“A near bloodless take over”? Oh, honey....
Spoilers The Flash - Season 6
- Thread starter Christopher
- Start date
“A near bloodless take over”? Oh, honey....
Your correct. I did kind of downplay the violence. I was thinking mostly of the 2 day coup d'Etat when they took the capital in what is now St. Petersburg. To be honest though I am kind of tired of talking about all this. I appreciate all the good talk everyone has had but it's really depressing to think about and to be honest I don't even know what it has to do with The Flash anymore. Much better debate than I would imagine happening on Twitter.
Jason
Jason
No.
It's that the private and or publicly traded corporations who own the rights to those films have been forced to recognize that the "outdated cultural references" in those films are offensive to groups of people who are fighting hard to change the cultural perception of their gender/race/etc. Therefore, to satisfy the marketplace, and perhaps even their corporate conscience, they are adding disclaimers to the labeling of those films and shows. Something similar has happened when tobacco products are depicted in a film - there is a disclaimer added to the credits that the filmmakers were not compensated for the use of those products. That disclaimer is in response to the long-standing practice of paying filmmakers to have the actors in their films smoke cigarettes.
The marketplace puts both visible and invisible pressure on the corporations who produce most of the entertainment we consume, with uneven and at times conflicting or contradictory results.
Well they might as well slap one of those labels on every film because movies with "outdated cultural references" is in every film. Of course maybe a better idea is to look at older films and redo their rating. Maybe Gone With the Wind should be a Rated movie by today's standards. In reality it will likely just become the modern Comic Code. A form of self imposed censorship to stifle art but I guess we will just have to wait and see.
Jason
All ratings are self imposed by the movie industry. They did that rather than have the government step in and do it for them, for fear of censorship. This was done because of pressure by religious groups. Just as the comic code was done by the comic book industry because groups were pressuring the government to do something about those “nasty” comics.
Basically, outside groups getting the Federal government involved in issues of Free Speech.
To me I don't mind ratings because that seems to be a pretty good and fair balance between free speech and making people aware of something. Letting someone know something is for adult where the other is for children and one is maybe okay for children with parental guidance. It puts all the responsibility on the people to figure out what they feel about a movie instead of feeling a need to tell them how to feel. I think it actually encourages critical thinking in people to have to figure some things out on their own.
Jason
There is really no reason to be upset over labels and warnings.
We eat food every day with labels, some of which clearly tell us that we probably shouldn't eat that item.
A label or warning is a way for a producer/manufacturer/marketer/distributor to shift liability from them to the consumer.
It's a ubiquitous practice (at least in Western-style democracies) and the only time it seems to cause a fuss is when a new style of label is introduced or a previously unlabeled object becomes a labeled object.
We eat food every day with labels, some of which clearly tell us that we probably shouldn't eat that item.
A label or warning is a way for a producer/manufacturer/marketer/distributor to shift liability from them to the consumer.
It's a ubiquitous practice (at least in Western-style democracies) and the only time it seems to cause a fuss is when a new style of label is introduced or a previously unlabeled object becomes a labeled object.
Hester Prynne might disagree. It really comes down to just how responsible you think the people making the label will be. I feel like the ratings systems in Hollywood has mostly been fair at least lately. Use to be stuff dealing with LGBTQ characters were treated as adult even when they didn't need to be due to homophobia which is one of the reasons I wouldn't mind going back and fixing those. Who knows what you can expect if they start putting new labels on them though. Generally I don't care though as long as access to the art is always available and easily available to boot. To me access is the important thing.
Jason
Jason
I'm not sure what the argument is at this point, other than "ALL LABELS ARE BAD!"
There is zero chance that a consumer guidance report will no longer voluntarily be attached to new entertainment products. The entertainment industry is terrified of the specter of federally generated consumer guidance, as they have seen the restrictions that places on the food industry, the drug industry, and the tobacco/gambling industry.
Therefore, we may not LIKE how a voluntarily generated consumer guidance report looks on our current or past entertainment choices, but it won't go away.
There is zero chance that a consumer guidance report will no longer voluntarily be attached to new entertainment products. The entertainment industry is terrified of the specter of federally generated consumer guidance, as they have seen the restrictions that places on the food industry, the drug industry, and the tobacco/gambling industry.
Therefore, we may not LIKE how a voluntarily generated consumer guidance report looks on our current or past entertainment choices, but it won't go away.
I’m 100 percent in favor of providing context for older works of art, especially if the alternative is altering or suppressing them. To me, it makes plenty of sense to say, “GwtW is a hugely entertaining movie in the classic Hollywood style, full of unforgettable scenes and indelible performances. It’s also racist as fuck, an historical document that is very much a product of its time. You’re welcome to watch it, but you should watch it critically and within its cultural context.”
You’ve included a bit more colourful language than I do, but essentially you’ve described what I do with my students on a regular basis (my previous graduate work was on cinematic representations of history spanning the earliest years of cinema to the present and I make frequent use of that research in my courses). Sometimes I want to gauge student reactions to older films, so the contextual discussion comes after the film, but before or after, it’s always there.
To watch a film without cultural or historical context is like looking at a painting without the same thing. Sure, you'll still have a response to it--whether you like it or not--but you'll have a richer understanding of that response if you know more.
I don't see why knowing more--in any context--is a bad thing.
I don't see why knowing more--in any context--is a bad thing.
Last edited:
If the world doesn't fall apart it might also do something else and make older movies attractive to fans in the same way lots of people avoid horror movies if they aren't R-rated. Having a official seal of disapproval from the people in power will no doubt make these things look edgy because the other effect of trying to ban something is once you do or you talk about how bad something is and you shouldn't see it you will pull out peoples contrarian streak and make them really want to go see it now that they have been told or hinted at they shouldn't.
I mean how many people really wants to watch it right now whether you support or don't support what they are doing? It's very old and very long and one of those things like classical music where you appreciate the artistry but not exactly something you want to put on for some relaxing and fun. Now though it might spark some interest in new fans or older fans to go revisit it.
Jason
It's not bad it's just in the past people figured this stuff out without needing it spelled out for them. People didn't exactly just now figure it out that it had some racist stereotypes in it. Maybe the question is why are modern people unable to learn stuff in the same way we have in the past when they have access to all the knowledge of the internet. Even understanding the business reasoning I am surprised people don't find this stuff more insulting because they are basically saying people are to dumb to understand that whitewashing slavery is bad without their help.
Jason
It's also partly a way for them to save face they have to do something to show people that are not going to overlook the problems, but also don't want to get rid of the movie completely. The only options they have in a situation like this are, ignore the problem, completely pull the movie, edit out the offending scenes, or put a warning or something that acknowledges the problems in some way with it. The last option, which is what most of the companies are going for with most movies and shows, is the best option since it pisses the least amount of people off.
I would rather have material that contextualizes something rather than pretending America didn't ever hold terrible views on race and gender. That's the problem, so many things we haven't been taught or have been taught without the full information. Like, I was never taught about what happened in Tulsa.
That was completely under my radar until just a couple of years ago, and I'm almost 50. I'm a bit ashamed of myself.
I have always felt one of the problem s with teaching history in schools is there is literally no time to study even half of the stuff. It's all about getting kids to remember dates when important invents happen and less on subtext and details. I always liked the idea of maybe expanding history even at younger levels to things like Government history, social issues history and then World History. We also need Civics brought back so I guess it's just a matter of where you fit it all in during a school day. Without dropping PE. Students need that for exercise and also dodgeball because grade school just isn't the same unless you have faced off with your peers in a game of skillful combat.
Jason
Jason
They didn't just figure it out out of thin air, Jayson. Either they read it or were told. No one in the past learned something in a vacuum. Stop. Romanticizing. The. Past.
There were dumb ignorant people in the past too. Stop. Romanticizing. The. Past.
It's not about the time. It's about who decides to teach what and why.
I just know I always hated having to sit through f'n Leonard Maltin, the whitest guy on earth, put racism into context every single time before watching my Disney Treasures DVDs. From what I understand, Gone with the Wind is flying off the shelves at Amazon right now instead of being ignored in the oldies section on HBO Max. I bought the complete Little Rascals on DVD at one time because I knew they'd be hard to come by at some point.
Is it time to just excise this stuff entirely? I don't know, maybe, even though it doesn't sit well with me. I do think it's the start of a slippery slope though. I'd be OK if maybe it was put behind a passcode wall or something (like TNZ here maybe). Though that won't satisfy people who think adults needs to be forced and hand-held with context.
Is it time to just excise this stuff entirely? I don't know, maybe, even though it doesn't sit well with me. I do think it's the start of a slippery slope though. I'd be OK if maybe it was put behind a passcode wall or something (like TNZ here maybe). Though that won't satisfy people who think adults needs to be forced and hand-held with context.