Social War Room Lounge v260: Pls no bully Geg

[Cubo de Sangre]

I edited the post but I'll just repeat here that your claim "the idea of micro-dosing to combat depression was bunk" is not supported by your source, is it?

That's not my claim.

 

[Gandhi]

What grade did you get?

A or A+. My drama teacher loved the vegetarian anarchist crass / conflict hippie punk angle I had going. Doing unplugged hardcore was an easy grade even if I was of average musical talent at best.

The year before I sang Holiday in Cambodia acapella

 

[Trotsky]

Propaganda for "brutal fascism"?Seems like a stretch.

The function of that scene isn't to endorse what Alfred did there. That's what's ominous about the "we brunt the forest down" line, the function of the scene is to demonstrate that men like the Joker sometimes make monsters out of the men trying to stop them which becomes an important theme in the film.

Batman's "burning of the forest" moment is when he creates the surveillance state which is framed as an ethical dilemma to be approached with extreme caution and moral fortitude. He could've kept that tech to go after other criminals but he doesn't.

Well said. It definitely has right wing undertones but propaganda for brutal fascism? I think that's a stretch.

Good post, and obviously there's room to argue, and essie brought up a good point (I found a good article on the particular subject from a Thai author). And there's definitely some projection from both sides. When I first saw TDK, it struck me as an aggressively socialistic film (!) but I couldn't really explain why.

@essie If we're doing bold takes, I'll do you one better: Joker was the single most left-wing comic book movie of all-time.

It was anti-rich, anti-austerity, anti-privatization, and (imo) surprisingly anti-racist (I've posted before on that quality of the film in re the believability of the unfortunate white man getting the beautiful black girl). After actually seeing it and liking it much more than I expected, I was genuinely appalled at all the alarmism from liberals. I specifically remember a bit from SNL Weekend Update where all the cast joins in at once "it's white male rage!" I believe that is the only instance, at least in my memory, where @HereticBD had a genuine "I told you so" case against me after I had offered some defense of the criticisms before seeing it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

You get a sense then that the film thinks Alfred is a villain?

Uh, what? I said "sure", as in that in a general sense Bruce and Alfred are among the "heroes" but the theme of the film is that heroes can easily become villains under the right(or I suppose wrong)circumstances. So while Alfred is one of the "good guys" that doesn't mean everything Alfred has ever done is morally good. His whole story about the bandit could very well be interpreted as a cautionary tale.

Later in the film Bruce's decision to create a surveillance mechanism that covers all of Gotham is framed in a morally negative way as evidenced by Lucius Fox's reaction to its existence. The only reason that technology isn't abused is because its put in the hands of a man who realizes the ethical dilemma it presents.

 

[Andy Capp]

Pretty serious right now but we can't go see him because we are not family.

Thinking of you. Take care.

 

[Sycho Sid]

Just had a friend have a heat attack today... Fucking shitty

Damn man, I am really sorry to hear that. Hope he pulls through with no complications.

 

[Andy Capp]

That's not my claim.

Oops, that's my bad. I somehow misread it to say you were telling her the idea is bunk but obviously that's totally my mistake. I blame the late hour... well, that and the drugs. Well, mostly the drugs.




Bed time.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It asks you to take it as seriously as an other action film from Aliens to the Terminator. It’s not taxi driver. It’s the exact right balance for a comic to action film, unlike that rocket penguin thing.

I think Aliens and the Terminator justify a bit more, and TDK is more pretentious than those two.

 

[essie]

Uh, what? I said "sure", as in that in a general sense Bruce and Alfred are among the "heroes" but the theme of the film is that heroes can easily become villains under the right(or I suppose wrong)circumstances. So while Alfred is one of the "good guys" that doesn't mean everything Alfred has ever done is morally good. His whole story about the bandit could very well be interpreted as a cautionary tale.

Later in the film Bruce's decision to create a surveillance mechanism that covers all of Gotham is framed in a morally negative way as evidenced by Lucius Fox's reaction to its existence. The only reason that technology isn't abused is because its put in the hands of a man who realizes the ethical dilemma it presents.

No, sorry, I wasn't saying that like a statement I was genuinely asking because I didn't understand if you meant that Alfred had lived long enough to become a villain.

 

[Islam Imamate]

No, sorry, I wasn't saying that like a statement I was genuinely asking because I didn't understand if you meant that Alfred had lived long enough to become a villain.

Oh sorry, yeah I see what you mean. No Alfred isn't a villain, not even really a hero as he's more like the sage character I guess. But his tale from his days in Burma comes off to me like a cautionary tale about how even he, this benevolent influence in Bruce's life, was once at the crossroads between villain and hero and even made a few steps in the wrong direction.

 

[StoneColdSteveAustin]

Sure but the film explicitly deals with the idea that sometimes there's a fine line between villains and heroes. I mean it wasn't even very subtle, Harvey Dent literally says "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain" and later has a near death experience and becomes a villain.

This is completely in line with the overall Batman Mythos as well.

 

[essie]

Good post, and obviously there's room to argue, and essie brought up a good point (I found a good article on the particular subject from a Thai author). And there's definitely some projection from both sides. When I first saw TDK, it struck me as an aggressively socialistic film (!) but I couldn't really explain why.

@essie If we're doing bold takes, I'll do you one better: Joker was the single most left-wing comic book movie of all-time.

It was anti-rich, anti-austerity, anti-privatization, and (imo) surprisingly anti-racist (I've posted before on that quality of the film in re the believability of the unfortunate white man getting the beautiful black girl). After actually seeing it and liking it much more than I expected, I was genuinely appalled at all the alarmism from liberals. I specifically remember a bit from SNL Weekend Update where all the cast joins in at once "it's white male rage!" I believe that is the only instance, at least in my memory, where @HereticBD had a genuine "I told you so" case against me after I had offered some defense of the criticisms before seeing it.

I can't really think of much to say about Joker because I found it so uninteresting. Persepolis is a pretty leftist comic book film but I'd have to think about others too.

 

[Trotsky]

Tim Burton sucks









































Look its Batman part 25 or watch centrists to the right of Attila the Hun beat off to 80s punk all night.

I just don't get how the Burton Batmans have retained positive appraisals through time.

They're just bad, particular Batman Returns.

Personally, I hate everything Tim Burton has done (meh, Ed Scissorhands was okay). I absolutely loathe that intersection between whimsy and gothic horror. And a grown man doing that stuff into his sixties just strikes me as sad.

 

[essie]

Oh sorry, yeah I see what you mean. No Alfred isn't a villain, not even really a hero as he's more like the sage character I guess. But his tale from his days in Burma comes off to me like a cautionary tale about how even he, this benevolent influence in Bruce's life, was once at the crossroads between villain and hero and even made a few steps in the wrong direction.

Your point is well taken. I think to me the fundamental issue with The Dark Knight is that by virtue of it being a superhero property it can't explore the gray area here and thus lends itself to projection. If the point of Alfred's story and Batman's use of surveillance is to show that heroes are corrupted i don't think it goes far enough to outline this and would think Batman should be the one who turns into a villain like Two Face. Of course a studio can't do this because of a need for a sequel and marketing, maybe.

Outside of whatever issues I have with the politics of the film I still find it to be loud, poorly paced and frustratingly wastes the pathos that Joker taps into by resolving his relationship with Batman through fighting.

 

[essie]

I just don't get how the Burton Batmans have retained positive appraisals through time.

They're just bad, particular Batman Returns.

Personally, I hate everything Tim Burton has done (meh, Ed Scissorhands was okay). I absolutely loathe that intersection between whimsy and gothic horror. And a grown man doing that stuff into his sixties just strikes me as sad.

Batman Returns is my favorite superhero movie lol.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I just don't get how the Burton Batmans have retained positive appraisals through time.

They're just bad, particular Batman Returns.

Personally, I hate everything Tim Burton has done (meh, Ed Scissorhands was okay). I absolutely loathe that intersection between whimsy and gothic horror. And a grown man doing that stuff into his sixties just strikes me as sad.

I liked Batman Returns but mainly because I saw it right after Batman which I had high hopes for given all I had heard about it but I ended up hating it. So going into Batman Returns I had low expectations but I enjoyed more than the first film. The main strong point is the chemistry between Keaton and Pfieffer but yeah overall I see your point, way overrated.

Your point is well taken. I think to me the fundamental issue with The Dark Knight is that by virtue of it being a superhero property it can't explore the gray area here and thus lends itself to projection. If the point of Alfred's story and Batman's use of surveillance is to show that heroes are corrupted i don't think it goes far enough to outline this and would think Batman should be the one who turns into a villain like Two Face. Of course a studio can't do this because of a need for a sequel and marketing, maybe.

Outside of whatever issues I have with the politics of the film I still find it to be loud, poorly paced and frustratingly wastes the pathos that Joker taps into by resolving his relationship with Batman through fighting.

Two Face is kind of like the shade of grey between Batman and the Joker. Batman is the hero who resists corruption, the Joker is the irredeemable villain, and Harvey Dent is the well meaning hero who eventually gives into corruption. Batman wanted Harvey to be not only as heroic as him but even more so in the hopes that he can give up the mantle of the Batman but in the end Dent couldn't live up to Wayne's expectations.

 

[Sketch]

Good post, and obviously there's room to argue, and essie brought up a good point (I found a good article on the particular subject from a Thai author). And there's definitely some projection from both sides. When I first saw TDK, it struck me as an aggressively socialistic film (!) but I couldn't really explain why.

@essie If we're doing bold takes, I'll do you one better: Joker was the single most left-wing comic book movie of all-time.

It was anti-rich, anti-austerity, anti-privatization, and (imo) surprisingly anti-racist (I've posted before on that quality of the film in re the believability of the unfortunate white man getting the beautiful black girl). After actually seeing it and liking it much more than I expected, I was genuinely appalled at all the alarmism from liberals. I specifically remember a bit from SNL Weekend Update where all the cast joins in at once "it's white male rage!" I believe that is the only instance, at least in my memory, where @HereticBD had a genuine "I told you so" case against me after I had offered some defense of the criticisms before seeing it.

Holy fuck, a Trotsky post I'll co-sign. He even touches on White male...eh nvm.

 

[essie]

I liked Batman Returns but mainly because I saw it right after Batman which I had high hopes for given all I had heard about it but I ended up hating it. So going into Batman Returns I had low expectations but I enjoyed more than the first film. The main strong point is the chemistry between Keaton and Pfieffer but yeah overall I see your point, way overrated.

Two Face is kind of like the shade of grey between Batman and the Joker. Batman is the hero who resists corruption, the Joker is the irredeemable villain, and Harvey Dent is the well meaning hero who eventually gives into corruption. Batman wanted Harvey to be not only as heroic as him but even more so in the hopes that he can give up the mantle of the Batman but in the end Dent couldn't live up to Wayne's expectations.

Maybe a problem for me is I feel so much love for the Joker and don't find him irredeemable. I think he is the one who exposes the dangerous hyper masculinity of Batman and truly does seem himself in that character. I think that character has such a remarkable way of exuding the pain that comes from rejection or oppression, when he is caught off guard by Gamble calling him a freak and he seems genuinely hurt by it that is beautiful. But the way he is treated by the film, as you said, irredeemable, rubs me the wrong way.

 

[irish_thug]

This week he was telling his audience to confront mask wearing people in public.

If that's the case then he's gone full fucking retard.

 

[Bald1]

You just had to jam a “both sides” in there didn’t you <45><45><45><45><45><45>

lol. I was wondering if anyone was gonna pipe up about it.