reposting this becUse it d idn t get the appreciation it deserved
its a fucking crying shame that this movie is going to bomb, honestly. arguably the one reason it was made at all is because sony has been a ten year long disaster and they really needed a prestige kind of film to build pedigree so in all likelihood there wont be anything like this for another 10 years or at all. i would see it in IMAX if you have any fondness at for the original
White girl stands up to bullies harassing another kid, then becomes a Marine, then later gives out blankets to the homeless. How Woke.
jiroemon1897 posted:Just saw this during college football lmao:
White girl stands up to bullies harassing another kid, then becomes a Marine, then later gives out blankets to the homeless. How Woke.
the comments are great, it's just a bunch of dudes complaining about women being in the marines (muh standards)
tears posted:i watched yesterdays panorama about how the number of children raped or abused by other children in britain has gone up by 71% over the past 4 years. what have we done
as a society? kinda sounds like you abused a bunch more kids. which is weird because i dont think stuff like jimmy savile coming to light was meant to be inspiring
tears posted:what have we done
from my understanding the stats are significantly increased by "sexting" / "revenge porn" being classed as a crime this year. although i don't mean to minimize the real and destructive effects of social media and "cyberbullying". also the "child on child" tag drastically underplays the fact sexual violence / harassment is mostly perpetrated by males aggressively sexualized by constant access to toxic online porn.
Gssh posted:tears posted:what have we done
from my understanding the stats are significantly increased by "sexting" / "revenge porn" being classed as a crime this year. although i don't mean to minimize the real and destructive effects of social media and "cyberbullying". also the "child on child" tag drastically underplays the fact sexual violence / harassment is mostly perpetrated by males aggressively sexualized by constant access to toxic online porn.
The..."increesed reporting/criminalisation" always seemed like a cop out, esp considering the inefectualness of the police in dealing with rape and abuse, and this was data across the last 4 years
As for child on child it is, as always, almost entirly male on female, everyones just getting younger, in a huge part because of what u say, access to pornography.
The idea that girls are ment to get educated and develop in an environment where theyre constantly surronded by males brough up on a diet of their own superiority under patriarchy and a constant input of rape propaganda, and many girls having to return day after day to sit in class with their abusers, is a literal torture scenario
abolish porn and bring back sex segregated schools imo
this particular scene is a nice showcase (garbage quality, sorry):
toyotathon posted:edit- is this show fash? laughing at work-a-day petty boug struggle and craigslist labor, getting suckered by promises of wealth to go along with nathan's schemes...
i was kind of disturbed by this week's episode too
i can see where everyone is coming from with this but i think there's two main things that put the show on solid ground. one is that the absurdism of the humour takes it beyond a simple prank show, so that the participants aren't really the butt of the joke, rather the foil for nathan's ridiculous scenarios. the second is that, as you point out, nathan is the one putting himself on the line (physically, legally, etc) for the sake of the humour. nobody ever looks more ridiculous than him.
e: I guess that sort of aligns with Zizek but I have no idea what the relevance is of "Stalinism" except as a fantasy Zizek can use to sell a critique of capitalism to liberals. Obviously building a critique based on a lie though doesn't work since Nathan for You is a particularly capitalist show and Zizek in no way engages with the rich understanding of art in Marxism.
Edited by babyhueypnewton ()
blinkandwheeze posted:imo the show almost universally presents everyone as just going along with it out of politeness & not wanting to shut a well meaning guy down or make an awkward situation hostile. it's weird to read the constant refrains of "...Uh yeah sure maybe" as anyone being genuinely tempted by their petit-bourgeois greed or whatever.
http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/nathan-for-you-los-angeles-reality-tv/
TG posted:TG posted:rewatching deep space nine, about 13 eps in
one year later and im back at it, halfway through season 4 again. dominion war > borg invasion
in case anyone is wondering about my tv watching habits, i am once again watching ds9. its possible that i have a real problem
one thing i find interesting about star trek is that aliens are almost always only given one name while all the humans have at least two and often three. youve got james tiberius kirk and jean luc picard but only spock or worf or quark. its like they go out of their way to treat the aliens the same as humans, referring to them as people, or men and women, but then they overlook the fact that there are ostensibly tens of billions of klingons, and even the emperor and members of the high council have only one syllable to go by. maybe they get a house name (but why is it still the house of mogh when mogh is dead? why isnt it the house of worf, or better yet, the house of some long-dead patriarch?). i know that aliens in star trek are meant to represent a certain aspect of human behavior, so theyre all one-dimensional: vulcans are pure logic, ferengi pure greed, etc. maybe the naming conventions are designed to reflect that fact
a notable exception is that bajorans get two names, ie kira nerys (but even then, most of them just get the one, like wynn or opaka). its as if theyre trying extra hard to make you sympathize with the plight of an oppressed people by extra-humanizing them as opposed to the lizard people who occupied them, led by the evil dukat. i know garak has a first name, but in many ways he stands for the redemption of the cardassians, because he overcomes his cia training and helps the Good Guys so he earns himself a mark of humanity that aliens just dont have. of course, worf was raised by humans and has himself a human last name but it is Never used. he isnt commander rozhenko at all. this is probably because, despite his close association with humans, he does all he can to reject his humanity and embraces his klingon side