" to the comic, there's heavy emphasis at times that shouldn't trust the crazy propagandist narrator who "tells" the story. Lots of people think it's clear that the guy who made the movie tried to pull a Starship Troopers - present a fascist sourcework for the most part straightfaced and allow the inherent weirdness to provide satire.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 16:46

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

I don't think that that is clear at all, especially given Snyder's changes to Rorschach in Watchmen.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 17:48

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Pope Guilty posted:

I don't think that that is clear at all, especially given Snyder's changes to Rorschach in Watchmen.

Did you watch the full cut of Watchmen and still think that? The theatrical cut is different in many ways as well as being much shorter, the full cut is a lot more faithful to the Watchmen comic.

Also, I'm not saying Snyder is good at giving the Starship Troopers treatment to 300 or anything.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 19:35

Tacky-Ass Rococco: Sep 7, 2010; by R. Guyovich

Install Gentoo posted:

Although the movie is often quite "faithful" to the comic, there's heavy emphasis at times that shouldn't trust the crazy propagandist narrator who "tells" the story. Lots of people think it's clear that the guy who made the movie tried to pull a Starship Troopers - present a fascist sourcework for the most part straightfaced and allow the inherent weirdness to provide satire.

Aside from the stupid McNulty subplot and the depraved/monstrous characterization of the Persians, I thought the movie and comic were just (pointlessly) watered-down Herodotus. Calling Herodotus fascist would be, well, peculiar. But it's been a good while since I've encountered either. What subtleties am I missing?

# ? Nov 13, 2011 19:47

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

Install Gentoo posted:

Did you watch the full cut of Watchmen and still think that? The theatrical cut is different in many ways as well as being much shorter, the full cut is a lot more faithful to the Watchmen comic.

Also, I'm not saying Snyder is good at giving the Starship Troopers treatment to 300 or anything.

I haven't, no. I saw it a couple of times in theatres (I had to go a second time- the first showing was ruined because every single incident of violence or sex was met with gales of laughter from everybody in the audience, which started out as annoying and became disturbing right around the rape scene, which drew much laughter), and the impression I got both from the way Snyder handles Rorschach and 300 is that Zach Snyder thinks that Leonidas and Rorschach are loving awesome badass heroes. I didn't get a whiff of satire from 300, which may be my own fault for rolling my eyes constantly through it, and Watchmen seemed like it major-league missed the point.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 19:51

sub supau: Aug 28, 2007

Pope Guilty posted:

I don't think that that is clear at all, especially given Snyder's changes to Rorschach in Watchmen.

And the entirety of Sucker Punch.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:00

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

Jack of Hearts posted:

Aside from the stupid McNulty subplot and the depraved/monstrous characterization of the Persians, I thought the movie and comic were just (pointlessly) watered-down Herodotus. Calling Herodotus fascist would be, well, peculiar. But it's been a good while since I've encountered either. What subtleties am I missing?

Prizing violence as morally purifying and aesthetically pleasurable, portraying "the West" as a unique bastion of higher civilization in a world of barbarism, portraying anyone opposed to military solutions as effete, cowardly and corrupt, portraying a noble but doomed military expedition that has been "stabbed in the back" by traitors on the homefront, portraying the enemy as literally being subhuman monsters, using physical appearance as a crucial marker of moral character (ugly = evil, attractive = good), valorizing military sacrifice. Indulging in a homo-erotic celebration of the virile young male warrior. The list goes on and on.

The problem is that these are also the plot elements of many (most?) successful Hollywood action movies, and a lot of regular authoritarians also share some or all of these values without believing in the need for an all powerful state to express the organic will of the people by smashing all internal and external enemies. Its perhaps a little hyperbolic to call 300 straight up fascist literature... but then again, when you read Miller's comments on his website, you have to wonder what he would sound like if he had, say, been born in Germany in 1900.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:00

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Pope Guilty posted:

I haven't, no. I saw it a couple of times in theatres (I had to go a second time- the first showing was ruined because every single incident of violence or sex was met with gales of laughter from everybody in the audience, which started out as annoying and became disturbing right around the rape scene, which drew much laughter), and the impression I got both from the way Snyder handles Rorschach and 300 is that Zach Snyder thinks that Leonidas and Rorschach are loving awesome badass heroes. I didn't get a whiff of satire from 300, which may be my own fault for rolling my eyes constantly through it, and Watchmen seemed like it major-league missed the point.

There's also an extra line for Night Owl in the movie that isn't in the graphic novel, which turns Ozymandias from "morally ambiguous" to "obvious villain, obviously." Snyder really missed the point.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:03

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

TetsuoTW posted:

And the entirety of Sucker Punch.

Sucker Punch has Snyder explicitly saying it was suppose to satirize things and was "supposed to" make people feel bad about enjoying the stripper dances. Too bad he did really bad at doing it!

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:08

Helsing: Aug 23, 2003; DON'T POST IN THE ELECTION THREAD UNLESS YOU JOE BIDEN

FactsAreUseless posted:

There's also an extra line for Night Owl in the movie that isn't in the graphic novel, which turns Ozymandias from "morally ambiguous" to "obvious villain, obviously." Snyder really missed the point.

I definitely think that Ozymandias was intended to be the villain of the Watchmen comic. Moore is an anarchist and it makes complete sense that a fascist like Rorscrach comes off more sympathetic than the smugly self satisfied Liberal vegetarian do gooder. Honestly, its one of the most brilliant things about the whole comic.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:14

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Oymandias is also a huge corrupt semi-randian businessman. Veidt Enterprises and its subsidiaries controls all kinds of things.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:21

ArchRanger: Mar 19, 2007; I'm tired of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with 'em there.

FactsAreUseless posted:

There's also an extra line for Night Owl in the movie that isn't in the graphic novel, which turns Ozymandias from "morally ambiguous" to "obvious villain, obviously." Snyder really missed the point.

What extra line is that? It's been an age since I've read the comic and I can't recall any extra dialogue.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:24

Tacky-Ass Rococco: Sep 7, 2010; by R. Guyovich

Helsing posted:

Prizing violence as morally purifying and aesthetically pleasurable, portraying "the West" as a unique bastion of higher civilization in a world of barbarism, portraying anyone opposed to military solutions as effete, cowardly and corrupt, portraying a noble but doomed military expedition that has been "stabbed in the back" by traitors on the homefront, portraying the enemy as literally being subhuman monsters, using physical appearance as a crucial marker of moral character (ugly = evil, attractive = good), valorizing military sacrifice. Indulging in a homo-erotic celebration of the virile young male warrior. The list goes on and on.

It's hard to regard most of that list as "fascist," though, in any meaningful sense. In particular:

Helsing posted:

Prizing violence as morally purifying and aesthetically pleasurable...valorizing military sacrifice. Indulging in a homo-erotic celebration of the virile young male warrior.

To varying degrees, all this stuff was present in the classical world, and probably pops up in most cultures with a heavy martial slant.

Helsing posted:

portraying "the West" as a unique bastion of higher civilization in a world of barbarism

This sort of exceptionalism also shows up repeatedly in history. But honestly I don't really think it was a big part of the movie. I remember the Spartans slagging off the Athenians, and Sparta wasn't grand enough to pass for a bastion of anything. My feeling of the movie's theme was not, say, "protecting light from darkness," but more like a Bravehearty "ARE FREEDOM!"

Having made those objections:

Helsing posted:

The problem is that these are also the plot elements of many (most?) successful Hollywood action movies, and a lot of regular authoritarians also share some or all of these values without believing in the need for an all powerful state to express the organic will of the people by smashing all internal and external enemies. Its perhaps a little hyperbolic to call 300 straight up fascist literature.

Yeah. I'm just a little pedantic about people projecting fascism two millennia backwards to describe the Spartans and the Romans. Neither Herodotus nor Livy were "fascist," no matter how much Mussolini wanted to sell Italians on Roman heritage.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:25

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Jack of Hearts posted:

Yeah. I'm just a little pedantic about people projecting fascism two millennia backwards to describe the Spartans and the Romans. Neither Herodotus nor Livy were "fascist," no matter how much Mussolini wanted to sell Italians on Roman heritage.

We're not saying the historical Spartans were fascist, just that Frank Miller writes fascist things.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 13:22

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

Miller is all too happy to depict Big Manly Men who are in positions of exploitative power and yet are somehow also the greatest defenders of freedom imaginable.

# ? Nov 13, 2011 20:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

«‹›106 »