Ghost in the Shell Reviews Are In

*So far, the consensus seems to be that Ghost in the Shell is  a merely okay film. I haven’t seen it and had no plans to do so, not because of the Whitewashing, although that’s a big issue, but because I’m more than a little tired of looking at Scarlett Johansson.

There’s quite a lot of spectacle but yeah, there’s the little issue of Whitewashing, not just of the film itself, but actually referenced in the plot, where the identity of an Asian character, Motoko, is erased and placed in the body of a White woman. 

According to the critics, it is possible to watch this movie and not care about any of the social issues involved, but this movie is never gonna be a classic, and doesn’t have the depth of the original anime. It’s never going to be Bladerunner, or The Matrix either, no matter how much it apes those movies aesthetics. According to the critics, it’s a gorgeous film that lacks warmth. It’s at about 51% on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. The reception of the movie, even by audiences,  has been rather lukewarm.

There are a handful of reviews giving it a rousing endorsement, like Variety, Entertainment Weekly, The Telegraph and The Chicago Tribune (Roger Eberts old employer). But the critics who panned it, come from more Geek oriented online sites, that skew much younger than the ones mentioned above, with a millennial audience who grew up watching the original movies and series, and I guess they’re unimpressed by the story.

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/29/scarlett-johansson-and-the-perils-of-white-feminism/

http://www.avclub.com/review/beguiling-ghost-shell-more-replicant-remake-252941

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15114902/ghost-in-the-shell-review-scarlett-johansson

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/ghost-shell-review-remake-2017-johansson/?tu=gav

http://www.gq.com/story/ghost-in-the-shell-review

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/03/30/ghost-in-the-shell-review

http://www.polygon.com/2017/3/30/15121524/review-ghost-in-the-shell

http://www.businessinsider.com/ghost-in-the-shell-review-2017-3

 

*And because apparently I’m just not finished bashing Iron Fist for what we could have had vs. what we got:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/heres-the-important-stuff-that-happens-in-iron-fist-so-1793445273

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/21/14980216/iron-fist-problems-marvel-netflix-writing-villains-optics

http://www.polygon.com/2017/3/17/14958828/finn-jones-and-iron-fist-have-one-thing-in-common

*Bottom line: if your character’s backstory features him punching a gobdamn dragon, to obtain his superpowers of being able to punch shit, and you don’t show that shit on screen, you need your entire ass thoroughly kicked. So far, we’re stuck with Finn Jones as Danny Rand but this can be fixed. He’s never going to look good as a martial artist until he gets some serious training. Put him in some intense stunt training, so that he can at least look as competent as the actors from The Matrix. Get a brand new showrunner. And this time find someone who gives a shit about Danny’s Rand being Iron Fist,  cares about his martial abilities, and is willing to do the research to make it look good.

 

*Just to cheer us all up, here are some Logan reviews. I loved this ugly, bittersweet movie, so much.

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/6/14829768/logan-movie-wolverine-hugh-jackman-patrick-stewart-discussion-highs-lows

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/why-we-needed-logan-to-kill-the-modern-superhero-movie-w470501

https://theringer.com/logan-and-conquering-pessimism-through-fatherhood-86d377ae85b9

Stuff I’m Watching

Okay, I though I posted this already, but apparently not, since I can’t find it in my published file. So here we go again, maybe!

The Ghost Brothers (TV)

 

Its a TV show about three guys who all had paranormal experiences as children, and decided as adults that they would like to investigate the existence of ghosts. The second season of this show airs April 15th. In the meantime the first season is available for streaming on TLC. I’m already addicted.

Its  a pretty good show. One of the reasons I’ve always hated ghost hunting shows is I get  exasperated with  White guys running around in the dark, shaking their cameras, and yelling at the ghosts. There’s none of that here. The feel of this show is very different. One of my biggest issues was the attitudes of the ghost hunters in these shows, challenging the ghosts, making demands, and the general disrespect. That’s not here, either. For the record, I don’t believe in ghosts, but I do believe in the inexplicable, and this show has that too, which occasionally makes it actually scary. But it’s not just that. It’s the humor and camaraderie between these three friends, that I enjoyed the most. They genuinely like each other,  and are not above ranking on each other, but don’t do it in a mean spirited way. You can tell they’re really old friends, and this is one of the most authentic depictions of black male friendship, you’ll ever see in a TV show.

The guys make a point of visiting sites that are known spots of racial trauma, so they’re not in the business of retraumatizing any presences that might be there. After all, these are their ancestors. They try to approach their job from a place of respect, with minimal equipment. They ask questions and  try to reach out and emotionally connect with a presence. In one episode, they visit a hotel where a sex worker was killed maybe a hundred years ago. They visit her rooms and attempt to find out if she’s still present. They ask her about her life, implore her to answer, and when they leave, they respectfully leave payment for her time, which I found both sad and hilarious.

In another episode, they visit a place where some children were known to have died. To get the children  to respond, they bring toys and dolls, ask the children if they would like to play, and assure them that it’s safe to come out and do that. All very respectful. Nothing happens of course, but there’s a great deal of tension as you suspect something might.They bring the absolute minimum in equipment, they don’t have scanners, and meters and various devices. They really just have their smartphones and a camera.

Also, these guys are surprisingly brave, in situations that would frankly give me the screaming heebie jeebies, sitting alone in a dark room waiting for some presence to reveal itself. Yes they do get scared, and are willing to acknowledge that, but there’s no exaggerated terror, with a lot of running and screaming. This isn’t a comedy, although the guys are occasionally funny. They take their self appointed task pretty seriously.

One of the reasons I like for white people to watch shows like Atlanta, Luke Cage, and Ghost Borthers is if they’re interested in more authentic depictions of what black people are actually like when white people arent around, and contrast these images with depictions crafted and written by white men, who can only guess at how we relate to each other, or just make shit up. One of the most interesting things I’ve noticed about media depictions of marginalized people by white male writers, is often the relationships are depicted as contentious ones. The white men, who write almost all of the media we see, have no idea what women talk about when men aren’t present, what gay people do when straight people aren’t around beyond having sex, or what black people do when white people arent present. Shows written, by marginalized people themselves, tend to have fewer token characters,  and more genuine conversations, and activities. We actually do get along with each other when white people arent around. We laugh, joke, and tease each other. We have deep conversations that aren’t about race, and trivial conversations that are. And just like with the Bechdel Test, almost none of our conversations center white  straight men.

Ghost Brothers joins those lists of shows that depicts black people’s authentic reactions to the world around us.

ETA:  I added a much more detailed description for this show, and the second season has already started. I’m currently watching episode two, where the Brothers visit the Winchester Ghost Trap House.
Ghostbusters (2016)

Image result for ghostbusters

I told myself I wasn’t going to watch this, but it aired on Starz, earlier this month, and that’s why I pay for cable. So yeah, I’m one of five people on Earth who actually love this movie. It was entertaining and I found a lot of positive  things outside of the one negative thing that made me want not watch it.

The one negative thing was me being mad about Patty, played by Leslie Jones, not being a scientist. I still don’t like that, but I also don’t feel she was ill treated by the creators of the movie. Although Leslie’s personal humor doesn’t match mine, I still really liked her character. She was one of the funniest people in the movie and gets some of the best lines. This one negative thing was outweighed by all the positive things I enjoyed.

One of my biggest takeaways was the depiction of friendship between women, which is almost never authentically shown in genre films, in favor of having a lonely badass. These characters are friendly and supportive of each other. To use Erin and Abby, for example, the subplot of how they met is Abby believing Erin when she claimed she saw a ghost when she was a child, and no one else believed her.That no one else believed her is something  that affects her for the rest of her life, prompting her to abandon Abby, and never have anything else to do with the paranormal. Later, she and Abby reaffirm their bonds of friendship when Erin risks her life to save Abby at the end of the movie. When Erin has a very obvious crush on their dimbulb male secretary, played by Chris Hemsworth, the other women never make fun of her, or make her feel ashamed of it. They just accept that she likes him, while gently cautioning her to be careful of sexually harassing him.

I liked Patty, and felt she was given ample screen time. The other characters make no big deal about her not being a scientist. She’s an expert in other things. She talks her way onto the team by offering them something they don’t have. Historical context and knowledge of the city, allows Patty to provide a lot of the movie’s exposition. This is not exactly her being “street -smart” (I suppose technically she is “street-smart,  but only because she is her own kind of nerd, who reads History books for fun. So yeah, all the ladies are in fact, nerds! Patty just is not a Science nerd.)

The other women never act as if they know better than her, or try to lord it over her that they have credentials, and even defer to her expertise on matters they know she has studied. They accept her, like Holtzman,  as one of the contributing members of the team. Yes, she gets them a car, but that’s not why she was allowed to join them. It’s something she offers, along with their ghostbusting suits. She also gets some of the funniest lines in the movie, most of which are quiet personal asides  that if you blink, you’ll miss them.

I especially enjoyed the beginning of a friendship between her and Holtzman. Abby and Erin were already friends, and Holtzman must have occasionally felt like a third wheel, but she and Patty seem to hit it off pretty well, hanging out together whenever they’re not working. Patty  saves Holtzman’s life at one point, and nicknames her Holtzy.

Speaking of Holtzman, she is my favorite character in the entire movie. She’s just plain nuts and really, really,  loves her job. The trailers don’t really do this character justice, just like they didn’t make Patty very likable. She’s impossible to describe. She just has to be seen. She loves destruction, dances around with blowtorches, and is utterly fearless when it comes to her various science toys.

ETA:

So, my niece finally watched this movie, and she had a great time. She couldn’t wait for me to get home from work, and she watched it without me, for which she was mildly chastised. And guess who her favorite character is! Guess! Patty, of course, who she thought was hilarious. I don’t know that my niece wants to grow up to be a Ghostbuster, but she really enjoyed herself, and the movie, and that’s enough for me.

 

 

Suicide Squad (2016)

Image result for suicide squad

Once again, I’m in the minority when it comes to liking a movie. I actually had a good time watching this. I really liked the visuals, and performances, even if the story was full of massive holes, and largely incoherent . I really enjoyed the characters though. I watched this with my niece and she seemed to have a good time, too. I think she wants to be Harley Quinn when she grows up, but I told her no, because that’s not a good look for a Black woman, unless she’s gettin’ paid a lot of money, like Margot Robbie. It would also require she be tortured by Jared Leto, after which I’d have to beat Leto’s ass. (He should probably have his ass kicked just on general principles, anyway, because my niece has decided she has a crush on his version of the Joker. What? She’s like ten years old!)

I’m one of five people on Earth who think that Suicide Squad winning an Oscar for Best Makeup is both hilarious and outrageous. Really!? Over Star Trek? Yeah, right!

It really shouldn’t be that shocking that I liked this. It stars Will Smith and I’ll basically watch anything he ‘s in. Margot Robbie wasn’t too bad in this. I thought her version of Harley was pretty entertaining and not too unlike the comic book version of the character. And then there’s  Queen Viola. I just love the idea of Viola Davis and Will Smith starring in a superhero movie together. Although, the next time we see them together, I hope its something a little more serious.

The Magnificent Seven (2016)

Image result for magnificent seven

Unfortunately I did not get to see this in the theater.  I did rent this for me and my Mom to watch for a couple of days. She is a die-hard Denzel fan, and she had expressed an interest in going to the movies to see this. Now this is pretty remarkable for two reasons. She’s not a huge Western movie fan, (even though she was the one who introduced me to Bonanza), and its really hard to get her to go to the movies with me, as she’s  picky. In the past few years, I managed to get her to see Jurassic World, World War Z, and that Halloween Madea movie.

We watched this movie over a weekend and she really enjoyed it. She was deeply happy that Denzel survived to the end of the movie. I enjoyed all the characters but I was kind of bummed out because the one Asian guy got killed. It doesn’t really compare overmuch to the original. It has a very different feel, although the plot is exactly the same. The action sequences were very exciting, and I enjoyed the banter between the various characters. It suffers from lone woman syndrome, and a bad guy who is evil just because he’s evil. (Not that every villain needs a backstory. Its just something I noticed.)

It has a Benetton ad cast, and although the one Mexican guy, Vasquez, is annoying, the stereotypes are mostly kept to a minimum. The men of color in the cast all get to have their action moments. Despite the presence of Vincent D’onofrio as Jack Horne, my favorite character was  Billy Rocks, the group’s blades-man. The most intriguing relationship was between Billy Rocks, and  Ethan Hawke’s character, Goodnight Robichaux. I kept wondering about the nature of their friendship, and afterwards I wrote my own headcanon, where Billy saved Goodnight from suicide, and Goodnight felt indebted to him. It was very clear that one of Billy’s purposes was helping  Goodnight hold his shit together.

My Mom liked the Jack Horne character a lot. He was  melancholy and  gruff, with a penchant for making profound philosophical statements, that mostly puzzled the other characters. Denzel, as Chisholm, was his usual mildly snarky, pragmatic self. He wasn’t really stretching it in this role, but Denzel sparkles on even his worst days, so its all cool.

No, this movie isn’t as good or influential as the original, but its worth watching some cold Saturday night, with a bowl of popcorn, and some good friends.

Legend of Tarzan (2016)

Image result for legend of tarzan

Let’s just state, for the record, that I’m a little bit older than some of the more hysterical members of Tumblr. As a result, I grew up with the idea of Tarzan, and am well used to the tired trope of Tarzan the White Savior. I grew up reading the Edgar Rice Burroughs books, and watching some of the movies with my Mom, whose favorite Tarzan was Johnny Weismuller. Yes, we did see the problematic aspects of having some White guy being a better African, than actual African people, in Africa, but since almost all of TV, and movies, consisted of this trope, it was easy to overlook it, yet impossible not to see it.

That said, I did watch this movie when it came on cable, which only proves that I will watch any damn thing when it comes on TV, where Alexander Skarsgard takes his shirt off, and growls like a lion. It does not mean I’m not “woke” or “aware”. It just means I occasionally have low standards for what I find entertaining, especially if I can knit to it.

Nevertheless, I still enjoyed this movie for the sheer silliness that it is. Yes, the premise is just as stupid as the original films, and one still wonders what the hell White people,  (and lets face it, there were no PoC clamoring for this movie to be made) were thinking when this movie got made. If you haven’t seen this movie, it’s okay, as your life will not have been upheaved.

For what its worth, the creators did keep the White Savior stuff to a minimum by adding Samuel L. Jackson, who does the saving of various Black people, and some of the actual Congolese people get lines and screen time. Skarsgard is ridiculous in this role,  and spends most of his time trying to look dramatically serious, while trying to save his girlfriend, Margot Robbie, from Waltz’ slimy Englishman. I still don’t know why Waltz kidnaps her but its got something to do with diamonds. It doesn’t matter anyway because the plot is really not that important. What’s important is that Skarsgard is bare chested for most of the movie’s running time.

There is indeed some tree swinging, and some gorilla punching, and for some strange reason, Djimon Honsou is in this movie as an antagonist. He only gets about five minutes of screen time, and maybe six lines. Samuel L. Jackson is in this movie too, and pretty much just acts like Samuel L Jackson, despite the fact that everyone else is acting like they are in a period movie, which is very jarring. I wanted to turn off the sound, so I didn’t have to listen to him speak, but then I wouldn’t have been able to hear Alexander Skarsgard talking to various animals, and yodeling. Yes, there is a classic Tarzan yodel. When I was a kid, this didn’t particularly bother me, but every time I heard it in this movie, I laughed my ass off.

But really, I think the biggest question you have to ask yourself, if you ever watch this movie: Why is Samuel L. Jackson in this movie, when they have Djimon Honsou?

Televsion and Movie Meta Linkspam

For your reading pleasure this weekend:

 

Get Out (2017)

Wow, there is so much meta being written about Get Out that its hard to keep track of it all. (Do these writers know thats what they’re doing?)Everybody has something to say aobut this movie, even when they dont have anything to contribute. For the record, I have seen this movie and I loved it as much as I’ve loved anything on the Key and Peele show. (And no, I dont have much more to add to the discussions Ive already read.) If you’ve ever watched that show, than Get Out is not some huge surprise for you, as you are well aware of Jordan Peele’s Horror credentials. For example, his zombie spoof is pretty deep:

 

And this spoof of vampire tropes is hilarious:

I dont have anything to add since people pretty much have every topic covered:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/kareem-abdul-jabbar-why-get-is-invasion-black-body-snatchers-trump-985449

http://io9.gizmodo.com/get-out-is-a-horror-movie-only-a-black-person-could-hav-1792781911

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/get-out-what-black-america-knows-about-the-sunken_us_58c199f8e4b0c3276fb7824a

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/lets-talk-about-all-the-amazing-little-details-in-get-o-1792781479

 

Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1997)

Its the 20 year anniversary of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and yep, people are writing about it. I was total trash for this show. I used to watch it like a religious duty, and even back then I was drafting meta, in my head, about this show. For the record, I hated the movie it was based on, and I was prepared to ignore the show. I watched it off and on for the first season. Then the internet started writing about it, and I really revved up my watching in the middle of season two, after Angel became evil. (I didn’t completely understand what was happening but I caught up fast.)

Buffy is also one of the most written about and talked about shows in television history. There are aabout a bajillion books, articles, and websites, devoted to parsing everything from the fashions, to the plot, to the characters and language. 

http://www.whedonstudies.tv/slayage-the-journal-of-whedon-studies.html

http://lithub.com/10-famous-writers-on-loving-buffy-the-vampire-slayer/

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/03/the-body-the-radical-empathy-of-buffys-best-episode/519051/

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/03/how-buffy-the-vampire-slayer-redefined-tv-storytelling/519174/

http://www.vox.com/culture/2017/3/10/14857542/buffy-the-vampire-slayer-explained-tv-influence

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/mar/10/buffy-the-vampire-slayer-at-20-the-thrilling-brilliant-birth-of-tv-as-art

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/08/buffy-the-vampire-slayer/

http://io9.gizmodo.com/10-vital-storytelling-lessons-i-learned-from-buffy-the-1766651082

http://io9.gizmodo.com/20-things-we-still-love-about-buffy-the-vampire-slayer-1793132161

http://www.vulture.com/2017/03/buffy-the-vampire-slayer-twenty-years-greatest-legacy.html

 

Logan (2017)

I did go see Logan, as I promised. I was going to write a review, but a lot of people have  already written about the issues I would’ve covered in my review. It’s an excellent movie, btw, and  every bit as heartwrenching as you expect.

http://www.rogerebert.com/mzs/all-things-must-pass-the-emotional-reality-of-logan

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/03/05/logan-the-things-we-leave-behind

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/why-we-needed-logan-to-kill-the-modern-superhero-movie-w470501

https://theringer.com/logan-and-conquering-pessimism-through-fatherhood-86d377ae85b9#.nsgel72hh

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/6/14829768/logan-movie-wolverine-hugh-jackman-patrick-stewart-discussion-highs-lows

https://theringer.com/james-mangold-hugh-jackman-wolverine-logan-movie-review-1d5e5b9c5c93#.2oe0rp6ff

 

Moonlight (2016)

I haven’t seen this movie yet, but I’ve heard such wonderful things about it. I’ve seen a few clips come across my dash on Tumblr, which have me intrigued, and of course, it won Best Picture at the Oscar Awards.  I’ve made plans to watch the DVD soon, however.

Why I refuse to watch “Moonlight,” or any other film about race, with white people

View story at Medium.com

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/masculinity-and-moonlight-eight-black-men-dissect-barry-jenkins-momentous-film-1.3836460

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/21/moonlight-affirmation-gay-black-men-exist

http://www.mtv.com/news/2935326/moonlight-and-the-preservation-of-black-manhood/

https://contexts.org/blog/moonlight-trayvon-the-oscars-and-americas-fear-of-black-boys/

https://bitchmedia.org/article/shedding-moonlight-toxic-masculinity/problem-homophobia-not-gay-characters

 

Star Wars

http://www.kissmywonderwoman.com/2016/02/masculinity-monday-star-wars-finn-is.html

View story at Medium.com

A Hero, Just Not The Hero: Masculinity in Star Wars: The Force Awakens

http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/columns/134072-lets-talk-about-finn-star-wars-the-force-awakens.html

 

Hidden Figures:

Yes, I’ve already seen this movie. I loved it, but as a long time Blerdgirl, I’m still processing my thoughts about it. I haven’t finished geeking out about it yet, but when I do, I’ll come back at you with some knowledge. Ideas are already percolating as I type.

http://latinasuprising.com/hidden-figures-feminism/

What’s Hiding Behind the Feel-Good Curtain of <i>Hidden Figures</i>: One Black Feminist’s Take

Taraji P Henson’s Hidden Figures is the intersectional feminist movie we need right now

ETA: This last link was removed because, while I have plenty of issues with feminism, I won’t tolerate any lying  MRA mansplaining bullshit on my blog.

 

Miscellaneous

http://www.chrisbrecheen.com/2012/06/8-things-prometheus-can-teach-you-about.html

https://clearancebinreview.com/2012/05/18/cinematic-soulmates-three-amigos-a-bugs-life-and-galaxy-quest/

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2015/10/pantomime-james-bond-reveals-tragedy-modern-white-masculinity

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rAM9EtJTHL_M6STjL7TyfUs9ew83v_fhYAlwI97hG5s/mobilebasic

 

Tumblr Humor # 247

*Why does no one think it at all strange to be gluing appliques on their baby? And what about gluing shit on boys? How about little bow-ties, since we’re going for that whole gender essentialism thing?

brainstatic: “Tired of your baby girl being seen as a genderless imp? Afraid strangers might not recognize your sexless proto-human as the soft femme heartbreaker she is? Well now you can glue some shit on her head! That’s right, just glue some...

brainstatic:

Tired of your baby girl being seen as a genderless imp? Afraid strangers might not recognize your sexless proto-human as the soft femme heartbreaker she is? Well now you can glue some shit on her head! That’s right, just glue some gender conformity right onto her unclosed fontanelle! Say goodbye to awkwardly explaining that no, despite her bald head, your androgynous poop machine is actually a demure coquette! Glue your fucking baby today!

@
@

*Once I sit down in my house, that’s it! I’m not having any more interactions with ppl for the rest of the evening. And no, don’t  even be in my neighborhood.

We have a twitter here too: https://twitter.com/IntrovertUnite. See some of you there?

@
@

*I think it might have been a mistake for NASA to ask for suggestions on this. I mean they’re talking to Americans and I think we invented snark.

@
@

*This is the most plausible explanation, I’ve ever seen, for why people don’t recognize Clark Kent as Superman, and its not the eyeglasses:

raptorific:

I still think it’s hilarious that the reason nobody ever figures out Superman’s secret identity or where he lives or what he does when he’s not saving the planet, is because he already told them all the Kryptonian stuff that can’t be tied to any of his human friends or family. I guarantee you the in-universe wikipedia article on Superman lists his name as Kal-El and the “personal life” section says that he lives full-time at his private fortress of solitude at the north pole. Nobody in the world looks at Clark Kent and thinks “oh my god, maybe he’s superman!” for the same reason nobody ever starts to suspect that their coworker who looks KINDA like Barack Obama is actually secretly Barack Obama – They know who Barack Obama is and know what he does and they know their coworker Greg is Greg and not Barack Obama. They have no reason to assume Barack Obama secretly moonlights as Greg The IT Guy at their workplace even though they’ve never seen Greg and Obama in the same place. At best, “Greg is secretly Obama” would be a running joke at the office, and the same is true at the Daily Planet. “Kal-El of Krypton, who lives in a CRYSTAL PALACE at the NORTH POLE and whose dayjob is SUPERMAN, sometimes puts on a suit and pretends to be a clumsy reporter and lives in a one-bedroom walkup in Metropolis” is a ridiculous concept to anyone who doesn’t already know it’s true

@unpretty

“Hey, that— that guy, in the corner, is that— is that Superman?” 

Clark looks up from his computer at the new intern. “Oh, no,” he says. “You caught me.”

“Clark, you pull this shit every time, man,” his desk neighbor Steve says. “Shut the fuck up.”

“No, the kid’s right, I’m Superman,” Clark says. He gets out of his seat and cracks his back out. “I guess we’re gonna have a superhero fight.”

“Clark, sit back down.”

“Nope. Superhero fight.”

“Clark if you don’t sit the hell back down and finish your article by lunch I am going to tell Perry on you.”

Clark points at the intern. “You get off easy this time, buddy,” he says, and sits back down.

“So…” the intern says, very lost. “Uh…”

“That’s Clark,” a slightly older and more experienced intern says. “He’s Superman’s asshole twin.”

@

@

*This is, very possibly, one of the best reviews of Fences.  Ever! Or, as clueless White people at awards shows like to call it, Hidden Fences!

Art Art by John Ueland

 

Source:
@
@
And you know Black Twitter couldnt let that Hidden Fences comment pass:
@
@
*And finally , I laughed too long and hard at this discussion, with Black people refusing to tell White people what “Take the L”, actually meant, and basically trolling  them.

poonpie:

dope-lore:

poonpie:

For those who don’t know, ‘take this L’ refers to the Longitude and Latitude of a map. When you have to take an L, you need to locate your Longitude and Latitude. By doing so you will discover how far out of your lane you fucking traveled.

I thought the L stood for log like logarithim cuz u gotta do a complicated problem to figure out who the fuck u think ur talkin too

You’re actually not wrong. Originally it referred to the Latin word ‘lūcidus’ which means ‘radiating light’. Therefore, when you need to take an L, you must enlighten yourself on where you got me fucked up.

The “Get Out” Link Roundup

Get Out, Jordan Peele’s new Horror movie, with a racial twist, is the new media darling of the moment, and has a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It’s made almost as big of a splash as last year’s release of Lemonade and has spawned a metric ton of think-pieces. I can live with these types of Black media events happening every February, if you ask me.

What’s surprising to me is the number of White people who have gone to see this movie, and have really gotten into it by not just thinking of it as a movie for Black people, which is what usually happens when a movie stars more than three Black people but liking it as a relatable Horror movie. I think part of the charm is that it is really accessible, its not preachy, and  it is a straight up Horror movie, that’s a cross between Invasion of the Bodysnatchers and  The Stepford Wives.Its one of those types of movies with lots of gaslighting and paranoia.

Another part of the movie’s charm is that its Jordan Peele, who has  established his Horror credentials on the show he co-hosts with Keegan Michael-Key, called Key and Peele. Both of them are alumni from MadTV. (If you haven’t watched the show, please step right to it. Its almost as great as The Chappelle Show, which is saying something, because I’m a huge Chappelle Show fan.)

The video at the end of this post by Latasha, contains lots and lots of

SPOILERS

SPOILERS

SPOILERS

So, if you don’t want to know all the sordid details, as she dissects the movie, skip the video.

Now, some of these commentaries have spoilers too,  so be careful, again. And for Gob’s sake don’t read the comments to any of the articles if you have a low tolerance for White Fragility.

 

http://www.theroot.com/get-out-proves-that-nice-racism-and-white-liberalism-1792955235

https://bitchmedia.org/article/get-out-movie-white-feminism

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/feb/28/get-out-box-office-jordan-peele

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-get-out-milk-horror-jordan-peele-allison-williams-20170301-story.html

http://www.gq.com/story/things-ill-never-trust-again-after-watching-get-out

http://www.mtv.com/news/2986793/get-out-understands-the-black-body/

http://intelexual.co/home/racist-white-women-an-american-legacy/

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/review-the-giant-leap-forward-of-jordan-peeles-get-out

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/03/07/how_get_out_positions_white_womanhood_as_the_most_horrifying_villain_of.html

https://www.wired.com/2017/03/get-out-discussion/

View story at Medium.com

https://thinkprogress.org/white-lies-matter-get-out-knows-no-one-is-as-woke-as-they-think-they-are-d526212e28eb#.hq7j5c43e

http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a53515/get-out-jordan-peele-slavery/

http://www.vulture.com/2017/02/daniel-kaluuya-on-get-out-how-racism-is-like-horror-films.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/03/in-get-out-the-eyes-have-it/518370/

View story at Medium.com

https://filmschoolrejects.com/race-horror-and-the-death-of-the-status-quo-5b1bbdf3f1c6#.ib83eao0g

http://www.vox.com/culture/2017/3/7/14759756/get-out-benevolent-racism-white-feminism

http://nymag.com/thecut/2017/03/what-get-out-gets-right-about-american-culture-and-blackness.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Random Tumblr Shenanigans #15

This video made me laugh so hard. If you’re unfamiliar with the philosophy of White Fragility, then here’s a link to the White woman who coined the term: Robin D’angelo.

http://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/viewFile/249/116

And here’s a video lampooning White Fragility:

@
@

Okay, this video is just begging for a caption:

Uhmhmmm, yeah, that’s it! The red tulle with the…Oh, uh hello “hooman”. I didn’t see you there. I was just putting this back…you left it on the floor..I’ll uh…just be over here then…

Please feel free to add your own captions!

@
@
#11 is definitely not the typse of White person you  wanna be friends with, tho’, even if that is your current aesthetic.

@

@

*This is a long one and is going to take a minute or two.

Now, normally, I would never have printed this entire review here, but the person who wrote this, has a deactivated account, and someone else published this on Tumblr. If anyone knows the original poster, and wants me to remove this from this particular site, I will.  In the meantime, this will stand as one of the most intelligent, and astute, meta of a Science fiction movie, I’ve ever read. Whats really impressive is that there’s no fan-wanking. They didn’t pull this review completely out of their  backside:

Meta: Snowpiercer

My [scattered] thoughts on Bong Joon-ho’s Snowpiercer. This was originally just a defence of the film’s ending—which I’ve seen widely criticised—because I think it’s brilliant and necessary and worth defending. But… then there’s everything else.

THIS IS AN ALLEGORY

A lot of discussions of Snowpiercer I’ve seen have been very literal, which I think is a terrible way to read this film when so much of it is densely allegorical. The train at its centre is a clear allegory for capitalism [I’ve seen this rejected so here’s the director saying it himself this is a film about capitalism]. It’s capitalism: what was promised as an ark of salvation but became a barbaric prison for all but the very privileged.

And it’s a capitalism so advanced that the illusory crutch of money has disappeared—this system deals directly in human flesh. The “alienated labour” of Tail Section is a constant supply of children fed to the machine. At the same time, the system tames the body politic by literally marking and mutilating the underclass: the flesh of almost every soul in Tail Section bears the scars of being “consumed” by each other and the regime.

That anti-capitalist sentiment concentrates around Tilda Swinton’s Mason, a character that without doubt invokes Margaret Thatcher, the widely abhorred UK prime minister who ushered in neoliberal capitalism in the 1980s. Thatcher was born to a northern British lower-middle-class family, and was mocked for her jutting teeth and large nose; she spoke with a broad loamy Lincolnshire accent until elocution lessons got rid of it [x]. Thatcher’s policies crippled British industries [including, yes, the railways] and caused incredible suffering to working-class people.

In the film Mason originally boarded the train as a lower-class citizen and over the years was groomed by Wilford to become minister [x]—she’s also a class traitor. Mason presides over the the violence & suffering inflicted on Tail Section inmates, as Snowpiercer accelerates the system so that capitalism’s slow violence becomes bloodsoaked brutality in real time.

Within capitalism crisis isn’t an accident; it’s endemic. Capitalism is untenable and inevitably manifests cycles of boom and bust; the illusion of harmony followed by violent rupture. It’s almost like clockwork—and the train itself is a clock, circumnavigating the earth once every year, ticking down to the next scheduled uprising.

Capitalism’s genius is its ability to co-opt every attempt at resistance; every revolution is engineered within the system, with the permission of the system, according to terms defined by the system. Which is why the exploitative conditions of capitalism—its visceral and mundane horrors—have persisted for so very long: they seem to be driven by a “sacred engine” which will run perfectly forever.

“We control the engine, we control the world.”

But revolution’s not impossible. Curtis is an honest Marxist revolutionary who believes in the righteousness of his cause, setting out to seize “the means of production”—the engine itself. And as a creature of the train he knows how to topple from the inside, how to turn the system’s material reality against itself.

Snowpiercer lets you see only what Curtis sees as he moves forward and forward. Maintaining an artificial hierarchy relies on an artificial reality—“false consciousness”—in which none of the classes perceive the material reality of other classes. The lower classes are socialised to keep their place, to “be a shoe”. The upper classes are socialised to believe in their natural superiority to the underclasses. By breaking down divisions & doors, remaking the train into one long continuous system, Curtis—for a moment—collapses the artificial hierarchy. He’s the first person to walk the full length of the train.

HE’S NOT THE MESSIAH…

— “My friend, you suffer from the misplaced optimism of the doomed.”

Curtis is essential to the revolution: he plots with Gilliam, he drives it forward, he realises that the guards have no bullets, it’s his strategy that gets the rebels to Prison Section; he’s on the frontline of the Battle, and he temporarily halts the bloodshed by capturing Mason. He makes the ugly decisions: he’s willing to keep others ignorant about the reality of the system, to censor what the Artist draws [i.e. what’s really in the protein bars], to seize political gains at the cost of lives [sacrificing Edgar to capture Mason; one life for many], to make brutal choices in service to The Idea.

At first Curtis is sold to the audience as an American hero, the noble but reluctant leader of the rebellion [the casting of “Captain America” in this role is slyly ingenious]. But Curtis is a creature of the train: he remembers nothing before it; he came into being as the man with the knife, the man who killed Edgar’s mother and was ready to butcher a baby, to extract use-value from something sacrosanct.

Consciously or not, he absorbed & replicated the system’s brutal exploitative logic. And even as he moves forward he’s looking back; he’s never moved beyond that horror seventeen years ago [x]. He’s still “the man with the knife”. He’s still the train.

Snowpiercer quickly collapses the idea of Curtis as a messianic figure. When he’s called upon to lead—in the Battle of Yekaterina Bridge, by Wilford at the Engine—his face & image blur, or he’s reduced to a faceless silhouette shot from behind. Curtis isn’t marked for greatness or “chosen” in any sense; he’s thrust into that role by a system which demands white male figureheads to elevate as false prophets. He’s not special; he’s just next in line.

Curtis isn’t the hero. Curtis is the inevitable crisis within the system. His chaos is as essential to the order of things as the brutalised lower classes and the debauched upper classes, and all the bureaucrats and apparatchiks and military thugs in between.

“Yes, Wilford knows you well, Mr Curtiss Everett. He’s been watching you.”

It’s hard to know if Gilliam did conspire with Wilford to bring about Curtis’s revolution; if Gilliam intended the revolution to fail but changed his mind after the Water Section, if he always intended Curtis to take Wilford’s place; or if all that was Wilford’s lie—Gilliam warned Curtis,don’t let Wilford talkcut out his tongue. Wilford’s knowledge of their conversation about having two arms strongly suggests that Gilliam conspired with Wilford.

But the ambiguity is the point: within capitalism you’re never certain that any “resistance” hasn’t already been co-opted and repurposed and undermined by the system you’re trying to escape.

When Curtis reaches the Front Section he falls to his knees before the Engine, overwhelmed and awed and horrified—the same quasi-religious fervour shown by Wilford and Mason. It’s reminiscent of Coppola’sApocalypse Now and Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, when the journey up river culminates in a view of the unseen tyrannical figurehead, an awesome and shameful creature. Curtis is the train; is the system; is Wilford’s natural & inevitable successor, the white-man heir to his throne. The man who can ensure the system’s survival and oversee the next generation of subjugated souls. Edgar inadvertently predicts this at the very beginning:

“What I mean is he’s gonna die someday. And when that happens you’re gonna have to take over. You’re going to have to run the train […] I think you’d be pretty good, if you ask me.”

Curtis’s revolution serves the system it threatens—helps to fulfil the killing quotas to keep the population down. Keeps the fishtank in equilibrium.

By sacrificing his arm to stop the train and free Timmy, Curtis begins to make amends for his crimes seventeen years ago. But he’s only ever half-redeemed. He can’t ever escape, and his violence will always be reabsorbed back into the social order, drained of all its subversive power.

Most crucially, Curtis doesn’t believe in life outside the train; that survival is possible, that the result would be anything but death and annihilation. He can only imagine the train. The irony of the word “revolution” is that it describes a circle, like the endless turning of the Sacred Engine—round and round and round, forever. That would be the legacy of Curtis’s revolution—if it weren’t for Nam.

CHILDREN OF THE REVOLUTION

Fundamentally, Snowpiercer is a film about parents and children, the legacies of generations. Parents should strive to leave their children the best possible world; but today’s children inherit the ideologies and inequalities and injustices of morally bankrupt predecessors. They inherit a world threatened by global warming and environmental collapse, thanks to the rapacious plunderings of capitalism.

Worse, children are taught to adore that monstrous world. Perhaps the most disturbing sequence in Snowpiercer takes place in the school car, a grotesque hypersaturated parody of a classroom environment.

You see the next generation of Front Section children taught to worship the Engine and its messianic Conductor, immunised to the violence and horror that system wreaks [in the first shot of the classroom all the children are faceless; dehumanised, as though not real children at all].

And the hand gestures they make in reverence to the Engine are the same gestures made by Tail Section children who become dehumanised organic-mechanical parts of the Engine. This is how propaganda works: it condenses an entire ideology into a few visual or verbal signs that can be replicated ad infinitum. And these privileged children are unwittingly complicit in the subjugation of Tail Section children. The system dehumanises everyone, front to tail.

The teacher responsible for “breeding” this ideology is pregnant, a symbol of perverted maternalism—a next generation already corrupted. She parallels Wilford, who sought to make Curtis the son and heir to the corrupt system. Curtis, too, is a failed father: he sacrifices his symbolic “son” Edgar in order to capture Mason; and the “new world” he intends to create for the next generation will look identical to the last. [Had Curtis died at Yekaterina, it seems clear that Edgar would’ve been groomed by Gilliam to lead the next revolution.]

On the other hand, Tanya is a brave and brilliant mother who fights and dies for the cause.

But she’s never reduced to a maternal figure: she’s a fierce revolutionary who fights and survives the Battle of Yekaterina Bridge [where dozens die], and who drives Curtis onward. Her beating by the soldiers is meant to invoke the beating by police of Rodney King which sparked the LA riots of 1992, another citizen uprising against oppressive violence [x]. In Tanya the personal and political are wound together: in her mind, political resistance and freeing her son are one and the same goal—she wants his liberation, in every sense.

And Namgoong is the real father of the revolution, Snowpiercer’s radical imagination. Before Curtis finds them, he and his daughter Yona exist in a liminal countercultural space within the train, taking hallucinogenic drugs rather than experience its horrific reality.

Namgoong is not interested in the Sacred Engine—his ideas are “above Curtis’s” [x]. Nam cares to see the world beyond the train; he knows that the conditions which “required” the train’s creation have begun to recede. Nam protects Yona at all costs; and once they pass the Water Section he begins to plan their escape. He demands more for his daughter than the same system in new [white] hands.

[This was the moment I knew that Yona was going to escape the train.]

The Front Section children, brainwashed and monstrous and overwhelmingly white, contrast with the young people and the “train babies” of Tail Section, who are brave and brilliant and largely not-white. These children of the underclass have also been lied to: they believe the world outside can’t be survived; that the mutilated world of the train is all there is. Edgar even hero-worships Curtis, the man who murdered his mother and tried to take a knife to him.

Most importantly, they’ve been lied to about the Engine. It’s not perfect and divine and eternal; it’s a broken defective thing that survives only by the subjugation of train-babies. The Front Section children are bred to prop up the system, the train-babies—bred to be actual cogs in its diabolical machinery—are its downfall. They are the heart & life of the revolution: when Grey is murdered, it’s with the knife that’s stabbed through his hand—he dies with his hand over his heart.

At Yekaterina Bridge, where the revolution was supposed to die, the spark of resistance comes from Chan’s little hands striking a match in the deep dark at the very back of the train.

He passes the torch to Andrew, but it’s Grey who multiplies the burning torches until the fire’s hurtling along borne by many hands of many rebels.

The desperate cage of the downtrodden written in Grey’s tattoos—surrender or die—becomes the choice he presents to his oppressors when he rises up against them.

YONA

And most important of all is Yona [“Yona” is a form of the name “Jonah”, the biblical prophet]. That revolutionary fire begun in Tail Section becomes explosive in Yona’s hands when she blows up the gate to the outside world. It’s Yona, not Curtis, that the brutal implacable killer Franco the Elder tries to shoot through two windows when the train curves.

Yona is Nam’s revolutionary legacy. Her clairvoyant eyes see through the barriers he’s made, see through the bars of the cage, see the coming violence. Psychologically, she is already “outside” the system. And with the Kronol Nam & Yona create the means to physically escape the train.

That escape means blowing up the door, the event which triggers an avalanche and destroys the train. The new world comes at terrible cost—and Snowpiercer doesn’t flinch from that. This is the radical message of the film: ideology is never just abstract—its injustices & brutalities are decreed by human mouths and wrought by human hands—and the adult revolutionaries who can bring down the system are too compromised to do anything but replicate the very thing they destroyed.

Curtis can’t be part of the new world. He has to die with the train. So does Nam: he created the protective inter-carriage doors which allowed class segregation to last for so long. Snowpiercer is determined to show the kind of sacrifices that might be demanded to bring down a system as resilient and as monstrous as this. This film is not remotely fucking around.

The only survivors of this collapse are the train-babies Yona & Timmy, who emerge from the burning wreckage of the train like phoenix-children. A clean break from the dominance of the old order and its white patriarchs. They’ve never touched the earth; and when they step outside the train it’s as though they’re the very first humans alive. This is the real “sacred engine” of Snowpiercer: nature itself. A beautiful brutal state of chaos and freedom and life and death. Cold and cleansed.

The end of Snowpiercer seems like a desolate vision: in literal terms, the children’s chances of survival are almost zero. But the film is an allegory, and in those terms the escape from the train is hopeful: these two children, a new Adam & Eve setting foot on frozen pristine ground, can repopulate the earth [x].

The polar bear which stares them down is a threat; but it’s also proof of life outside the prison of the system. [Bong originally intended the animal to be a deer, but the polar bear is a contemporary symbol of global warming and its consequences, making its survival a happy irony.]

This last scene suggests that white Westerners are too compromised and complicit with the capitalist system to bring about its downfall—inevitably, they will shore it up as “the lesser evil”. True revolution against capitalism must come from elsewhere. [Yona’s words to Curtis could be the film’s words to America and the West at large: “you’re fucked.”]

Snowpiercer is one of the very few films willing to imagine what might be necessary to bring down capitalism—if not literal fire and blood, then real destruction and suffering—and to ask, honestly, if it’s a price the generations currently in power are willing to pay for the sake of a planet staring down ecological catastrophe; and for their children, the real-world “train babies” who will inherit the earth.

This is a lot of what I saw in the film too.

 *This is a lot of what I saw in this movie too. I saw more of the racial angles, than the realtion to capitalism, but the review comes by its ideas ogically, and there are clear parallels to the real world in the movie.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finn Meta Linkspam

Here are some discourses on my favorite character from Star Wars:

Star Wars, Finn, and Fandom Racism

 

We start with an admonishment to not be “That Person”.

thesovereignempress:

the-bi-writer:

this is a post for my fellow white star wars fans: we gotta do better. the treatment of Finn in the fandom at large has been dismal, both in obvious and insidious ways. so let’s talk about this.

quick note before we start: if you’re only here to argue, move on. if you’re already typing out a response beginning with, “not all white people,” don’t. however, if you’re interested in challenging your own biases, welcome aboard.

here are some harmful things white fans do, in regards to Finn:

1. we ignore him in fan works.

a quick check of ao3 stats shows that Hux (who has approx. 3 min of screen time) shows up in two thousand more works than Finn.

before you get defensive: no one’s telling you what you can and can’t write. however, as white fans we need to consider why we’re willing to go to the effort to imagine a rich backstory for a minor character we know almost nothing about, while ignoring the *actual* protagonist who already has a rich backstory of his own. (that protagonist is Finn, in case i was being unclear. Finn is a protagonist of Star Wars: Episode VII -The Force Awakens. Finn is a main character and co-lead. it’s Finn.)

2. when we do include Finn in fan works, we treat him poorly.

i’m going to stay in my lane on this one, and refer you to Writing with Color for more specifics on how *not* to treat black characters in harmful and/or stereotypical ways.

briefly: Finn is often hyper-sexualized (BBC, etc.) or pushed to the side by the narrative. additionally, very few fics, even ones with Finn in the main pairing, truly treat Finn as the protagonist of their fic.

i’m guilty of this myself, and i’m working on it. which is all i’m asking you to do: educate yourself, be willing to change, and then do it.

3. we underestimate his role in cannon

go read this post, and then tell me you haven’t been underestimating Finn from the moment he stepped on screen. i’d noticed almost everything the post points out, but chalked it up to plot holes, instead of considering that Finn (again, a protagonist) had been awake in the force since the beginning of the film.

that, right there friends, is racism.

tl;dr fellow white fans, we gotta do better. let’s take the energy we spend trying to convince people we aren’t racist…and actually be less racist. it’s our responsibility to examine our attitudes and change our actions. now is the time.

further reading:

here’s some excellent finn meta

here’s 5 tips for being an ally (video) by chescaleigh (Franchesca Ramsey) – her channel has a ton of other videos about race too.

here are a whole bunch of resources from Writing with Color, a tumblr “dedicated to writing and resources centered on racial & ethnic diversity.”

(feel free to add links + resources)

The thing is, if Reylo is your pairing and that’s the characters you choose to focus on – since that is how shipping works and as a reader I’m definitely going in for Reylo and other characters are secondary – what qualifies as “ignoring” or “pushing to the side”? That’s my issue with these talks about erasure and sidelining around Finn.

Lest it be misunderstood, I totally agree that we can be better at treating Finn in our fan works. I’ve seen him used in some uncomfortable ways. But there are some contradictions in this endeavor that tend to get glossed over.

I mean, no one is saying Finn should be the focus of fanfics about Reylo or other non-Finn ships. That doesn’t make sense. When we talk about Finn erasure, we’re talking about the bigger picture.

For example, if I go to the main TFA tag or the Star Wars tag, Finn is often nowhere to be seen. If I look for Finn (or even Finnrey or Stormpilot) fics, few that come up in the search are actually about Finn, making it difficult to find actual Finn content where he’s not a background character. When the title for Ep 8 dropped, There was a lot of speculation that The Last Jedi might be Ren and Rey as if Finn doesn’t exist. It’s not just in individual ship fics, if you look at many fan spaces, you would think Finn was a very minor character, not a main character. And that’s a problem.

We have to ask why Reylo and Kylux are the dominant ships while fics about Finn are the least popular. The question is not why aren’t Reylo and Kylux fics about Finn, it’s why are these ships exponentially more popular than ships including Finn and fics where Finn is actually a main character.

After a year’s worth of justifications that historically ONLY apply to white characters (fandom loves villains, the blank slate, etc) plus the fact that white heroes/protags are shipped like crazy, it’s clear that Finn’s blackness contributes heavily to his minimization.

Source: the-bi-writer fandom racism star wars finn
jawnbaeyega luminousfinn

skywalkerapologist:

luminousfinn:

The narrative arc The Force Awakens create between Finn and Kylo Ren is an interesting one. Visually it begins in the very first scene they appear on screen together at the assault of Tuanul village after the execution of the villagers that FN-2187 refused to participate in. When Kylo Ren is returning to his shuttle, he stops and stares at Finn for, at the time, no discernible reason.

In doing this the movie draws a visual line between the two men, connecting them in the audience’s mind and in-universe. One is dressed in black, the other in white, both are helmeted and faceless, but already we have witnessed the distinction between them and the movie spends the rest of its time emphasizing it: Kylo Ren will murder on a whim, while FN-2187 refuses to kill unarmed civilians.

After this “meeting” Kylo Ren maintains a distinct interest in FN-2187. So much that he not only knows that it was the same trooper which aided Poe in escaping, but that when he learns that Finn has got away with BB-8 he throws one of his two destructive rampages.

The other he has when Rey escapes captivity.

After this their stories part for a time, but only to be rejoined on Starkiller Base after Kylo Ren murders Han Solo.

After Chewie shoots Kylo, blows up the oscillator and everyone including Finn and Rey starts shooting, we see Kylo Ren kneeling on the bridge looking up. .

The camera cuts to an angle behind Kylo Ren’s head so we now also have Finn and Rey in the shot, both standing on a balcony in the background

Another cut, closing up on our two leads. This shows them both standing, looking down on Kylo Ren. Both look shocked and Finn is stepping forward on the balcony, towards the audience and more importantly, towards Kylo.

Once again the movie cuts and again it zooms in so that now Finn is in focus. His face merges from the shock and fear he has so far displayed, into grief, anger and determination. And throughout the shot he steps further and further forward while the camera zooms in on him, visually emphasizing him stepping into the conflict with Kylo Ren.

Rey is barely in the frame here and by the end of the shot she’s entirely gone, leaving her literally out of the picture.

Next cut is back to Kylo Ren, who is staring up at Finn. The way this sequence is cut together makes it startlingly clear that this is where he is looking and who he is looking at. Kylo’s face merges from surprise into unmitigated fury and hatred at the sight of FN-2187, the Stormtrooper who defected, who is everything he is not.

The whole sequence mirrors their first encounter with the two men staring at each other, though they’re now unmasked and we can see the mutual enmity clear on their faces. Finn is no longer running away, he’s stepping forward and the camera zooms in on Kylo’s face drawing him into conflict with Finn as well.

The movie sets up this conflict not just for the coming battle in the forest, but also for the next two Episodes as the battle between the two men is a draw. Finn is defeated by Kylo, but the Dark Sider does not obtain the lightsaber and is in turn defeated by Rey. Neither of them emerges a victor and the narrative conflict between them remains unresolved.

So whatever Episode VIII and IX brings, it is clear that Finn and Kylo will cross paths again and Kylo had better beware. To borrow John’s words: “Finn ain’t playing no more”, that much is clear from the scene in the oscillator.

Next cut is back to Kylo Ren, who is staring up at Finn. The way this sequence is cut together makes it startlingly clear that this is where he is looking and who he is looking at. 

This part is so important and yet flew over like 90% of the fandom’s heads in favor of focusing on Rey (gee I wonder why).

The shift in Finn’s expression from shocked grief to quiet rage reminds me of Luke’s reaction to seeing his aunt and uncle’s burnt corpses in ANH. Obviously Rey and Kylo will be squaring off again in VIII but TFA also made it clear that there’s some serious bad blood between Finn and Kylo that’s entirely separate from wanting to protect or recruit Rey. Which is why I roll my eyes when I see people claim that Finn is going to be shunted off to a B-plot opposite Hux (a character he never interacted with in TFA) and Phasma (who he literally threw in the trash).

Also, it’s worth noting that for the first time, Rey has to take Finn by the arm and pull him away.

image

Kylo was stumbling up towards them and I’m not convinced that Finn wouldn’t have tried to take him down right then and there.

finn meta to read
rebelfinn

@
@

*Look, as far as I’m concerned Finn is Force Sensitive, and that’s that. He will be a  Jedi. I will wrestle you out of of your underwear, with your pants still on, if you disagree. Here, have some receipts:

Also, I just love this gorgeous essay on the parallels between Finn’s narrative and Arthurian legend.

jawnbaeyega adagalore

luminousfinn:

Maz giving Finn the lightsaber is noticeable for many reasons, not least of which because it happens twice and for all the Arthurian parallels surrounding the scenes.

 

The first time takes place just after the destruction of the Hosnia system which is what makes Finn return to Han (and implicitly to the fight against the Dark Side). At this point none of them knows that they’re about to be attacked themselves by the First Order, not even Maz.

Despite this she immediately upon Finn’s return  takes him, Han and Chewie into the cellar where she keeps the lightsaber. When she takes it out of the chest Han recognizes it and asks where she got it, she brushes him off and focuses on Finn.

Why Finn? Last she saw him Finn made it clear that he was leaving. Hosnia’s destruction marked a tentative return, but so far it is tentative. And wouldn’t Han a man who might not be a paragon, but someone she’s know for years, make more sense?

Her words as she passes it are ambiguous. “Take it. Find your friend.” And do what exactly? Give it to her? Use it to protect her? What? Recall, no one but Maz and Rey herself knows that Rey can use the Force at this point. In fact Finn is never told this in TFA.

In assorted other things the fact that Han’s attention shifts off Maz and onto Finn the moment she tells him to take it, but before she stops talking is interesting. His intent gaze on Finn as he makes the choice to take the weapon is mirrored in the second “giving” by Maz.

Maz too is looking rather expectantly as Finn reaches out and takes the lightsaber from her. The music that has so far been playing softly in the background swells dramatically the moment Finn’s hand touches the saber and mixes with the diegetic sound of an approaching TIE fighter as Finn raises the lightsaber as a young Arthur might Excalibur. The scene ends in a dramatic boom as the castle is struck just as we see Finn look at the saber with a serious face.

It is noticeable that Finn is so entranced by the lightsaber that he doesn’t seem to hear the incoming TIE. Not long before at Niima Outpost he jumped at the first sound of it, but here he’s oblivious to the noise.

 

Now before I go on to the second “giving” I’m going to make a small detour around Arthurian myth.

Much have been made of the Arthurian parallels in TFA. Kylo Ren as a Mordred like figure. Luke as either a Merlin or a fallen Arthur himself and of course Rey pulling the Skywalker lightsaber out of the metaphorical stone. But the Arthurian parallels have been ignored where Finn is concerned, especially when it comes to the giving of the lightsaber/Excalibur, because in Arthurian myths there are two kinds of givings of that sword. One is Arthur pulling it out of the stone which declares himself the true king of Britain, in the other it is given to him by The Lady of the Lake.

In both versions Arthur starts out as a youth of unknown parentage grown up fostered by strangers, just as Finn is. In the second versions Arthur runs into Merlin, often portrayed as an older, wiser man. Depending on the version Arthur either asks Merlin for help or about his future, in either case Merlin takes him to The Lady of the Lake.

The Lady depending on the version of the tale is either a powerful magical being or a High Priestess of Avalon. She proceeds to ask the young Arthur several question and put him through a test which he fails, but she sees that though he is not perfect he has a good heart and a true spirit. Realizing this she bequeath him Excalibur, the sword of the true king and the mark of a hero.

Maz is in a quite literal sense The Lady of the Lake. She a powerful alien, strong in the Force who has made her home on a lake.

Her initial interactions with Finn runs parallel with The Lady’s testing of Arthur, complete with Finn “failing the test” by choosing to leave. But in deciding to return to the fight Finn proves to The Lady of the Lake that he’s heart and spirit is true and so she gives him Excalibur (the Skywalker lightsaber) to wield.

 

That she means for him to wield it and not just as a caretaker becomes clear in the second “giving”.

When they exit the now ruined castle the dark forces are upon them and battle is joined. Maz once more tells Finn to go find his friends.

This time Finn has no intention of leaving proving him once more worthy of Excalibur and this time Maz’s words are unambiguous, she intends, and always intended, for him to be a wielder of the blade, not just a carrier.

As Finn again lifts the Skywalker lightsaber and this time ignites it, Maz look on with great expectancy clearly meant to mirror the audience. Will “Excalibur” accept Finn as its wielder? And will Finn accept the lightsaber as his?

At first we see doubt on Finn’s face, it’s an unfamiliar weapon and a Jedi’s weapon to boot. How can he wield this? But Maz believes he can and Finn is nothing if not up for whatever challenge life throws at him so he ignites it. The blade flashes to life in his hand, accepting him as a worthy wielder, and the moment it does Finn’s decision is also made. He may not be a Jedi (yet), but the sword is his.

 

tl;dr. There is a lot of Arthurian coding around Han (Merlin) bringing Finn (a young Arthur) to Maz (The Lady of the Lake), Maz testing him and in finding that he has a good and pure heart gives him the Skywalker lightsaber (Excalibur). The sword allowing itself to be ignited (drawn from the sheath) confirms Finn’s worthiness as its wielder.

Source: luminousfinnLISTENTHIS IS THE CONTENT FOR WHICH I AM HEREGOOD SHIT RIGHT HERE OKfinn factsfinn metafinn is force sensitiveboth rey and finn are gonna be jedi okchoke on THAT
@
@
*I have a friend who insists that Finn was nothing more than comedy relief and refuses to move from the position that he is a “coon”, no matter how many valid points I bring up. I just don’t get it. Its obvious that she and I were not watching the same movie at all. But then, she and I aren’t in the same place on the idea of representation, either, which might be some type of generational thing. Also part of the problem is that a lot of Black people were expecting Shaft in Space. We already got all that with Mace Windu’s  purple lightsaber, so why copy that?
lj-writes

Finn’s subversive decency

Choosing to be kind is not choosing to be passive. It’s choosing to end the cycle of abuse… . It’s a courageous act in itself.

-Melissa Grey on Cinderella

It’s amazing to me how some parts of the Star Wars fandom have no sense of nuance when it comes to Finn’s character, seeing him as either a naive child who can hardly function in the real world or a ruthless killer who showed no regrets or conflicts whatsoever about killing his former comrades.

Both extremes are fairly dehumanizing and distorted portrayals of the actual character, because the core of Finn’s character is that he is innocent when he has no business being so. He’s a character whose innocence and purity are not oblivious naïvete but qualities he had to fight to keep and attain. His morality is not based on an ignorance of life’s harsh realities, but rather on an intimate knowledge of brutality and the will to break free of it.

Keep reading

@
@

Oooh! More theory!

https://youtu.be/YByg2UoncBs

The Final Girls (2015)

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

Normally, I plan my Horror movie reviews,  for October, well in advance of Halloween, but this one surprised me. I’d never heard of it until a few days ago. I originally confused this movie with another movie about serial killers, with the same title, called Final Girl, which was released the same year. Final Girl is also a comedy but the two movies are very different.

The Final Girls is a rather broad parody of serial killer movies from the eighties, with all their various tropes, specifically the  Friday the 13th movies, and  the movie Sleepaway Camp. There’s also some elements of the Scream  movies. Some modern day teenagers get trapped in an eighties horror movie and have to try to survive to the end of it. To that end, they use their knowledge of horror movies, in general ,and the specific horror movie they’ve landed in, to try to navigate their way through the movie. Nothing goes as planned.

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

About 25 years ago, Max’s actress mother, Amanda, starred in a horror movie called Camp Bloodbath, and can’t seem to live it down, as she’s having difficulty finding other roles. After one such audition, Max and Amanda are involved in a car crash and Amanda’s mother dies. Three years later, Max is still grieving for her, but has some new friends, and a crush on a guy named Chris.

All of them get invited to a special screening of her mother’s old movie and its new sequel, Camp Bloodbath II. When the theater catches fire, Max, Chris, her best friend Gertie, a bitchy girl named Vicki, and Gertie’s stepbrother, Duncan,  try to escape the fire by tearing their way through the movie screen, only to find themselves stuck in the movie. Duncan is an expert on serial killer movies and Camp Bloodbath specifically. One of the funniest moments is them sitting by the side of the road, trying to figure out where they are, and if they are indeed, in a movie.

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

In a moment of prime surreality, Max meets her actress mother, years before she became her Mom, as the nice girl stereotype named Nancy. Max spends the rest of the movie trying  to save Amanda’s life, even though on some level she knows these aren’t real people. Its a bittersweet moment, as you can tell that seeing her mother alive and well again is having a real effect on Max. She tries to advise and guide her without telling her that she’s Amanda’s  unborn daughter.

The Camp counselors consist of the usual throwaway characters including a randy horndog, named Kurt, who everyone thinks is disgusting, except for the girls in the Bloodbath movie. There’s Tina, the camp sexpot, and the actual Final Girl of Camp Bloodbath, Paula. The Black guy of course, is killed almost immediately. Since one of the rules of serial killer movies is that whoever has sex dies, the  modern crew spend most of the movie trying to keep what characters they can from having sex. After Duncan gets killed, they learn that their own lives are fodder for the killer, named Billy.

Billy is played as a straight killer, in the mold of Jason rather than Freddie, with much the same backstory.  We learn this when the modern day teens get caught in a flashback, within the movie, in the movie (and believe they’ve gone colorblind.) Billy  doesn’t crack jokes, or cackle menacingly. He’s actually pretty terrifying, really, which just makes the movie funnier, as no one takes him as seriously as they should with Duncan deciding he wants a selfie with him.

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

One of the funniest moments, for me, is when they put Tina in restraints, kitchen mitts, and extra clothing to keep her from having sex or taking her clothes off. Tina, who is best classified as a very dim bulb, doesn’t understand any of it. Bless her heart! At one point, Vicki tries to explain  that her cellphone is actually a  phone, and Tina just laughs at her.

When Paula gets killed, they decide to take matters into their own hands. Without Paula to be the Final Girl,  they elect Max as the only virgin. Her job is to kill Billy just like in the original film. Killing Billy is probably the only way they can escape the movie. So they lure Billy to the camp by using Tina as bait, by allowing her to take off her clothes, and booby trapping the entire house. During Billy’s siege of the camp, most of the other characters get killed. Only Chris, Nancy and Max escape, and Chris is wounded, when Billy kidnaps Nancy.

Max is desperate to save Nancy and goes after her . She manages to free Nancy but is wounded in the attempt. In order for there to be a Final Girl, one of the girls must die, though. Nancy sacrifices herself but not before Max confesses to her that she is the movie counterpart to her late mother. Now, as the Final Girl, Max has the superpowers to defeat Billy. After killing him with his own machete, she wakes up in the hospital to find all her friends are alive again, but unfortunately, they are all now  stuck in the sequel.

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

I had a lot of fun watching this movie. I loved the dialogue, the sight gags, all of it. I especially liked the character’s relationships with each other. Normally these types of movies are full of people you are hoping will be killed, but with the exception of Kurt, who is kinda “rapey”, and thereby disgusting, most of them are sweet, but not too bright. Even the modern characters, while snarky, are not actually mean, and some of them even make fun of which stereotypes they are, with Vicki making cracks about being the “mean girl”. I laughed the hardest at some of the throwaway lines the modern teens lobbed at the movie teens, who were too dim to understand.

I especially liked Max’s relationship with Nancy. The two of them spend some amount of time bonding, and you can see all of Max’s grief and longing, when she talks to Nancy, while  trying not to reveal who she is.  Nancy asks her, a couple of times, why she cares about her so much, and Max stutters to come up with a reason for why she’s attached herself to this girl. I like that the women aren’t just sexy floor lamps. They affect the plot as much as they can, considering their circumstances, and manage to contribute a lot of one-liners to the discussion. The movie teens have no idea how funny they are. They play it completely straight, while the modern teens are deliberately snarky, because they can’t believe the situation they’re in.

 

There are several girls in the movie and they all  talk to each other, support each other when they can, and are largely non-judgmental about one another. For example, no one considers Tina’s cat-in-heat behavior, to be at all remarkable. They just take it in stride that she’s gonna try to hump anything that moves, and/or take her clothes off. They try to stop that because it attracts Billy, not because they judge her as being bad.

Image result for THE FINAL GIRLS

The modern teens are surprisingly intelligent, and some of the funniest moments is watching them come up with a plans to defeat the movie they’re trapped in, but it doesn’t matter because, according to the laws of teen killer movies, there can be only one survivor, so everyone keeps having horrible accidents, as the movie attempts to correct itself.

This strongly reminded me of the movie Tucker and Dale vs. Evil, as it has much of the same kind of silly, slapstick humor.  The kind of humor that’s  not predicated on people being bitchy or unlikable. As an example, I give you Grizzly Park, which is a movie about a bear, hunting and killing teenagers, at a summer camp. The people in that movie, are quite possibly some of the most unlikable characters I’ve ever watched  in a movie, and at some point, I wished all of them would hurry up and be mauled by the bear, so the movie could end. I watched that movie with my Mom, an old veteran of these kinds of movies, and even she cheered for the bear.

Image result for grizzly park

And it was very refreshing to watch a movie made in 2015, where you care about the people being killed. Ordinarily, the killer seems to be the focus of any  movies made after Scream, and you root for  him, or the people he’s killing are so annoying that you pray for their deaths. And its also quite a contrast to movies made in the 80’s, where the teens seemed to like each other. Teens were annoying in the movies back then, and the movies were deeply sexist, but the teens weren’t bad people, and I didn’t spend the movie wishing for them to die.

Since I saw this on a family oriented network, I can assume its mostly safe for teens, but not for little kids under a certain age maybe, as there is a certain amount of gore, language, and sexual situations.

This movie was a surprise like for me, as I wasn’t expecting it to be so good, and I’m adding it to my comedy/ horror list, along with Tucker and Dale, Shaun of the Dead , and The Addam’s Family.

Train to Busan (2016)

I was wowed by this movie. This is one of the best zombie movies Ive seen all year. If you like The Walking dead and the Dawn of the Dead remake, you will like this movie. Once it gets started, and it gets started almost right away, it doesn’t let up til the end.

Now lets get this out of the way. The movie contains fast zombies. They run,  twitch, growl and scream. So if you don’t like fast zombies, or hated 28 Days later, you can probably skip this. It also has a young child, and teenagers, who are constantly in danger. If you have trouble watching that sort of thing (sometimes I do) then  I’m going to suggest skipping this, or watching this with a great deal of caution.

Image result for train to busan

This is a harrowing movie, and every bit the movie that World War Z should have been, with some great setpieces. I got so attached to these characters, so fast, and spent several breathless moments wishing for their safety. Its been a while since I’ve been scared during a zombie movie, but this one is very effective. The zombies sense by sight, so there are more than a few suspenseful moments when the train passes through long tunnels,  and it gets dark enough the zombies can’t sense the passengers, who find several ingenious ways to get past them in the train cars, like crawling above them along the luggage racks. You have to see this movie for the passengers as much as the zombie action.

Seon-Woo is a busy manager, who doesn’t seem to have much time for his daughter, so decides to take her to see her mother in Busan. During their trip by train, there’s a zombie breakout, the train is quickly overcome and Seon and his daughter spend most of the movie fighting their way through the train, off that train, onto another train, escaping a crashed train. Basically, its trains all the way there.

Image result for train to busan

Seon is accompanied on this harrowing expedition by several people including a tough workman named Sang-hwa, a character I totally fell in love with, and his very pregnant wife,  an elder businessman, who is a complete asshole because every zombie movie has to have at least one, a homeless man who followed the other passengers  when they got off the train, and attached himself to Seon and his daughter, and the teenage members of a baseball team. Yes, they get to use their bats during a crucial scene.

I really enjoyed the message and characterizations in this movie. Earlier in the movie Seon had an opportunity to help Sang, and didn’t. Later Seon gets called on his behavior by his daughter, who questions why they aren’t helping others, and  that’s not nice. When Sang meets up with Seon, he continues to give him shit for what he did to him and his wife, needling him for his selfishness.

Seon becomes more selfless as the movie progresses. The parallel with the villainous businessman is not lost on the viewer. In the beginning Seon’s focus is more on saving himself and his daughter, but he comes to care for others besides himself. This is not true of the selfish businessman, who is really just kind of a  cartoon villain. He throws people to their deaths, leaves others behind to be eaten, and at one point, he screams a rant at a teenage girl, and  gets the other train passengers to turn on Seon, and his little crew of survivors.

Image result for train to busan

The movie is filled with touching moments of bravery and sacrifice. I rooted for Sang through most of the movie and wished he’d been the focus of the film, as Seon is a rather bland character, but that was the point, I think. Sang is brave and selfless from the moment we see him,  fighting the zombies hand to hand to save the life of his wife, unborn child, and other passengers. At one point using his own body as a break against the zombies invading one of the train cars.

Seon  has the greatest character arc, though. The kind of man who has nothing but contempt for the homeless, at one point, goes out of his way to save that man’s life, he fights side by side with Sang, goaded by Sang’s needling of his selfish behavior, when they first met, and goes toe to toe with the villainous businessman. Along the way his goal becomes making his daughter proud of him.

Image result for train to busan

The only problem is that in the world of the zombie,  none of this selflessness comes without a price, and selfishness doesn’t pay off too well, either. One of the most tearful moments was when a teenage boy gets bitten, and instead of leaving him, his girlfriend chooses to stay by his side, as he dies. She knows that when he turns, she’ll die, but she makes that sacrifice because she doesn’t want him to die alone, and he was bitten while saving her life.There’s a similar scene in the Dawn of the Dead remake, but in that movie, its much less effective. What starts as a train full of people finally gets whittled down to the villain, Sang’s pregnant wife, Seon, and Seon’s daughter.

The action is fast and frenetic, and the only quiet moments are at the beginning of the movie, or when the zombies get quiet, but that’s not much consolation because the tension  just ratchets up during those moments. I can’t list all the great moments in this movie.

Now, its a zombie movie so there’s plenty of gore, and if you have anxiety issues, you may want to watch this in bits and pieces because it doesn’t ease up very much. It clocks in at two hours but its so fast paced that it just doesn’t feel that long.

I’m fully prepared to call this the best zombie movie of 2016, and its definitely going on my favorites list. This is an excellent choice for a Halloween Zombie marathon.

Wer (2013)

I’m horribly behind in my Halloween reviews. (But not my movie watching. I can do that. Its one of my skillz.) But here’s one of my recommendations for movie watching this Halloween.

Image result for wer movie

I only saw this movie about a year ago, and its a straight Horror movie. Its not a satire, or played for laughs, and its not bad. In fact its one of the more underrated werewolf movies floating around out there. No, its not as good as Dog Soldiers but it is better than the bigger budgeted Wolfman.

I don’t know any of the people involved in this movie. The director, William Brent Bell, is someone I’ve never heard of. The actors, A. J. Cooke, and Brian Scott O’Connor are  unknown to me. I liked the acting here. The actors approach this with the reserve and calm the plot deserves, although I could’ve done without some of the soap drama in the middle, as I felt that was unnecessary. It’s kept to a minimum so I wasn’t too irritated.

Image result for wer movie

A family on a camping trip, in Lyon France, is mauled  by some unknown creature. The mother is the only one to survive the attack, and it looks very harrowing onscreen. Not quite as gory as expected, which is to the good, as sometimes gory can be distracting. Talyn, played by Brian O’Connor, is caught almost immediately afterwards and accused of killing the family.

Kate (A.J. Cooke) is called in as Talyn’s defense attorney ,along with her assistant Eric, and a specialist in animal attacks, Gavin. Gavin and Kate have some kind of romantic history, that Eric objects to, as Gavin begins showing interest in Kate during this case. Eric himself has some unnamed scandal in his past involving the misuse of information, and fleeing the US, and he and Gavin butt heads over all of this. Kate who is still in some grief over the death of her father only has her eyes on this case and helping Talyn.

We follow Kate’s investigation of Talyn’s case,which at first appears to be a setup by the government to try to steal his family’s land, but Talyn  throws a monkey-wrench into Kate’s plans by actually being a werewolf. at one of their meetings Talyn attempts to grab Kate by the hand, and Gavin gets scratched on the arm.Guess what happens!

Image result for wer movie

 

Talyn is given a physical exam to determine if he has a form of porphyria, which is a kind of cutaneous blood disorder that results in Talyn’s  unique appearance. He looks like a werewolf before he becomes a werewolf. He is extremely tall, his face is covered in hair, he moves and talks slowly, and has unnaturally long fingernails, all symptoms of his disease, according to Eric.

During his physical exam, Talyn goes berserk and kills the entire hospital team, and then escapes into the city of Lyon, and the woods surrounding the city. At the same time Gavin is undergoing some changes of his own, and eventually he and Talyn go head to head, with Kate in the middle of it, as Gavin attempts to defend her from the rampaging Talyn.

Kate is at the center of all this, as she first endears herself to Talyn, by commiserating with him over the recent death of his father. She’s also the center of Eric, and Gavin’s focus as they fight over her attention, but at no point is one given the impression that she is nothing more than a sexy floor lamp.

For one thing, she’s not played for sexy. She makes decisions and has character. She’s not merely a damsel in distress, as she does have backbone. For most of the movie she appears to be fully in charge, standing up for Talyn against a system, and the detective, that has pronounced him guilty, based solely on his looks. You can tell she’s good at her job and takes it very seriously. Although she does  appear strangely unperturbed that her client is actually a werewolf.

Image result for wer movie

 

I kept waiting for the twist in this movie, like maybe everything was a dream, or a government plot that created Talyn, but none of those things occur. The plot remains pretty straightforward in that there isn’t much of one. Most of the movie reads like  ” A Day in the Life of Kate, the  French Defense Attorney”, and I rather liked that.

I actually liked Gavin , but I thought Eric was a dick. The detective in charge is played by, Sebastian Roche, someone Supernatural fans will recognize.He is kind of a jerk too, but he’s not wrong about Talyn. This doesn’t benefit him much because he is involved in government corruption to steal Talyn’s family’s land, so he goes to jail. But none of these subplots are the focus of the movie. They’re introduced and then settled, and the movie moves on. So, if you’re looking for some kind of in-depth crime investigation, like the movie Crimson Rivers, you’re out of luck. his movie isn’t about that.

Image result for wer movie

Its worth watching for Halloween, also  nice and streamlined, clocking in at a brisk 90 minutes, and its suitable for teenagers to watch. There’s a little gore but its not overdone. Its got a lot of action, including some werewolf on werewolf fighting towards the end, which looks pretty graphic, but again, its not overdone.

Its well worth looking at.

Check it out. Its on DVD.

Bite (2016)

 

Image result for bite movie

I was trying to  review some of the lesser known horror movies that caught my eye,  that I felt were worth watching this Halloween.

This is a 2016, transformation horror movie by Canadian Director Chad Archibald.

Bite is definitely for people who don’t want to watch torture porn but can stomach lots and lots of goop. The special effects in this movie seem to consist of almost nothing but goop. The plot is nothing remarkable, consisting pretty much of girl gets bitten by a strange bug, and turns into a monster.

Image result for bite movie

On some level , I think the filmmakers are trying to evoke the specter of body horror films like Cronenberg’s  1986, The Fly, but this film doesn’t reach that level. It does have an underwritten theme about the horrors of pregnancy but it doesn’t reach the thematic levels of Cronenberg’s 1975 film, The Brood, either. It has a cast consisting almost entirely of women but isn’t as frightening as The Descent.

This isn’t a great film. Its never going to be a classic, but it is worth looking at just for the spectacle.

Casey is in Costa Rica with her two best friends, Jill and Kirsten, celebrating her impending wedding to Jared when, as per formula, they decide to get off the tourist trail and  go swimming in a remote location. Casey gets bitten by some strange insect. She seems alright but later she passes out. Its all downhill from that point.

Image result for bite movie

When Casey gets back home, she starts developing some strange urges and appetites, but doesn’t pay much heed to them as she’s distracted by other anxieties, such as her upcoming wedding, her bitchy mother-in-law, frenemy Jill, and Jared’s insistence that she will start popping out babies as soon as they’re married. What kind of man brings his future wife a baby’s highchair, as a wedding gift? All of this is only exacerbated by Casey having recurring dreams  of vomiting up tiny eggs all over her apartment.

The movie has some echoes of It Follows in that it features yet another  pretty White girl,  frightened of what her future might hold, and the existential angst around birth and death.  Just once I’d like to see what one of these movies might say about a young  WoC’s existential crisis.

The first part of the movie, where you get to know the characters goes on almost too long. So long that it  starts to be a bore because none of her friends or family have enough personality to be that interesting and the acting is a little dodgy, too.

Image result for bite movie

But the movie starts to reach its high point after Casey actually starts vomiting up thousands of eggs, instead of just dreaming it, until every surface in her apartment is covered in them. By the time Jill (the nice friend) comes to check on her absence, her apartment is coated in goo, egg sacs, and webbing. Nevertheless, Jill just waltzes her dumbass right in, and this is how you know your’e not dealing with normal human behavior from the other characters, because anyone else would’ve run screaming. Jill, naturally, pays the ultimate price for her stupidity.

As per formula, people keep wandering into  the apartment looking for Casey, so that by the end of the movie she’s managed to catch everybody who was giving her grief earlier.

Image result for bite movie

The movie does set itself up for a kind of sequel as the eggs start hatching, producing more of the weird insects that bit Casey, and getting into the outside world.

As I said, this isn’t a bad film. Its definitely worth seeing but its never going to be considered a great movie. It does continue the grand ol’ tradition of body horror spectacle, though, and will tide you over until you can watch that television re-run of The Fly.

Eight Legged Freaks (2002)

Alright everybody! We’re going into  his review with the following information: I am an arachnophobe. I practice this talent every Spring and Summer, and I’m really good at panic attacks, expert at searching parking garage  ceilings for spiderwebs, and freaking the hell out, when a spider is large enough for me to see it with my naked eyeballs.

Neverthelsess, I do watch movies about spiders. I don’t seem to have a problem with really, really giant spiders. In fact, there’s no fear, the larger, and furrier, the spider is. (Tarantulas are kinda cool. ) Apparently it’s only spiders of a certain size that I don’t like. That said, I really enjoyed Eight Legged Freaks. It combines two of my favorite topics, chills and laughs, and does a pretty good job. Basically, you can watch this movie, even if you’re scared of spiders.

Eight Legged Freaks was released at a time when a lot of these types of movies weren’t being put out by Hollywood. It’s an old school Comedy-Horror mashup, like Critters, or Tremors,  with the emphasis on the comedy, even though it does have creepy moments. It has the usual plot of most monster movies ,with a surprising amount of emotion added, which I wasn’t expecting, but then you have to take that with a grain of salt, because I’m a huge crybaby at movies. (I will cry, if anybody on screen is crying, basically.) I was not disposed to watch any movie with David Arquette because: one, I didn’t think he was very funny, and: two, his sister is a mindless boobyhead, and I like to hold him responsible for that. But actually, he’s not bad in this movie, and I got quite a few laughs at his “over the top” reactions to the spiders, although it’s hard to say the reaction is over the top, when it’s giant spiders.


The whole cast is kind of a surprise, and are pretty funny. Most of them play it straight but get good lines, while others are clearly comedic relief. Scarlett Johansson is here, and she’s not bad, as the local Sheriff’s daughter, who is played by Kari Wuhrer, whom I’ve been holding a grudge against since she messed up in the show Sliders, Eileen Ryan who was a real delight, and  Doug E. Doug, who is hilarious, as a conspiracy theorizing DJ, who knows he’s been abducted by extraterrestrials. He gets the best lines and screams in the entire movie.

I don’t think I can list all the funny moments in this movie, most of which I didn’t see coming. The spiders squeal and yell in high pitched voices when they get blown up, there’s a knockdown, drag out fight between a cat and a dog sized spider, which happens entirely through sounds through a wall, and there’s the various puns and one-liners spouted by the cast, which are awful, but still kinda funny. I also wasn’t expecting the spiders to have personalities too. I actually thought they were totally adorkable knuckleheads, who killed and ate people, squeaked out words when they got hurt, and coordinated their attacks with  leg gestures, as if they were military units. This seemed to tickle my juvenile funny bone, and I wasn’t as scared of these spiders, as I was of the ones in Arachnophobia, but then those guys had no sense of humor. 

My niece and I had a grand ol’ time laughing really hard at this movie. There’s also a Queen spider, whose name I forget. I think it’s Consuela, which is a strange name for a giant spider, but she’s a lot more frightening than the Tarantula, even though she’s a lot smaller than that tank-like creature. One of the funniest moments is when Arquette’s character, on the advice of a little boy expert on spiders, spritzes her in the eyes,  with a tiny bottle of perfume. And it works! She just backs off, sneezing uncontrollably. 

 The tarantula was awesome, and the other spiders used it as a battering ram, which was all kinds of cool to watch. He’s like a big, dumb,brute from a hardboiled crime novel. The Muscle! There’s also more than a few disgusting,  and scary moments, which is to be expected, in a movie about giant arachnids, like the scene where a guy swallows a mouthful of baby spiders, and the sight of running people getting jumped on, or snatched underground, by dog sized spiders. But the writers were very clever to make these moments pretty funny, and not TOO scary, by having the spiders punch their  struggling prey into submission, while making boxing noises, and slamming into windows, because they hadn’t figured those out yet.


Arquette’s character comes back home to Prosperity, Arizona, which is on its last legs, ever since it’s  mines tapped out. His father owned them and insisted there was gold there. When the spiders get dosed with toxic waste (well actually they eat contaminated crickets), they grow larger, eat their keeper, and descend into the mines, where they begin preying on the local animal population. The local bigwig, Wade, believes there’s money in Ostrich farming and is so optimistic, he builds a mall, but his ostriches all get eaten by the spiders, and as the spiders attack the town, everyone holes up at the mall for protection, and later, work their way into the mines. You think Wade is going to be the big asshole of the movie, but Wade actually turns out okay, and lives to the end of the movie. He’s never likable, but he’s also not outright evil. Neither is his son, who tries, at one point, to sexually assault Johansson’s character, but changes his ways, after she tases him, he pisses his pants, and she throws him out of the car. Later, he does some heroic redeeming type stuff, to make up for being a shite, earlier in the movie, I guess.

It’s a happy ending, and we get to root for these characters, along the way, especially Harlan, the terrified but brave DJ, and Chris and the sheriff, who renew their old flame. I’ve never been a fan of Kari, but she did so well in this movie, I can get behind her as a character, even if I can’t forgive her for being so awful in Sliders. The spiders are as much characters, in the film, as the people, and I had my favorites.  There are tarantulas, orb weavers, trapdoor spiders, which were pretty scary, and jumping spiders, which are tiny cute little things in real life, but less so, grown to enormous size. Still, they’re the funniest ones in the movie, creating a proper excuse for why nobody’s cell phones work.

I watched this movie with my Mom, and she seemed to like it although she thought the spiders talking was too much. Her tolerance for silly isn’t quite as high as mine, I guess. Nevertheless, it continues to be one of her favorite spider movies, (and I love her for that, even though she tried for years to get me to sit down and watch Arachnophobia, when she knew I was too scared of the spiders to watch it. I still hate that movie.)
If you have a low tolerance for gore and scares, then Eight Legged Freaks is the perfect movie for Halloween night. Yes, your kids can watch it, the female characters are treated with all due respect, and the language is pretty mild.

 And guess what? The Black guy lives all the way to the end of the movie.

Funny Stuff & Link Roundup

 

Humor:

*Pick an Olympic event at which you would most certainly excel. Mine isn’t on here, but I chose Advanced Napping, with a minor in Lollygaggin’ and/or Procrastinatin’. I am very competitive on those. I also happen to enjoy Competitive Falling Over, and Professional Lunging, but only as an observer.

natblida: “ hedaclexa: “ Tag yourself I’m competitive falling ” I’m stabbing people for points ” I’m Water Panic! I could win the gold on that one. Do they have Advanced Napping ? I’m good at that, too.plain-flavoured-english Source: heyhaughtshot

@
@

*I love this little TV Tropes fight. Big Sky Dreaming has many such odd communications on their blog.

bigskydreaming poseyslegtattoo

poseyslegtattoo:

bigskydreaming:

poseyslegtattoo:

bigskydreaming:

sunwukxng:

poseyslegtattoo:

@sunwukxng is dropping trope names like he read the entirety of TVTropes.org yesterday and he needs to stop before I smack him

Don’t Angry Fist Shake at me. What are you saying? Is That A Threat?

Okay but Ced you have to know TVTropes.org well enough to recognize all those trope names so Who Is The True Villain here hmm?

It’s Hypocritical Humor, Because I Said So

Oh look, He’s Back. What next, you going to Destroy the Evidence like you didn’t just Dramatic Drop this Drama Bomb on our Friendly Conversation? We’ve Seen This Episode Before. Rewind, Replay, Repeat.

We Used to Be Friends, Cedric. Where Did We Go Wrong?

As You Know, This Troper is New Meat compared to The Old Master Kalen and the Memetic Badass Adam so Let’s You And Him Fight.

A classic Pick On Someone Your Own Size. *Sarcastic Clapping* Fine. Throw The Fight.

@
@

*Its like the Hotel California. I’ve been in this place before.

hannibalsbattlebot crave-that-mineral

Fanfiction gothic

crave-that-mineral:

  • You wait for an update on your favorite fic. You wait a week, a month, a year. You wait forever. The author never updates.
  • You tell your friend about a fic you loved. A few days later they tell you they couldn’t find it. You look it up yourself. You can’t find it. You can’t find the author. “They must have deleted their account,” you tell yourself. You can’t remember.
  • You have already left kudos here. 🙂” You have no recollection of having read this fic before.
  • Your favorite writer starts a new fic. It gets progressively darker with every update. The last chapter is just a string of random letters and numbers. You want to ask if the writer is okay. You don’t dare to.
  • AO3 doesn’t work again. It didn’t work yesterday. It didn’t work last week. Has it ever worked?
  • Your friend starts writing a fanfic about you. “It’s just a joke,” they tell you. You go check it out. It’s a complete work with a major character death warning. “It’s just a joke,” you remind yourself. You refuse to read the last chapter.

@
@

*This had me crying’, I was laughing so hard. For reasons unknown, I just love weather related humor.

karnythia nethilia

robotmango:

awed-frog:

robotmango:

it’s ninety-nine degrees outside, four fuck-thousand percent humidity, and my husband was like, “i’m gonna go for a bike ride.” and i was like “why. no. why. don’t put us on the news like that. local fool collapses on unnecessary journey. don’t do it.” so he says he doesn’t want to “hide in the house” because the sun is shining. bruh. honeybruh. “the sun is shining” does not cover it. its hot outside. its motherfucking hot as fuck outside. our outdoor plants have been crying into their hands all week. whole cars are melting into the sewer. our fucking patio umbrella developed sentience to ask me for lemonade this morning

@robotmango, you need to work for the weather forecast – this was both hilarious and sovivid it made me stand up and get some iced tea.

this is a great idea, thank you. here goes. my audition tape for the weather channel. dearly beloved. we are gathered here today to have a fucking funeral for the outdoors. it had a good run, with all its creeks and clouds and shit. pretty great. now it’s ten-thirty at night but still ninety-two asshole-sweating degrees and humid as fuck. everything is hot and slimy, like being a “borrower” that got trapped inside a bottle of shampoo and then accidentally microwaved. you can see on my doppler radar that nothing is moving around out there because everything is probably dead.  the only alive thing is the mosquito currently trying to drill a hole in my leg. no surprise that all the shitbag mosquitos are fine, since the thermostat of hell is always at the devil’s preferred temperature. this forecast has gotten away from me a little, but in conclusion fuck the sun.-Source: robotmango

@
@

Bad Puns
rhube: “ So, this may be the best gardening joke I have ever seen. ”

Source: laddermatchthis made my day
@
@
Culture:
Just some general cultural artifacts sitting on my dashboard that made my ears perk up.
@
@
I thought this critique of JK Rowling was interesting. It sparked an unexpected world-building discussion of what magic in America would actually be like.

mylovelylittleobsessions:

standbyyourmantis:

cepheid-variable-star:

patroklov:

jkr doesnt understand anything about america if she thinks the northern and southern states will share the same wizarding school lollll. like the south would have formed its own school anyways after, if not before or during the civil war?

hell east coast and west coast magic has got to be different (european settlers on the east, mexican/hispanic in the whole new mexico, arizona, cali area).

not to mention historically black wizarding schools would have absolutely been a thing bc african magic survived thru slavery hello??? not to mention under slavery and jim crow laws i highly doubt black children would have been allowed to study with white students. you could even make the assumption that white slavers forbade them for using their magic at all (african magic = dark magic and all that Fun Racism)

underdeveloped and struggling to thrive native american reservation schools of magic in the dakotas?

texas has to have its own school on its own school. like its just a given fact. TEXAS WIZARDING SCHOOL QUDDITCH (like texas high school football #texasforever)

and obviously you have the elitist new england schools which everyone assumes is the pinnacle of american magic education lol

The U.S. would have tons of day schools in every region and zero live-in boarding schools.

The U.S. simply doesn’t have the same history of live-in “public schools” that England has and they make no sense at all in an American context.

PLUS all the stuff listed in this post.

J. K. Rowing has zero understanding of American culture or history.

The thing is, America is so heavily colonized that there’s no way the magic here would look similar at all to a European or British wizard. First off, you’re telling me Aztecs, Hopi, Seminole, and Lakota peoples (to name a few) would all have the same wizarding traditions as each other? No, I do not buy it. There would have been a substantial diversity between larger tribes.

Now we have first contact and you’d have Spanish and Mesoamerican magical traditions interbreeding heavily into probably a pretty solid fusion. The French tended to trade openly in the Northeast, and likely wouldn’t have assimilated as thoroughly as the Spanish but more so than the British who tended to just go “ours now, you leave.”

Then come waves of immigration, including the African Diaspora/the slave trade and focusing heavily in the south and northeast. Alongside that, you have French Canadians (Acadians) moving down the Mississippi into Louisiana and giving it a heavy French and Caribbean influence. You have Scotch and Irish immigrants moving into the Appalachians where (in some places) they’re in close contact with Cherokee and similar tribes, and in others with slaves. We can assume those groups would trade magic thoroughly amongst themselves in the few hundred years of living in close contact. You have Latin American immigration coming up through the south west and bringing their Mesoamerican/Spanish hybrid magic where it would be informed by Creole traditions formed by hybridizing French, African, and Native techniques along with the dominant British traditions. The Midwest tends to be Scandinavian, but again their magic is influenced by people they would have had trade with such as plains Indians and French trappers in the north.

Then, of course, Chinese and Japanese schools of magic coming into California where it blends with traditional Mexican schools. You have Puerto Rican, Italian, and Jewish immigrant communities living in close contact with each other as well as whatever hybrid Dutch-British-African hybrid is going on in NYC. That’s not even getting into more recent waves from Vietnam, Laos, and the Middle East, for example.

What I’m saying here is that not only would American magic look like an unholy hodgepodge to a European wizard, but there would be regional variations within the country that would be almost impossible to even work around.

I mean, say what you will about the French and British, but they’ve spent most of the last thousand years in close contact with each other and you can assume that French and British wizards and witches would probably at least know what their magic looked like. We’re talking now about cultures spread across the entire globe taking up residence in one area where they’re now surrounded by people with entirely different traditions. After a few generations, there’s going to be a lot of adaptation and adoption of techniques to the point that your grandparents wouldn’t recognize your wandwork because you’re now using something adapted from a Hmong style with a distinctly Norwegian flare and youre casting it with Incan words.

I mean Jesus, just look at the variations in American food from region to region if you don’t believe me.

I keep reblogging different versions of this post because it just gets better every time I see it

*Let’s not even get into the various regional environmental differences that require different types of magic. The wetter swamplands of Louisiana (with its French-Creole underpinnings) and moist  Delta river land of Mississippi (with its high concentration of rural Black people) is going to require a very different kind of magical ability than what’s required in drier, hotter, conditions like the Nevadas, Arizona and other desert places. 

I’ll also mention that magic practiced above the snowline would probably be very different than magic practiced in warmer climates. One would have to make allowances for the fact that, for about 4 to 6 months of the year, certain vegetation and wildlife wouldn’t be available. The air above the snowline gets cold and dry, rather than hot and dry, and maybe magic would have to be practiced differently in Chicago, vs. Las Vegas.

I like to think that a lot of the magic practiced in the north would also involve the energy of specific cities. NY for example would have its own unique flavor of magic on account of its age, location and history, and be wholly unlike anything practiced in say, Dallas Texas.

Colorado, due to its higher elevation, would probably require one to perform magic very differently from rural Maine. The Appallachians style of magic (forested, temperate environment) is going to look very different from Northwest Pacific magical styles (cool, with lots of rain in winter)  and a lot of these magical styles would be based on how to practice magic in an area with a lot of rainfalls vs. an area that receives almost none.

Certain things in the Midwest, that no one worries about, like earthquakes and hurricanes, wouldn’t even be addressed in magical systems developed there, not like in California and Florida, for example, where such events would have to be taken into consideration, and probably magical systems might spring up to prevent such events from happening, altogether.

Jkr definitely neglected to take geographical locations and environments into consideration.

 

finnnorgana Source: patroklov
@
@
*Oprah and Ava – I think Oprah is going to play (one of the)  Ms. Witch or somesuch. That would be cool. I read the hell out of A Wrinkle in Time when I was a kid. I always imagined myself as Meg. I can’t wait for this. Ava has already called for a mixed race, interracial cast.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/oprah-winfrey-ava-duvernay-black-920196
*I thought this and the accompanying photos was awesome. I’m against the pipeline. We don’t need another Flint Michigan.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/katebubacz/lakota-standoff?utm_term=.fyGRXNoLk#.xd8BvgML0

*This is Allan G. Johnson. I love his website. He’s so insightful.He mostly writes about the intersection of Toxic Masculinity, and Racism.

https://agjohnson.wordpress.com/2016/06/14/and-now-orlando-manhood-guns-and-violence/

 Movies & TV:

This is just some meta and analysis about some of my favorite movies and TV shows. Some of these are a little academic,while  some are just posts on people’s blogs.

 

Women and Superheroes:

http://www.btchflcks.com/2016/05/superheroines-week-the-roundup.html#.V7YaWvkrIeE

Mad Max Fury Road:

https://theawl.com/the-startling-humanism-of-mad-max-fury-road-84294de4d64#.umqk7hkt9

Intervention – “Finding Hope Without Salvation in Mad Max: Fury Road”

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/05/emmad_maxem_and_the_dreamwork_of_homosexuality.html

The Faith of Fury Road

Who Killed the World? – The Complicated Feminism of Mad Max: Fury Road

Geek Culture:

Exclusionary Geek Culture Misunderstands Diversity on a Fundamental Level

Hannibal the Series: https://www.overthinkingit.com/2014/02/03/hannibal-economics/

 Original Star Trek:

https://timeline.com/star-trek-interracial-kiss-ba0948687788#.s02fznr5i

Oz the Series:

“Oz”: Ten Years Later

Alien:

Essay: Women in the Horror Film – Ripley, the Alien & the Monstrous Feminine

Fanfiction:

Fetishizing Homosexuality

Fight Club and Media Consumption

*I’m going to put this entire discussion here about why it is so important to critically question the media we consume. 

I have a niece who just turned eleven. She and I watch TV together pretty often, and sometimes we watch movies others would consider questionable for an eleven year old. But my attitude is like this, I will treat her the same way my Mother treated me at her age. She let me watch whatever I wanted, as long as I understood it, and we discussed it. If I was confused about anything, I could ask her, and she would tell me as much of the truth as she thought I could handle, at whatever age.

I never let my niece watch anything without asking questions about what she’s viewing, what’s happening on the screen, how she feels and thinks about what she’s viewing. These are never deep questions, because what I want her to do is just get into the habit of asking questions. What did we just watch? What did she like about it? Why does she like certain things? Why didn’t she like about the story, the characters, the images? Why didn’t she like those things?

I also don’t believe in giving her answers, or telling her what to think about a show or movie, either. I want to listen to her answers, understand her responses, as she learns to articulate her thoughts,  let her know I’m interested in what she thinks, and let her know that what she thinks is important to me. Sometimes we disagree and that’s good too, because that teaches her to stand by what she thinks, and articulate her arguments for, or against, something.

I do understand that every parent doesn’t have the time or effort to do this with their children. I know her Mother doesn’t, but she is fortunate to have someone like me, and my Mother, in her life, who are teaching her to think critically, and have informed opinions, about the world around her.

I don’t want her to grow up as one of those people who unquestioningly accepts whatever they’re told by the TV.

sleepynegress bankuei

bankuei:

eshusplayground:

expo63:

lierdumoa:

lierdumoa:

bloodpopsicles:

prokopetz:

leofdaeg:

prokopetz:

Hold up – you mean there are people who watch Fight Club anddon’t realise that Tyler Durden is meant to be full of shit?

I mean, his doctrine of radical individualism is a sham that ultimately reduces his followers to faceless conformity. This isn’t deep metatextual wankery – it’s the literal text of the film.

How do you see the film and not get that?

My ex didn’t get this. He loves Tyler durden. I’ve never seen fight club so I DIDN’T KNOW.

Yeah, in the film he’s a total con-man. His grand speeches sound good if you don’t think about them too deeply, but they’re not meant to be insightful – they’re meant to be a snake-oil salesman’s patter, calculated to bamboozle dumb, angry young men into doing his bidding.

Trouble is, they’re sufficiently well-written that apparently they work on the dumb, angry young men in the audience, too.

I’ve actually written about this academically! There’s a really specific genre I call bro cinema that includes fight club, all of kubricks work, some Scorsese, and Tarantino (all of which I love TBH.) These directors don’t explicitly condemn toxic masculinity and instead trust the audience to have COMMON SENSE and realize that Alex from A Clockwork Orange or Tyler Durden or Travis Bickle are horrific misogynists. But without the film telling the audience how to feel about these characters, men misinterpret the objectivity as glorification. Fight Club is about how shitty masculinity is, but it’s been warped by men grasping for justification for their misogyny

The real issue here, I think, is the passive consumption of media, and moreover, creators and critical viewers underestimating just how passive the average audience member is in their consumption of media.

In the book Nurture Shock, which is a child psychology book that identifies common parenting mistakes, the author spends a chapter on children’s television. The author specifically talks about how media designed to teach morals often backfires – children who watch morality lessons express *more* behavior problems and become *more* cruel.

Now the author says it’s because of how these programs are structured. First they depict bad behavior, and then they explain why the behavior is bad, showing consequences, and tying up the program with a moral.

Small children aren’t smart enough to understand the moral. Small children learn by emulating behavior they see. They see a bad behavior and they learn the bad behavior. Just exposing children to bad behavior is enough to make them internalize that the behavior is something lots of people do, and therefore something acceptable for people to do to do.

If you try to explain to them after the fact that the behavior is harmful and to be avoided, that message is too complicated and goes right over their heads. You can’t tell little kids “do as I say, not as I do.”

Now the author of this book says “small children aren’t old enough to understand the moral.”

But honestly? Adults have the exact same problem.

Tyler Durden loses in the end. That’s the moral of the movie. Unfortunately that moral is too complicated for the vast majority of the audience. The typical adult audience member does not think critically enough about film media to process this moral.

A critical viewer thinks – the point is that Tyler is wrong! The point is that Tyler is doomed by his own hubris! HOW CAN AUDIENCES HAVE MISSED THE ENTIRE POINT IF THE MOVIE?!?!?

Easily, considering the movie only really devotes 5% of its screen time to explicitly denouncing Tyler’s behavior, and that explicit denouncement only arrives at the very end of the film.

The other 95% of the screen time is spent watching Tyler Durden jerk off.

Look – you can’t film two hours of bareback sex followed by a five minute tutorial on how to correctly use a condom and a 30 second montage of miserable teen parents changing diapers, then call your film a safe sex PSA.

You did not make a safe sex PSA.

You made a porno.

You can try to argue that the bareback sex is an ironic subversive metaphor, and that the “real point” of your film is proper condom usage and an anti-teen pregnancy message, but the fact is, the majority of your audience is going to change the channel the moment the cumshot finishes.

Audiences, outside of our special little corner of fandom discourse, are by and large just straight up lazy. They can’t be bothered to think that hard about the media they consume.

via @sarcastrophesam  #THIS IS WHAT I WAS TRYING SO DESPERATELY TO PIN DOWN IN MY ESSAY ON EX MACHINA #AND HOW THE DIRECTOR HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO CLEARLY SPELL OUT TO THE AUDIENCE#THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUPPORTING A CERTAIN BEHAVIOR BY DEPICTING IT#AND CRITICIZING IT BY DEPICTING IT #BECAUSE USUALLY THE AUDIENCE DOES NOT PICK UP ON SUBTLE CRITICISM OR MORALES AT ALL

This is why I loved Fury Road so much, and also what I felt was so profoundly revolutionary about the movie. Fury Road is a movie about women escaping violent misogynists. Yet editor Margaret Sixel had the SHEER BRILLIANCE and AUDACITY to cut all the footage of misogynist violence out of the movie.

Mad Max: Fury Road proved that it is possible to denounce misogynist violence without depicting it.

Mad Max: Fury Road showed that refusal to depict misogynist violence is in and of itself a denouncement of misogynist violence.

We don’t need to show what victims went through to make victims sympathetic. In fact, voyeuristically depicting acts of cruelty only further objectifies victims. George Miller and Margaret Sixel understand this.

Similarly, George Miller made a point of using telling his videographers to use camera angels that focused on the action of the scene, instead of voyeristically zooming in the female castmember’s breasts/asses/legs  – because he understood that when the camera ogles the female characters in an objectifying manner, the audience, who views the movie through the camera’s lens, is forced to ogle and objectify. George understood that sexist camera work creates a sexist perspective, and a sexist perspective tells a sexist narrative.

The thing is that the narrator is always sympathetic. Intimacy and familiarity breed sympathy. The audience is primed  to feel sympathy for the narrator simply because they are speaking more than any other individual character.

No matter how unreliable, or morally dubious you make the narrator, they are still the hero or the story. Every villain is the hero of their own story. And when the villain is the narrator, the audience is hearing the version of the story in which the villain is the hero, and the audience is moved by that perspective.

We can give Fight Club the benefit of the doubt and look at Fight Club as an intellectual experiment to see whether or not it’s possible to tell a story from the villain’s perspective and still denounce the villain’s actions.

But the fact is, the experiment didn’t work. It was a statistical failure. The vast majority of the audience did not recognize the film as a criticism of toxic masculinity, but rather, a romanticization of it.

Perhaps the author’s goal was for Tyler Durden’s death to be interpreted as a cautionary tale, but the author failed in that goal. He failed. Because by the time Tyler Durden dies in the movie, he has already been painted a hero in the eyes of the majority of the audience, and heroes don’t become cautionary tales when they die; they become martyrs.

A further layer of this issue: Fight Club was made in a different era (as well as with a different sensibility) from, say, Mad Max: Fury Road. ‘The real issue here … is the passive consumption of media’ – yes, exactly. But also, Fincher made Fight Club at a cultural moment when postmodern moral ‘blankness’ and ironisation ruled – a moment which also ‘happened’ to coincide with the rise of (‘old enough to know better, but we don’t care’) lad culture and the (lad-related) knowingly uncritical celebration of ‘bro cinema’.

Rather than spelling out an ‘unfashionably’ direct critique, or moral lessons, to their male audience, the cool moral detachment of films like Fight Club requires a critical, thinking, supposedly sophisticated, viewer – the viewer who knows ‘The point is that Tyler is wrong!’ – while playing a double game. The cool mode enables bro cinema to have its cake and eat it, commercially speaking: it can simultaneously profit from (A) the ‘majority of the [male] audience’ who don’t want to have their misogyny challenged and even celebrate misogyny, while gaining acclaim for (B) its subtle, yet meant-to-be-understood-as-critical, depictions of toxic masculinity…

The esteem for bro cinema then gets boosted higher and higher by male critics who pay lip-service to (A), while in many cases enjoying the films because (B).

Question: can someone discuss the role that race plays in all this? Most of the movies being discussed here are really, really white.

For a lot of white men, the idea of why something is wrong is an intellectual exercise – when you’re not actually the one constantly victimized, it becomes a matter of ideas and not survival.  For them, depicting horrific things is cool and edgy because it’s not “real” for them, which is why the morals hang so weakly in the media.

Also, to the comment about 95% celebration vs. 5% “morals”, it’s really about what you show in terms of character reaction and consequences immediately that tells the audience whether this is good, or bad.

When a character does something and other characters are repulsed and react immediately (or the same character realizes they’ve messed up and you can see them regret it right away), no one sees this as something to enjoy or celebrate.  When it goes without comment or is treated as good, you can’t later get to the moral and say “Actually it’s wrong” and expect it to sink in.

This is even true of villains – they may see nothing wrong with what they’re doing, but the characters whose emotions you center and frame are the ones that paint events as right or wrong.

Tying these two points together – if you never center or frame the feelings of certain groups of people (marginalized people), then the harm exists as an idea but not as a narrative reality.  It’s not “don’t do x because it hurts y people” it’s “Don’t do x because this other white guy said so”… which fundamentally teaches “do what the white guy says” not “respect people’s boundaries”

I say this a lot – the way media teaches violence is less about the specific violent behavior but rather the expected social hierarchy – when you some people’s boundaries, feelings, and existence do not matter, even if the narrative doesn’t show violence, you still end up with audiences who act violently towards those people because they’ve been taught those people aren’t people, and often should be punished for trying to put themselves on equal footing as “people”.

 

Why “The Magnificent Seven” Upgrade Is Already Iconic — JUST ADD COLOR

I usually don’t go for Westerns. Well, actually, they have to be one (or more) of three things: they are bending the rules of the Western to a ridiculous degree, involve a rarely-discussed racial angle, or I have to watch them for a film class. (Because I was forced to watch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid…

via Why “The Magnificent Seven” Upgrade Is Already Iconic — JUST ADD COLOR

Samir Chopra

Refusing to Stick to the Subject

The Nobe

The People-Watcher and Noticer of Things

Black and Bougie

musings of a colored introvert with a thing for green juice and french vanilla

Colin Newton's Idols and Realities

Movies, metaphysics and more

Square Cop In A Round World

A former cop taking on tough subjects

The Blerdy Report

Black+Nerdy=Blerdy!!! Black Nerds Unite

Dave Chrisp Comedy

Same Shit, different Dave

The Peanut Gallery

or, a supposedly clever thing I really wish I'd thought of earlier

AfroSapiophile

Intelligent Black Thought.

spokenblackgirl.wordpress.com/

Mental Health & Black Womanhood

UNRAVELING THE KNOT

ALLAN G. JOHNSON'S BLOG

Welcome to HORRORLAND

Horror News, Reviews, Interviews, Art, Trailers, Fashion, Collectibles

Monster Legacy

Behind the scenes of the greatest Movie Monsters

%d bloggers like this: