Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

PT6A posted:

I recall when Roma was being heavily critically acclaimed there were a bunch of established Mexican actresses of European descent bitching that Yalitza Aparicio wasn't even a real actress and all that sort of classist, racist bullshit.

I won't say anyone can be an actor, but at the same time it's not the sort of thing you need 12 years experience and a master's degree to do. And before anyone says, "well the true mark of an actor is versatility, and the ability to perform multiple different roles," that's not entirely wrong, but look at how many famous actors only ever play one character with minor variations. And that very much seems to favour white men.

I do remember that. My wife was quite involved in that conversation since she's a Mexican woman of indigenous decent. She was overjoyed and felt represented.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
It really doesn't help that Spacey transformed into a cartoon villain overnight with those weird loving videos. He acted the part of a villain.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

DrVenkman posted:

To push back on this a little bit (and has Brendan actually said that or are people guessing?), for one thing I think it's pretty clear that given his line about RDJ, Disney are better at keeping a hold on these sorts of stories and that as Fisher alludes to here, the praise the cast gave Whedon was pretty much guided by the studio. So it makes me question how much praise he gets as being genuine. There's a difference in the praise James Marsters gave Whedon, which is more about the work than the man, compared to say Alan Tudyk who was full of praise for the person.

Maybe race is a factor, but to me his behaviour screams much more 1) I'm a writer and my word is law and 2) Actors are a pain and don't know anything other than how to say lines. Like the Booyah incident isn't even Whedon, it's Johns and the studio insisting that they have it.

Oh on a related note: https://twitter.com/notsofiacoppola/status/1379509976033468417?s=19

There's absolutely always a concerted push to keep the image of things moving smoothly. If you go by the DVD extras and interviews, Blade 3 was the happiest film production in the history of everything. Instead it turned that it was a dumpster fire in a landfill that was also on fire.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Somebody described this as what you usually hear as the adoption ad for a pitbull called Onion Ring and that is pretty bang on.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
I was completely unaware of Courtney Stodden. It was just a piece of pop culture that missed me entirely. The last couple of pages have been a loving trip. An awful one.

It's crazy that, as petty and nasty as he was, WWTDD was somehow nowhere near the worst gossip site and looks almost principled compared to some of their competition.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Mob posted:

That's the site that made me aware of what was eventually termed yachting, due to his constant Victoria Silvstedt updates

I liked his self awareness. He pointed out that if Kelly Clarkson, who is by all accounts a very nice person, walked up and kicked him in the balls, it would hurt, but she'd be completely justified since he'd written 11 billion really mean jokes about her for no real reason.

He popped up on my twitter feed and, to my absolute astonishment, he's not a chud at all. He just seemed like someone that would have become one at some point in the last few years and he hadn't.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

Wow, he's still got a ways to go before he's a bigger piece of poo poo than his dad, but he seems to be making an honest go of it.

It's an instance of 'keep him away from children' is in no way a joke.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
I cannot imagine how badly being a billionaire breaks brains where you go 'I'm going to go commit sex crimes as an escape from my marriage' instead of just...like...I don't know, buying time in a jet plane or tank or something, or just paying a whole NFL team to play exclusively in dresses, or hiring a film director to make a badass action film starring you. The only limit is your imagination and all these idiots can think of is 'drink with other billionaires' or 'do sex crimes'

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

I don't think it's possible to even become a billionaire without having sociopathic tendencies.

yeah, it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing: does the process of becoming a billionaire break you and make you a sociopath, or is it that only someone who is already a sociopath (or very prone to it) can become a billionaire.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
It is perhaps an overstatement to say that they killed it, but they loving tried. It's not a coincidence that every dem leaning outlet and mouthpiece immediately wondered why this accusation surfaced at such a 'convenient' time, including people who described it as disqualifying before he was the nominee. It's been nauseating to see the exact same playbook rolled out for loving Cuomo.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

PeterCat posted:

How are those allegations against Cuomo going?

They're going nowhere because Biden showed him the playbook.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
I got into an argument once that metoo was going too far, and the case this person picked was how Masterson was accused and everyone immediately believed. This was after it came out that, yeah, this poo poo had happened and there was enough to go to court.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

Wahlberg did two movies with him for some reason.

Wahlberg's a piece of poo poo and has been his whole life.


Timeless Appeal posted:

I mean Walhberg is an attempted murderer and has shown very little remorse over the fact so not really a beacon of good dude.

More than that, he wanted the racially motivated assault he committed struck from his record because it was interferring with his ability to open a business of some kind. He also said in an interview that he had learned to forgive himself before revealing that he had never contacted the victim of the racially motivated assault.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

It's way the gently caress worse than that. It was interfering with his ability to become an honorary cop. Because he wanted to be one after playing cops in so many movies.

Though honestly, he's from Boston and the honorary thing would have happened in Boston, attacking an old guy in a racially motivated attack at 17 means he's overqualified for Boston PD.

gently caress, I either remembered it wrong or got told the wrong thing at the time. What a loving rear end in a top hat.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

well why not posted:

Apparently Trinh forgave him, and was already parlty blind before the attack.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-did-that.html

Grains of salt all around.

Why do people bring up the partly blind part? That...doesn't make it better at all.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

well why not posted:

I think because the story was "he attacked and blinded a man in one eye" when it (might be) "he attacked a man" which is quite a bit less concerning.

Not really, no.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

emo-ignorance posted:

Echoing this. I'm generally more surprised by child stars who aren't hosed up, but especially if they worked under a tyrannical pedophile like Dan Schneider.

We did have a weird person in this thread defending Dan Schneider and wishing him well in future projects. That was an incredibly weird hill to die on.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

pentyne posted:

The campaigns in the 80s and 90s of "stranger danger" did serious harm because it created a perception that the threats to child were from outsiders (like maybe 5% at best) and then made it hard for children to accuse their abusers because people didn't believe local "good guy A" would do such a thing when everyone knew it was traveling carnies and deadbeats who molest children.

The actual percentage is something 75% of attacks come from someone known to the victim, and a full third of those (so, a quarter overall) come from a family member. I know a lot of people who've been assaulted and it comes so often from someone well known, often from their friendship group.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

I thought the 69 guy died

that was xtenacious

or possibly xtencion

I'm not being facetious i genuinely can't remember what his name was and my internet's playing up so i can't google it.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

loving hell what an rear end in a top hat. It serves as a sharp and grim reminder that it's not about sex to a predator, it's very much about power.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Martman posted:

I've never fully understood this statement and it seems very categorical in a way that's completely unnecessary and tells lots of people how to interpret their own traumatic life situations. Are you saying the fact that he had easy access to consensual sex is proof that his rapes were not "about sex," but about power instead? Harvey Weinstein had all kinds of power, and could probably get whatever he wanted, and he just happened to enjoy using his power... for nonconsensual sex. How were his rapes not about sex?

I can understand that people have some good intention when saying this thing, but it seems simplistic at best and paints some image of a "standard" rapist that doesn't seem like it could possibly be helpful.

edit: Here's an article I found a few months ago that makes a good argument about it, sorry I'm not super equipped to take it on and I don't mean to be super rude about it

No. It's a rebuttal to 'he had sex whenever he wanted/is very handsome/popular, ergo he couldn't have comitted rape.' which was a pretty common defence. It is, itself, a rebuttal to the idea of the standard rapist.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Martman posted:

Ok. I feel like it starts from a reasonable place of "lack of access to sex is not the cause of rape" and goes too far I guess.

It's a very short phrase, it doesn't go very far at all.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
Jesus Christ shut the gently caress up about feet, Tarantino and Tarantino's interactions with feet.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Macdeo Lurjtux posted:

Considering Chapelle made a follow up sketch about how he'd never vote to convict and it wasn't that serious and put Rick James back in the public eye after the rape/kidnapping/torture charges, he doesn't seem to take anything done to women that seriously.

I tried watching Chappelle's show a few years back and holy poo poo the misogyny. There's a few points of pretty dedicated misogyny, but its more that women in the sketches are never anything but props for gags about their tits or asses. You could basically teach the concept of 'objectification' without much more than his show. The only women in his sketches are hos, or girls who he thought were nice but were actually hos and thus worthless.

I don't even think you can call it a blindspot, it ends up coming across as a pretty sincere belief.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

CPL593H posted:

Well yeah, I just posted it because repeating "I respect Bill Cosby" multiple times is one of those things that aged very, very, very poorly.

Comedy is one of those things that ages poorly but Chapelle and other comics of his age/generation thrived on edgelord bullshit, slurs, and stereotypes. That's not to say he was never funny. His standup and Chapelle's Show were often funny but he's one of the comics in his age group that's dug his heels in the sand on getting with the times and whines about cancel culture and these drat kids with their pronouns and being offended all the time killing comedy. It's just the mark of someone with not much left to say who refuses to acknowledge that a lot of what he did have to say was pretty hosed up. I can't even imagine how insufferable Bill Hicks would be by now if he'd lived.

I think he was pretty loving sexist at the time, the difference I was 18 at the time and, thus, a moron.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

DrVenkman posted:

I'm pretty sure the episode was shot back at the start of the year. It raised a few eyebrows but it's not like they were going to ditch the whole episode because of him.

Other shows have done that. There's an episode of Never Mind the Buzzcocks with Russel Brand that didn't air because he was in trouble at the time.

pentyne posted:

anything that can be remotely covered under "lads having some cheeky fun" is like a non-crime over there. If David Mitchell did what Lous CK did he'd be on panel shows 3 months later making jokes about it.

a lot of the activist organizations, including feminist and queer ones, that would normally raise hell are too busy trying to erase trans people.

It's interesting that Angus Deayton lost a hosting gig because he might have used prostitutes, and then lost another for making fun of Jimmy Saville before it was widely known Saville was a monster.

What a very strange place.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
It is pretty depressing sometimes being a cishet white dude and finding out who advertisers think you are.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Space Cadet Omoly posted:

There's a distressingly long list of movies and TV shows made within the past thirty years that are just "Sexual assault is a funny and goofy thing!" and a disturbing amount of commercials from the same time period that are essentially "Our product will help you commit sexual assault and that's why you should buy it!"

There was a twitter sketch recently of a guy watching a (fictional) favourite comedy from his youth and being horrified by how much it normalises sexual assault and other lovely things and the movie, if it existed, would date from the early 2000s, when i remember there being a ton of jokes reckoning with the lovely comedies from about 15 years earlier. Maybe that's how long the cycle takes.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
If it's asked in good faith, it's a good question to ask because it has real answers. Those answers help one understand the nature of abuse and abusers. In turn, this helps one understand the abused so if someone in your life is going through it, you're better equipped to notice and help.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

thekeeshman posted:

If the Chicago PD claimed the earth was round would you become a flat earther?

mistrusting the CPD on a verifiable, objective fact and mistrusting them on the subject of whether a gay black man was assaulted are not the same thing shut the gently caress up.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

What's the (probably apocryphal) Benjamin Franklin quote? "Rather let a hundred guilty man go free than a single innocent one be imprisoned." Modern justice operates on an inverse of that ratio.

The Warhammer 40k view of law.

graventy posted:

I thought this was a pretty good summary of the case:

The CPD are an incredibly corrupt batch of assholes and siding with them anywhere is a bad idea.

Thanks for adding this. I last remembered it sounding loving fishy and I had no idea it had turned out this insanely hosed up.

Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Dec 3, 2021

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Skwirl posted:

There's news reports about him walking into the dressing rooms of 16 year old models unannounced while they were changing. This was reported before he was elected president, people who like Trump really don't give a poo poo about all his sex crimes.

It wasn't even a news report, he told the loving story himself.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Brazilianpeanutwar posted:

“Do you swim? You won’t”…

holy loving poo poo.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Rhyno posted:

Jesus. Good show.

That was walking, not swimming.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

AceOfFlames posted:

I will never understand why the gently caress people bring forward this kind of information. This, Liam Neeson wanting to kill black people, Lena Dunham's molestation... What exactly do these people think they GAIN from this. It doesn't make sense.

Neeson doesn't belong in the same category as the others. He was asked a question about how revenge fantasies play out in real life and he told a story that reveals that, no poo poo, they're horrifying. I thought that was his point, that it was only okay specifically as a safe fantasy in fictional story. He knew it was an awful thing to have done. That was why he told the story.

At least that's my memory of it and my memory has proven over and over that it's loving useless.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

ImpAtom posted:

*a lot of very good points that I broadly disagree with*

So he specifically included a whole bunch of details that skew the story racially and make him look far worse but you think he wasn't aware of the racist part of the story or how bad it made him look?

The fact that his 'revenge' wouldn't even be against the person who did it is part of the critique of revenge fantasies. In how many revenge films does the hero start with people who don't have anything to do with the original act? Who just broadly fit the profile? That's most of, for instance, Death Wish's running time. All the people who broadly fit the profile are also bad in some way, justifying the hero's actions. But the more likely path is just beating the poo poo out of random people. In a revenge fantasy, that random anger and violence leads either to people who are up to no good if not the people who they're looking for, or eventually someone who is who they're looking for. That random anger ends up justified in the world of the film.

Maybe I'm just biased towards a charitable view since I've been a fan of Neeson for a long time, but I also think you're extrapolating a little too much from a story he told off the cuff. If he'd worked through it with a therapist and then written it down as an essay or open letter, fair enough, but he's publicly telling a story that he's likely told very few people. It's a story that makes him confront some very ugly parts of himself and I'm inclined to cut someone a little slack.

Anyway, this is a derail in a thread that's already prone to really bad details. Your points are well made and well taken.

Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Jan 21, 2022

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Brazilianpeanutwar posted:

I also only knew her as gorans arch nemesis (some of the best episodes ever) and this is the first time i’ve ever heard of bolero.

According to imdb : Set in the 1920s, a young woman sets out to lose her virginity. Her mission leads her to a Moroccan sheikh and a Spanish bullfighter.

Olivia d'Abo, who was 14 at the time, appeared nude in several scenes.

Olivia D'Abo said in an interview in 1986 that she matured physically at age 13, a year before making this movie. In fact she said director John Derek thought she had breast implants until she took her clothes off on set the first time and he saw her breasts were natural.

Jesus wept.

amazing, litrally every part of this is somehow the worst part. It's an ouroboros of awfulness.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Alhazred posted:

According to Gangs of London they have enough guns to form an army.

But they primarily resolve things through elaborate karate fights. gently caress that show is so good.

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010

Grendels Dad posted:

And if they think a cop couldn't be bigoted for any reason whatsoever they don't know much about cops.

Yeah, it's got some strong "black cops wouldn't do this *insert most recent example of cop racism*" energy

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
This might be paranoia on my part, but I'm noticing that my various streaming things (apple TV, chromecast, etc) are all suggesting a lot more Johnny Depp stuff. I was already getting the Youtube stuff and occasional facebook stuff. It may simply be a coincidence (or simply the algorithm cashing in on something people are already looking for) but it's still pretty loving weird.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply