Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by JD, May 18, 2017.
Source? That's a pretty big claim to put out there without anything to back it up.
If someone can edit these two links into clickable links, I'd appreciate it.
Ah, yes, the good ol' reliable "Random Video on YouTube" source!
But random white dudes screaming about movies have always been such reliable sources of information. We all know Star Trek Discovery was cancelled before season 1 ever aired, they just keep making it for some reason likely connected to the machinations of Brie Larson.
JD asked for sources. I provided them. Did either of you watch the video? Why does it matter that he is a white man?
I have better ways of spending my time. These videos exist to make money off an audience desperate for someone to tell them that they're right to hate a company for making movies that aren't written to please their individual tastes. They tell them exactly what they want to hear using sources that range from some guy on 4chan to websites that just make shit up based on what some other guy on 4chan said. Something that backfired hilariously recently when that same guy from 4chan admitted that he was making it up just to troll.
How can you critisize the video if you didn't watch it?
You didn't watch the video, so how do you know?
Too much experience?
Yeaaahhh...that's not how credible sources work.
I skimmed through the CNCB and Hollywood Reporter links in link you posted, and I didn't see anything about Cuties.
As for the video I don't waste my time on random bullshit, from random people on Youtube.
When it comes to Hollywood news, I'm very picky about what sources I trust. I pretty much only trust stuff from The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Deadline, IGN, Io9, Tor.com, and a handful of other sources that I know are reliable.
Thank you, JD, for the polite response. The bottom line is Netflix is hemorrhaging subscribers over Cuties, what many call a pedophilic movie. I don't follow Hollywood news. But when Cuties came out, the internet practically exploded with outrage.
I'd like to think that it's the pandemic. That the angry people just didn't have anything better to do as opposed to doing what probably most of us do... simply not watch a movie we don't want to watch.
Sadly, I know better than to blame pandemic boredom.
I still don't know what the outrage is (I have zero desire to look into it since the movie nor the controversy interest me at all) but I've read that it has had an effect on the bottom line unfortunately.
From what I read, the movie is meant to critique the sexualization of young girls, not to endorse it. It's been widely released in Europe without controversy. It's just another casualty of the American culture wars and the eagerness of the fanatical right to find things to condemn and judge so they can feel morally superior to others (even as they denounce the acknowledgment of racism, sexism, homophobia, or transphobia in fiction as unacceptable "cancel culture").
Also, "Netflix is hemorrhaging subscribers" is incorrect. Apparently there was a surge of cancellations that died down after about a week, and has had no real, lasting impact on their profits. So any claim that Netflix has been forced to cancel shows because of it is false.
If anything, Netflix should have been gaining subscriptions in regards to the pandemic prior to Cuties.
In America, child pornography is illegal. Americans have zero tolerance.
Not even remotely true. Right-wing assholes faked outrage against a film they have not not watched nor would ever watch because it's made by and about black people. If they had watched it they might have noticed that (a) it's not child pornography and (b) it's very much against all the things they claim it's pro about.
The movie sexualizes young children and is praised by sick pedophiles. What else is there to say?
Americans stand against pedophilia.
Dude, the movie poster is pornographic.
That that is not actually accurate?
I would share the movie poster to make a point, but here in America, that would be distribution of child pornography, and that is very illegal.
Oh, come on. A story with sexual themes is not the same thing as pornography. US federal law defines child pornography as the visual depiction of any sexually explicit conduct involving minors below the age of 18. Sexually explicit, as in actual sex acts, not just sexy poses in skimpy outfits.
And I believe Canadian law is actually stricter than US law. Technically, under US law, something only qualifies as child pornography if it depicts the actual sexual exploitation of actual children, so cartoons or written works depicting imaginary underage sex would not be illegal, whereas under Canadian law even cartoon and prose depictions would be illegal.
That neither of those statements is actually true. It's just propaganda.
Oh, bull. The original poster (which Netflix pulled after a week) is right here on Wikipedia, and if you think it's "pornography," you have no idea what the word means. It's just a shot of a few girls in midriff-baring outfits striking vaguely sexy poses. You can see racier stuff from the cheerleaders at a football game.
Separate names with a comma.