This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I just want to defend the Lady Gaga musical thing.
I think that would fit the sort of nihilistic “clown world” perspective the first movie was dipping into. Basically the world has gone crazy, and a movie where a psychopathic Joker character is maybe but maybe not signing absolutely over the top showtimes with Lady Gaga while enacting some ultra violence would have been perfect. That, to me, captures the spirit of Joker as a supervillain. He’s the answer to the question of what would happen if the crazy schitzophrenic homeless man you see on the street screaming got pushed just a little bit further.
That’s a terrifying villain. I was actually really looking forward to this movie and was totally bought into the musical/gaga thing. From what I’ve read they just didn’t commit to it hard enough.
Yeah, Sweeny Todding it up would have had a lot of potential.
It's kinda been an undertone for the Harley Quinn stuff, most overly by way of Marilyn Monroe with the Diamonds are A Girl's Best Friend scene in Birds of Prey. And while that series has its ups and downs -- most overtly, the writers keep writing checks for melee combat that the fight choreographers can't cash; more subtly, Quinn herself often dives from 'funny' to 'obnoxious' by an hour in -- the dichotomy between someone who treating life like a video game and the actually-gorey violence in something like Suicide Squad does work and make her disquieting even when on the side of the 'heroes'.
But apparently not what they were aiming for here.
Agreed, an updated Sweeny Todd set in a Taxi-Driver-esque, legally distinct New York, starring Joaquin Pheonix and Lady Gaga actually sounds like a lot of fun. Somone should totally make that movie.
Unfortunately that's not the movie that got made.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It kind of reminds of Cop Rock. I actually watched this when it aired.
It was awful. So hilariously bad no one could believe they actually produced this. But at the time, I had to give them credit for at least trying something original. Hollywood so rarely comes up with an original idea, I can't blame them too hard when they fail.
So yeah, when I heard about a Joker musical with Lady Gaga, I thought it sounded insane, but also maybe crazy in a good way?
Unfortunately not, but I still think the idea that they did this to punish fans who liked the first movie is even more crazy. "We made a blockbuster hit, but the wrong people liked it, so let's make a terrible movie that says fuck you to all the people who made the first movie profitable" is a thought that only makes sense in a dark fetid place.
Even when people are hostile to the original work and its fans, they aren't trying to tank its success or being indifferent to it. Take Paul Verhoeven, who made the original Starship Troopers movie and famously despised the book, thought Heinlein was a fascist, and probably would have been quite happy to say "fuck you" to Heinlein fans. He still made a movie that he thought would appeal to an audience that didn't care about fidelity to the book. The movie was hilariously bad* but not because he was trying to make sure Heinlein fans wouldn't like it.
* Actually I liked it and thought for all Verhoeven's blinkered misunderstanding of the book, he did capture some of its essence, even if unintentionally. It was bad in a campy, so-bad-it's-good way. Ironically it's now kind of a cult classic, spawned multiple sequels, and has been criticized for being too pro-military. All of which I bring up by way of saying, a simple black and white model of reality in which the entire creative team says "Hey kids, let's put on a show - and say fuck you to any bad people who might like it!" is an example of how conflict theory can degenerate to a childish understanding of the world.
Killing off successful and profitable media because the wrong audience is enjoying it is far from historically unprecedented. The rural purge of the 1970s that killed off a dominant genre of broadcasting basically on the grounds that TV executives who didn't like rural TV wanted a different audience.
True, but there is a difference between killing something because you don't care that the (wrong) audience likes it, and funding something you expect to fail just so you can stick a thumb in the audience's eye. The equivalent here would be just... not making a sequel, despite the obvious potential, rather than making a sequel that's deliberately shitty because you're angry at the people who liked the first one.
I also doubt that the Joker became a hit on the strength of angry disaffected young white men, even if some movie critics think so. Thus, I am very skeptical of the narrative that the studios said, "Whoa! We'd better fix this!" when they saw who bought tickets the first time.
You are assuming not only that the expectation is that it would fail, but that this expectations is excused by a particular reasoning. Neither end of that has to apply, especially if you get into internal political dynamics over competition for resources and future developments. Poison pill strategies and setting projects up to fail or flounder as a means to a separate end are banal workplace dynamics.
Setting up something you don't like to fail, and publicly so, is a classic way to delegitimize something you don't like. It places an onus and responsibility on the nominal lead advocates both for it to succeed and if/when it fails, whereas complaints that failure is the fault of insufficient support is a classically and generally dismissed claim of the loser of a bureacratic fight. Since executive meddling is an extremely normal and non-controversial practice at the executive level, the advocates trying to problematize execute handling are implicitly casting accusations at more than just the interested meddler, which in turn draws a bandwagon effect by others because if executive meddling is a censorable act, it means those other executives would be acknowledging grounds for their own censoring.
I’ll also point out that there aren’t a lot of alternatives right now with the reach and scale of Hollywood and as such it’s a lot like pro sports. Yes there are minor leagues, or maybe college sports but most often people only choose them when they don’t have easy access to the big leagues and almost no one would deliberately choose the small leagues when given the option to see major league teams.
In movies, a lot of this is based around intellectual property— there are very few space stories that you can do without tripping over something owned by a big studio somewhere. Most superhero types have something like them in either the Marvel or DC catalog. And on it goes. So you either go with small movie houses — either indies or Christian, or possibly foreign, made by people who didn’t quite make it, or you go see a blockbuster made by the usual suspects who will own all the rights to those kinds of films and shows until the end of time. If this iteration of Joker fails, who cares, we own the rights and in five or ten years we make a different Joker movie. Not like anyone else owns the right to make movies about evil clowns like this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I agree it could have worked brilliantly. But instead of leaning into the madness, they chose to deconstruct it.
Expectations subverted, I guess.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link