inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 26, 2019 16:46:11 GMT
Was quoting a character from the first ep, Lol. One uttered by the character to justify having impulsively kidnapped another citizen on vague suspicion of racism, yeah. B. Hieronymus Da 's response to your quote and implied accusation seems perfectly warranted to me. It's a pretty messed-up thing to say to another person over something like a tv-series discussion, even as a joke, which I assume it was. People feeling inspired by it to casually throw lines like that out there definitely isn't an argument for the series not being "woke garbage", though I'd personally call it something else. "Paranoid political fantasy", maybe. At least based on that first episode. I thought Lavochkin's joke landed, myself. I wouldn't try that approach on everyone here since I don't like hurting people's feelings by accident, but bevethesda's struck me as being fairly thick-skinned in the past. Although it isn't a best practice to use a quote joke on a guy who you know can't get it, since he just said he hadn't watched the show. I know the joke wasn't for bevethesda, but it's kind of unfair . And it's just a category mistake to call that post an "argument." Lavochkin's not usually in that business.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 26, 2019 17:00:40 GMT
I'd need to have a working definition of "woke culture" to know whether it even applies to the TV show -- I suppose whether I care about this myself is immaterial. Besides "stuff bevethesda doesn't like," of course. What have you got? What have I got what? Thought that was clearer than it was. What have you got for a working, objective definition of "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage" that can be applied by someone who doesn't share your emotional reaction to the "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage"?
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 26, 2019 17:05:19 GMT
Excluding the the show's propaganda it tenuosly references Moore's original work, and thematically has fuck all to do with the original. It's a blatant cash grab that make's DC's recent exploitation of the IP seem earnest by contrast. Yes i'll say it, Doomsday Clock is shit too. I don't check you on this. What do you figure the original was about, thematically? My impression was that the original was largely about unaccountable power. Hence the title. And "tenuously" is just silly. It's a direct sequel.
|
|
inherit
802
0
Apr 19, 2024 23:19:07 GMT
5,241
B. Hieronymus Da
Unapologetic Western Chauvinist. Barefoot. Great Toenails
3,603
August 2016
bevesthda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by B. Hieronymus Da on Nov 26, 2019 17:19:32 GMT
Oh, really? In my experience, people who think they "have a nose for white supremacy", suffer from a grotesquely distorted perception of reality. The term is mainly and frequently used by fascists (left) as a smear to shut down dialogue and silence differing opinions, by invalidating, demonizing, and "canceling" opponents. In reality, there are only a very small number of actual "white supremacists". "Bleach" you say? You seriously think I tried to make my Avatar "whiter"? Was quoting a character from the first ep, Lol. Ah, well. Quotation marks and a smiley would have improved it. Though, since I haven't watched the show, it's still doubtful I would get it.
|
|
inherit
802
0
Apr 19, 2024 23:19:07 GMT
5,241
B. Hieronymus Da
Unapologetic Western Chauvinist. Barefoot. Great Toenails
3,603
August 2016
bevesthda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by B. Hieronymus Da on Nov 26, 2019 17:37:02 GMT
Thought that was clearer than it was. What have you got for a working, objective definition of "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage" that can be applied by someone who doesn't share your emotional reaction to the "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage"? Why? Language is a tool to project ideas from one brain to another brain. Part of how that works is that language doesn't only contain message, but also always continuously defines itself, by subtly providing information about how the language is supposed to be decoded. If that doesn't work, it's sometimes worthwhile to use more language. Sometimes not. Still, "ugly" seems to be generally well understood, though it's typically considered to be subjective. "Stupid", much the same. "Pandering" is maybe a more vague concept, but "preaching" is something I'd bet lots of people get.
|
|
Noxluxe
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 1,979 Likes: 3,492
inherit
10359
0
Mar 14, 2019 16:10:11 GMT
3,492
Noxluxe
1,979
Jul 21, 2018 23:55:09 GMT
July 2018
noxluxe
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Noxluxe on Nov 26, 2019 19:32:16 GMT
I thought Lavochkin's joke landed, myself. I wouldn't try that approach on everyone here since I don't like hurting people's feelings by accident, but bevethesda's struck me as being fairly thick-skinned in the past. Although it isn't a best practice to use a quote joke on a guy who you know can't get it, since he just said he hadn't watched the show. I know the joke wasn't for bevethesda, but it's kind of unfair . And it's just a category mistake to call that post an "argument." Lavochkin's not usually in that business. I used the word more in the sense of a broken bone being an argument for more caution in the future. A crime wave being an argument for trying to lower poverty and reduce unemployment. A comment off-handedly accusing people of monstrous things parroted from a show on the first page of its discussion thread being an argument either for that show not being written particularly carefully about what messages it's giving out, or a show that's deliberately written to give off pretty extreme messaging. That's what I meant by implicitly calling the comment's existence an argument.
|
|
inherit
2249
0
705
Treacherous J Slither
939
December 2016
jslither
|
Post by Treacherous J Slither on Nov 26, 2019 21:16:29 GMT
I find it amusing that the word "pandering" is used by certain people when a main character in some form of media isn't a straight white man.
As if media that has a straight white man as a main character isn't "pandering" to straight white men.
"Woke" is used in a similar way.
I don't see this show as pandering or woke. It simply seems like an entertaining alternative history with superheroes. Just like the source material.
|
|
Noxluxe
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 1,979 Likes: 3,492
inherit
10359
0
Mar 14, 2019 16:10:11 GMT
3,492
Noxluxe
1,979
Jul 21, 2018 23:55:09 GMT
July 2018
noxluxe
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Noxluxe on Nov 27, 2019 2:54:36 GMT
I find it amusing that the word "pandering" is used by certain people when a main character in some form of media isn't a straight white man. As if media that has a straight white man as a main character isn't "pandering" to straight white men. "Woke" is used in a similar way. I don't see this show as pandering or woke. It simply seems like an entertaining alternative history with superheroes. Just like the source material. You may be right that the disproportionate prevalence of white protagonists can count as pandering, but seriously? Black vigilantes getting to kidnap white guys on suspicion of racism and having them submitted to CIA interrogation techniques that draws out their secret racistness, and then using that as justification for having them surveilled by law enforcement, and all that being portrayed unambigiously as a really awesome and cool and heroic thing to do, doesn't strike you in any way as wish-fulfillment and pandering to current extreme political trends? I'll grant that it definitely isn't all that's going on, there are plenty of other things to find entertaining about the show. But pretending that the show doesn't have a "woke" and "pandering" element is silly.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Nov 27, 2019 4:12:44 GMT
Excluding the the show's propaganda it tenuosly references Moore's original work, and thematically has fuck all to do with the original. It's a blatant cash grab that make's DC's recent exploitation of the IP seem earnest by contrast. Yes i'll say it, Doomsday Clock is shit too. I don't check you on this. What do you figure the original was about, thematically? My impression was that the original was largely about unaccountable power. Hence the title. And "tenuously" is just silly. It's a direct sequel. That's only a surface level theme, It goes deeper than that. The original served primarily as a deconstruction of the mainstream hero archetype of the time that Moore despised, with Rorschach and Ozy (two halves of the same coin) symbolizing his criticisms of the uncompromising ubermensch, mainstream heroes, who he considered fascists. Labeling the tv show a direct sequel is debatable thanks to Moore's avoidance of project and is essentially an over glorified What If story because of the existence of DC's/Warner Bros own follow up series that is unfortunately considered canon.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Nov 27, 2019 4:40:50 GMT
I find it amusing that the word "pandering" is used by certain people when a main character in some form of media isn't a straight white man. As if media that has a straight white man as a main character isn't "pandering" to straight white men. "Woke" is used in a similar way. I don't see this show as pandering or woke. It simply seems like an entertaining alternative history with superheroes. Just like the source material. You may be right that the disproportionate prevalence of white protagonists can count as pandering, but seriously? Black vigilantes getting to kidnap white guys on suspicion of racism and having them submitted to CIA interrogation techniques that draws out their secret racistness, and then using that as justification for having them surveilled by law enforcement, and all that being portrayed unambigiously as a really awesome and cool and heroic thing to do, doesn't strike you in any way as wish-fulfillment and pandering to current extreme political trends? I'll grant that it definitely isn't all that's going on, there are plenty of other things to find entertaining about the show. But pretending that the show doesn't have a "woke" and "pandering" element is silly. Moore wouldn't have militarised police or vigilantes going Gestapo on civies be viewed postively, which flies in the face of his anarch beliefs and the themes of the original Watchmen. Racebaiting for views be damned, the show with each passing episode seems more like the writers didn't understand the underlying theme of the original.
|
|
inherit
2249
0
705
Treacherous J Slither
939
December 2016
jslither
|
Post by Treacherous J Slither on Nov 27, 2019 5:37:11 GMT
You may be right that the disproportionate prevalence of white protagonists can count as pandering, but seriously? Black vigilantes getting to kidnap white guys on suspicion of racism and having them submitted to CIA interrogation techniques that draws out their secret racistness, and then using that as justification for having them surveilled by law enforcement, and all that being portrayed unambigiously as a really awesome and cool and heroic thing to do, doesn't strike you in any way as wish-fulfillment and pandering to current extreme political trends? I'll grant that it definitely isn't all that's going on, there are plenty of other things to find entertaining about the show. But pretending that the show doesn't have a "woke" and "pandering" element is silly. Moore wouldn't have militarised police or vigilantes going Gestapo on civies be viewed postively, which flies in the face of his anarch beliefs and the themes of the original Watchmen. Racebaiting for views be damned, the show with each passing episode seems more like the writers didn't understand the underlying theme of the original. Is it viewed positively? Because I don't see it that way. Masked policemen? That's scary af imo. Race baiting for views huh? Lots of non white people on the show must mean some agenda is being pushed huh? I see.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Nov 27, 2019 6:33:40 GMT
Moore wouldn't have militarised police or vigilantes going Gestapo on civies be viewed postively, which flies in the face of his anarch beliefs and the themes of the original Watchmen. Racebaiting for views be damned, the show with each passing episode seems more like the writers didn't understand the underlying theme of the original. Is it viewed positively? Because I don't see it that way. Masked policemen? That's scary af imo. Race baiting for views huh? Lots of non white people on the show must mean some agenda is being pushed huh? I see. They are masked because the angry alt righter maga proud boyz nazi 7KKK will murder them and their families if they knew their identities. That's the justification Lindelof establishes early on for the Gestapo like police, and has done little to draw criticism to the militarization of the police, and the police state. Race baiting more like race exploiting. We see racism as a subject but Lindelof doesn't address it's origins, or it's socio-economic impact on black americans. We are left with thinly veiled revenge fantasy white guilt porn from a pasty liberal who thinks referencing Black Wallstreet makes him groundbreaking and controversial, but does little to address the subject of racism beyond using it as selling point to mask the vapidity of his script.
|
|
inherit
802
0
Apr 19, 2024 23:19:07 GMT
5,241
B. Hieronymus Da
Unapologetic Western Chauvinist. Barefoot. Great Toenails
3,603
August 2016
bevesthda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by B. Hieronymus Da on Nov 27, 2019 6:36:03 GMT
I find it amusing that the word "pandering" is used by certain people when a main character in some form of media isn't a straight white man. As if media that has a straight white man as a main character isn't "pandering" to straight white men. "Woke" is used in a similar way. Seriously? While I have seen that narrative around, I consider it ludicrously easy to dismiss. You just have to point to the wealth of stories and movies that don't feature "a straight white man" lead, and yet don't attract this criticism. Just consider like every Wesley Snipes, Denzel Washington, Samuel Jackson, Laurence Fishburn, Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, Chow Yun Fat, Toshiro Mifune, Meryl Streep, Sandra Bullock (except Ocean's 8), Whoopie Goldberg, Angela Basset, Sigourney Weaver movie ever made. And the recent blockbusters 'Wonder Woman' and 'Black Panther'. I think that argument may have grounds in projecting. These activists and propagandists care greatly about "representation". Normal people don't. White males particularly, seems obliviously indifferent to representation, but black males don't care either, neither do normal non-feminist women. Just give them a likable character who behaves and reasons in a rational way, that they can care about, and a good story, and they'll be happy.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 27, 2019 7:14:20 GMT
Black vigilantes getting to kidnap white guys on suspicion of racism and having them submitted to CIA interrogation techniques that draws out their secret racistness, and then using that as justification for having them surveilled by law enforcement, and all that being portrayed unambigiously as a really awesome and cool and heroic thing to do, doesn't strike you in any way as wish-fulfillment and pandering to current extreme political trends? I'll grant that it definitely isn't all that's going on, there are plenty of other things to find entertaining about the show. But pretending that the show doesn't have a "woke" and "pandering" element is silly. Sounds like a typical episode of 24, except that it's being done to a white guy rather than by a white guy. Where'd you get the idea that this stuff is being presented unambiguously as a really awesome and cool thing to do? That's like saying that Rorschach was presented as an unambiguous hero in the original comic.This is literally the first time I've seen anyone say that he read the scene that way. Edit: although on second thought, some comments from the haters could be interpreted as being pretty close to this. So maybe I have read opinions like this but didn't pay enough attention to them; when someone obviously doesn't get a show I tend to dismiss his remarks out of hand, which is a bad habit. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a strong correlation between adopting your interpretation and disliking the show, and adopting my interpretation and liking the show. IOW, you dislike the show for doing something that its fans don't see it as doing in the first place; the fans find this sort of thing ambiguous, and like the ambiguity. (Should I cue up the "conservatives are uncomfortable with ambiguity" material?)
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 27, 2019 7:35:19 GMT
I don't check you on this. What do you figure the original was about, thematically? My impression was that the original was largely about unaccountable power. Hence the title. And "tenuously" is just silly. It's a direct sequel. That's only a surface level theme, It goes deeper than that. The original served primarily as a deconstruction of the mainstream hero archetype of the time that Moore despised, with Rorschach and Ozy (two halves of the same coin) symbolizing his criticisms of the uncompromising ubermensch, mainstream heroes, who he considered fascists. Labeling the tv show a direct sequel is debatable thanks to Moore's avoidance of project and is essentially an over glorified What If story because of the existence of DC's/Warner Bros own follow up series that is unfortunately considered canon. If you want to debate it being a direct sequel, give it a shot. As for dueling canon, standard practice is that the most recent entry is canon until it isn't, unless specifically branded as noncanon. Has DC issued any statement about this? But canon is fundamentally silly, and I don't really have a dog in that fight. And of course the series doesn't recapitulate the exact themes of the original comic. Why should it? We had that already. The point is to take the basic theme and do something original with it.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 27, 2019 7:58:02 GMT
Thought that was clearer than it was. What have you got for a working, objective definition of "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage" that can be applied by someone who doesn't share your emotional reaction to the "ugly, stupid, pandering, preaching, woke garbage"? Why? Language is a tool to project ideas from one brain to another brain. Part of how that works is that language doesn't only contain message, but also always continuously defines itself, by subtly providing information about how the language is supposed to be decoded. If that doesn't work, it's sometimes worthwhile to use more language. Sometimes not. Still, "ugly" seems to be generally well understood, though it's typically considered to be subjective. "Stupid", much the same. "Pandering" is maybe a more vague concept, but "preaching" is something I'd bet lots of people get. I'm getting how you feel about the things in the "woke, etc." conceptual box. What I'm not clear about is which specific works actually go into that conceptual box, and what the criteria are. While I could use whatever the incel neckbeards are ranting about lately as a first approximation, that strikes me as being a fairly imprecise technique.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Nov 27, 2019 8:22:24 GMT
That's only a surface level theme, It goes deeper than that. The original served primarily as a deconstruction of the mainstream hero archetype of the time that Moore despised, with Rorschach and Ozy (two halves of the same coin) symbolizing his criticisms of the uncompromising ubermensch, mainstream heroes, who he considered fascists. Labeling the tv show a direct sequel is debatable thanks to Moore's avoidance of project and is essentially an over glorified What If story because of the existence of DC's/Warner Bros own follow up series that is unfortunately considered canon. If you want to debate it being a direct sequel, give it a shot. As for dueling canon, standard practice is that the most recent entry is canon until it isn't, unless specifically branded as noncanon. Has DC issued any statement about this? But canon is fundamentally silly, and I don't really have a dog in that fight. And of course the series doesn't recapitulate the exact themes of the original comic. Why should it? We had that already. The point is to take the basic theme and do something original with it. Iirc Doomsday Clock is canon to their mythos after they finessed the property from Moore who doesn't acknowledge it, while the events were referenced in Batman, Superman and The Justice League which take place after the event which is still ongoing because it was delayed due to staff issues. Tbh i wouldn't consider relations in a fictional version of an American city rife with racial tension an original story. American History X already did what HBO's Watchmen attempts to do but wrapped it up in 2 hours and without the ridiculous costumes.
|
|
Noxluxe
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 1,979 Likes: 3,492
inherit
10359
0
Mar 14, 2019 16:10:11 GMT
3,492
Noxluxe
1,979
Jul 21, 2018 23:55:09 GMT
July 2018
noxluxe
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Noxluxe on Nov 27, 2019 11:25:09 GMT
1) Sounds like a typical episode of 24, except that it's being done to a white guy rather than by a white guy. 2) Where'd you get the idea that this stuff is being presented unambiguously as a really awesome and cool thing to do? That's like saying that Rorschach was presented as an unambiguous hero in the original comic.This is literally the first time I've seen anyone say that he read the scene that way. 3) Edit: although on second thought, some comments from the haters could be interpreted as being pretty close to this. So maybe I have read opinions like this but didn't pay enough attention to them; when someone obviously doesn't get a show I tend to dismiss his remarks out of hand, which is a bad habit. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a strong correlation between adopting your interpretation and disliking the show, and adopting my interpretation and liking the show. IOW, you dislike the show for doing something that its fans don't see it as doing in the first place; the fans find this ambiguous, and like the ambiguity. 1) And... you wouldn't describe those plotlines as semi-offensive garbage too? I'm confused, are you arguing that those situations aren't pandering and wrong-headed here just because they appear on other pandering and wrong-headed shows that lean in the other direction? I don't know "24", but I'm imagining it's a worthless police procedural with tenuous links to reality like so many others, and can't say I'm a fan of those either. 2) I didn't see the need to tune into the internet consensus before discussing my own impression of a tv series. If you feel like you've conducted a survey about how people have reacted to the first episode and don't find me consistent with it then I don't know what to tell you. Rorsarch was constantly derided and mistrusted by everyone else. The main character here seemed to have complete and unfailing support from everyone whose job it would have been to curtail her behavior, and was ultimately vindicated for her actions, bragging about her instincts and presented in every possible way as a badass who did the right thing because others didn't have the balls to. That isn't ambiguous at all, it's a positive portrayal. 3) Sounds like you're pretty quick to decide who's a "hater", too. I don't think I've said anything to indicate that I outright dislike the show, much less that I resent other people liking it. I just find this aspect of it pretty distasteful, and am not otherwise interested enough to watch the series in its entirety. There were a few things I enjoyed about the first episode, just not enough to draw me in.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 27, 2019 18:00:49 GMT
Well, my major objection to 24 is that it shows torture as always working, which just isn't true; too often you get the prisoner to cough up whatever he figures you want to hear, which isn't a useful way to get intelligence. I don't have any particular problem with the main character being someone who does bad things even if he's nominally the hero of the show.
Re point 2: I was just pointing out that your interpretation sounded bizarre to me, and seemed to be an outlier (two separate things). I don't know what your metric is for "presented unambiguously as a really cool and awesome thing to do," unless merely showing a main character doing it without being punished is sufficient.
You're simply confused about the ambiguity. The ambiguity extents to the entire police force.; Sister Night having the support of the whole police force just implicates them in the behavior Are the Seventh Kavalry right about them? They're certainly right about the government running a false-flag attack to keep the population cowed. Do we really need some character to stand up and say "this is wrong" for the benefit of the audience?
As for point 3, I don't need to decide who the haters are. They've been proclaiming it themselves. All I meant to say there is that your interpretation may actually be common among haters, and I was wrong to think of it as a bizarre outlier.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Nov 27, 2019 18:09:10 GMT
If you want to debate it being a direct sequel, give it a shot. As for dueling canon, standard practice is that the most recent entry is canon until it isn't, unless specifically branded as noncanon. Has DC issued any statement about this? But canon is fundamentally silly, and I don't really have a dog in that fight. And of course the series doesn't recapitulate the exact themes of the original comic. Why should it? We had that already. The point is to take the basic theme and do something original with it. Iirc Doomsday Clock is canon to their mythos after they finessed the property from Moore who doesn't acknowledge it, while the events were referenced in Batman, Superman and The Justice League which take place after the event which is still ongoing because it was delayed due to staff issues. I don't know anything about Doomsday Clock, so I'll take your word for it. Like I said, canon issues are silly, and I don't play. (For instance, for me LSH continuity ends with the Glorithverse, unless something better comes along someday. What DC says is not of interest.) I still don't see how the "tenuous" thing is supposed to work. In order to not be "tenuous" they'd have to... repeat the themes of the original comic exactly? I'm not coming up with any sort of usable criterion there.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Nov 27, 2019 21:31:03 GMT
Iirc Doomsday Clock is canon to their mythos after they finessed the property from Moore who doesn't acknowledge it, while the events were referenced in Batman, Superman and The Justice League which take place after the event which is still ongoing because it was delayed due to staff issues. I don't know anything about Doomsday Clock, so I'll take your word for it. Like I said, canon issues are silly, and I don't play. (For instance, for me LSH continuity ends with the Glorithverse, unless something better comes along someday. What DC says is not of interest.) I still don't see how the "tenuous" thing is supposed to work. In order to not be "tenuous" they'd have to... repeat the themes of the original comic exactly? I'm not coming up with any sort of usable criterion there. The tenuous relation comes from the show being a debatable sequel due to the original creators lack of involvement in the show's production, Lindelof taking liberties with established characters like giving Hooded Justice a secret identity without Gibbons' or Moore's input, a character like Laurie ever being included, and contradictory depictions of superheros as positive figures despite Watchmen being Moore's criticism, and rebuke of superheros as a concept. The series reads more like overglorified fanfiction than a proper sequel.
|
|
Noxluxe
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 1,979 Likes: 3,492
inherit
10359
0
Mar 14, 2019 16:10:11 GMT
3,492
Noxluxe
1,979
Jul 21, 2018 23:55:09 GMT
July 2018
noxluxe
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Noxluxe on Nov 27, 2019 23:59:21 GMT
1) I don't have any particular problem with the main character being someone who does bad things even if he's nominally the hero of the show. 2) Re point 2: I was just pointing out that your interpretation sounded bizarre to me, and seemed to be an outlier (two separate things). I don't know what your metric is for "presented unambiguously as a really cool and awesome thing to do," unless merely showing a main character doing it without being punished is sufficient. You're simply confused about the ambiguity. The ambiguity extents to the entire police force.; Sister Night having the support of the whole police force just implicates them in the behavior Are the Seventh Kavalry right about them? They're certainly right about the government running a false-flag attack to keep the population cowed. Do we really need some character to stand up and say "this is wrong" for the benefit of the audience? 3) As for point 3, I don't need to decide who the haters are. They've been proclaiming it themselves. All I meant to say there is that your interpretation may actually be common among haters, and I was wrong to think of it as a bizarre outlier. 1) I do have a problem with it, if nothing whatsoever is done to imply that it's costing them their soul, fraying their personal relationships or outright backfires. There are plenty of subtle ways to make it seem like a character is paying for making immoral decisions in ways that would make it clearly inadvisable to emulate them, and I didn't sense anything of the sort in the first episode of Watchmen. Every scene with Sister Night is shot to make her look like the biggest and smartest badass in the room who knows exactly what's going down, not a dangerous sociopath who is a threat to civilians and shouldn't be allowed to walk the streets. 2) The lack of ambiguity extends to the entire police force, you mean. Far more is done to excuse and justify the police being what they are than is done to show how insane and horrible the whole prospect of masked law enforcement is. Its leadership letting themselves be bossed around by maverick grunts who terrorize civilians is portrayed as them being respectful and knowing their place because the grunt in question is just so good at it. Seems like you're the one who's confused about how ambiguity works. Portraying something horrible in a positive manner and relying on the viewer to know it's wrong anyway isn't ambiguity, it's just a positive portrayal of something horrible. I don't know the show's writers, I have no idea if they understand the messages they're sending, because they're not showing that they do from the get-go. 3) Of course. All of them being "haters" and "neckbeards" and "incels", there's no reason you should be bothered to think about anything they're saying. It's not like they're also just fans of good television who want to enjoy their shows and see meaningful stories played out just like you do, only their opinions vary marginally from yours. Label them based on images in your head and dismiss their thoughts because they don't "get it". That's the open-minded way.
|
|
inherit
Champion of Kirkwall
1212
0
8,023
Sifr
3,737
Aug 25, 2016 20:05:11 GMT
August 2016
sifr
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by Sifr on Nov 30, 2019 10:50:26 GMT
Black vigilantes getting to kidnap white guys on suspicion of racism and having them submitted to CIA interrogation techniques that draws out their secret racistness, and then using that as justification for having them surveilled by law enforcement, and all that being portrayed unambigiously as a really awesome and cool and heroic thing to do, doesn't strike you in any way as wish-fulfillment and pandering to current extreme political trends? She's actually a cop, not a vigilante, who's acting with the support of her entire police department. That being said, it was never presented as a good thing that she jumped the gun and already had the suspect beaten up and in her trunk, before she got the official go-ahead from her chief.
Putting people through the "racist detector" and beating information out of them also wasn't treated as standard operating procedure, but rather the police invoking the need for "enhanced interrogation" methods to take down a group of domestic terrorists, who at that point had already killed one of their own (in addition to the lives they during the "White Night").
When Laurie comments on how they got the location of the barn out of the suspect, Looking Glass claims to have "not seen anything", showing that the methods they used to get the information were obviously illegal. This was the reason Sister Night wanted to be alone with the suspect to get the information, in order to protect her fellow offers by giving them plausible deniability for her actions.
Even though the 7thK are obviously bad guys, none of what the cops do is presented as "good" or "heroic" in any way. They use shady, underhanded and illegal methods to get information, frequently infringe on citizen's rights and obstruct each other and other agency's investigations.
The tenuous relation comes from the show being a debatable sequel due to the original creators lack of involvement in the show's production, Lindelof taking liberties with established characters like giving Hooded Justice a secret identity without Gibbons' or Moore's input, a character like Laurie ever being included, and c ontradictory depictions of superheros as positive figures despite Watchmen being Moore's criticism, and rebuke of superheros as a concept. The series reads more like overglorified fanfiction than a proper sequel.I'd disagree on this, because we see that the 1970's Keene Act banning masked vigilantes is still being heavily enforced almost 50 years later, showing that the public still doesn't approve of superheroes. Laurie works for the FBI (albeit seemingly only to stay out of prison) to catch vigilantes and frequently derides her former career, lampshades how the masked cops are really no different to vigilantes and the tendency for people in masks to always think of themselves as the "good" guys.
The only "positive" depiction of masked heroes I'd say on the show is the in-universe nostalgia people seem to have for the Minutemen-era, such as "American Hero Story" being a popular show that sensationalises the lives of the 1940s heroes. However this was equally present in the original graphic novel, where former Minutemen would often reminisce about that bygone era, even though they were perfectly aware the "good old days" were anything but that.
The "American Hero Story" show-within-a-show might be a homage to the "Tales of the Black Freighter" comic-within-the-comic of the original novel, which likewise often paralleled the main plot. Much like the above criticism of HBO's Watchmen being "overglorified fanfiction" that spits on the legacy of the original characters and canon, we even hear Looking Glass deride "American Hero Story" as not being historical accurate and playing extremely fast and loose with characters and facts.
|
|
inherit
113
0
8,455
Hier0phant
3,815
August 2016
hier0phant
|
Post by Hier0phant on Dec 1, 2019 23:56:56 GMT
The tenuous relation comes from the show being a debatable sequel due to the original creators lack of involvement in the show's production, Lindelof taking liberties with established characters like giving Hooded Justice a secret identity without Gibbons' or Moore's input, a character like Laurie ever being included, and c ontradictory depictions of superheros as positive figures despite Watchmen being Moore's criticism, and rebuke of superheros as a concept. The series reads more like overglorified fanfiction than a proper sequel.I'd disagree on this, because we see that the 1970's Keene Act banning masked vigilantes is still being heavily enforced almost 50 years later, showing that the public still doesn't approve of superheroes. Laurie works for the FBI (albeit seemingly only to stay out of prison) to catch vigilantes and frequently derides her former career, lampshades how the masked cops are really no different to vigilantes and the tendency for people in masks to always think of themselves as the "good" guys.
The only "positive" depiction of masked heroes I'd say on the show is the in-universe nostalgia people seem to have for the Minutemen-era, such as "American Hero Story" being a popular show that sensationalises the lives of the 1940s heroes. However this was equally present in the original graphic novel, where former Minutemen would often reminisce about that bygone era, even though they were perfectly aware the "good old days" were anything but that.
The "American Hero Story" show-within-a-show might be a homage to the "Tales of the Black Freighter" comic-within-the-comic of the original novel, which likewise often paralleled the main plot. Much like the above criticism of HBO's Watchmen being "overglorified fanfiction" that spits on the legacy of the original characters and canon, we even hear Looking Glass deride "American Hero Story" as not being historical accurate and playing extremely fast and loose with characters and facts. The Keene Act was repealed because of the 7th Kalvary, why a small terrorist group that is predominantly based in one state warrants this nuclear option when martial law is an option is beyond my reasoning, besides it being a possible yet sloppy justification for Sister Night's unimpeded vigilantism. The police who are supposed to be facists, the establishment, are by default depicted as positive figures when their foils are cop killing white supremacist terrorists who fire bombs churches filled with children which muddies Moore's message my making the fascists sympathetic, and the anti establishment figures unsympathetic to the average viewer. Whatever duality or grey conflict Lindelof tried to create between the police and 7k will be ignored because of this, and rightfully viewed as a black and white conflict (White Night incident). About the heroes' positive depictions, when Sister Night is depicted as anything other than deluded, ineffectual, narcissistic, psychotic her portrayal contradictsWatchmen's message on superheros. Plus Laurie's character as is raises too many questions surrounding her knowledge of Veidt's ruse, and her inclusion seems more like Lindelof is just exploiting the character in an effort to haphazardly tie in his plot to Moore's story.
|
|
inherit
Champion of Kirkwall
1212
0
8,023
Sifr
3,737
Aug 25, 2016 20:05:11 GMT
August 2016
sifr
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by Sifr on Dec 5, 2019 6:27:40 GMT
The Keene Act was repealed because of the 7th Kalvary, why a small terrorist group that is predominantly based in one state warrants this nuclear option when martial law is an option is beyond my reasoning, besides it being a possible yet sloppy justification for Sister Night's unimpeded vigilantism. Has the Keene Act been explicitly stated to have been repealed? It was still in existence when Laurie and Dan were arrested for violating it in 1995 and Laurie arrested the pseudo-Batman at the bank in Ep 3 for seemingly violating the Act with his illegal vigilantism. It's worth restating that Sister Night isn't a vigilante, she's a masked cop.
We have to draw a distinction because unlike illegal vigilantes who act with no sanction or oversight from the state, the police are still bound by the same rules, regulations and limitations that applied before they began wearing masks, the only difference is that now their identities are no longer subject to public disclosure. That's why despite wearing masks, the cops still have to get authorisation before they are able to use their firearms, unlike vigilantes who would not seek permission to act.
We do see the masked cops are repeatedly violating suspect's rights, however this might be explained by a remark that Looking Glass makes early on, stating that as terrorists, the members of the 7thK don't have any rights (suggesting a suspension of habeas corpus and normal due process).
Admittedly though, this timeline's US having something similar to the "Patriot Act" doesn't seemingly gel with what we're told about them being very left-wing. Nor would Laurie make a point of bringing up the issue of prisoner rights (even if she doesn't care) and Looking Glass have to cover for Sister Night beating information out of a suspect, if these sorts of activities were being "officially" sanctioned. This more suggests that the Tulsa PD are overstepping their bounds when it comes to trying to take down the 7thK and engaging in activities they're not normally supposed to.
It does not necessarily mean that all masked cops in the US are prone to and/or actively engaging in vigilante justice, only that it is a in-universe concern whether the power of anonymity from a mask might make some more liable to succumb to vigilante tactics?
(Laurie seems to be under the belief that there isn't any difference, but that could be chalked up to her cynicism)
|
|