Post: #201

(02-28-2017 01:28 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 10:08 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  "Conceited cunt" doesn't show up on their radar, though in reality it's probably the only real world correlation between her and her fan base, whereas all the other comparisons are pure fantasy hamstering.

One day, mate: the beers are on me!

What do you mean one day? The chap lives in Tasmania, not Tanzania...

Post: #202

(03-04-2018 10:35 PM)Dusty Wrote:  So it looks like this award is for a pedophile film?

Call Me By Your Name

Quote:Elio, a seventeen-year-old Jewish American-Italian boy, lives in the northern Italian countryside with his parents. His father, a professor of archaeology, invites a 24-year-old Jewish American graduate student, Oliver, to live with his family during the summer of 1983 and help with his academic paperwork. Elio, an introspective bibliophile and musical prodigy, finds little in common with Oliver's carefree and exuberant personality. Elio also resents vacating his bedroom for the duration of Oliver's stay. Elio spends much of the summer reading books and hanging out with his girlfriend, Marzia, while Oliver is attracted to one of the local girls, much to Elio's chagrin.

Elio and Oliver begin to spend time with each other, and a seductive courtship emerges—they swim together, go for long walks in the town, and accompany Elio's father on an archaeological trip. Although Elio begins a sexual relationship with Marzia and brags about it in front of Oliver to gauge his reaction, he increasingly finds himself attracted to Oliver. He sneaks into Oliver's room to smell his bathing suit and thinks about him while masturbating. During a trip to the post office, Elio subtly confesses his feelings to Oliver, who gently tells him that he should not act on them. Later that day, Elio and Oliver kiss, though Oliver is reluctant to go further. The pair subsequently grow distant during the next few days.

What the fuck is this? I could even understand if the movie ended with them becoming a gay couple, but the movie literally involves nothing happening and no changes at the end.

Post: #203

(03-05-2018 06:46 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

(03-04-2018 10:35 PM)Dusty Wrote:  So it looks like this award is for a pedophile film?

Call Me By Your Name

Quote:Elio, a seventeen-year-old Jewish American-Italian boy, lives in the northern Italian countryside with his parents. His father, a professor of archaeology, invites a 24-year-old Jewish American graduate student, Oliver, to live with his family during the summer of 1983 and help with his academic paperwork. Elio, an introspective bibliophile and musical prodigy, finds little in common with Oliver's carefree and exuberant personality. Elio also resents vacating his bedroom for the duration of Oliver's stay. Elio spends much of the summer reading books and hanging out with his girlfriend, Marzia, while Oliver is attracted to one of the local girls, much to Elio's chagrin.

Elio and Oliver begin to spend time with each other, and a seductive courtship emerges—they swim together, go for long walks in the town, and accompany Elio's father on an archaeological trip. Although Elio begins a sexual relationship with Marzia and brags about it in front of Oliver to gauge his reaction, he increasingly finds himself attracted to Oliver. He sneaks into Oliver's room to smell his bathing suit and thinks about him while masturbating. During a trip to the post office, Elio subtly confesses his feelings to Oliver, who gently tells him that he should not act on them. Later that day, Elio and Oliver kiss, though Oliver is reluctant to go further. The pair subsequently grow distant during the next few days.

What the fuck is this? I could even understand if the movie ended with them becoming a gay couple, but the movie literally involves nothing happening and no changes at the end.

But for some reason its up for an Oscar or 3. Because reasons.

Post: #204

Kimmel sort of played it safe, but that was probably expected.

Post: #205

Movies and TV are increasingly being seen as a proxy for democracy. The term "representation" keeps being used as if actors are elected officials. People insist on seeing actors who "look like them". This sounds good but it depressingly paints a portrait in which nobody should ever be expected to identify with characters unless they literally match their sense of identity (race, gender, sexuality, class, etc....). The whole idea of story is to put yourself in someone else's shoes to broaden your horizons, not to merely see yourself up on screen like a narcissistic mirror. This is what has led to Mary Sues who do no wrong. The perfect hero or the perfect martyr. It becomes merely an exercise in fluffing up your own ego rather than an exploration of what it really means to be human, warts and all.

Post: #206

(03-05-2018 02:53 AM)captain_shane Wrote:  I don't watch these circle jerk award shows, but I'm happy for Gary Oldman and Roger Deakins.

Deakins seems like a real salt of the earth guy, totally unaware of his talent. Not at all affected or concerned by being around big money.

Glad for him too. I saw him in interviews a while back and he's never faking it or putting on a front, has a genuine interest in the questions.

Reminds me of our recent talks about Mark Hamill in the other thread.

Post: #207

So am I understanding correctly that our cultural establishment has given the top prize to a movie about a desperately horny middle-aged woman with a disability who manipulates a lonely gay man into helping her sabotage America's fight against world communism by kidnapping and raping a fish?

OK.

Sluts, man. Jesus.

Post: #208

(03-05-2018 09:04 AM)Jetset Wrote:  So am I understanding correctly that our cultural establishment has given the top prize to a movie about a desperately horny middle-aged woman with a disability who manipulates a lonely gay man into helping her sabotage America's fight against world communism by kidnapping and raping a fish?

Yes, a fish that also is shown biting the head of a harmless cat and who is nevertheless portrayed as a desirable "man" worthy of creating LaLa Land-like dream sequences of ballroom dancing. To women, this is sweet fantasy. I mean, he's got a pecker that probably feels like a dildo and he's got superpowers hence he's alpha enough. So what if he probably has the IQ of a chimpanzee? Alpha tingles = true love.
To anyone with a brain, it's a rather sad commentary on the state of sexual politics. In Ex Machina the substitute women kill their maker. In this movie the substitute man runs off with the horny woman---happily ever after. Funny how in one movie men substituting real women for fakes is demonized and here, substituting real men for a fish is celebrated. Kind of a sign that women have written men off as mates. The perfect movie to win in the era of #MeToo.

Post: #209

Ashley Judd went full retard while presenting:

Quote:'We look forward to make sure that the next 90 years empower these limitless possibilities of equality, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality... That’s what this year has promised us.'

Post: #210

(03-05-2018 10:10 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  Ashley Judd went full retard while presenting:

Quote:'We look forward to make sure that the next 90 years empower these limitless possibilities of equality, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality... That’s what this year has promised us.'

She sure is a nasty woman.

Post: #211

From Drudge/The Wrap:



What's the over/under on a POTUS tweet on this today that ends in "VERY SAD!"?

Post: #212

(03-05-2018 10:10 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  Ashley Judd went full retard while presenting:

Quote:'We look forward to make sure that the next 90 years empower these limitless possibilities of equality, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality... That’s what this year has promised us.'

That dumb bitch has fallen off the wagon so far not even the Indians would take her.

Post: #213

Harvard grad school will do that.

Post: #214

(03-05-2018 09:04 AM)Jetset Wrote:  So am I understanding correctly that our cultural establishment has given the top prize to a movie about a desperately horny middle-aged woman with a disability who manipulates a lonely gay man into helping her sabotage America's fight against world communism by kidnapping and raping a fish?

OK.

Sluts, man. Jesus.

Like I said

(03-04-2018 08:06 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  They need to change the name of the thing from Oscars or Academy Awards to what they really are...The VSO's....Virtue Signalling Olympics

Post: #215

Why is gender parity in the entertainment industry so important? I'm sick to death of hearing about this on these dumb awards shows. Why isn't Russian transgender parity important? Or people with red hair getting their fair shot? Or how about people born with spina bifida being equally represented? Or people born in the year 1973?

If someone made a film - or helped in some capacity - and that film was successful, either artistically or commercially, their gender would not hold them back.

Nobody would turn away an artist based on something as superficial as gender, especially if that person is going to make megabucks for other people.

If there aren't enough women directors, or cinematographers, blame it on decisions women have made in their careers, not on some conspiracy to reject them at the door on account of them having a vagina where there should be a penis.

Ladybird is an average film at best, but it was directed by a woman and it's 2018.

Ten years ago a woman made a masterpiece called Fish Tank that barely caused a ripple.

Post: #216

(03-05-2018 01:00 PM)griffinmill Wrote:  Why is gender parity in the entertainment industry so important?

Why is it such a big deal anywhere? It’s a manifestation of identity politics. And leftist politics are 100% identity politics at this point. They give zero fucks about the working classes and are totally fixated on identity groups and their supposed struggles against the majority oppressor.

Post: #217

Lowest ratings ever for the Oscars

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-f...rs-1091636

Post: #218

(03-05-2018 08:37 AM)questor70 Wrote:  Movies and TV are increasingly being seen as a proxy for democracy. The term "representation" keeps being used as if actors are elected officials. People insist on seeing actors who "look like them". This sounds good but it depressingly paints a portrait in which nobody should ever be expected to identify with characters unless they literally match their sense of identity (race, gender, sexuality, class, etc....). The whole idea of story is to put yourself in someone else's shoes to broaden your horizons, not to merely see yourself up on screen like a narcissistic mirror. This is what has led to Mary Sues who do no wrong. The perfect hero or the perfect martyr. It becomes merely an exercise in fluffing up your own ego rather than an exploration of what it really means to be human, warts and all.

I posted about this in the everything goes lounge, but I'll add on to my thoughts here and reply to you.

I can't blame people for wanting to see movies with people who are from the same background (race, ethnicity, religion, region, nationality, ext.). I know I miss seeing movies with all white characters, like American Pie. I definitely related to those characters in the movie and yeah, a part of that was because they were white and looked like me and my friends/girlfriends.

On the other hand, I also agree with what you say about wanting to broaden your horizons. If they made some historical movie about an ancient African, Asian or Native American civilization with some bad ass characters and fighting for their people, even if the characters didn't look like me I would still be in to it if the writing was good. Nothing wrong with having an African or Asian version of Lord of the Rings, where all the characters are except for a tiny 1% of background characters are of the same race.

Then there's other movies where you don't even think about race. I never really thought about how Morphius was black in the Matrix, he was just a bad ass mother fucker dropping red pills left and right.

I really think people should be able to make movies however they want to and let the audience decide what they like or don't like.

The idea of "inclusion riders" is only going to divide this country even more then it's already divided. We all know what "inclusion riders" means. We all know that an ethnic Flemish and an ethnic Hungarian are never going to qualify for those "inclusion riders".

Just go ahead and say it Hollywood - you want less white straight males in your movies.

But minorities have no fear, the cancerous left will come for you as well after their "inclusion riders" diversify every movie to hit the screen in America, where there are only a marginal amount of white people being portrayed in a white majority country.

You see, a virus is never finished in its mission, which is to eat away at its host until the host is dead. The virus, ironically, kills the life vessel that the virus needed in order to survive in the first place.

So take comfort minorities, diversity will come to your tribe one day as well. After all, diversity is our strength.

Post: #219

Edit.

Post: #220

(03-05-2018 01:00 PM)griffinmill Wrote:  Ten years ago a woman made a masterpiece called Fish Tank that barely caused a ripple.

IMHO, the best movie directed by a woman is Fast Times at Ridgemont High from Amy Heckerling. Won no awards. What are the odds of a female director making a movie like that these days?



It neither glorified nor demonized male or female sexuality. It just laid it out there as it was, messy, complicated, contradictory, confusing, frustrating.

Post: #221

Quote:Oscars Ratings Might Have Hit an All-Time Low—but That’s Not a Sign of Doom
Yes, ratings are crucial—especially to advertisers. But let’s look at the big picture here.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/201...l-time-low


Indeed - because who cares if ever less people watch it, but at least the propaganda is great.



Emma Watson going full batshit crazy with a current-year-feminazi tattoo!

Post: #222

(03-05-2018 04:06 PM)GoingTheDistance Wrote:  I really think people should be able to make movies however they want to and let the audience decide what they like or don't like.

The problem is that because of social media people are less interested in the essence of sitting down to watch a movie and are more interested in virtue signalling that this or that movie is "woke" and gives the middle-finger to "the man".

Since women in particular thrive on drama they are as addicted to online arguments with the haters as nerds are in arguing whether the Enterprise could beat a Star Destroyer. They feed off the drama. That's why they will go out of their way to pump up mediocre product (like Female Ghostbusters) or hold stuff up to a microscope to find signs of things that aren't suitably "woke" (you know, Wonder Woman not having hairy armpits or being too maternal around babies).

So it's the film snob in me that is bothered by the controversy surrounding movies becoming the main event rather than the movie itself. That this has bubbled all the way up to the Oscars is sad. The Oscars should be more of an objective measure of a film's artistic merit and not just an ideological litmust test.

The meta-discussion about the movie industry and the calls for some sort of enforced affirmative action are just the next logical step on this chain of veering farther and farther away from film or TV as an artform and as, like I said it, the nexus of a political/ideological culture-war.

I wonder whether this whole thing will be discussed in Spielberg's Ready: Player One because that setting demonstrates what happens to a society that can ONLY view the world through the lens of pop culture. Then again, Spielberg self-identifies only as "the guy who is married to Kate Capshaw" (last acting role, 2002). The Cuckening continues apace.

There are certainly people out there today who care far more about Wonder Woman's armpits than the actual plight of real women.

Women have become a new brand of geek that is just as addicted to media as the male nerds, but only as far as they can use it as a springboard for SJW activism and triggerings.

Post: #223

I think what really hurt the academy awards was that the list of nominees was pretty lackluster. Most of the films I had never even heard of. Dunkirk and Get Out being the only two. This year was definitely lacking the usual big budget Scorsese-type films the people want to see. Instead, we got the small, indie type films that basically got no promotion from the studios.

Post: #224

So now Basic Horrors like Get Out are winning academy awards simply for points out Liberals think blacks are trendy? Okay. Setting the bar high fellas.

Post: #225

Follow the money. The heavy-handed infusion of politics into the Oscars probably had more to do with the movie industry trying to maintain some sense of importance than with anyone there actually giving a f*ck.

According to the year-end wrap-up in Variety, box office returns are down, investors are getting upset, and Hollywood is becoming irrelevant. Here is the important quote:

“The tide has moved against movies. They used to be the hub of what entertainment is, but that core has shifted to streaming and television. Back in the day people talked about ‘Back to the Future’ or ‘E.T.’ when they talked about entertainment. Today, it’s ‘Stranger Things’ or ‘Game of Thrones.'”

The articles doesn't discuss Hollywood's back catalog, so I'll add my own two cents.

Today's actors don't seem to realize that practically the entire history of film and TV is at most people's fingertips. So, if audiences are disinterested or disgusted with the current crop of dumbed-down, globally-focused fare, they can just say "Hey, I think I'll check out Clint Eastwood's entire catalog" or "I think I'll watch every episode of my favorite obscure '90s show" and they'll be busy for months.

We no longer have to go to Blockbuster and bring home clunky VHS tapes or DVDs. With a few mouse clicks, we can get pretty much anything we want.

I saw the music industry crumble partially because of this. When downloading came around, people disgusted with new music realized they could bone up on all the old artists whose work they never fully explored. And the industry never recovered.

So, campaigns like #metoo and #timesup may be the new way Hollywood keeps itself in the news. Because films about women screwing fish and two boys in love sure aren't gonna get the average person to take notice.