|
News
Dec 7, 2019 19:30:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverpup on Dec 7, 2019 19:30:30 GMT
How the hell do these people know just HOW BC's character is going to be portrayed in this film?!? It hasn't even finished filming yet.
Call-out culture at its finest I see! 🤮🤯😱 Sounds to me they just are petrified of anything that seemingly doesn't measure up to their own rarefied sense of moral "purity". How do they manage in such an imperfect world? And what ever happened to freedom of artistic expression? Guess that's reserved for things that ONLY align PERFECTLY with their own ideals.
|
|
|
News
Dec 7, 2019 20:00:22 GMT
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 7, 2019 20:00:22 GMT
I admire migration lawyers. I think they are doing God's work! I used to follow one after I read an article he recommended about the awful abuse kids were receiving in the USA (it was during Obama's presidency. Things just worsened since then but Obama opened the door to the abuse. At the same time, he did good things and was much better leader that the clown at the White House!). TBH I stopped following him and the journalist years ago! I still admire them! But they were very self-righteous! I kind of don't like to be called Latix or whatever it's written and I have always think the concept of "cultural appropriation" is kind of racist itself! Neither of them is the people talking about this film, tho. Maybe they would in the future!
I have always think that the most effective activists are the ones who can see complexities. This is just a "frivolous" movie but it's based in a real story. The guy they are condemning actually did something good many years ago. It's not related to their cause (apart maybe of the racism behind both issues) but it was an admirable action that freed an innocent man. The question would be what they want of the film? I personally think it would be nice if his more questionable actions as immigration judge are mentioned at the end (it would give some complexity to the guy) but would that be enough for them? After all they are talking about boycotting the film! So Mohamedou Ould Slahi's story should be boycotted because a guy who helped his cause is a bastard? Or should the producers completely erase Couch's contribution because activists just can't admit he once did something good?
|
|
|
News
Dec 7, 2019 20:13:09 GMT
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 7, 2019 20:13:09 GMT
How the hell do these people know just HOW BC's character is going to be portrayed in this film?!? It hasn't even finished filming yet. Call-out culture at its finest I see! 🤮🤯😱 Sounds to me they just are petrified of anything that seemingly doesn't measure up to their own rarefied sense of moral "purity". How do they manage in such an imperfect world? And what ever happened to freedom of artistic expression? Guess that's reserved for things that ONLY align PERFECTLY with their own ideals. TBF the reporting of the alleged nasty 2016's comment is from this year so probably they know the scriptwriter didn't have too much time to include it on the script! The fuss would be kind of cynical if they understand this (and that the film it's not about him!) but I would agreed that it's a good time to reach the producers with the issue so they can probably include a short note at the end. The thing that bothers me is the boycotting and the "why you are presenting this guy as an hero in this film I haven't even watched?". I hate left wing activist acting like conservatives from the 70s!
|
|
|
News
Dec 8, 2019 2:16:11 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverpup on Dec 8, 2019 2:16:11 GMT
These people who are calling for a boycott of the film (that no one has even seen yet) don't strike me as the types to be reasoned with over character's presentation. They strike me more being more into a "slash and burn" approach, so the word "capitulation" seems more in line with their stance.
So personally I don't see any use in "consulting" with them and giving these people a chance to have input over this character or the story.
I may be cynical but to me they are just out for a "column inch" of publicity (as they say in the newspaper business), or their 15 minutes of fame.
It's just call out culture pure and simple as far as I am concerned. If they did have more noble concerns behind them, they could have worked quietly behind the scenes and, knowing the persons involved with SunnyMarch, they probably would have listened to their concerns and been receptive to their opinions.
But THEY decided to take a CONFRONTATIONAL approach - in a way, they used the "angry dog in the next room" threat to try, by frothing online about a boycott, and put the filmmakers in their place. That's just as much as being a bully to get your desired results, as they are whining about with the target of their ire.
|
|
|
Post by prudence on Dec 8, 2019 5:26:23 GMT
I don’t think they realize that the movie is not about Stu Couch but about Mohamedou Ould Slah.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Dec 8, 2019 6:12:40 GMT
People always seem to assume BC's character will be portrayed as a hero, even before the movie comes out. They complained the same about Dominic Cummings before Brexit was released.
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on Dec 8, 2019 7:11:11 GMT
Why are people assuming anything about a movie they know nothing about? This is ridiculous. And, if they know anything about BC, they should know that he loves to mix the light & dark in a character, to make him more real.
|
|
|
News
Dec 8, 2019 9:26:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverpup on Dec 8, 2019 9:26:15 GMT
I don’t think they realize that the movie is not about Stu Couch but about Mohamedou Ould Slah. I doubt that. If they knew the title of the film (which clearly at least some of them did) then they are fully aware of just what the focus of the film was. Also even the most rudimentary summary of the film in the showbiz papers/sites announcing that BC, Jodie Foster, etc. were involved, also stated the film was about Mohamedou Ould Slah's incarceration struggles.
|
|
|
News
Dec 8, 2019 12:13:18 GMT
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 8, 2019 12:13:18 GMT
That's the most problematic part to me. This movie is not about Couch. They seem to be asking people to boycott a film about an innocent man that was tortured by the American government.
Couch was there so deleting him or censoring his contribution would be a lie. Not wanting to admit that people can do both good and bad is also problematic to me. But I guess, it is part of the modern politics of no caring for the truth but for the narratives! If someone say my enemy did something good in the past then they are presenting him as a "hero" and it goes against my narrative that he is evil on earth. Again, with this logic I would be assuming that they are pro-torture for trying to boycott a film that criticize the issue! I'm sure they aren't! As I'm sure BC and co. aren't pro vulnerable infant kids being scared by abusive judges!
Agreed that it would be more convincing if activists tried to be more moderate in their first contacts with companies, subjects, etc.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Dec 8, 2019 12:30:11 GMT
Twitter really is a platform for global village idiots.
|
|