StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Shinova wrote:He protests against racism against blacks and calls them niggers in the same sentence. How wonderful.

I read that sentence as being sarcastic, but the point stands.

In any case, Black Hawk Down is in my mind one of the best movies that has ever been made. I can, of course, see why many people don't like it, but to say that a film is racist because it is realistic is to demonstrate an incredible level of short-sitedness and ignorance. In this case, the Somalis are virtually all black. The rangers and D-Force operators were almost entirely white. It is not racist, but realistic, to depict the perspective units that way.

Gah, I am so annoyed but dumbasses like these PC bastards who accuse people of racism just because they perceive some imagined slight on the surface without actually researching it. Dumbasses.

TrailerParkJawa wrote:The same guys like this are the ones that try to find racism in every Disney cartoon. I remember some critic stating that the Hyena's in Lion King were urban blacks.

Gah. I know that some early Disney cartoons had racism, check out Bamboozled to see some examples, but damn it, not everything is racist.

Gah. I know that some early Disney cartoon had racism, check out Bamboozled to see some examples, but damn it, not everything is racist.

Is that the Bugs Bunny where he gets away from a black "Elmer Fudd" type character by playing dice ?

Some of the Warner Brothers cartoon from that time are clearly racists. I remember seeing them as a kid, but most have been censored or completely removed by now. The Bugs Bunny one was pulled before I was even born.

TrailerParkJawa wrote:

Gah. I know that some early Disney cartoon had racism, check out Bamboozled to see some examples, but damn it, not everything is racist.

Is that the Bugs Bunny where he gets away from a black "Elmer Fudd" type character by playing dice ?

Some of the Warner Brothers cartoon from that time are clearly racists. I remember seeing them as a kid, but most have been censored or completely removed by now. The Bugs Bunny one was pulled before I was even born.

Song of the South, was what I was talking about. It isn't as bad as some of the early WB stuff was though.

A lot of the stuff made before about 1960 was pretty racist, and fully deserves criticism. That doesn't mean we should project that condemnation onto modern films which are merely being historically accurate.

Evil Sadistic Bastard wrote:Whew... that was dumb.

(Deep breath)

[rant]

Emptyheaded? No visual direction? Ridley Scott can't place his actors?

IT'S WAR, YOU MOTHERFUCKER, NOT A FUCKING BALLET! UNTIL YOU CAN PIROUETTE IN FRONT OF A FUCKING SHOTGUN, DON'T GIVE ME YOUR WORTHLESS SHIT! HE'S DOING A DAMN GOOD JOB OF PORTRAYING WAR AND ALL YOU CAN DO IS NITPICK AT HOW CHAOTIC AND MINDLESS THE SUBJECT MATTER IS!

There WAS no fucking point after the mission went FUBAR except to survive! What did you think they'd do, settle it over tiddlywinks and luncheon?

[/rant]

Ditto.

Vympel wrote:This reminds me of the 9/11 incident where the firefighters put up a flag on the ruins- a monument was being made to commemorate it but it was altered to make 1 firemen white and the other 2 black and hispanic respectively. This is not what happened- it was 3 white/anglo/whatever the hell they are guys. Was it right to do that?

No.
Those 3 men deserve personal recognition, and should not have been replaced. It boggles the mind what our politicians will do to achieve polictical correctness.
Im moving to Canada!

Didn't read the review, but if the quote was representative of it as a whole, I'm probably better off, and the fucktard who wrote it is better off if I never get my hands on him. I'm a liberal, and in America I'd likely be branded as one of the communist far-out left nutter variety, but that aside, the movie was a blast, best war movie I've seen, it was accurate, and anybody spouting the sort of PC shit Stravo was talking about in his rant deserves to get sodomized with an electric cattle-prod.

That's my 2 cents.

Edi

I am suddenly ashamed of where I live...I will now go vomit.

The guy has a point, it's just a pity it's the top of his head.

Fucking wanker.

Stravo wrote:Its the same bullshit that had the media ignore the trial of the two black kids that raped and murdered some of their white friends...but because its black on white crime and feeds into the worst stereotypes about blacks the media chose to ignore it. Who made them the guardians and bastions of what the truth is?

Hm that reminds me of the move Animal.

Darth Wong wrote:A lot of the stuff made before about 1960 was pretty racist, and fully deserves criticism. That doesn't mean we should project that condemnation onto modern films which are merely being historically accurate.

Generally - the older a movie is, the more likely it is to contain racism. For an example - look at Birth of a Nation which was released in 1915 if I recall correctly.... and guess what?? It tells the history of the American Civil War and the aftermath from the Ku Klux Klan's viewpoint!

Some historians even maintain that the KKK - as we know it - owes its continued existence to this movie.

It's a good thing that I don't read reviews from cinema critics. Just what the hell is this guy on? I fenished reading it, and I'm tempted to sending him an email calling him a prick!

Oh, and he goes on about other movies, as well:

Like the similarly brain-dead Behind Enemy Lines...

As in his execrable Gladiator...

Commence Primary Ignition!

Philadelphia Weekly is one of those artsy-fartsy left-of-Mao rags that's distributed free and suports itself entirely with classified ads for gay escort services. ALL of their reviews for mainstream movies are like this. They even piss all over art house movies the general public has heard of. The editorial board is apparently of the opinion that movies (and books, music, paintings, architecture, and anything else) that the general public likes must be McCrap. Nobody takes them seriously except for artsy-fartsy left-of-Mao types, and fortunately there aren't that many of them around here.

Just had to clairfy that. The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Daily News may have their stupid moments, but the Weekly is NOT a representation of the quality of journalism in the city of Philadelphia.

I see it's one of those papers that's essentially a group of people that if they see more than than two people liking something, obviously it's overrrated.

Doesn't excuse them, but now I see they are petualant little babies whining for momma.

THAT explains a lot!

This story is just history repeating itself. I remember that certain critics tried to paint 'Glory' as racist because "it didn't have any black commisioned officers in it."

Arg. A fuckwit close to home.

Glory was a great movie, BTW.

What pointy ended Gibralter Rock has that idiot been living under?

Holy fuck. I'm not reading that review, because I want to preserve my brain...

The reveiwer shouldn't slam the movie for being historically accurate. I find it hard to believe that people want to rewrite history in the name of "diversity" and "equality". Movies shouldn't be made unrealistic for the PC factor. Villians don't have to be made into neo-Nazis or mad scientists, like what Hollywood does.

They'll nitpick every little part, and relate it to being racist.

If the movie has Arab terrorists, they'll sayt we're being unfir to Arabs (Who do you think commits all these acts of terror?)

If the movie is set in Mideval Europe, they'll slam it for not having Hispanics.

Political correctness: Allowing stupid motherfuckers to create bullshit arguements since 1970.

I have to say, after watching the utter dross that was Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves that while equal oppertunities is all very well it can be taken too far. I'd rather see comptence in a movie than idealistic, lets-all-sing-along modern values.

This reminds me of someing from about nine months ago, where some guy posted on the Blizzard MB about if they should make some of the human units in Warcraft III be black or hispanic. Most people's responce was either "because humans in Warcraft are from from Lordaeron and Azeroth" or "Because then they'd have to include pink Orcs." Basically, it was because none of them are African, and it'd be like adding blacks into Braveheart.

Naturally, the guy barely acknowleged these points, and went downhill in reasonability from there, insisting that they should make a couple of them be balck or hispanic (but curriously not asian.). I think it turned out he was hispanic, and just really wanted something contrived to 'relate' to or something.

Hell, I'm not sure if you could get away with inventing a non-white, fantasy race. The media would be on your case if you made them anything but perfect (if they're unadvanced, they're implied as savage, if they're more advanced, they're implied as immoral anti-environmentalists, if they're equal with all other races, they're merely conforming to the majority, etc, etc.). And heaven forbid if you make the villian anything but white. Political correctness exists only to hide people's own habits of making generalizations or subjective differences.