Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
"The Lorax" and "Arriety" will teach young children the dangers of environmentalism, warns Lou Dobbs
2012-03-03 21:53:02
edited 2012-03-03 21:53:02 in Media
I clench my fists and yell "anime" towards an uncaring, absent God, and swear solemnly to press my thumbs into Chocolate America's eyeballs until he is blinded, to directly emasculate sporting figures, to beat the shit out of tumblr users with baseball bats, and to quietly appreciate what Waylon Smithers being gay means to me.
http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2012/02/lorax-secret-world-of-arrietty-will-teac.php
Man, fuck Lou Dobbs for a) insinuating that these are bad things, b) telling people not to go see movies, something that could cost people their jobs if they don't get enough revenue, c) telling people to protest in the stupidest, most dickish way possible, and d) lambasting these films as propaganda by Obama when there is a literal propaganda film out in theaters right now.
Mods, please change my name to "FuckYouLouDobbs"
Comments
This shit again?
You know what, I'm going to keep tabs on every children's movie coming out this year and see if some conservative douche says its corrupting kids with "liberal values".
Some conservative douche will always say that. Just like there are liberal douches that rail on pretty much everything under the sun that doesn't address LGBT issues whether or not it's even remotely related.
Douches will be douches and they come in all colors of axes to grind. And yes, fuck Lou Dobbs.
"Just like there are liberal douches that rail on pretty much everything under the sun that doesn't address LGBT issues whether or not it's even remotely related."
I've never seen anything like this in my life.
Happens with cartoons a lot.
Ms. Magazine thingie on MLP, perhaps? It's not so much LGBT issues as well as genderwank that is hilariously farfetched.
"It's possible that in future decades Jackson's LOTR may well become most notable for its non-stop depiction of war. Has there ever been a series of movies that depicted war so extensively, so lavishly, so approvingly? For this, Tolkien is not entirely to blame: as well as the fighting, his book contains many extended moments of repose, of attempts at beauty; in chapters like The House of Healing, or the journey through Mordor, he tried to show the misery of war as much as the romance. But Jackson dwells on the scenes of battle and skims over everything else. He serves up what is unquestionably a pro-war film, depicting the righteous and desperate struggle of pure good over pure evil, the forces of civilization defending themselves against a mass horde that wants to destroy it at all costs. Why make such a movie? Why, in particular, make it at this time in history? Like it or not, artists don't exist in a vacuum. Their work inevitable reflects something of the culture and the times in which it is made. Jackson, perhaps unwittingly, has produced a work that plays into the hands of the neoconservative paranoiacs in the White House. He would probably protest against such an accusation, but then he would be walking around with his eyes down. It's about time he and other fanboys looked up and took a bit of responsibility for their cultural contributions.
It wasn't just MLP, though that was one of the reasons 4chan noticed it so quickly. Disney gets it a lot too.
^^ Uh... Wow. Do they not realize that black-and-white morality has existed in fiction for as long as it's existed? It's not like the film tries to make the black-and-white mentality as the moral of the story, it's just used as a device to tell it. A work of fiction will rarely encourage any sort of behavior if it doesn't go out of its way to have a moral.
@Bee: I mean liberal values specifically. I know people have been railing on X because it's "immoral" or "Satanic" for years, but blatantly attacking something because its message opposes right-wing corporate interests is a whole new level of stupid.
See also: That fiasco with the Muppets movie.
I'm confused as to the enviromental message behind Arrietty. They don't ever even mention the environment. At least the Muppets had the flimsy fact that an oil baron was the villain.
Supposedly, the message behind Arrietty isn't about the environment, but about helping poor people and the less fortunate. This brings up two points: that Lou Dobbs hates poor people and the less fortunate, and that he can't comprehend the fact that the people in the movie aren't socially small, they are literally small. As in, the size of insects.
I guess the concept of a group of people who survives by taking what they need from those who won't miss it is too socialistic for them to like?
The more likely answer is that he hates Jesus.
Some of Miyazaki's past films have been enviromentalist so maybe he assumed this one would be too?
Then again, I might be assuming that he knows more information than he actually does.
The environment is precious, people do wasteful unnecessary things that damage it, these are bad things to do, and opposing them is right.
I refuse to even consider any of this a matter of opinion or debate. Almost the entire scientific community, the people whose lives are built on objective pursuit of straightforward truth, are concerned for the environment and agree that we should improve how we utilize natural resources.
Anybody who thinks "environmentalism" is a bad word is a straight-up cartoon show villain. People only feel threatened by environmentalism because they're selfish, worthless human sicknesses who want to continue being a problem.
there is a literal propaganda film out in theaters right now.
Wait, which one? (I'm hopeless when it comes to knowing what films are in theatres because I usually just wait for the rental)
I believe it's...Act of Valor, it's called? Meant to drum up support for special forces, made with actual Navy SEALs.
Which consequently fails as a movie because actual Navy SEALS, for all their special operations skills, also fail at being actors.
Should have hired actors that looked like the SEALS for the non-action parts, then?
Which consequently fails as a movie because actual Navy SEALS, for all their special operations skills, also fail at being actors.
Is it necessary to act when you're playing yourself?
Yes. It's necessary to know how to deliver the lines and how you look when being filmed. Because just being yourself isn't good acting. Good acting is lying and finding some emotional honesty to back it up.
Yeah, basically. It's not wholly unscripted. They mostly designed the action sequences I think, which are apparently very realistic. But they didn't write the parts in between, and the script is apparently kind of meh or worse. Acting from a script is not quite "playing yourself".