SJWs denounce Tarantino

Tools    





I know the guy who played Bruce Lee (Mike Moh) and he said that Tarantino just had him watch a bunch of martial arts movies and interviews like that to try to get the style of his fighting AND character... I don’t know what people find so offensive.
yeah right ? screw Asians...tarantino rocks...asians should stay in asia and let us make the movies we want...bruce lee sucks...tarantino is the man.



I don't like Tarantino or most of his movies, BUT I fully support his right to make his movies anyway he wants. Critics who criticize his new movie as being sexist/racist/misogynistic, are only showing the hate they have for a high profile, successful white male middle age director. Their complaints only go to show their own personal bigotry towards white males, is very much a real thing.

If Tarantino was a woman and made the exact same damn film, not a single SJW would be whining about the movie. Instead they'd be praising a woman director for making such a creative and entertaining film.
exactly...screw SJWs....i was so happy when brad pitt punched the annoying pompous little asian man bruce lee in the face. The whole crowd was laughing when brad pitt was humiliating bruce lee by mocking his sound. I live for that stuff. I want tarantino to make a movie where leo dicaprio takes a crap in jackie chans mouth. He should be allowed to make any movie he wants. But that would be so cool.



...i was so happy when brad pitt punched the annoying pompous little asian man bruce lee in the face. The whole crowd was laughing when brad pitt was humiliating bruce lee by mocking his sound. I live for that stuff. I want tarantino to make a movie where leo dicaprio takes a crap in jackie chans mouth. He should be allowed to make any movie he wants. But that would be so cool.
Well, that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

My guess is Tarantino is decompiling the myth about the end of the 'golden age of Hollywood.' Bruce Lee's myth has grown until he has become god like in alot of people's minds, so it follows Tarantino is having fun with that silly god like myth, by showing that: yes Bruce Lee was just another human, and yes he could get his ass kicked too.



You could argue that the child actor who Rick works with at one point comes close, but that still doesn't fit some easy "SJW" stereotype for chuckleheads to rant against. As for the Manson family, it was my understanding that Manson himself was a white supremacist (he infamously got a swastika tattooed on his forehead, after all), so I'm not surprised that the cult he builds consists entirely of white people.

Anyway, like mark said, this is a regurgitated thread where a bunch of criticisms of the film got compiled into some easy rage-bait that draws out all the usual suspects to make the same old complaints and jokes. The word count thing is obviously a stupid approach regardless of sociopolitical outlook, though.
Honestly if were talking politics I think its a game that both sides willingly play feeding off of each other. Two political groups who are actually both right wing in terms of economics and foreign policy looking for a distraction to that by playing up often quite inconsequential issues to a massive degree. "Wokeness" deliberately tends towards being simplistic(to the point is utterly incapable of analysis of anything but the most simplistic cinema) and inconsequential as result IMHO relative to actual liberal political awareness.

I do think this is now playing a significant role in film criticism and indeed film production, in the post Obama era tokenism has been elevated to religion and seemingly only positive depictions of anyone but white males are allowed in certain peoples world views. The idea that woman or minorities might be able to play just as wide a range of roles as white men seems to have fallen by the wayside as indeed does the idea of representing the world as it actually is. At some stage I would argue that "representation" actually becomes apologistic, looking to sell a falsified view of the world that actually downplays inequality.



I know the guy who played Bruce Lee (Mike Moh) and he said that Tarantino just had him watch a bunch of martial arts movies and interviews like that to try to get the style of his fighting AND character... I don’t know what people find so offensive.
yeah right ? screw Asians...tarantino rocks...asians should stay in asia and let us make the movies we want...bruce lee sucks...tarantino is the man.
errmm... yeah... what Citizen Rules said.



Are Directors supposed to ret con the past to fit modern political trends?

Doing that is as stupid as denying the Holocaust if you ask me.



Welcome to the human race...
Honestly if were talking politics I think its a game that both sides willingly play feeding off of each other. Two political groups who are actually both right wing in terms of economics and foreign policy looking for a distraction to that by playing up often quite inconsequential issues to a massive degree. "Wokeness" deliberately tends towards being simplistic(to the point is utterly incapable of analysis of anything but the most simplistic cinema) and inconsequential as result IMHO relative to actual liberal political awareness.

I do think this is now playing a significant role in film criticism and indeed film production, in the post Obama era tokenism has been elevated to religion and seemingly only positive depictions of anyone but white males are allowed in certain peoples world views. The idea that woman or minorities might be able to play just as wide a range of roles as white men seems to have fallen by the wayside as indeed does the idea of representing the world as it actually is. At some stage I would argue that "representation" actually becomes apologistic, looking to sell a falsified view of the world that actually downplays inequality.
Gotta admit, "all left-wingers are actually secret right-wingers" is not the take I was expecting out of all this, especially in the same paragraph that complains about how being woke is too simplistic an approach to the complexities of art and media. It's not like responding to any and all criticism of this film with a blanket generalisation about "the SJWs" is an inherently smarter way of going about it. Likewise, trying to render this approach to criticism as a simplistic "everyone except cishet white males have to look good" screed is also a reductive outlook that misses the nuance.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



...in the post Obama era tokenism has been elevated to religion and seemingly only positive depictions of anyone but white males are allowed in certain peoples world views...
Very astute observation and I agree too. Well said.



Gotta admit, "all left-wingers are actually secret right-wingers" is not the take I was expecting out of all this, especially in the same paragraph that complains about how being woke is too simplistic an approach to the complexities of art and media. It's not like responding to any and all criticism of this film with a blanket generalisation about "the SJWs" is an inherently smarter way of going about it. Likewise, trying to render this approach to criticism as a simplistic "everyone except cishet white males have to look good" screed is also a reductive outlook that misses the nuance.
Well, what we call wokeness is a very simplistic thing. It is basically a list of things you are not supposed to do and if you do then you are a sinner.

It's a new religion in that sense. All cultures have their taboos so when the West evolved beyond its Christian cultural heritage it is developing a new set of taboos, but now witbout a god to punish the sinners so they have to be punished by public opinion.

I find labels right and left are not very useful and they often distract more than iluminate things. The term "left" is a very fluid concept, for example Romney and Paul Ryan would be categorized as "leftwing" in some countries at some points in time.



Well, what we call wokeness is a very simplistic thing. It is basically a list of things you are not supposed to do and if you do then you are a sinner.

It's a new religion in that sense. All cultures have their taboos so when the West evolved beyond its Christian cultural heritage it is developing a new set of taboos, but now witbout a god to punish the sinners so they have to be punished by public opinion.

I find labels right and left are not very useful and they often distract more than iluminate things. The term "left" is a very fluid concept, for example Romney and Paul Ryan would be categorized as "leftwing" in some countries at some points in time.
As you say it seems like a shift from real social liberalism based on understanding towards a very simplistic set of rules. In the case of cinema especially this really does render it incapable of much in the way of intelligent analysis, something I think we saw brought up in the OP and the reviews it mentions.

I would say you can point to a lot of the nominal "left wing" who aren't really that far separated from the right, both increasingly chased the middle ground from the 90's onwards across much of the western world. The traditional idea that those espousing socially liberal values have a real commitment to social justice is IMHO often not the case. To say that you think such causes have been used as a distraction at points doesn't mean you don't support said liberal causes, I'd say quite the reverse as I think cynical use of them damages the causes credability.

I think you could argue that's really what we see with some recent Hollywood films as well. Using these issues to try to cover for sub standard cinema has the effect of damaging their credibility rather than helping them.