The Culture Wars

[MikeNovack]

The distinction exists certainly: some films are more “simple” accounts of personal relationships, but most of the “great” films are films with many levels of commentary.

I can think of an example where "simple". Its message is against the societal (and Hollywood) stereotype of attractiveness/romance. In other words, the message "you don't have to be young and pretty to find love". But it raises another issue (marketing such films).

Marty 1955 The "romantic" couple are not young, pretty people. Early middle age, not good looking. The memorable line "I'm going to marry that dog" (Marty's response to criticism how can he want to be with a woman looking like her). While now considered a great (not top level) and ultimately a financial success, when released it appeared to flop badly (and be a financial disaster). Luckily a few theaters picked it up later in the season as "fill" and by then word of mouth had spread. See, the usual promotion had been (still is) trailers and these not "pretty looking people".

Non-standard films may need non-standard marketing, but that is really off topic. EXCEPT -- this might go a way to explain the prevalence of political/social issues? Easier to express in a trailer?

[Alexis Jacobi]

And I also don't understand why need to smear AJ. He said nothing about Hitler in this thread, so why bring up Hitler?

A Jacobi without a smear is like a bagel without a schmear. You just gotta put a big dollop on!

Probably the real reason Flash is suspicious of me is simply because I investigate and challenge all historical narratives. That in itself, for his camp, is thoughtcrime. If you are inclined to do that, that indicates an inclination toward “evil narratives”. And these always end up “you know where”.

Also, that I have from time to time put up a short polemical video by Jonathan Bowden which is highly controversial because it transvalues the value-set Flash ensconces himself in.

I can fairly cite Bowden as a counter-woke theorist and to a degree a man with radical right tendencies. These are generally found more toward the fascistic side of European politics.

Here

[FlashDangerpants]

I can fairly cite Bowden as a counter-woke theorist and to a degree a man with radical right tendencies. These are generally found more toward the fascistic side of European politics.

Here

Why are you so stupid Jacobi? All you had to do was sit back and hope that phyllo was angry enough at me to defend you out of spite. But you just had to "defend" yourself by linking to a notorious fascist and proving my point for me instead. Now he would be an utter idiot to lift a finger for your sake.

[phyllo]

I don't undertand why somebody who seems to be so interested in masculinity issues is so paper thin-skinned as you are. Man up.

That's your imagination. I'm not particularly interested in "masculinity issues". It's one possible area of discussion among many.

Take a tranquilizer before you blow a blood vessel.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I can fairly cite Bowden as a counter-woke theorist and to a degree a man with radical right tendencies. These are generally found more toward the fascistic side of European politics.

Here

Why are you so stupid Jacobi? All you had to do was sit back and hope that phyllo was angry enough at me to defend you out of spite. But you just had to "defend" yourself by linking to a notorious fascist and proving my point for me instead. Now he would be an utter idiot to lift a finger for your sake.

Because you exist within an indoctrinated framing, you cannot be said to be a “free thinker”. And so naturally the mention of Bowden, or any thinker just a hair over the Centrist line, evokes in you Nazi-like goblins. This is a phenomenon, a pathology, of the ultra-woke. And naturally the word “Nazi!” has talismanic power.

This thread is dedicated to the topic of the culture Wars. And I can think of no one with as direct and poignant message against the “woke construct” as Jonathan Bowden. I think he strikes a chord in whomever listens to him. And I also think it right to say his thinking has fascistic notes. But, not everything conceived of by fascists or the ultra-right is necessarily wrong in se.

[FlashDangerpants]

I don't undertand why somebody who seems to be so interested in masculinity issues is so paper thin-skinned as you are. Man up.

That's your imagination. I'm not particularly interested in "masculinity issues". It's one possible area of discussion among many.

Take a tranquilizer before you blow a blood vessel.

So I ask again, what is the content that has been stolen from you by all this wokeness?

You obviously do understand that Old Hollywood did need to change. It did need to stop making all the queers victims and villains, it did need to let girls have some of the good roles, and it needed to stop using black people as little more than dim-witted comic relief. You know perfectly well I am making a fair point, and that's why you are arguing with side issues like IC does.

Some remake of a Disney cartoon with a black kid as the mermaid can't really be the problem. Luke Skywalker really can't be the problem. So what is the actual "woke Hollywood" problem? Is it really there, or is it just a confected culture-wars issue, like the War on Christmas?

[FlashDangerpants]

This thread is dedicated to the topic of the culture Wars. And I can think of no one with as direct and poignant message against the “woke construct” as Jonathan Bowden. I think he strikes a chord in whomever listens to him. And I also think it right to say his thinking has fascistic notes. But, not everything conceived of by fascists or the ultra-right is necessarily wrong in se.

I'm not really commenting on this right now. The purpose of quoting it is to have an easily searchable reference if I feel like using it against you at some other time.

[Alexis Jacobi]

This thread is dedicated to the topic of the culture Wars. And I can think of no one with as direct and poignant message against the “woke construct” as Jonathan Bowden. I think he strikes a chord in whomever listens to him. And I also think it right to say his thinking has fascistic notes. But, not everything conceived of by fascists or the ultra-right is necessarily wrong in se.

I'm not really commenting on this right now. The purpose of quoting it is to have an easily searchable reference if I feel like using it against you at some other time.

Fair enough. I’ll be standing by.

Meanwhile … enjoy!

[phyllo]

You obviously do understand that Old Hollywood did need to change. It did need to stop making all the queers victims and villains, it did need to let girls have some of the good roles, and it needed to stop using black people as little more than dim-witted comic relief.

It did change.

The last Charlie Chan movie was made in 1949.

Now it has gone to another ridiculous extreme.

Some remake of a Disney cartoon with a black kid as the mermaid can't really be the problem.

Why does the race of the character need to change?

Why not write another story about a black person instead? That would make sense. If it's a good story, people would go see it.

Are they going to make a movie about Henry VIII and make him black? What does that achieve?

Luke Skywalker really can't be the problem.

Why does Luke have to be destroyed as a heroic male character?

Why destroy the reputation of the Jedi?

Why not just create a heroic female character and leave Luke and the Jedi as they are? That would make sense.

You think that these are reasonable corrections that Hollywood needed to make?

[FlashDangerpants]

You obviously do understand that Old Hollywood did need to change. It did need to stop making all the queers victims and villains, it did need to let girls have some of the good roles, and it needed to stop using black people as little more than dim-witted comic relief.

It did change.

The last Charlie Chan movie was made in 1949.

Oh, well it's good to know that racism ended in 1949. They had me worried there.

You seem to have concerns about your own culture and skin tone and sex being represented on screen, but no obvious awareness of how other cultures, races and so on feel about their representation.

I am white and British and I speak with a generic London accent. My people are preresented in Film as the best villains (Alan Rickman for instance whenever he wasn't being a German) and the best heroes (Bond, Holmes, and Paddington Bear), and all sorts of Americans. Englishmen get to play all the other types of roles too, there's nothing really that's denied to us, we've had some of the best vampires, detectives, soldiers, thieves, cads and monsters in every category. Except we're never the first guy to die in an American horror movie, apparently that honour is reserved for some black dude for some reason.

With all that in the bag, it doesn't really matter that every now some foreigner plays a Londoner with a ridiculously bad accent, like Dick Van Dyke in Poppins. Or that dude in The Boys. There's no trope equivalent to the Magical Negro for us, nor the Bury Your Gays one. But it's cool, we do get to be the White Saviour quite often.

So perhaps your satisfaction that the problem went away is a little complacent, ignores the people who have actually been on the receiving end, and requires revision.

Now it has gone to another ridiculous extreme.

Some remake of a Disney cartoon with a black kid as the mermaid can't really be the problem.

Why does the race of the character need to change?

Why not write another story about a black person instead? That would make sense. If it's a good story, people would go see it.

I don't think there's a real colour of skin at all for a mermaid, I suspect them of being fictional creatures.

Why remake any movie at all? If the original is being remade, the purpose is to make money, and the decision to not use new IP has been made already. So in that context, why does it matter if a remake that is going to be made anyway because Hollywood cannibalises its back catalogue as a business practice, should include a superficial change to the skin colour of an imaginary creature that doesn't exist?

Are they going to make a movie about Henry VIII and make him black? What does that achieve?

They probably aren't. Rumour has it thatHenry VIII was a real dude though, so I am rejecting the analogy. Not that I would really care if they did do it.

Luke Skywalker really can't be the problem.

Why does Luke have to be destroyed as a heroic male character?

He wasn't.

Why destroy the reputation of the Jedi?

They didn't really do that did they?

Why not just create a heroic female character and leave Luke and the Jedi as they are? That would make sense.

You think that these are reasonable corrections that Hollywood needed to make?

I still don't care about Luke Skywalker. He's a shit character. The movies were fun because of Han Solo, Chewwie, that Golden pimp robot, and the little wheelie bin that whistled at the princess. Not the charisma free ham sandwich with a light saber.

I seriously cannot believe that we are stuck on a piece of dryer lint like Luke Skywalker. When I said that can't be the real problem, I meant it. That is the dullest character in the series, and one of the dullest in movie history. He's so boring that even his incest was just bleh.

[accelafine]

You obviously do understand that Old Hollywood did need to change. It did need to stop making all the queers victims and villains, it did need to let girls have some of the good roles, and it needed to stop using black people as little more than dim-witted comic relief.

It did change.

The last Charlie Chan movie was made in 1949.

Oh, well it's good to know that racism ended in 1949. They had me worried there.

You seem to have concerns about your own culture and skin tone and sex being represented on screen, but no obvious awareness of how other cultures, races and so on feel about their representation.

I am white and British and I speak with a generic London accent. My people are preresented in Film as the best villains (Alan Rickman for instance whenever he wasn't being a German) and the best heroes (Bond, Holmes, and Paddington Bear), and all sorts of Americans. Englishmen get to play all the other types of roles too, there's nothing really that's denied to us, we've had some of the best vampires, detectives, soldiers, thieves, cads and monsters in every category. Except we're never the first guy to die in an American horror movie, apparently that honour is reserved for some black dude for some reason.

With all that in the bag, it doesn't really matter that every now some foreigner plays a Londoner with a ridiculously bad accent, like Dick Van Dyke in Poppins. Or that dude in The Boys. There's no trope equivalent to the Magical Negro for us, nor the Bury Your Gays one. But it's cool, we do get to be the White Saviour quite often.

So perhaps your satisfaction that the problem went away is a little complacent, ignores the people who have actually been on the receiving end, and requires revision.

Now it has gone to another ridiculous extreme.

Some remake of a Disney cartoon with a black kid as the mermaid can't really be the problem.

Why does the race of the character need to change?

Why not write another story about a black person instead? That would make sense. If it's a good story, people would go see it.

I don't think there's a real colour of skin at all for a mermaid, I suspect them of being fictional creatures.

Why remake any movie at all? If the original is being remade, the purpose is to make money, and the decision to not use new IP has been made already. So in that context, why does it matter if a remake that is going to be made anyway because Hollywood cannibalises its back catalogue as a business practice, should include a superficial change to the skin colour of an imaginary creature that doesn't exist?

Are they going to make a movie about Henry VIII and make him black? What does that achieve?

They probably aren't. Rumour has it thatHenry VIII was a real dude though, so I am rejecting the analogy. Not that I would really care if they did do it.

Luke Skywalker really can't be the problem.

Why does Luke have to be destroyed as a heroic male character?

He wasn't.

Why destroy the reputation of the Jedi?

They didn't really do that did they?

Why not just create a heroic female character and leave Luke and the Jedi as they are? That would make sense.

You think that these are reasonable corrections that Hollywood needed to make?

I still don't care about Luke Skywalker. He's a shit character. The movies were fun because of Han Solo, Chewwie, that Golden pimp robot, and the little wheelie bin that whistled at the princess. Not the charisma free ham sandwich with a light saber.

I seriously cannot believe that we are stuck on a piece of dryer lint like Luke Skywalker. When I said that can't be the real problem, I meant it. That is the dullest character in the series, and one of the dullest in movie history. He's so boring that even his incest was just bleh.

You are such an insufferable twat. Why are you so obsessed with skin tone? And what's a 'generic London accent'? I bet it's a lot more 'Charles' and a lot less 'Danny Dyer'. People who make movies get to choose who plays the parts. It's a business and a business is about making money. Choosing actors that people want to watch and who will play the role well is part of that business whether you 'approve' of it or not.
China and India have huge film industries as do many other countries.
I saw a wonderful Chinese film called 'Farewell my concubine'. Not a single black, white or brown person in it, and it went on for HOURS. How dare they! Ditto a film set in Afghanistan (no 'blacks', 'whites' or Asians). You need to report this blatant racism to the appropriate authorities immediately!

[MikeNovack]

We have not yet considered films that include a political/social message biut are not about that message. IMHO, that can be very effective messaging.

I will give as an example, Hey Babu Riba (1985) << when dealing with "world cinema" (even high rated) I have lower expectations primarily US forum members would have seen, so synopsis at the bottom >> It is a coming of age film. It is ABOUT friendship, loyalty, and the comedy of errors trying to to lose your virginity. But it also painting Communism is a bad light. That's sort of "in passing" but maybe because just in passing, more effective. I'm sure we can recall other examples where the political/social message is "in passing". Do you agree this can be very effective? Not coming across as heavy handed precisely because so secondary to the story being told.

Synopsis: In the current day, four middle aged men return to Belgrade for the funeral of the woman who was their contemporary when they were young. Switch to the past. It's the crew of a four man shell, and their cox is the girl. All these guys are eager to lose their virginity, preferably with her, but anybody will do. Humor in their trials and tribulations (and difficulties getting by under Communism) . Meanwhile the girl's mother is dying so she gives hers to the son of a Party functionary in exchange for medicine that might save her mother. The medicine is fake, she ends up pregnant, and the scumbag useless. Her loyal crew, without her being in on the plot, set off for a usual practice row, but instead of turning back, row her all the way across the Adriatic to her father in Italy (he has escaped the regime). My favorite scene is him angrily glaring at them accusing "which one of you did this to her" and they say nothing, because each wishes he had been. BTW, you learn at the end that scumbag not quite as bad a scumbag as they (and we viewers) thought. He's at the funeral too, and explains to them he didn't know the medicine was fake.

HEY, those insisting on blacks, etc. are NOT being so silly as to expect where aren't any in the vicinity. But the Brits here should recognize A Taste of Honey. (1961) Hard to believe a teenager wrote the play. Race and homosexuality. I don't know if we were expected to agree or disagree with Mum when she ejected Geoffrey as useless. Sorry, but IMHO, even gay, a WORKING class bloke who wanted to be the dad better than lumpen prol slut (American meaning) Mum.

[accelafine]

Then there are all the paintings depicting 'white people'. The Mona Lisa needs to be immediately restored to her orignal blackness. Everyone knows that Leonardo da Vinci was black and only painted black people! The light skin tones were painted in over the darker ones by white supremacist art conservators.
Bach and Mozart were hiding afros under those wigs. Of course they were black people. At least Dr. Who did the right thing and chose an appropriate actor to play Isaac Newton (who was black of course).

[MikeNovack]

Then there are all the paintings depicting 'white people'. The Mona Lisa needs to be immediately restored to her orignal blackness.........

Your ridiculous hyperbole is disgusting. The non-depiction of people of color where people of color present is their objection, not a demand that they be depicted where absent.

AND YOU KNOW THIS

[Alexis Jacobi]

I still don't care about Luke Skywalker. He's a shit character. The movies were fun because of Han Solo, Chewwie, that Golden pimp robot, and the little wheelie bin that whistled at the princess.

He robbed it all from Kurosawa