Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by dodge, Jul 20, 2019.
dvd/blu-ray releasing Sept 8
Agreed, and in fact, I've heard some supporters of Star Trek: Discovery whine about TOS featuring "Alpha Male" characters (oh, the horror of it all), and cannot stand the kind of "aggression" seen in many of its stories. TOS was a series produced during the Cold War when the threat of nuclear annihilation as a possibility was real, not theory, fears of a second American civil war ran through the government (seen in relevant FBI & surviving CIA files, where both agencies actively disrupted the civil rights movement), and of course, Vietnam. That was the dark world TOS was created in, and it needed characters who could sell their being a reflection of the good and bad of 1960s..earth. Some live in some revisionist fantasyland where they believe the tepid worst of Berman-era Trek and now STD was what Star Trek "really" was.. Utter nonsense tied to a likely ignorance of the real world history of the era which shaped TOS and it creators.
If your problem is just the presentation and not the actual nature of the character I think it avoids being as ham-handed as some of the other series. The trailers laid it on thicker than the series itself. Interestingly, she had her ass handed to her a couple of times by larger male opponents that you don't often see in shows with female leads.
I do not understand this comment.
What is it about "woke culture" that you are rebelling against so much that it prevents you from watching BW?
Is it the Black tech wizard, the Asian step sister/medical student, or the unlucky in love White lesbian?
That is so not true--or if it was, not by today's standards. The left was nowhere near as far left back then as today. Today, Star Trek would be conservative.
Depends how you define socially conscious.
It's not a loss if you know you won't like something. How do you decide whether to watch something? I would think it would be something like, you hear a description that interests you, you see the trailers, and if the trailer looks good, you watch the pilot. If the pilot interests you, you give it another shot, and if you like it after a few episodes, you're in.
For me, with Batwoman, I'm already turned off by the check the box casting call, the use of the term SJW in the description, and the trailer was god awful. There was nothing about the show that I figured I would like, so what would be the point? My love for DC characters hit a breaking point.
But I'm back with Stargirl and I'm praying that the new writing staff will make Superman and Lois good enough to watch. Even on Supergirl, when they stick to Superman mythology, the show works very well (one of the main reasons I haven't bailed).
I didn't have a problem with Batwoman in COIE other than her being a paragon which made no sense. I dismissed that as "well, she has her own show on CW" and let it go. The trailers looked so awful, and the SJW part of the show seems very heavy handed. Interestingly enough, this was the first year I can remember where every single first season show I tried to watch failed with me. They were either not entertaining or "in your face" woke.
I didn't even know there was a black tech wizard or an Asian step sister. I knew there was a lesbian, but how could you not when they post it on billboards?
I feel like if I try to answer this honestly, it won't be a good discussion because there are people that like to get outraged, put words in my mouth, create things that I wouldn't say, assume I think things that I don't, all in the name of showing how woke they are.
So let's just say this--I like to be entertained--not lectured. I like to enjoy a show, not have ultra left politics shoved down my throat. Superhero shows should be about escapism and fun, not SJWs.
Please don't use "the left" in a context that actually means liberal, they're not the same thing. Can go hand in hand (I view myself as socially liberal, economically left), but they often don't. For example, the Arrowverse shows are definitely liberal, but in the economic politics, they are quite pro-corporate.
I'm just guessing, but you're not American or live in the US? For Americans (I am one, though I don't live there anymore--still work there, though), liberal and left are practically synonymous (my students are often confused when I point out they are not so in Canada, where I live, let alone in most of the rest of the world).
I'm German, but I keep up with the left movement in the US, so I know they aren't the same there, either. It's mostly corporate mass media enforcing the two as synonymous, because they don't like dealing with left economics, but they really like looking socially progressive.
Are they? Most of the Arrow's early career was spent taking down corrupt corporate execs, including his own mother, and the 2040 flashforwards in Arrow's penultimate season portrayed an extreme corporate dystopia. LexCorp is evil, and despite all of Lena's attempts to reform it as L Corp back on Earth-38, she and it remained morally ambiguous at best. Obsidian North in Supergirl this past season has been mostly villainous despite Andrea Rojas's best intentions. The back half of The Flash this season has pitted the team against a corrupted corporation, McCullough Technologies. In Batwoman, the Crows have been criticized as a private security force supporting the corporate elite at the expense of the general public. There have been a few benevolent corporations -- PalmerTech, CatCo, Wayne Enterprises -- but only when they had the right people running them.
Maybe pro-corporate was the wrong choice of words, I admit that, so please, let me rephrase; the Arrowverse shows are liberal, but they do contradict left economic philosophy, namely in making the corporate villains about individual choices instead of a systemic evil.
As I said, I don't think that's true. Both Batwoman and Arrow have portrayed corporate abuse as a systemic problem. The occasional corporations with heroic/benevolent heads are exceptions to the rule, just as the vigilante heroes are exceptions to the rule of masked people working outside the law being mostly criminals.
Also, you're buying into right-wing propaganda if you believe that liberal economic philosophy is intrinsically anti-corporate or anti-capitalist. Certainly it is against the abuses of such things, and in favor of regulations that ensure a healthy balance between corporate profit and the rights and safety of the public. But it is not against the existence of corporations, any more than the juvenile court system is opposed to the existence of children. It's just about keeping them honest and fair.
That is very specifically not what I said. My very point was that liberal and left are not synonymous. You are accurately describing the liberal economic philosophy, I described the economic philosophy of the actual left. And the Arrowverse shows are very much liberal shows, not left-wing shows.
When you constantly use "SJW" as a pejorative -- thereby actively and explicitly aligning yourself against efforts to promote and achieve social justice -- I'm not sure how you can claim to be some kind of maligned and misunderstood victim. People are simply believing what you tell them about yourself.
You had to know a certain someone would swing in here and attempt to tell you what you really meant in words that were clear to anyone else....
No SJW's here...
Just tired warriors and friends learning to be with one another,
Define "actual left."
Well played, but no need to validate the premise that being an "SJW" is a bad thing. Kate and company do indeed fight for justice, including social justice, as any true hero must.
You're right. They're not the same. But Christopher is proving my point (even if he doesn't realize it). The vast majority of Americans do NOT make a distinction between liberal and left. For many, the terms are either synonymous or the left is simply described as "extremely liberal". Hence the shock and surprise of most of my students in my US History classes.
Honestly, the show hasn't been anywhere near as "SJW" about Kate sexuality as the trailers were. It's definitely nowhere near as heavily focused on social issues the way Supergirl has been.
There have been storylines dealing with her love life, but other than one part of the backstory, hasn't really made a big deal out of the fact that she's gay. Most of it has been treated pretty much the same as the other Arrowverse shows have treated there heterosexual relationships.
Are you OK with how Legends and Arrow handled Sarah Lance being gay?
Separate names with a comma.