CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media - Page 9

post #401 of 4805
Thread Starter 
Nevermind misogyny, what's problematic is that outfit. The costume design for Black Widow is utter shit. It's hideous.
post #402 of 4805
Quote:
I'd also agree that Twitter and social media in general are doing the exact opposite of helping any of this, and plenty of people would probably be a lot better off spending substantially less time in their lives on them.

 

Social media is without a doubt a mixed bag.  On one hand, it does often encourage the groupthink that we should try to move away from as a society.  On the other hand, it's created a safe space where marginalized people can now feel a little less voiceless.  It's established communities that didn't exist before because of the stigma attached to openly discussing certain ideas and identities.  In my view, looking down from above and sneering at its flaws as a platform for communication ignores its many positive aspects.

 

Regarding Renner and Evans, it's disappointing to hear those comments in light of the criticisms about how AoU handles Black Widow.  Do they seriously think Black Widow is a "slut" and a "whore"?  I highly doubt it.  Should they be banished to the farthest corners of the galaxy?  Of course not.  That doesn't make the situation any less unfortunate, though; Renner's response is a perfect case of How Not to Apologize (it's more or less "I'm sorry you guys took this the wrong way").  You don't have to be a snarling, woman-despising monster to contribute to a culture in which these comments are shrugged off as harmless jokes.

post #403 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

Haven't seen it yet!


OH, YOU'LL SEE!!!

post #404 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post

On the other hand, it's created a safe space where marginalized people can now feel a little less voiceless. It's established communities that didn't exist before because of the stigma attached to openly discussing certain ideas and identities.
A. social media is not responsible for this to any significantly greater extent than the Internet in general, and B. it's only for the list of Approved Minorities We Can All Pat Ourselves On The Back And Feel Good About Ourselves For Accepting And Embracing. The really weird fuckers (furries, etc.) aren't appreciably "safer" than they were before, they've just staked out their little zones of the Internet where they can hang out with mutually weird fuckers.
post #405 of 4805
So in this case, what's the specific difference between THE INTERNET

and

SOCIAL MEDIA?
post #406 of 4805
"Social media" is the whole Facebook/Twitter/share-this-with-everybody-you-ever-knew/privacy-and-anonymity-are-for-losers thing where the whole thrust of it is to get people feeding advertising data-miners "connecting" and "talking," never mind about what. The Internet, on the other hand, is actually (this may come as a shock to Facebook users) a much, much larger place where there are countless sites that aren't actually linked in any significant way and may even have specific subject matter (like, say, a forum about movies.) It's like the difference between a gated community and a city.
post #407 of 4805
'Social media' is the participatory wing of the Internet.

Also data mining.
post #408 of 4805
Quote:
 it's only for the list of Approved Minorities We Can All Pat Ourselves On The Back And Feel Good About Ourselves For Accepting And Embracing

 

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the judgment of people outside of communities for, say, gender nonconforming individuals.  In many cases, they aren't part of them, even if they might be aware of their existence.  That's precisely what makes them safe spaces:  the spaces are occupied by, and therefore safe for, the very people who they are directly targeted at.  I can assure you that A. social media absolutely plays a role in it (Tumblr, Facebook groups, etc.) outside of the larger Internet and B.  people with nonconforming identities do feel appreciably safer for having access to them, despite your claims to the contrary.

 

Quote:
The really weird fuckers (furries, etc.) aren't appreciably "safer" than they were before, they've just staked out their little zones of the Internet where they can hang out with mutually weird fuckers.

 

sigh

 

I'm honestly not sure what to say in response to this.  How exactly are we defining the "really weird fuckers" here?

post #409 of 4805
If the original "naive ideals intent" of the internet was to connect people through an interconnected network of digital devices...

social media is a natural extension of that.

There is no way that social media doesn't happen in a world where the Internet is a thing.

Also data mining.

Which isn't to say that this stuff shouldn't be criticized. But to brush off the positive aspects of social media in favor of THE INTERNET while using it solely as a scapegoat for the ugly stuff sounds a bit dishonest to me.
post #410 of 4805
I can see the logic in that argument, nooj, but it's ignoring the established common-usage meaning of the phrase, which is specifically referring to your Facebook and your Twitter and your whatnot, and those really are distinct things from the rest of THE INTERNET, which distinction is kind of at the core of the whole topic of this thread. And as far as scapegoating...well, sorry, but I gotta disagree. Like I said earlier in the thread, you did see flamewars and creepy intrusions of the online world into everyday life in the pre-Facebook days, but it was never on the kind of massive, omnipresent scale that social networking has allowed, and because of that it couldn't achieve the kind of self-sustaining feedback loop of madness that we've been seeing on the rise in the past few years. Now, certainly, that's just an emergent behavior, not any part of any kind of sinister conspiracy, but I do seriously contend that this would not be happening without the kind of culture of omnipresent interconnection that Facebook et. al have been fostering (to increase their ad revenue.)
post #411 of 4805

Which goes back to social media (as an extension of the INTERNET) working as a steroid of mob behavior.  It's enhancing something that's already there.

 

Social media is the INTERNET truly reaching 'mainstream' culture to the point that is seems to have this power.  But as we usually find out, this is very often a vocal minority that comes across a lot more massive than they usually are.  And it's because we (the media, the 'normal' people, more social media) have a hard time ignoring the negative SENSATION of it all only serve the master of turning it into a big deal.

 

If you truly just blame SOCIAL MEDIA for these ills, you are merely confirming

 

 

 

no free will

 

 

If you're gonna blame social media on stuff, you should also not forget about 'advertising convincing us to a capitalist mindset in order to get us buying things we don't need and continue feeling bad about ourselves in ways we don't even realize.'  Social media is just the current form of that.

 

As usual, I don't actually disagree all that much with your main points.  Appropriate to this social media discussion, I really only find the WAY you're expressing those points to be.........

 

 

PROBLEMATIC.

 

Mmmm... proper.

post #412 of 4805
I don't disagree in general principle, but my point is that I really don't think it could've reached the level it has - where petty disagreements and flamewars over somebody saying something dumb can flash-boil into netwide witchhunts that can even straight-up destroy people IRL - without the component of netwide interconnection that "social networking" brought to the table.
post #413 of 4805

Any community (large or small) is capable of using public shaming to hurt the life and livelihood of someone.

 

It's really just a scale thing.  Once again, we agree.  And yes, the ratio between the offense and the punishment has gotten very high... and for people who would otherwise not be in the public spotlight at all.

 

 

What do you think of the revolutions in Iran and Egypt that very specifically made use of Twitter to spread more effectively?

post #414 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

What do you think of the revolutions in Iran and Egypt that very specifically made use of Twitter to spread more effectively?
I think that there's always going to be somebody who figures out a way for some good to come of just about anything. And, y'know, that's certainly not nothing. But I'm not going to get into "would the world be better/worse off if x..." because that always seems to lead down a bunny-trail of increasingly elaborate but completely unprovable speculation. Suffice to say that, while it's great that happened, it doesn't make me any happier about the negative fallout from the rise of "social networking."
post #415 of 4805

I was just wondering if you would've credited that instance to the INTERNET.

 

As long as you're aware.

post #416 of 4805
I'm really doing my best not to let my bias get in the way of what I'm actually trying to say, so I'll just refrain from comment on that.
post #417 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I'm really doing my best not to let my bias get in the way of what I'm actually trying to say, so I'll just refrain from comment on that.
 

 

The SOCIAL MEDIA SHAMING/SELF-CENSORSHIP COMPLEX works!!!

 

 

 

I think you're approaching it from the reverse direction when it comes to the usual intention of developments like the INTERNET and SOCIAL MEDIA.

 

Most of these things start with good intentions.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but data-mining wasn't originally the intent of Facebook, Google, and Twitter.  Social media was just supposed to be social media.  It's once they become huge successes that data-mining became the next step for increased revenues, and SCWOOOP!  There goes ideals and good intentions straight out the window.

 

Good uses full of positive ideals is what these things were meant for.  It's usually people being people that corrupts them.  Do we blame data-mining?  Sure, but it's still being driven by people going for the easy rush/high/pleasure of bad things under the delusion that good is being done.

 

It's just such a twisted network of factors.  Simply going, "BOOOOO social media!" seems too easy.


Edited by mcnooj82 - 4/28/15 at 7:12pm
post #418 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaquio View Post
 

In the great "culture war" of the Bush years, the left lost. Stone cold lost. We lost, the damage we tried to stymie from the right was done, and done directly over our protesting, and when it really counted most we proved to be completely impotent and ineffectual on the national stage for the whole world to see. I think the left turning on itself is, on some level at least, a direct fallout of this. This is how dirty-hippie/bleeding-heart liberals play out the "not taking losing well" angle: by devolving into every obscene parody from the early/mid 90s about "political correctness hounds" brought to life. As has been said, its pure animal instinct taking over: we've been thoroughly beaten and had all our power taken away from us, so the primal part of our brain needs to "reclaim" control over SOMETHING, no matter how laughably unimportant it may be. 

Creating this "outrage culture" is a way for the powerless to feel powerful and feel like they're "making a difference" after they've completely failed to do exactly that at a crucial, important time in the world.
 

 

I don't think the Left lost the culture war as much as you think.  Gay marriage rights are not a loss.  Abortion rights are not a loss.  Marijuana legalization is not a loss.  Freaking Universal Healthcare is not a loss. 

 

These things are becoming mainstays in the cultural consciousness now and young people are all very much in favor of all these things.  (Maybe not abortion as much)  But still I don't think the outrage culture and PC hounds that you mention are a result of the Left being swept to the side and complaining about it.  The ones who are pining and propagating outrage bullshit on social media nowadays may think they are making a difference, but those are liberal AND conservative people.

 

The ones who actually are making a difference might also be social media as well, that's the kind of crazy thing.  Like you said at the end of your post, some people just need to do with a little less of the constant panopticon of today's connected world. 
 

post #419 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

Which goes back to social media (as an extension of the INTERNET) working as a steroid of mob behavior.  It's enhancing something that's already there.

 

Social media is the INTERNET truly reaching 'mainstream' culture to the point that is seems to have this power.  But as we usually find out, this is very often a vocal minority that comes across a lot more massive than they usually are.  And it's because we (the media, the 'normal' people, more social media) have a hard time ignoring the negative SENSATION of it all only serve the master of turning it into a big deal.


 

 

I really really like this train of thought w/r/t Social Media and the Internet.  Very apt. 

 

A lot of the outrage pieces on the internet only work because they are on the internet.  It may seem like they are dominating our social lives at times, but I feel like a lot of us spend more time on the internet than average people so constantly seeing new articles or click-bait is something that we deal with and process more than (the foolish) others, so it all adds up to feeling more substantial of a problem than what it really is. 

 

Like I already don't give a shit about Trevor Noah or Patton Oswalt or Micheal Richards or w/e is going to be an issue in two weeks. 

post #420 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

Yes yes, let's direct it back to Marvel!  BRING THAT SHIP DOWN AND THAT SNEAKY FEIGE!!!

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/28/the-avengers-black-widow-problem-how-marvel-slut-shamed-their-most-badass-superheroine.html

 

Nerdist also did a surprisingly decent write-up on the issue of Black Widow.  It nicely ties into the almost non-existence merchandising that The Daily Beast's article references:

 

 

http://nerdist.com/yes-jeremy-renner-and-chris-evans-black-widow-comments-are-problematic

 

Quote:
Black Widow has more to do than ever before — and she’s allegedly getting a movie (yes PLEASE says the lot of us), but still her character’s sexual agency is the main topic of conversation. Who she is or isn’t flirting with or sleeping with is the go-to question. And to make jokes about a woman who is confident and secure is ultimately damaging. Because it gives credence to the idea that this is what the representation should be, and that it’s OK to — subconsciously or otherwise — forget that she is more than that. It’s callous and ultimately, regardless of intention, adding fuel to the fire of how we talk about and portray female characters.
[...]
Imagine for a second if you will, you had a little sister who loved Black Widow. She loved her intelligence and abilities — she was inspired by how her past didn’t stop her from being the kickass former Russian spy turned Avenger. She was impressed by her ability to do martial arts, defend herself and those she cared for, getting to play with the same high-tech weaponry as the boys. Imagine your sister then saw or overheard Black Widow being referred to as a “slut” and a “whore” by her fellow Avengers. As someone who once was a young girl, I can tell you that stuff sticks and causes an internal riff. It’s confusing, upsetting, and ultimately impresses upon young people that regardless of all the awesomeness of Black Widow, she’s still defined by the man with which she is or is not involved.
post #421 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post
 

 

Nerdist also did a surprisingly decent write-up on the issue of Black Widow.  It nicely ties into the almost non-existence merchandising that The Daily Beast's article references:

 

 

http://nerdist.com/yes-jeremy-renner-and-chris-evans-black-widow-comments-are-problematic

Imagine for a second if you will, you had a little sister who loved Black Widow. She loved her intelligence and abilities — she was inspired by how her past didn’t stop her from being the kickass former Russian spy turned Avenger. She was impressed by her ability to do martial arts, defend herself and those she cared for, getting to play with the same high-tech weaponry as the boys. Imagine your sister then saw or overheard Black Widow being referred to as a “slut” and a “whore” by her fellow Avengers. As someone who once was a young girl, I can tell you that stuff sticks and causes an internal riff. It’s confusing, upsetting, and ultimately impresses upon young people that regardless of all the awesomeness of Black Widow, she’s still defined by the man with which she is or is not involved.

Now imagine that your little sister is has a sense of humor and understands context and then just goes on with her life and loves Black Widow anyway. Also while your at it, imagine a world where everyone didn't call attention to this small interview so she didn't even see it in the first place.

post #422 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post
 

Now imagine that your little sister is has a sense of humor and understands context and then just goes on with her life and loves Black Widow anyway. Also while your at it, imagine a world where everyone didn't call attention to this small interview so she didn't even see it in the first place.

 

"Understands context"?  What are you talking about, exactly?  That Renner and Evans weren't being intentionally malicious toward Black Widow by laughingly calling her a slut and a whore during an interview?  I don't think anyone has been disputing that at all.  To be honest, I don't know what to say in response to these posts anymore.  While I think this is indicative of a larger cultural issue and worthy of further examination (this is more about a trend of how female characters in various forms of entertainment are treated, not an isolated interview between two guys who should have known better), you seem to believe there's no space between being indifferent to the problem and "OUTRAGE!!!!".  Such an attitude leaves little room for discussion, if any.  Just get a sense of humor, everyone.  Laugh along or shut your mouth.

 

I'm going to take a break, I think.  It's difficult enough to balance talking about these issues with trying not to take the snark too personally and avoiding depression.

post #423 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post
 

 

"Understands context"?  What are you talking about, exactly?  That Renner and Evans weren't being intentionally malicious toward Black Widow by laughingly calling her a slut and a whore during an interview?  I don't think anyone has been disputing that at all.  To be honest, I don't know what to say in response to these posts anymore.  While I think this is indicative of a larger cultural issue and worthy of further examination (this is more about a trend of how female characters in various forms of entertainment are treated, not an isolated interview between two guys who should have known better), you seem to believe there's no space between being indifferent to the problem and "OUTRAGE!!!!".  Such an attitude leaves little room for discussion, if any.  Just get a sense of humor, everyone.  Laugh along or shut your mouth.

 

I'm going to take a break, I think.  It's difficult enough to balance talking about these issues with trying not to take the snark too personally and avoiding depression.

Ohh I certainly think you can have issues with her portrayal in the films. I can see where people are coming from there. I certainly think girls should have someone to root for and identify with as there seems to be a female audience for these. What I will always take issue with is attacking humor, especially something so obvious as this. The fact that most people recognize that and still continue bothers me. People seem to be using it to air their real problems with women in comics or movies, the same with Colbert.

 

The apologizing is hilarious. What? Renner doesn't sound sorry? Well he isn't. Neither is Evans by the way. They dabbled in somewhat edgy humor for like a second at the end of a long day and never thought about it again. Then they get a call from a publicist at Marvel going "Are you out of your fucking minds? Apologize right now" then they both yell "oh my god don't take my money away!" and then have their publicist draft something up because it's easier than arguing about it and losing your job. They don't care or mean it and we all know that. They will never do it again out of fear but whatever their personal feelings about the matter are will not change one bit. No one learned anything and if anything you may have actually made the average person (the ones you are trying to reach) shrug off the issue. 

post #424 of 4805

I'm still trying to figure out why Renner said that Black Widow has a prosthetic leg.

post #425 of 4805

Oh, for fuck's sake!

 

Thank god real people are less prone to pantie-twisting than the stupid internet. I'd be all out of jokes and have to resort to going around acting like fucking Drax.

post #426 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evi View Post
 

I'm still trying to figure out why Renner said that Black Widow has a prosthetic leg.

I've heard tale that all whores do. They can keep things in there like condoms and lube.

post #427 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post
 

 

 

 

 

sigh

 

I'm honestly not sure what to say in response to this.  How exactly are we defining the "really weird fuckers" here?

 

 

Fabfunk.

post #428 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaquio View Post
 

This could be me grossly oversimplifying an astronomically complex issue, but I always keep going time, after time, after time in all this back to... wait for it... 9/11.

Yeah I know: give me a sec.

Unlike so many people in my rough age bracket, I don't in the least bit have a rose colored view of the 80s and 90s: I know and remember all too painfully well how plenty of shit in this country was well beyond dysfunctional to start with all during my adolescence, from issues stretching countless years before I ever first drew breath. But speaking as someone who was something of a news/pop cultural junkie since a very early age, it honestly felt like SOMETHING particularly fragile and important got knocked loose in the national psyche from that particular tragedy, and almost everything that's been happening since then still, to me, feels like a gigantic snowball effect that's still playing itself out even now.

I think that even ties into the "outrage/thinkpiece" culture of today as well. It was rightfully pointed out earlier that for a significant chunk of people, the early to mid 2000s felt like a much more unified time to be left-leaning, because of how insanely over the edge the right had gotten. The bad side of that was how polarized it made everything (that was when I first really noticed to how much a significant degree nuance was being hurled out the window on a mass scale) but more than that even, I think what we're witnessing in the trend of "the left eating itself" is a direct result of a very painful fact that I don't think has really set in for most people yet:

In the great "culture war" of the Bush years, the left lost. Stone cold lost. We lost, the damage we tried to stymie from the right was done, and done directly over our protesting, and when it really counted most we proved to be completely impotent and ineffectual on the national stage for the whole world to see. I think the left turning on itself is, on some level at least, a direct fallout of this. This is how dirty-hippie/bleeding-heart liberals play out the "not taking losing well" angle: by devolving into every obscene parody from the early/mid 90s about "political correctness hounds" brought to life. As has been said, its pure animal instinct taking over: we've been thoroughly beaten and had all our power taken away from us, so the primal part of our brain needs to "reclaim" control over SOMETHING, no matter how laughably unimportant it may be. 

Creating this "outrage culture" is a way for the powerless to feel powerful and feel like they're "making a difference" after they've completely failed to do exactly that at a crucial, important time in the world.

Of course its doing anything but making a difference in any real way, other than further stripping liberalism of its credibility. I feel like more so now than ever before in my lifetime, this is a particularly nihilistic period where I really don't have ANY corner of culture to "align" myself with. That's a hugely bad thing, not so much because I need the comfort and safety of others to validate what I think (I'm as staunch an individualist as you'll ever find), but because of how severely damaged things are right now, and the fact that I'm not seeing anywhere I look anybody who's really taking serious steps towards doing something constructive about any of it, but rather sort of just wallowing in this morass of personal delusion and psychological hangups. 

Basically what I'm saying is that we're all essentially traumatized children, and we're going through various emotional "phases" of grief and loss, most of them probably unhealthy on a fundamental level. What I've long hoped for since way back in the Bush years (and have mostly given up on ever happening in my lifetime at this point) is for more people to psychologically suck it the fuck up, accept that what happened happened, put the pain of it behind us and try to move the hell forward and take more practical steps to repairing whatever damage to the culture can still be repaired.

I wouldn't doubt that that's exactly what a lot of people engaged and entrenched in the whole petty outrage/thinkpiece culture THINK that they're doing, but if that's the case then clearly they're delusional and need wake the hell up and realize that nitpicking at petty social offenses is the exact opposite of constructive and helps no one other than their own damaged, fragile ego.

I'd also agree that Twitter and social media in general are doing the exact opposite of helping any of this, and plenty of people would probably be a lot better off spending substantially less time in their lives on them.

 

 

This should be repeated.
 

We live in a world where women are being raped and enslaved by ISIS, a major earthquake just killed thousands in Nepal, and here people are feeling "damaged" by what was very very obviously  a couple of jokes by guys who clearly didn't "mean it".

 

This is still the same country that Howard Stern, Rush Limbo, and (up until a few years ago) George Carlin inhabited, right?

post #429 of 4805
Ah, but none of those gentleman play super HERO characters in a FAMILY franchise owned by DISNEY. Above reproach clauses in their contracts I'm sure. No scandal, boys! No naughty language in the interviews! Go visit another children's hospital and don't forget the cameras!
post #430 of 4805

Au Contraire!

 

 

 

 

post #431 of 4805

This superhero movie boom won't truly feel like its been all worth it until we finally get that Fartman movie we were promised in the early 90s.

post #432 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post
 

 

We live in a world where women are being raped and enslaved by ISIS, a major earthquake just killed thousands in Nepal, and here people are feeling "damaged" by what was very very obviously  a couple of jokes by guys who clearly didn't "mean it".

 

This is still the same country that Howard Stern, Rush Limbo, and (up until a few years ago) George Carlin inhabited, right?

 

But it's only possible that we even know about those events, Nepal, ISIS, and even things that happen in our own country, through the very technology that enables the behavior that most of us find shrill and overbearing.  One of the only real beneficial things me and you can do about Nepal* is give money via the internet.  A lot of people can only bitch about stuff on the Internet, and if they are lucky, they get paid for it. 

 

 

*Assuming you aren't some Aid Worker, or actually live in Nepal. 

post #433 of 4805

First the love.

 

Then the light shining on you ever exposing a BRIGHTER PICTURE....

 

...then always the potential of burning out and revealing a DARKER NEGATIVE mwuhhuhuhuhuhuh

 

 

 

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/robert-downey-jr-trashes-indie-moviemaking-fires-back-over-alejandro-gonzalez-inarritus-superhero-diss-20150501

 

Quote:
 

“...they’re exhausting and sometimes they suck and then you just go, ‘What was I thinking?’ " Downey Jr. explained about why he wouldn't sign up for an independent film.

"But I’m interested in doing all different kinds of movies. Sometimes the little movies are the ones that wind up taking the most out of you because they’re like, ‘Hey, man, we’re just running a couple of days behind. Do you think you can stay through your birthday and then come back on the fourth of July. And, by the way, but, like, the crew — can you pay for the craft services? And, oh, by the way, man, when we go to Sundance, it’s like, can we just sit you in a chair and you can sell this for six days in a row so that we’ll make 180 bucks when it opens in one theater?’” he continued warming up to his subject, pretending to be an indie moviemaker. And then caps it off with his own rejoinder.

“Actually, most of you are kind of inexperienced and lame,” he said.

 

Quote:
 Meanwhile, you might recall that last year, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, while doing press rounds for "Birdman," railed against superhero movies, saying they were "cultural genocide." The Guardian asked Robert Downey Jr. about the comments, and as per usual, he had a quip ready in his pocket. “Look, I respect the heck out of him [and] for a man whose native tongue is Spanish to be able to put together a phrase like ‘cultural genocide’ just speaks to how bright he is,” the actor retorted.

 

 

Though, there's a montage of interviews at the bottom of that link where RDJ speaks in a softly frank manner about the job he has of conducting himself in his work and the unintended consequences of ending up as a role model.  Pretty good stuff.  Of course, none of that gets headlines.

post #434 of 4805

Even Morgan Freeman, who considers something like Black History Month to be silly and that we should stop talking about race so much, is turning his view around a bit thanks to technology (social media, smart phones).

 

Quote:
 

Morgan Freeman supports the Baltimore protests sparked by the death of Freddie Gray and says technology is bringing to light “how dangerous police are.”

The Academy Award-winning actor spoke out on the subject in a Thursday morning interview with Newsweek.

 

“I was watching the news last night,” he said, “and [a protester] said, ‘You know, when we were out here marching peacefully, nobody was here. And now we start burning the place down, everybody is listening. What do you think we’re gonna do to be heard?’

 

“It’s like, hey, she’s got a point there,” Freeman said. Asked if he is supportive of the protestors, he replied, “Absolutely.”

 

“That unrest [in Baltimore] has nothing to do with terrorism at all, except the terrorism we suffer from the police,” the 77-year-old star said. “And the fact that now that’s out in the open.” Freeman referred to the case of Amadou Diallo, the Guinea immigrant who in 1999 was killed by four New York City plainclothes officers who mistook his wallet for a gun. “Forty-one times he was shot. That was the beginning of our understanding of how dangerous police are.”

 

Freeman has commented publicly on racial issues before, describing the concept of Black History Month as “ridiculous” in a 2005 interview. The current unrest in Baltimore stems from outrage following the death of Gray, a 25-year-old African-American who died of a spinal cord injury suffered while in police custody.

 

 

Regarding that case, Freeman also mentioned how mobile technology brings more attention to specific incidents of police violence. “Because of the technology—everybody has a smartphone—now we can see what the police are doing,” he said. “We can show the world, Look, this is what happened in that situation. So why are so many people dying in police custody? And why are they all black? And why are all the police killing them white? What is that?

 

“The police have always said, ‘I feared for my safety,’” Freeman added. “Well, now we know. OK. You feared for your safety while a guy was running away from you, right?”

 

Obviously, this is in regards to the discussion on weighing the pros and cons of social media.  Since we can't really trust mainstream media to not only focus on the sensationalized side of this (lootings!  thugs!), we're getting voices from the other side from those at the source.  Things that have been going on a lot more quietly for decades and decades... but is now being brought to light to people around the world.

post #435 of 4805
Thread Starter 
I read that Inarritu interview. He's coming from a position of ornery resistence, but honestly, I think he's fairly cogent about it. I feel the thing that people fail to acknowledge whenever a filmmaker like Inarritu rips on a popular, omnipresent genre such as the superhero film, is that these guys are reporting from the ground. They fight to get their stuff funded, they take the meetings, etc. It's not getting easier out there for the guys who don't want to play ball, and while that is not the fault of a genre per se, I totally understand the frustration with the market and the consumer.
post #436 of 4805

It's too bad he articulates his points a lot better in an interview than he did with Birdman.

post #437 of 4805
Former "Ridiculous Six" cast member Allison Young, one of the actors who recently walked off the set, told MSNBC that the makeup staff for the Adam Sandler picture made her wear bronzer in order to appear more authentically Indian.





This is Allison Young. She identifies as a "full-blooded Navajo" in real life.
post #438 of 4805

So, no mediocre indies in RDJ's future. Just mediocre blockbusters from here on out. Duly noted.

post #439 of 4805

I'm told that Whedon has closed his twitter account?

 

post #440 of 4805

But I do have to wonder though: how much of all the issues with Black Widow (and most of the film itself) due to Whedon's own hands, or just having to deal with Marvel's own demands for what they want in an Avenger's sequel.

post #441 of 4805
Thread Starter 
Incredible. I have not been keeping up with the controversy and haven't seen the film, but even if I had, I still don't think I'd be able to find the words. A few weeks ago I created a Twitter account for the first time and have done nothing with it. I obviously have an innate feel for something that's just wrong for me.


I am glad I created this thread though. The occasional bumps aside, I feel like I started it at exactly the right time.
post #442 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

Incredible. I have not been keeping up with the controversy 

CONTROVERSY?????????????????

post #443 of 4805
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

I'm told that Whedon has closed his twitter account?

 

 

Humans are awful. Maybe Ultron was right.

post #444 of 4805
Thread Starter 
By the by, the tweet in the top left corner says it all.
post #445 of 4805

the only thing that makes sense..IS TO BLOW IT ALL UP!!!

post #446 of 4805
Thread Starter 
Doesn't matter. Had sex.
post #447 of 4805
Did you cry the whole time?

Still counts!
post #448 of 4805

She put a bag on my head!

 

 While I thought the scene where Natasha refers to herself as a monster because she couldn't have kids, could have been better written, I didn't think it ruined the character. I think it would have been better if she told Banner that even though she had been raised to be a monster, she chose not to be one and he could do the same.

post #449 of 4805

Twitter is worse than 4chan.

post #450 of 4805

Just goes to show that most of this outrage on Twitter is basically a unfocused mob enjoying being a mob. Whedon was the cause celebre of the twitterati mobs a few months back during the tail end of gamergate. Now they turn on him for a throwaway line in a movie (perfectly in tone with the character) and a rather ineffectual Widow plotline?

 

Just goes to show, even though it's the same side of the political line, there is no strategy or meaning here and we should be giving these flare ups far less attention than they currently get.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media