Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

[Napoleon]

1 hour ago, LordNox said:

I think the opposite. Now that Snyder is out of the picture the main takeaway that WB will take from the success of Aquaman and the failure of the Snyder DCEU is that the general public wants dumb and fun superhero movies and rejected the gloomy Snyder movies. So expect future DCEU movies to be lighthearted movies with lots of quips and action and see the BO numbers expand like Aquaman. I think the era of Snyder flops is over.

The Snyder movies were profitable, you need to reconsider your use of that word. The only flop in the DCEU was Joss Whedon's Justice League.

[rukaio101]

7 hours ago, LaughingEvans said:

Lads, they're comics.

 

The only meaningful way they can be written is to be character driven. And it ends there. 

If you inject politics in comics, it's going to be watered down politics. If you inject social commentary, it's going to be watered down social commentary, and it goes on. Whether Moore is completely right or not, he makes a valid point: If you take your morals from comic books, they're gonna be watered down morals.

 

I'm telling you all this as a person who loves comics and still reads them at 29.

 

 

Comics are a medium, mate, not a genre. And as a medium, they have every bit as much potential to be serious and meaningful or political or make social commentary, when properly handled, as any other. Just because the most popular thing they're known for is people in spandex doesn't change that, no more than claiming film should be dismissed as a medium for being best known for stuff like Star Wars.

 

I mean, unless you're seriously arguing that this comic book somehow 'isn't meaningful'...

 

[terrestrial]

11 minutes ago, rukaio101 said:

Comics are a medium, mate, not a genre. And as a medium, they have every bit as much potential to be serious and meaningful or political or make social commentary, when properly handled, as any other. Just because the most popular thing they're known for is people in spandex doesn't change that, no more than claiming film should be dismissed as a medium for being best known for stuff like Star Wars.

 

I mean, unless you're seriously arguing that this comic book somehow 'isn't meaningful'...

 

Ahhh yes, I assumed its about main stream CBMs / comics. Another reason why generalizations are so wrong, thank you very much for the reminder!!!

[LaughingEvans]

2 hours ago, rukaio101 said:

I mean, unless you're seriously arguing that this comic book somehow 'isn't meaningful'... 

Of course it is, but as I argued, it's meaningful because it's character driven (the father - son relationship mainly, and the way they feel about the past)

 

It's views on fascism and racism are of course watered down. If you want a non watered down view on the subject, see Die Welle.

 

 

[The Futurist]

Political commentary in movies has always been basic and moralistic as fuck.

Movies are a place where manipulating your emotions is paramount and where facts don't matter in the least.

 

Read more.

Edited January 29, 2019 by The Futurist

[langer]

I think @LaughingEvans's point is that you're not going to get the equivalent of a political science thesis in a 2 hour movie.  You're gonna get a summary at best. 

[The Futurist]

A 200 pages thesis can be moralistic and manipulative too.

 

Problem is that s what movies do 90% of the times.

 

And that s ok because we want to feel something while watching movies, it s human.

 

Just need to be self aware of the constant manipulation filmmakers do.

Edited January 29, 2019 by The Futurist

[rukaio101]

1 hour ago, LaughingEvans said:

Of course it is, but as I argued, it's meaningful because it's character driven (the father - son relationship mainly, and the way they feel about the past)

 

It's views on fascism and racism are of course watered down. If you want a non watered down view on the subject, see Die Welle.

Dude. It's a fucking recount of a person's real-life experiences in the horrors of the Holocaust. Are you seriously trying to argue to me that shit like this is 'watered down'?

 

[LaughingEvans]

@rukaio101 I'm talking about complexity and you're talking about gravity. Nobody argues the severity of fascism and genocide, but you cannot argue that these are basic themes that everyone with a brain understands.

 

Compare that to Strasser's Wave for a moment; Strasser not only shows that fascism is bad, he also shows how easy it is for dangerous ideas to spread, and how black and white morality can lead to terrible conflict and war.

[TomCruiseTop]

8 hours ago, LaughingEvans said:

@rukaio101 I'm talking about complexity and you're talking about gravity. Nobody argues the severity of fascism and genocide, but you cannot argue that these are basic themes that everyone with a brain understands.

 

Compare that to Strasser's Wave for a moment; Strasser not only shows that fascism is bad, he also shows how easy it is for dangerous ideas to spread, and how black and white morality can lead to terrible conflict and war.

You won't get anywhere with him LE, he defended the censorship of Moore's opinion. He'd be one of the book burners (or at least defending the ones doing it). 

[TomCruiseTop]

10 hours ago, rukaio101 said:

Dude. It's a fucking recount of a person's real-life experiences in the horrors of the Holocaust. Are you seriously trying to argue to me that shit like this is 'watered down'?

 

Ah yes Spiegelman's brilliant take on a human tragedy that boils it down to "animals". As if depicting us as mice and the Nazi's as cats isn't itself basically giving credence to the Nazi sentiment that we are two different species. What a joke. Although I'm not surprised you trot out something with deeply anti-Semitic undertones as Maus as a paragon of comic books. I can understand when it something unreal like Watership Down, but to do it for a very real tragedy, in which the victims were dehumanized, is just in bad taste, at best. 

 

AS not only paints his father, the actual holocaust survivor in a strangely negative light, he does it in such a trivial manner as to be insulting. A single chapter from Levi's If This is a Man, is infinitely more profound, interesting, and downright humane than Maus could ever be. Then again I guess that's the difference a person who actually had real experience of the horrors of the death camps, and the desire to have his story told over the second hand and dehumanizing account of a comic. 

 

Again, I'm not surprised you use this as your example, you've shown your true colors here many times rukaio. 

[terrestrial]

29 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

You won't get anywhere with him LE, he defended the censorship of Moore's opinion. He'd be one of the book burners (or at least defending the ones doing it). 

I think you tend to overly exaggerations. You are aware that that does not help your cause?

[LaughingEvans]

 

Quote

 

Kiri Hart (head of the story group) is no longer showing up on the lucasfilm leadership page.

 

 

 

Looks like someone at Disney has started taking heads for the latest SW failures. This will be fun.

[TomCruiseTop]

14 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

I think you tend to overly exaggerations. You are aware that that does not help your cause?

What cause? I have nothing to prove to anyone, if people want to remain ignorant and censor opinions that they find too difficult to engage with, or to make false accusations it's not on me to change them. History has shown time and again where those kind of belief systems lead. 

[terrestrial]

20 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

What cause? I have nothing to prove to anyone, if people want to remain ignorant and censor opinions that they find too difficult to engage with, or to make false accusations it's not on me to change them. History has shown time and again where those kind of belief systems lead. 

How you interpret others posts / reactions seems very absolute and under a rather narrow pre-perceived opinion.

You use also a lot of posts to spread said kind of opinions and more, as in e.g. add things that no one said or wasn't what something was originally about. Brush off other POVs per absolute formulated judgemental statements,....

And as such do not help your cause, its too... 'too' (too much, too one-sided, too extreme, too narrow, too crusade,...)

 

If you really feel like you have nothing to proof, why write in such a way?

 

[terrestrial]

1 hour ago, LaughingEvans said:

Looks like someone at Disney has started taking heads for the latest SW failures. This will be fun.

Quote

Kiri Hart, vice president of development at Lucasfilm who oversees the Star Wars franchise

Quote

Kiri Hart has worked in film for more than 20 years as a story analyst, writer, and development executive. In 2012, she helped form Lucasfilm's Story Group, and ...

She was Senior Vice President (development), is actually not (longer) listed at the leadership page of lucasfilm.com

A link to her details there is not longer working.

 

Quote

Hart is producer of the animated television series Star Wars Rebels. She also co-produced the Star Wars Anthology film Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.^[1]

also co-produced The Last Jedi

Rebels does have a good reputation, or? I do not watch animated....

 

Not sure how far she can be connected to failures

[TomCruiseTop]

38 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

How you interpret others posts / reactions seems very absolute and under a rather narrow pre-perceived opinion.

 

That's your opinion of what I'm saying. Funny how so many people are so quick to tell others what it is they think and how they are to think it, even to go so far as censor certain points of view because we can't have people seeing 'dangerous' ideas can we.

 

Your appeal to how I present my argument doesn't matter one bit. The fact of the matter is that both you and r101 have argued against a serious look at the underlying racist implications of an increasingly popular media in an increasingly racist western world, while at the same time defending the censorship of a POV that attacks said racist history. I leave it to other people to judge for themselves and interpret my posts as they see fit - not for others to do it for them. 

[lorddemaxus]

1 hour ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Ah yes Spiegelman's brilliant take on a human tragedy that boils it down to "animals". As if depicting us as mice and the Nazi's as cats isn't itself basically giving credence to the Nazi sentiment that we are two different species. What a joke. Although I'm not surprised you trot out something with deeply anti-Semitic undertones as Maus as a paragon of comic books. I can understand when it something unreal like Watership Down, but to do it for a very real tragedy, in which the victims were dehumanized, is just in bad taste, at best. 

 

AS not only paints his father, the actual holocaust survivor in a strangely negative light, he does it in such a trivial manner as to be insulting. A single chapter from Levi's If This is a Man, is infinitely more profound, interesting, and downright humane than Maus could ever be. Then again I guess that's the difference a person who actually had real experience of the horrors of the death camps, and the desire to have his story told over the second hand and dehumanizing account of a comic. 

 

Again, I'm not surprised you use this as your example, you've shown your true colors here many times rukaio. 

Although I agree that Maus isn't any way complex or hard to digest in terms of its message or the way it explores the holocaust, this is such a weird interpretation of the comic. The mouse-cat metaphor isn't in any way mean't to dehumanise the former. Jews were literally decipted as mice by Nazi and killed like mice with poisonous chemicals. Spiegelman wasn't agreeing with Nazis but was trying to show the history of dehumanisation of Jews with one image. It is an image that shows the hierarchy present in Nazi ruled countries. As Miles Orvell who wrote "Krazy Kat, Maus and the Contemporary Fiction Cartoon" said:
 

Quote

“Spiegelman [represents] the world in the simplified but starkly authentic way the victims of the Nazis experienced it: the Jews were like mice to the terrifying cats of the Nazis”

 

And please show me these "deeply anti-semitic" undertones.

 

And yes, his father is portrayed in a more negative light post-holocaust but just because his dad horribly suffered in WW2 doesn't free him from his flaws or making shitty actions. That is like saying that Polanski should be absolved of his crimes because he both suffered greatly during the holocaust and had the love of his life and his baby killed after.

 

I agree that Maus isn't deep (and it doesn't have to be as long as it is able to get its message through) but to say that it is dehumanising and anti-sementic and to say that everyone who likes the book (which is most of the people who have read the it) is also an anti-Semite is completely wrong.

[TomCruiseTop]

3 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

I agree that Maus isn't deep (and it doesn't have to be as long as it is able to get its message through) but to say that it is dehumanising and anti-sementic and to say that everyone who likes the book (which is most of the people who have read the it) is also an anti-Semite is completely wrong.

I never said the latter, and it is dehumanizing by definition. We are portrayed as mice just as the Nazi's did, he's literally taking inspiration directly from Nazi propaganda. I understand the arguments that people have made in the past that AS is attempting to reclaim that from them, but it just doesn't fly with me. The holocaust was a deeply human affair, and one that I think to portray those who suffered and those who committed the atrocities as merely animals is deeply wrong. 

 

Your quote (and I'm sorry to say I have not read the book it is from) I don't disagree with, apart from the 'authentic' part, I don't see how anyone could believe an analogy using animals could in anyway be truly authentic - and I would point anyone who believes so to the plethora of writings by actual holocaust survivors - of which I think Primo Levi to be one that really captures a truly authentic experience.  (Although, I also concede that my own view is obviously skewed by my own background as an American Ashkenazim). 

 

To be clear I was not stating that anyone who likes the comic is an anti-Semite, I was merely pointing out what I see to be the profound misstep that I think AS took when he dehumanized the human beings involved. 

[terrestrial]

4 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

That's your opinion of what I'm saying. Funny how so many people are so quick to tell others what it is they think and how they are to think it, even to go so far as censor certain points of view because we can't have people seeing 'dangerous' ideas can we.

 

Your appeal to how I present my argument doesn't matter one bit. The fact of the matter is that both you and r101 have argued against a serious look at the underlying racist implications of an increasingly popular media in an increasingly racist western world, while at the same time defending the censorship of a POV that attacks said racist history. I leave it to other people to judge for themselves and interpret my posts as they see fit - not for others to do it for them. 

1. I did not ignore the racists implication, I said the majority of the readers and creators do not read / create them for that reasons and so on. I also see in especial Moore not as a glowing example for human rights / dignity, in my POV his work furthers sexism... as said already. (also there are way too many comics... to put them all into one pot)

2. I did not defend any censorship. I even asked where the posts ended.... But I see the possibility of another poster's idea why it might have been deleted, what still is neither a defending nor a support.

Someone that answers a question for why or someone who has additional ideas.... is not automatically doing that for the worst possible reasons = that is exactly what I meant with the previous posts.

Over the top, too narrow...

 

And that is it from my side, I see no sense in continuing this.... farce.