Why modern movies suck - they teach us awful lessons

[Guest 85555]

To be fair, this isn't about a conversation around a dinner table. Recall the source here: a successful youtuber. In that environment, controversy drives engagement drives money. Using weighted language to whip up the tribe and provoke outrage is exactly how one becomes successful in such an environment.
So yes, distrust is certainly warranted. It's the internet, after all.

Also just rewatching the YouTube video, I think while I disagree with his points, I don't see the value of distrust here. He is making arguments and they are arguments that one can respond to. But with the movies I have seen, I think there is value in contending with the argument he is making. I think though my two main criticisms of his video would be I think he is overplaying how much of an impact messaging has in the first place (a lot of times I think messaging is more about the audience than the film, and putting something out you know the audience will nod its head), and I think a lot of the things he identifies as problems in the star wars movies aren't (I also don't think contrasting them with the prequels is particularly effective because the prequels themselves had so many problems). I do think he made interesting points about Mulan. But again, I don't think the reason those points are valid is as much about the message, as it is the new Disney Mulan makes for a less satisfying experience because the character starts out great, and the reason she starts out great handles the concept of Qi a little weirdly (there are characters in wuxia stories and xianxia stories who are born with natural internal marital arts potential, and there are movies where characters become great fairly quickly, but if you are just comparing those two movies, I think the first one gives the viewer a more rewarding story of the character's development. But he is also a self-admitted alcoholic youtube reviewers, so there is an edge of humor here that I think needs to be accounted for too.

The way I look at these things is youtube videos are people speaking their thoughts about a film after they have seen them, or speaking their thoughts about movies out loud. It is not the same as a paper about a movie, a book, or a new york times review (though I have to say, I think there are a lot of very bad film reviewers out there with a news paper behind them). I tend to watch this sort of video with a dose of salt, and take it more casually.

I occasionally do podcast movie discussions I label "Late night reviews" and the point is to speak about a movie when I am tired. In that slightly altered state, there is more meandering, more free association, sometimes even contradictions, but you occasionally hit on interesting ideas that way. This video strikes me as something like that.

 

[Guest 85555]

You are using the term "dismissing," which I haven't used.

In any conversation we decide how much trust we give another person's views based on the language they use. If I'm talking with someone about movies and they drop terms like "cinema verite" and "martini shot" (I have no idea what those are but I google "obscure film vocabulary"), I'm going to think, 'Wow, this person really knows their stuff!'

If I'm talking with someone about movies and they say they didn't like X because of Y, I'm going to listen to their opinion, compare it with my own, and likely have an interesting conversation.

If I'm talking with someone about movies and they use the term "Mary Sue," I'm not going to trust that the rest of the conversation is going to be free from gender-based bias. In fact, if they continue to use the term, even after I bring it up, then I'll likely end the conversation. Later I'll talk with them about, say, classic D&D adventures or what video games they're playing, but I'm not going to continue to talk film with them.

That seems normal to me.

I am using the term to describe what you are talking about. So I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. But I would say not taking a person's opinions seriously because they use the term mary sue, is a case of dismissing their opinion because they use the term mary sue. I am not saying you are writing them off. But you are allowing their selection of that word to color your view of their opinions about movies. And I am not saying you are going to be wrong 100% of the time. There are probably people who you heard use that word, assumed many things about their opinions about film, and you were right. But there were also probably a lot of people who used that word, led to you assuming a lot of things about them, and those things were wrong.

I would say the same thing about someone using cinema verite or martini shot. People throw in ten dollar vocabulary all the time to make it seem they know more about a subject than they do. And even someone who doesn't know what those mean, might have more insight about the use of a martini shot than someone who learned about that in film school (because they know what a martini shot is from having seen movies, but just don't know the word for it).

 

[Guest 85555]

@Bedrockgames I'm quoting myself to note that this is how I expect to be treated as well.

If I use a term in a conversation that the other person thinks is ignorant or offensive, I want to know! I honestly think it's a respectful way to treat someone. It doesn't always feel good in the moment, but over time it helps me be a better member of my community.

For the record I don't think you've done anything ignorant or offensive. I just am pushing back on the idea you have expressed of not taking a persons views about film seriously because they used a particular word. But I don't think you doing that is offensive.

 

[Guest 85555]

In any conversation we decide how much trust we give another person's views based on the language they use.

This is something I try not to do. Maybe it comes from being around a lot of different kinds of people who use different kinds of language, and realizing that impressions based on language can often be very misleading. But generally try to remain curious about peoples opinions regardless of the way they express those opinions.

 

[BookTenTiger]

For the record I don't think you've done anything ignorant or offensive. I just am pushing back on the idea you have expressed of not taking a persons views about film seriously because they used a particular word. But I don't think you doing that is offensive.

You mentioned that if a person dropped in obscure terms like "martini shot" it would give you pause. I would probably want to find out if they actually know what they're talking about or if they're just trying to sound erudite.

It's the same thing with "Mary Sue." If someone uses it in a conversation, it's a signal to me that they might be a misogynist, and I'll steer the conversation to find out if they're just using a bad borrowed term or if it's true to their beliefs.

On the other hand, if someone is using the term on a YouTube video, I'm just not going to watch it.

 

[Guest 85555]

I want to say, I think it is totally valid for:

1) films to be political

and

2) critics to critique the politics of a film

I agree with this 100%. I just did a rewatch and discussion of all the Dirty Harry movies and those can't really be separated from political discussion around them. My point is not every movie needs that to be its priority and there are better and worse ways of doing politics in a film.

 

[Ryujin]

Out of curiosity, how many people here with an opinion about politics in Hollywood movies know what the Hays Office and the Motion Picture Production Code are?

(or have a favorite Pre-Code movie - some of them are wild!)

By content, but not by name. Figured I knew what you were talking about and had a quick search confirm. Watching for things like the couples always sleeping in separate beds, or there always being a foot on the floor when in the same bed, makes for fascinating viewing when you know about it.

 

[Guest 85555]

You mentioned that if a person dropped in obscure terms like "martini shot" it would give you pause. I would probably want to find out if they actually know what they're talking about or if they're just trying to sound erudite.

I don't think I said that, and if I did, it wasnt' what I intended to mean. If someone dropped martini shot into a conversation, and it sounded like they know what a martini shot is, it would just be part of the conversation. If they used some other language to describe a martini shot, it would just be part of the conversation. If they used it incorrectly, or used it to sound erudite, I wouldn't try to read too much into it personally (because there are so many different reasons a person might do that). And if they used a term like that, and I didnt' understand it, I would ask what the term means. But that is about it. My point was I don't think it is very helpful to make assumptions about someone based on them using language (whether it is martini shot, or mary sue) because you don't know why they are using that language. Obviously if it raises a question in your mind, you should ask. But I think using a personals language style as a measure of things beyond what they are trying to say, is unfair. You might just be bumping into a class difference, a geographic difference, a difference in educational background. It doesn't have to indicate a political difference or a difference around values. And if there is a difference of values and that is an issue, I would say people are better off directly talking about those values with one another instead of the movie as a proxy.

 

[Guest 85555]

It's the same thing with "Mary Sue." If someone uses it in a conversation, it's a signal to me that they might be a misogynist, and I'll steer the conversation to find out if they're just using a bad borrowed term or if it's true to their beliefs.

And if you are worried about that, feel free to ask people. I think issue here is I am saying, you shouldn't assume that is what is driving their use of the term. I think it is very easy in these discussions to see people we disagree with, as the villains we want them to be (and I am not saying you are doing that, but I think this approach to language in conversation makes that much easier to do).

 

[UngainlyTitan]

@Bedrockgames I have not watched the Critical Drinker videos linked to in this thread but I have watched several of his video and my conclusion is that he was not giving me an honest take but pandering to a following. That is why I will not watch him.