|
Darthemed posted:Sure, if someone reads a two-sentence summary of a film and assumes that it would contain content they don't want to experience, they're completely justified in not watching it to find out whether the summary was fully illustrative. The problem comes when you go out and start attacking a film you haven't actually seen for content you're guessing it contains, and spreading uninformed vilification. That leads to situations like the one on this page, in which one marginalized person is attacking a work for being queerphobic, when it's actually a work by another marginalized person, one which draws significantly from their own experiences as a queer person. Which the OP did. So my issue is with the poster who attacked them and reduced their perspective to "just wanting to be outraged." Especially since the OP has been open that that perspective was as a marginalized party justifiably sensitive to the issue. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Nov 26, 2019 |
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:firstly: Miller winning would mean no video game stuff, either, and there's a reasonable chance that all the existing sequels would be found to be in violation and taken out of circulation. when i say he wants to kill the franchise, i'm not being figurative or hyperbolic. his active goal in this, from what I understand, is to remove Jason Voorhees from pop culture, because Jason Voorhees is a perversion of his ideas. I wasn't specifically responding to the Miller situation just to the idea that there needs to be more F13 sequels. It sucks if he is trying to block the release of the old films. Also, I'm just tired in general of 80s franchises that keep on going forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Sure, if someone reads a two-sentence summary of a film and assumes that it would contain content they don't want to experience, they're completely justified in not watching it to find out whether the summary was fully illustrative. The problem comes when you go out and start attacking a film you haven't actually seen for content you're guessing it contains, and spreading uninformed vilification. That leads to situations like the one on this page, in which one marginalized person is attacking a work for being queerphobic, when it's actually a work by another marginalized person, one which draws significantly from their own experiences as a queer person. It really wasn't that serious, it was an off-hand post and they almost immediately corrected themselves once they read about the film. And the initial post was a honest request for a recommendation, so it kinda sucks that things have now gone beyond that in a negative way. I can understand the sentiment that when you've seen yourself represented in film a certain way so many times, it can be hard to continue digging through all that garbage to find the nuance that may or may not be there. At a certain point I'm sure it gets tiresome to see yourself consistently defined in popular media as someone who experienced trauma or overcame tough circumstances. People are more than the trauma they may have experienced and certainly there's a place for those stories but there's also a point where as a society we should be ready to go past that and tell other types of stories that marginalized people can relate to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
The art of cinema is bourgeoisie exploitation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I can understand the sentiment that when you've seen yourself represented in film a certain way so many times, it can be hard to continue digging through all that garbage to find the nuance that may or may not be there. At a certain point I'm sure it gets tiresome to see yourself consistently defined in popular media as someone who experienced trauma or overcame tough circumstances. People are more than the trauma they may have experienced and certainly there's a place for those stories but there's also a point where as a society we should be ready to go past that and tell other types of stories that marginalized people can relate to. And wanting more variety in the films told using characters with qualities that you recognize in yourself still doesn't justify going out and dogging a movie you haven't seen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:firstly: Miller winning would mean no video game stuff, either, and there's a reasonable chance that all the existing sequels would be found to be in violation and taken out of circulation. when i say he wants to kill the franchise, i'm not being figurative or hyperbolic. his active goal in this, from what I understand, is to remove Jason Voorhees from pop culture, because Jason Voorhees is a perversion of his ideas. Do you have any links about his wanting to kill the franchise? So far everything I've read's sounded like it was about not receiving royalties.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Absolutely. But Mysterious Skin is almost two decades old, so devaluing it for drawing from a widely-used narrative arc (to drastically generalize), at a time when getting wide distribution for a film with a gay protagonist (let alone one made by an openly gay auteur film-maker) was even harder than it is today, feels a bit unfair to me. Kvlt! started that one, I love the guy but this one is on him. The other poster immediately said "whoops I made a bad assumption there, I see my mistake, sorry about that", and then Kvlt! jumped down their throat. It was a throwaway nothing post that didn't need to end up in a multi-page derail, which I'm now contributing to. I'll drop it now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:22
|
|
|
dont u put that evil on me ricky bobby edit: not even worth the battle Kvlt! fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Nov 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
All horror is queerphobic compared to the one true queer horror, Seed of Chucky, which I stan
Pomp fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Nov 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
Pomp posted:All horror is queerphobic compared to the once true queer horror, Seed to Chucky, which I stan i stan it too so does john waters between us 3 the motion passes
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
Remember when people used to say Seed of Chucky was bad? gently caress outta here
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
Pomp posted:All horror is queerphobic compared to the one true queer horror, Seed to Chucky, which I stan
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I think that's a false choice. Film is artifice, it's about putting images together to convey some sort of meaning to people who will see it. But the images don't have that meaning until you put them together in a specific way that you think conveys the meaning you want to convey. It's at the core of film as an art form, so why not consider things like marginalized people and how the audience might interpret your thoughts on those issues when they see the film? As a director you're doing that in a thousand different ways already, so to say that you're not going to consider how the audience will interpret the film in a social justice context is a cop-out in my opinion. I don't see it necessarily as a cop out, though I'm sure bad actors would use that excuse to peddle garbage ideas, like a neo nazi who peddles propaganda under the protection of free expression. But spelling everything out to an ignorant audience can have the adverse effect of compromising the work, or at the very least, insulting the viewers intelligence. The famously-criticized scene in Psycho following the big reveal is a clunky as hell exposition dump that laboriously explains to the audience that Norman has a unique mental disorder, and is not just a murderous transvestite fueled by sexual perversion. And yet, I'm sure there were still people who took that lesson away from the movie anyway. Art is an expression, and sure, one wants to convey that expression to an audience in a way that accurately represents one's desired intent, but my beef is when that expectation of an audiences' reaction compromises the integrity of the art that represents that expression. A good portion of a general audience will always either be too dumb to get your meaning (like someone who would think Mysterious Skin were anti-gay even after watching it and knowing it's background), or too biased by their own prejudices to care about your meaning (like how American History X is enjoyed by a lot of skinheads), so to use their expectations as a compass for one's art is, to me, misguided. Of course, this isn't the idea behind the production of most studio movies, since they're made with the goal of generating capital, but  Maybe I'm just antiquated in my ideas about art. But I don't know if I would want to be in a world where no art was free to be problematic, even dumb bigoted art, because I think the dialectic about those issues is furthered, through criticism and continual cultural reevaluation, by having those reference points, as upsetting or even dangerous as they may be, and I find a great deal of value in that. I Spit on Your Grave, Cannibal Ferox, and God's Not Dead probably shouldn't exist. But in a way, I'm kind of glad that they do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
the S Craig Zahler Conundrum
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:firstly: Miller winning would mean no video game stuff, either, and there's a reasonable chance that all the existing sequels would be found to be in violation and taken out of circulation. when i say he wants to kill the franchise, i'm not being figurative or hyperbolic. his active goal in this, from what I understand, is to remove Jason Voorhees from pop culture, because Jason Voorhees is a perversion of his ideas. It's the karmic backlash against Friday the 13th being the only slasher franchise to remain consistently entertaining without taking the bumble stumbles of the others even when it should have. Also it's extremely loving bad that this is happening.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 22:52
|
|
|
Miller hasn't talked about removing Jason from anything. He just said what Friday the 13th ended up as is way off from what he intended (these are old interviews), but he hasn't said anything about having a desire to make a new series sans Jason, or doing anything with the property besides making a mint as the new rights holder. Miller went to Cunningham to ask for a piece of the pie, and made gestures towards having a certain amount of rights regarding the franchise, being the writer and creator of the characters, and instead of paying him off or making a deal, Cunningham just decided to say gently caress you, take it to court, so he did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
Jason X is the best Thanksgiving horror film. Prove me wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:47
|
|
|
Give me Friday the 13th and let me write my class warfare film that takes place in the 80s where a bunch of yuppies are trying to turn Crystal Lake into a ski resort
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Give me Friday the 13th and let me write my class warfare film that takes place in the 80s where a bunch of yuppies are trying to turn Crystal Lake into a ski resort I'd watch that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
Give me a fibanaci spiral of f13 sequels set further and further into the future that end with Jasont travelin back in time to jump start queer culture by being first gay caveman or give me death
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I do think that taking a step back and taking more of an overview on a film is worthwhile, sometimes a few plot details aren't good enough to overtake a negative stereotype that's being presented by a film and that's probably also being absorbed by many in the audience. Late to the convo, but I have never seen any actual evidence that people come away from SotL with the image of Buffalo Bill as a crazed, violent transsexual. Anecdotal, obviously, but what I've actually encountered is poor reading. This is not to say that SotL isn't transphobic, or that it isn't even just generally queer-phobic. The problem is that Buffalo Bill is not a transsexual, just like Norman Bates is not a transsexual, and just like both movies have bits of exposition in which an "expert" character asserts that they are pathologically distinct - and therefore we're no longer actually talking about the movie. We're now just talking about some nebulous, hypothetical spectator or group of spectators who are alleged to have also misread the film, or the film itself doesn't "communicate its themes" well enough, and so on... Which is to say that most people don't really pay that much attention to movies, even when they're trying. The assertion that they come away with any particular "image" doesn't reckon with the fact that our relationship with media is composed on a mass scale and is largely passive and uncritical. So rather than making presumptions about what people "take away" from a movie, it is far more important to just do the work of identifying systemic patterns that we can then say could, theoretically, contribute to a non-exclusive ideological framework. From this perspective, it is not actually particularly relevant whether Buffalo Bill or Norman Bates are transsexuals or not. It isn't even particularly relevant whether "people," in the abstract, think that these characters are transsexuals. What's relevant is precisely that this entire trope of the transsexual killer doesn't even technically exist - because actual representation of transgender and transsexual identities is being explicitly excluded from the entire pattern of representations. We have Z-Man in Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, sure - but then we just have a bunch of sociopath/psychopath/"human monster" characters who have been traumatized into their current pathology and behavior. And even in that context, most of these movies are marginal cult films that virtually nobody sees anymore or gives a poo poo about. The evidence that a pattern of "violent transsexuals" in film and media has significantly contributed to broad social conceptions of who transgender or transsexual people are is just not qualitatively evident. What is far more qualitatively evident is that there are no transgender or transsexual people in white cis-patriarchal movie land. The problem is so bad that they can't even be villains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
Give me an F13 with Jason crashing in on a slobs vs. snobs summer camp showdown.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
They on the book and in the movie explicitly stated Buffalo Bill is just loving crazy. It's actually rather progressive
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Give me an F13 with Jason crashing in on a slobs vs. snobs summer camp showdown. I'd watch that too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:They on the book and in the movie explicitly stated Buffalo Bill is just loving crazy. not really i mean i love Silence of the Lambs but let's not pretend its portrayal of a queer person skinning women alive because he wants to be one is progressive Edit slight correction I think I’m remembering now that Bill skins them after they’re dead but point still stands Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Nov 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
the Hannibal tv show is far, far more interesting and arguably progressive than the books
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:12
|
|
alf_pogs posted:the Hannibal tv show is far, far more interesting and arguably progressive than the books Sure, Jan.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:15
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Jason X is the best Thanksgiving horror film. Prove me wrong. What about Thankskilling? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:22
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Give me an F13 with Jason crashing in on a slobs vs. snobs summer camp showdown. I would watch the hell out of a slasher with the Wet Hot American Summer cast
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
You're both wrong, the best Thanksgiving horror movie is Blood Rage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FHi2AHakyw Stink Billyums fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Nov 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:not really It kind of is because it turns the trope on it's head that same trope that's found in dress to kill is portrayed rather realistic
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
Stink Billyums posted:You're both wrong, the best Thanksgiving horror movie is Blood Rage I mean Blood Rage has Ted Raimi as a drive-in bathroom condom salesman, so there’s really no compare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
Someone recommend me something overlooked, bleak and creepy to watch tonight. TIA
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Someone recommend me something overlooked, bleak and creepy to watch tonight. TIA Angst
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:39
|
|
|
Anyone say Skin?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
ya boi just found the vampire lovers on bluray for 10 bux at barnes and nobles gently caress yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 02:14
|
|
|
FancyMike posted:Angst Firing it up now. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:What about Thankskilling? On one hand, a turkey puppet rapes someone On the other hand, a turkey puppet rapes someone On the third hand, there's a worm fisting a robot to open a wormhole And on the fourth hand is a rapping grandma muppet
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:What about Thankskilling? It's such a piece of poo poo but fun, people sleep on Thankskilling. Still never got around to seeing the sequel (3).
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
Kvlt! posted:ya boi just found the vampire lovers on bluray for 10 bux at barnes and nobles gently caress yes def a top 10 vampire movie. Blu Ray looks great too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2019 02:48
|
|