Unpopular Geek Media Opinions

[TiQuinn]

outside of this thread, it's a forbidden topic, while the others are not. I would have loved to discussed Hogwarts legacy when it came out and i'll happily love to discuss the show/casting but i think the thread would be closed.

I think as long as you stuck to the actual show and game and not the author, you’d be fine.

 

[billd91]

I think as long as you stuck to the actual show and game and not the author, you’d be fine.

It’s never going to stick just to the show/game without the author. Because nothing says “Eff you” to the people the people she’s actively hurting than discussing any of her new license products as if the big transphobic elephant in the room isn’t there.

 

[MGibster]

To try to make my point crystal clear for the last time: You're allowed to make threads about their works, you can not as far as i am aware make a separate thread about Harry Potter anything (video game,tv show, movies etc) IF Lovecraft, Howard and others were treated the same you would not be allowed or strongly discouraged.

I get what you're saying.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If Charlie and the chocolate factory had been released today, we'd be talking about how unsafe and unhealthy everything is, among other aspects.

FWIW, the most recent movies DID get some fan based criticism along those lines.

(Also, because my Dad is an MD with an MPH, I grew up discussing the bad food handling practices in the ORIGINAL film.)

 

[briggart]

- The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales are an incoherent mess, the product of unholy necromancy on Tolkien’s waste paper basket to keep the money coming. They are not as bad as their main by product, the Fionavar Tapestry.

I can understand the confusion about The Silmarillion, but what exactly led you to expect a coherent narrative from an anthology book titled "Unfinished Tales"?

I don't think the book was trying to hide what it was, so I find "incoherent mess" a puzzling complaint.

 

[AnotherGuy]

It’s never going to stick just to the show/game without the author. Because nothing says “Eff you” to the people the people she’s actively hurting than discussing any of her new license products as if the big transphobic elephant in the room isn’t there.

People can discuss and appreciate The Cosby show without discussing Bill Cosby IRL.
People can listen and appreciate the music of MJ without needing to go into the scandals (real or not) that surrounded him.
People can read and appreciate the Green Lantern comics of Gerard Jones without needing to go into his arrest.
People can watch and enjoy the only two Terminators that should be considered I and II, without the need to discuss Arnold's role as a governor.

 

[jian]

I can understand the confusion about The Silmarillion, but what exactly led you to expect a coherent narrative from an anthology book titled "Unfinished Tales"?

I don't think the book was trying to hide what it was, so I find "incoherent mess" a puzzling complaint.

Oh, I don’t think either book is trying to hide its provenance, and I remember making fun of them with my friends when they came out*. But my opinion is that they’re incoherent to the point of unreadability, not meant for publication and honestly a rather saddening and involuntary addition to Tolkien’s bibliography. I rather hope that the Pratchett family don’t do the same, for instance. If they already have, I’m sorry to hear it.

*Just noticed that they came out in 1977 and 1980, rather earlier than I thought - the republished paperback editions?

 

[Swanosaurus]

Alien3 is the best of the sequels by far.

Event Horizon is far superior to its pseudo-intellectual, offensively sexist imitator Sunshine.

Had the Watchmen movie stuck to the octopus ending, it would have been really great.

The Last Jedi is the best of the sequel trilogy (I know, not saying much).

"Something Wicked this Way Comes" is an insufferable bag full of stereotypes that only seems tolerable because Ray Bradbury had mastered the art of presenting platitudes in a tone that mimicks deep thoughtfulness. (Okay, that one may be too harsh, bot boy do I hate that book!)

 

[TiQuinn]

It’s never going to stick just to the show/game without the author. Because nothing says “Eff you” to the people the people she’s actively hurting than discussing any of her new license products as if the big transphobic elephant in the room isn’t there.

Yeah, well, that’s a choice, and even then there are ways of addressing the elephant without discussing it, much as we’ve done here so far.

 

[jian]

Not here to argue about his antisemitism. However, I am rewatching all the old Bond movies with my teen daughters, and we watched You Only Live Twice last night. Dahl did the script for that movie, and he actually did a pretty good job turning Bond into the "other" (literally in one case). His portrayal of Japanese culture (the late 60s version of it at least) seems fairly respectful, and the two Japanese Bond girls are actual baddies compared to their European counterparts. Even Bond behaves somewhat more respectfully to his love interests here than in the previous films. No sexual assault in barns or day spas here! And Aki repeatedly rescues Bond instead of the other way around. The scene where Tanaka tells Bond that in Japanese culture, women are subservient to men, so he must allow his women to bathe him, seems more representative of Japanese sexism than the general societal sexism of the 60s (considering Tanaka comments that English women would never do that, although Bond says he can think of a few who might).

I really have to disagree about You Only Live Twice - Bond and Dahl’s approach to Japanese culture (veering somewhere between exoticism and imperialist Japanophilia without much in between), Bond somehow passing as a Japanese fisherman, general sexism etc were really quite jarring to me when I saw it first as a kid 40 years ago and remain so now. It’s one of the worst Bond films in that regard, and communicates more of Fleming’s appalling assumptions and prejudices than most films. It’s worth noting that I’m Korean-English and was at that point working out what my ethnicity meant in the UK at the time (racism, mostly). It did really help out the Japanese film industry and has some great action scenes, though.

The Dahl-Bond overlap is very interesting because Dahl was pretty firmly wedded to the ideals of post-war English heroic masculinity which were very culturally prevalent at the time (see also: Prince Philip and his mentorship by Louis Mountbatten) and which was probably most iconised by Bond. With that comes a whole pile of racism, sexism, homophobia, imperial nostalgia, and toxic masculinity. In Dahl’s writing it’s of course more notable in his non-children books (Tales of the Unexpected etc) but there are quite a few bits in his children’s books, for instance Fantastic Mr Fox and Danny the Champion of the World, both of which do a magnificently destructive job of setting standards for fathers which are unrealistically unachievable and quite unlike Dahl’s own haphazard and dismissive approach to parenting.

(I think Wes Anderson’s adaptation of Fantastic Mr Fox does quite a good and thoughtful job of deconstructing and reconstructing the heroic fatherhood myth in the book. When Mrs Fox says wearily, “I love you but I should never have married you,” she’s spot on.)