Why modern movies suck - they teach us awful lessons

[AnotherGuy]

True, writing a good character should be the point. What is being missed here is that the same standard isn't being applied to critiques of characters across the board because of the politics of the critic. In my admitted limited experience watching him, this is something that The Critical Drinker does frequently - he makes attacks on characters based on politics. As an example, in his reviews for Star Trek Discovery he refers to Michael Burnham as "diverse female space Jesus". I am the last person to defend Star Trek Discovery (I hate the show) and I think Michael Burnham has tons of problems as a character but none of them are because of her race or gender. In the few videos of his I have watched I never saw him apply a nickname to a male character that referenced his race and/or gender and said it was a part of the character's problem.

I'm not one to defend Critical Drinker as I have only watched a handful of his shows, but I think his nicknaming comes about due to the political ideology that is espoused with Discovery. Most notably for me was in the second season, where some nameless (white) guy acted like a tool to her, never listened to her advice and then got killed for it, all within 5 minutes. I mean really, this isn't the Star Trek I signed up for. To be fair I was already not liking her character from season 1.

He also had a lot to say about the man-hating that came from the Batwoman series. I mean we have experienced Christian Bale and Ben Affleck, then they go and produce this disastrous Batwoman character that makes the most unnecessary comments.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

he has powers in the real world.

There is no real world, just a bigger Matrix.

It's matrixes all the way down.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There can be that, but there can also be finding a political pattern where there isn't one because you are using a lens that is always looking for it.

People are going to find politics in art whether the author intends it or not. The more the author tries to "remain neutral" the easier it is for people to read in whatever they want.

 

[Guest 85555]

People are going to find politics in art whether the author intends it or not. The more the author tries to "remain neutral" the easier it is for people to read in whatever they want.

You can find whatever you want in a piece of art if you are looking for it. That doesn't mean it is there. There are better and worse interpretations of art. I am sure plenty fo times, there is politics there. But it is also entirely possible to find patterns that aren't present because you are locked in a mindset of seeking them. It starts to become like a conspiracy theorist always seeing aliens in everything if you have one thing you always find lurking inside a work of art.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I'm not one to defend Critical Drinker as I have only watched a handful of his shows, but I think his nicknaming comes about due to the political ideology that is espoused with Discovery. Most notably for me was in the second season, where some nameless (white) guy acted like a tool to her, never listened to her advice and then got killed for it, all within 5 minutes. I mean really, this isn't the Star Trek I signed up for. To be fair I was already not liking her character from season 1.

He also had a lot to say about the man-hating that came from the Batwoman series. I mean we have experienced Christian Bale and Ben Affleck, then they go and produce this disastrous Batwoman character that makes the most unnecessary comments.

I'm honestly curious, AnotherGuy, when you critique shows based on the race and gender of the characters, do you see this as political criticism?

 

[Blue Orange]

I'm not one to defend Critical Drinker as I have only watched a handful of his shows, but I think his nicknaming comes about due to the political ideology that is espoused with Discovery. Most notably for me was in the second season, where some nameless (white) guy acted like a tool to her, never listened to her advice and then got killed for it, all within 5 minutes. I mean really, this isn't the Star Trek I signed up for. To be fair I was already not liking her character from season 1.

He also had a lot to say about the man-hating that came from the Batwoman series. I mean we have experienced Christian Bale and Ben Affleck, then they go and produce this disastrous Batwoman character that makes the most unnecessary comments.

Star Trek was always left-leaning, though. TOS had the first interracial kiss, a diverse crew back in the 60s (and having Chekhov on board was showing we'd get through the Cold War with Russia and eventually become friends), and off the top of my head TNG had episodes about LGBT people, Palestinians, and even, arguably, asexuals, and people who watched the later series can comment on DS9, VOY, and whatever the others are. So woke has always been on-brand for Star Trek. Lately that seems to include actual nastiness to traditionally privileged groups (I have some membership on each side of that line), and I'm not on board for that, though I admit I'm no longer really on the left. But Star Trek has always tried to be progressive. That's who they are.

(Though: random (white) guys getting killed for not listening to the captain? That's an old trope--the term redshirt comes from the red-shirted security personnel TOS used to kill to create a sense of tension.)

I think doing it with Star Wars (traditionally the right-leaning foil to Star Trek, at least back in the end of the 20th century when I followed this stuff more avidly) was inevitably going to get a lot more pushback. But right-leaning fans (including far right fans) seem to have migrated to anime in response. (That is not to say all or even a majority of anime fans lean right, by any means!)

 

[Guest 85555]

Star Trek was always left-leaning, though. TOS had the first interracial kiss, a diverse crew back in the 60s (and having Chekhov on board was showing we'd get through the Cold War with Russia and eventually become friends), and off the top of my head TNG had episodes about LGBT people, Palestinians, and even, arguably, asexuals, and people who watched the later series can comment on DS9, VOY, and whatever the others are. So woke has always been on-brand for Star Trek. Lately that seems to include actual nastiness to traditionally privileged groups (I have some membership in each), and I'm not on board for that, and I admit I'm no longer really on the left. But Star Trek has always tried to be progressive.

(Though: random (white) guys getting killed for not listening to the captain? That's an old trope--the term redshirt comes from the red-shirted security personnel TOS used to kill to create a sense of tension.)

I think doing it with Star Wars (traditionally the right-leaning foil to Star Trek, at least back in the end of the 20th century when I followed this stuff more avidly) was inevitably going to get a lot more pushback. But right-leaning fans (including far right fans) seem to have migrated to anime in response. (That is not to say all or even a majority of anime fans lean right, by any means!)

I think fandom has become more tribal politically though as well. I remember in the 80s and 90s, I never thought of star wars as particularly right leaning (I thought of it as vaguely left, from the part of the 60s hippy crowd who got into eastern mysticism). I think what set it apart from a lot of the stuff from that era though was its optimistic tone and it wasn't overtly political. And the prequels did seem to have a stronger political message (that was certainly not right leaning). Whereas Star Trek has always been very political. But even then, I knew tons of conservatives who loved star trek. One of the things I liked about science fiction was it often felt like a meeting ground for a wide variety of viewpoints because it is built around thought experiments. I knew conservatives who didn't agree with Gene Roddenbury's world view, but would stick around to hear what he had to say.

Something I think has become extremely unhealthy is art being used divisively and used for us to identify which political tribe people are in. You saw this with star wars and ghost busters especially where a lot of criticisms, was just deflected by big media companies, by making them into political issues. Yes, some people did bring their politics into the theater and into their reaction. But there are perfectly non-political reasons to love the Last Jedi, and perfectly non-political reasons to dislike it. You can also agree with the political message of a movie, while thinking the message detracted from the film or was handled poorly. But the whole conversation seemed to get boiled down to if you like it you are a progressive, if you don't like it you voted for Trump. A lot of nuance was completely lost in the cultural conversation around star wars at that time. For me the last jedi was the first film I intentionally waited 6 months to a year to watch so I wouldn't be influenced by that, and I think it made a big difference. My view was some of the political messaging felt heavy handed (and I didn't necessarily disagree with many of the messages), and some of them undermined parts of the film (making Hux the butt of a slap stick humor, for instance, may have sent a message, but it weakened the character as a threat and villain in the story). But I enjoyed it. It was a fun movie to watch. I also really liked the Rose Tico character and I was a little confused that that love story didn't turn into anything by the final film (honestly if I have a political gripe with the new star wars trilogy it is that they seemed to reject the idea of interracial love: to go back to your star trek example---and I think the reason they did avoid that storyline was purely about profit). I also felt some of the dialogue was too meta (the whole kills the past speech felt a little on the nose to me and it wasn't the character speaking but the script writer). My main criticism of Last Jedi as a movie, isn't the film itself. It is that as the second film in a trilogy it threw a wrench into things. I think that franchise either needed to be written and directed entirely around the vision of Last Jedi or entirely around the vision of The Force Awakens. It just didn't work as a three part movie, and a big reason for that is the second film. But I don't blame Rian Johnson for that. I think that is on Disney for not having a good plan from the start.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'm honestly curious, AnotherGuy, when you critique shows based on the race and gender of the characters, do you see this as political criticism?

I don't critique shows based on gender or race characters. My biggest pet peeve as I've mentioned upthread is logic fails. I absolutely hated the first Superman with Henry Cavill (and it had nothing to do with the actor) - I would have walked out of the cinema if I wasn't there watching it with friends.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Star Trek was always left-leaning, though. TOS had the first interracial kiss, a diverse crew back in the 60s (and having Chekhov on board was showing we'd get through the Cold War with Russia and eventually become friends), and off the top of my head TNG had episodes about LGBT people, Palestinians, and even, arguably, asexuals, and people who watched the later series can comment on DS9, VOY, and whatever the others are. So woke has always been on-brand for Star Trek. Lately that seems to include actual nastiness to traditionally privileged groups (I have some membership on each side of that line), and I'm not on board for that, though I admit I'm no longer really on the left. But Star Trek has always tried to be progressive. That's who they are.

I was younger and obviously less aware of things along those lines when watching TNG or TOS and I will admit you are probably right about Star Trek.

(Though: random (white) guys getting killed for not listening to the captain? That's an old trope--the term redshirt comes from the red-shirted security personnel TOS used to kill to create a sense of tension.)

The incident was a little too in your face. I cannot recall if she were captain and that point, she may indeed have been. Also it was already in season 2 so I already had issues with that character from season 1. But yah, it was front and centre AND unnecessary. What lesson did we learn in those 5 minutes?

I think doing it with Star Wars (traditionally the right-leaning foil to Star Trek, at least back in the end of the 20th century when I followed this stuff more avidly) was inevitably going to get a lot more pushback. But right-leaning fans (including far right fans) seem to have migrated to anime in response. (That is not to say all or even a majority of anime fans lean right, by any means!)

Interesting, I never new anime was "right-leaning". I know next to nothing about anime.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I don't critique shows based on gender or race characters. My biggest pet peeve as I've mentioned upthread is logic fails. I absolutely hated the first Superman with Henry Cavill (and it had nothing to do with the actor) - I would have walked out of the cinema if I wasn't there watching it with friends.

But you just did! Your critiques of Star Trek and Batwoman were based on race and gender. Am I missing something? Why else would you write about race and gender in your critiques?