Do movies teach stereotypes?

Also, it's been a lovely, interesting conversation, but I think I'm about done.

(I am neither claiming victory nor defeat since this is an exchange of ideas and not a game of Hungry Hungry Hippos).

The best "outside" thing to come from this, in all honesty, was the 4 hour conversation it provoked with my parents, getting to hear their real examples from their industry, and talking about how it intersects with the work I am trying to do at my school and in my county. It's given me some real food for thought.

I do think that we've strayed a bit from the original question and topic. That's fine, because I feel as if most good conversations flow from one idea to the other, especially as questions get raised.

I guess to sum up, my positions are:

1. I do believe that films teach stereotypes, especially when a group is repeatedly portrayed the same way over and over.

2. I think that the use of stereotypes becomes less of a problem when the larger "mosaic" of films include more diverse representations.

3. I think that the inclusion of, and collaboration with, a variety of creators in the creative process is a good way to avoid the overuse of stereotypes.

4. I think that the film industry is very much in a transitional, "growing pains" period of trying to figure out how to create more diverse representation. I understand the concerns on both sides of this disagreement, though I ultimately agree with having industry standards for inclusion.

If anyone feels that I have somehow dodged a key point, please feel free to bring it up and I will respond. I'm not trying to evade, just being aware that my work week begins tomorrow and that I'd love to get back to giving more time to discussion the films I'm currently watching.

I don't have an issue with the function, but in how it's being used here. For example, in Agrip's reponse to mark f, twice there were comments directed at me personally, using the ping rather than just addressing me in a proper response. I dunno. Seems a little passive-aggressive.

Indeed, very much so.

Likewise. Only here.

Didn’t realise he was that young, but that wasn’t my rationale at all.

She wrote the tweets for her own bizarre reasons and had probably largely forgotten about them, being the kind of person she is, by the time she got the coveted job ten years later. Since she has no issue with writing it, she’d have no reason to keep it in mind.

But this man, whatever age he is, knows full well he will ruin her life, waits for the perfect moment when she’s just got into uni and is happy and riding high, and deals the sucker punch. That is actively mean and vindictive, and it’s blindingly obvious he gave that one a lot of thought. The definition of ‘premeditated’.

I will reply to every single line you sent me, including the PM, I just want to read and process all replies.

This is a very fair point. I just hope it was obviously and objectively better, so much so that white people and white critics picked it too and agreed it was hands-down the best damn thing in there, as was the case with Parasite, more or less. Rather than a doubt lingering in the air as to exactly why the winner is deemed deserving.

The whole idea of anyone having a problem with being tagged is entirely alien to me, but as it has been mentioned a few times now, let’s suppose it is, indeed, aggressive. I said I would not do so in future but every. Single. Reply to me that you wrote felt not merely passive-aggressive to me, but sarcastic, dismissive and condescending, as if you were doing me a favour of coming down to my level, not to mention the ‘lol’, which no grown human being with an ounce of manners would use in a half-serious discussion in my view.

Yet when I pointed it out, you suggested ever so many times I was ‘misunderstanding’ and that it wasn’t your problem what I did or didn’t think.

But the tagging suddenly feels aggressive to you, go figure!

Being so okay with saying racist and homophobic things that you don't even remember you said them does not say much about someone's character. If she had changed her ways, you'd think she'd actually be painfully aware of what she had said in the past. I'm not sure what "bizarre reason" someone has to write something like "thanks stupid Asian T.A. . . ". The calling out of race doesn't even fit the rhythm of the sentence.

I'm not sure that I find the exposure of someone's casual racism (even if it was premeditated and vindictive) a worse crime than repeated use of slurs and racist statements. They both did these things around the same age (somehow she's a "girl" and he's a "man" though). If she should be forgiven for her actions (which were multiple instances of racist and homophobic behavior), shouldn't he be forgiven for his actions?
.
.
.

I'm happy to respond to other things if you want, but I am kind of in "final thought" mode from here on out.

There's a difference between aggressive and passive-aggressive. It's just a matter of form. I don't mind being tagged, just not in a way that suggests that someone else has to answer on my behalf.


I've already mentioned that it's not my responsibility over which comments you choose to take personally. I'm presenting my opinion on the subject, just as you are. I josh sometimes because I like to smile.

I think sometimes it’s easy for a message to be misinterpreted, and tone inferred where there is none meant. Just an aside.

We're all good people here, even me But one thing I've learned from 25 years of posting on internet discussion boards is that internet humor can easily be taken the wrong way and then lead to hurt feelings. Maybe some took your joshing as a ribbing...OR...maybe you took someone's joke as serious. Who knows, lets put a good spin on this and put the thread to rest.

Here we go again. Likewise, nor mine over which people mind being tagged.

I think they got a large influence especially over the youth or childs.

He’s a ‘man’ because at the time of writing he seemed a bit older to me in my mind and I hadn’t, if you like, ‘got on board’ with him being 18. Adolescent, dear God. Don’t see the big deal. I will admit I find all this ‘young womanning’ of 17-year old females a bit funny, but that’s neither here nor there. I’m also aware, from personal experience, that should anyone do the opposite, i.e. call the male ‘a boy’ in this context, you’re accused of letting him off the hook even more.

I accept the rest of your points but don’t see the benefit of explaining why I see the difference.

I appreciate your desire to leave the thing there and I’m generally doing the same myself.

As ever, hope it didn’t seem too inflammatory to you and I have tried my best to keep the thread (which I’m now for some reason being held responsible for the entirety of) objective (or admit when the points I’m making aren’t) and to ensure you personally or anyone else didn’t feel attacked by me. That’s that.

I think what would've been weak (and predictable) would be if McDonagh had intended his character to actually having been redeemed on the whole by the end of the film, as opposed to what really happened, which is that

Sounds like lazy crap indeed.

You don’t know any, but I would guesstimate many white people are disturbed by them. I am not one of them.

There’s a lovely billboard in town for some medical facility. It depicts a black doctor & a white toddler. This billboard would not even exist not that long ago.

Gosh darn it, I thought it was.

I don’t know what a “ping” is. Someone please explain.

And “tagging” - is that when someone brings a 3rd party into the convo via a post? Why would this upset some people? Someone please explain.

__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.

Anything which triggers a notification: being mentioned by username on Twitter, Facebook, here, etc.

It's the above, basically. It bothers people (potentially, at least) because it's suddenly conspicuous if they don't get involved (and, to a lesser extent, people like notifications to pop up only for things they care about, so in that sense it's like getting an email for something you don't think is important).

I am at a genuine loss as to why, I’d love to be tagged whenever I’m referenced or I’d never reply to people! Half-kidding, but...

Yeah, it's a thing about which reasonable people differ. As mentioned I think it's generational as much as anything, but I kind of get both sides, if I'm being honest.

I really do not understand for the life of me. Surely by tagging you make sure the people mentioned have an opportunity to get involved, rather than being talked about unbeknownst to them?

Look, obviously no amount of explaining is gonna make sense if it doesn't already. I can only rephrase or repeat: it's kind of like being called out. Think of it more like having a loud argument in public and then yelling "HEY BRAD. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS?" You presumably understand why someone might not like that. This is kind of like that, or at least can be like that. And yes, some people would prefer not to dive into an argument even if they're mentioned in passing during it.

Also, in some of these examples people are not being talked about, but are brought in anyway, in which case it should be even more obvious why they might object.

This is pretty digressive, though, if people want to discuss it let's do it elsewhere.