Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

halfmanhalfbronco

Criticism of Netflix "Cuties" is now right wing, QANON, racist, sexist BS?

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

I remember they said that about the movie Kids way back when. Then I watched it. It was incredibly uncomfortable, which was the point. The creators wanted to show the depravity of urban teenage life. I didn’t think the movie was great, but I did see what they were trying to do once I watched it.

I have no idea what what the point of this series is, or if it hits the mark, I’m not sure if the pitchforks are warranted or not, but I don’t think your outrage comes with context either.

Gummo was a steaming pile of crap and IMO undermined a lot of the argument that KIDS was somehow a profound statement.

The people who called for those movies to be censored were crazy.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ridgeview2 said:

I'm probably way off on the mark with this, but this is just my opinion. I've been reading a lot of articles and reviews for this film which opened Pandora's box of controversy with friends I know talking about it. Seems to me that this director tried to be like Mel Brooks with a controversial topic, but completely missed the mark with his message and failed spectacularly. 

From the publicity it's generating, maybe not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, toonkee said:

I just don't want to watch it. I already get sexualizing little girls is gross.

This is my problem.  Was there a segment of the population that was on the fence about this, that the documentary was trying to reach?  No.  So how do you justify, literally sexualizing children for shock value as being justified?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Yes, yes it is.

This is what they call an impasse. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

I don't think you need to go for shock value to make the point that child sexualization is wrong, clear.

Kids wasn’t about that, though. Kids was trying to shock complacency away from parents. Whether or not it was effective in doing that is up for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Do I have to inform myself to form an informed opinion?

In a word, yes.

 

I find the idea of sexualizing young girls to be gross. The initial claim is that this film does exactly that. But even a cursory read of the first of your links states a POV - from the film's creator nonetheless - that frames the narrative of the movie in an entirely different light. And it seems to please the film critic crowd, many who (at least according to the links) see the movie as as a critique of the sexualization of young girls, not a glorification of it.

Does a documentary about the brutality of ISIS glorify killing? Did Tiger King glorify animal abuse?  

So as a result, if I really want to have an opinion about the movie (as opposed to the disgusting idea of sexualizing preteen girls), I will have to watch it. But as I have no desire to, I guess I'll have to live without investing in a conviction or strong opinion about the movie. :shrug:

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a single one of my democrat friends who attempted to watch it wasn't completely against it. This seems more crazy vs rational than it is D vs R. I won't even bother to watch it, since I have always thought this type of stuff to be weird.  I first saw this with Jon Benet and wondered why they were dolling up little girls like that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheSanDiegan said:

In a word, yes.

 

I find the idea of sexualizing young girls to be gross. The initial claim is that this film does exactly that. But even a cursory read of the first of your links states a POV - from the film's creator nonetheless - that frames the narrative of the movie in an entirely different light. And it seems to please the film critic crowd, many who (at least according to the links) see the movie as as a critique of the sexualization of young girls, not a glorification of it.

Does a documentary about the brutality of ISIS glorify killing? Did Tiger King glorify animal abuse?  

So as a result, if I really want to have an opinion about the movie (as opposed to the disgusting idea of sexualizing preteen girls), I will have to watch it. But as I have no desire to, I guess I'll have to live without investing in a conviction or strong opinion about the movie. :shrug:

 

If the ISIS documentary decapitated a person, just for the documentary, I would have a problem.  If Tiger King shot a tiger on camera, just for the documentary, I would have a problem.

Do you have to see puppies being murdered to know puppy murder is bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Gummo was a steaming pile of crap and IMO undermined a lot of the argument that KIDS was somehow a profound statement.

The people who called for those movies to be censored were crazy.

Agreed. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ridgeview2 said:

I'm probably way off on the mark with this, but this is just my opinion. I've been reading a lot of articles and reviews for this film which opened Pandora's box of controversy with friends I know talking about it. Seems to me that this director tried to be like Mel Brooks with a controversial topic, but completely missed the mark with his message and failed spectacularly. 

The writer/director is a woman, by the way. 

I was talking about this with a friend of mine earlier today. We're both parents of young girls; my daughter is 9, and her daughter (also my goddaughter) is 11. We've both kinda come to the same opinion on it, neither one of us having watched it. We both feel that it's wrong to use child actors to prove a point that exploitation of children exists and is wrong, because the film is effectively doing the very same thing it's purporting to combat. 

That said, I also think that the point, through the art of cinema, was supposed to make people feel uncomfortable. It was supposed to make people upset. To that end, it has accomplished those goals. It's at the bare minimum stirred up a global conversation on the topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that this is a hot topic within "altright" and/or conservative circles when I don't seem to recall similar protestations about such preexisting tripe like "Toddlers and Tiaras" that has been part of our cultural landscape for over a decade.

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Not a single one of my democrat friends who attempted to watch it wasn't completely against it. This seems more crazy vs rational than it is D vs R. I won't even bother to watch it, since I have always thought this type of stuff to be weird.  I first saw this with Jon Benet and wondered why they were dolling up little girls like that.

 

 

Honestly it seems like it's meant for women of a certain age who probably have feelings about their own coming of age...I haven't watched and it seems most of the men on this board haven't either but I wonder if we asked everyone's wife or GF and see how many watched it...my hunch is many more women are watching this then men.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

If the ISIS documentary decapitated a person, just for the documentary, I would have a problem.  If Tiger King shot a tiger on camera, just for the documentary, I would have a problem.

Do you have to see puppies being murdered to know puppy murder is bad?

No, but if someone makes a documentary about murdering puppies, you'd have to see the documentary to have an informed opinion about the documentary.

Did you even read my post? Because that was the entire bloody point of it, innit?

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Toddlers in Tiaras" ran for like 8 seasons on TLC. 

Happiness is a comedy with a scene where a boy is molested. 

Little Miss Sunshine has a scene where a little girl does a strip tease. 

I don't see Ted Cruz writing letters to the DOJ about those. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AztecSU said:

Honestly it seems like it's meant for women of a certain age who probably have feelings about their coming of age...I haven't watched and it seems most of the men on this board haven't either but I wonder if we asked everyone's wife or GF and see how many watched it...my hunch is many more women are watching this then men.

I think the inner WTF for men looking at little girls dolled is much more than women, particularly mothers.  Just based on the penal system (no pun intended) and the societal disparate views on older male/younger females than the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, smltwnrckr said:

"Toddlers in Tiaras" ran for like 8 seasons on TLC. 

Happiness is a comedy with a scene where a boy is molested. 

Little Miss Sunshine has a scene where a little girl does a strip tease. 

I don't see Ted Cruz writing letters to the DOJ about those. 

Timing is everything?

I will say this, its very easy to see why this movie is borderline if not outright just wrong...but right now is maybe the WORST time to form an opinion from other's opinions like the OP seems to be doing. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way... let's get something straight.

The debate over representing something morally wrong in a movie that is also critiquing that thing (child sexualization in this case) is a reasonable debate. 

Sitting senators trying to get the DOJ to investigate Nexflix for child porn over them, and using the "Won't someone think of the children!?!?!?!?!" excuse for censorship (and to attack big tech and hollywood even though its not a hollywood movie) is authoritarianism.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Not a single one of my democrat friends who attempted to watch it wasn't completely against it. This seems more crazy vs rational than it is D vs R. I won't even bother to watch it, since I have always thought this type of stuff to be weird.  I first saw this with Jon Benet and wondered why they were dolling up little girls like that.

It's disgusting. I don't understand howTF a parent could do that to their kids.

Oh, wait... I remember now. We're a narcissistically self-absorbed culture obsessed with such banalities as taking selfies with f*cking food and #posting on social media. That's why.

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...