DominicCobb

Ol

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:

How are you offended by alcohol?

The consumption of alcohol is abhorrent to me. Read up on why the Prohibition movement took hold.

Is the consumption of alcohol really affecting you in the way a racist remark might or do you just not like it?

It’s done a lot to ostracize me, so perhaps it is affecting me. It was just an example, I don’t want to be psychoanalyzed.

Okay I guess? Hard to understand without knowing the full picture. I suppose if people are treating you poorly because of this than I’d say that is the behavior that should change, not the alcohol itself.

Full disclosure, I don’t drink either. But that’s never really been any sort of issue for me.

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:

How are you offended by alcohol?

The consumption of alcohol is abhorrent to me. Read up on why the Prohibition movement took hold.

Is the consumption of alcohol really affecting you in the way a racist remark might or do you just not like it?

How are you offended by alcohol?

NeverarGreat said:

I’d be down for a fairytale Star Wars story.

I mean, acting like the nursery rhyme is inherently racist because of its history is a little silly, but if some people can’t help but see its unfortunate past and that makes them uncomfortable, I won’t begrudge them that.

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

And if you aren’t personally offended why act offended? Saying something is offensive to a particular group without being involved or a part of that particular group isn’t really much of a favor to them. In fact, it’s a tad bit condescending, isn’t it? Figuring they can’t complain themselves, that you have to do it on their behalf – not even factoring in the group in question is made up of a bunch of individuals who don’t even agree completely!

So, a business is selling a potentially offensive t-shirt, I should just ignore it because it’s not my problem?

I prefer to show some empathy.

It’s not empathy, it’s coddling. Taking the moral high ground here is wrong, honestly I find people going out of their way to protect minorities from things that might hurt their feelings as if they’re children who can’t do it themselves patronizing, and I’m not alone there. When everything is potentially offensive, as offense is subjective by nature, where’s the line drawn? How far are we going to go to hide people from simple harsh realities?

Who asked for your empathy?

Well, it’s not as if these minorities don’t have a history of significant offenses against them. I mean that’s just a fact that you can’t get around. Instead of pretending that history never existed or pretending that there’s nothing wrong anymore, we should be working to make things right. We can’t just throw our hands up in the air and say “that’s life!” We should be better than that.

Where am I denying this? We’re looking at the wrong things.

Sorry, I don’t mean to suggest this is exactly what you’re saying in this context. But it is very much an argument I stand by in regards to the “can’t hide people from harsh realities” mindset in general.

I give up. Clearly I suck at explaining my mindset, and am not gaining any friends in the process.

I hope you don’t actually think this debate has any correlation at all to how I feel about you as a person.

TV’s Frink said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Tyrphanax said:

Jesus Christ this is stupid.

Which part?

Every part!

Why?

Well we are talking about a fucking Walking Dead season 7 T-shirt.

JawsTDS said:

DominicCobb said:

JawsTDS said:

DominicCobb said:

JawsTDS said:

Tobar said:

KumoNin said:

(SORT OF SPOILERS FOR SW:BLOODLINE MAYBE)

Having just finished reading Bloodline, I’ve only just realised it was Korrie who Leia sends to her vainful death…

It’s a shame they cut this scene.

J.J. prioritized ‘fan service’ over effectiveness.

What? I think this is proof of the opposite.

He wanted Leia to appear at a certain moment in the film, for maximum “nostalgia” effect. Thus, important scenes like this were left on the cutting room floor.

Maximum nostalgia or not, that was the most effective place to put her introduction. I think having her in the film from the start would have been fan service when she only becomes important to the story halfway through.

That being said, I think Leia’s introduction in the final cut is perfect, but we lost scenes that could have provided much needed context.

Is that context really necessary for this film though? Whether the Resistance has the full support of the Republic isn’t something that really affects the story of TFA in any significant way.

Not to say there couldn’t or shouldn’t have been more context, but it wasn’t worth sacrificing the pacing and structure of the film just for the sake of these Resistance scenes.

I’d say it does need context, especially since this cut scene shows us Korrie’s relationship with Leia. In the final cut we only see her being vaporized, with no idea who she was.

It’s a few seconds and it’s not just her. It’s the Republic. That’s all we need to know.

That was my biggest gripe with TFA - there was no thorough explanation as to who was doing what in the New Republic. It is just miraculously destroyed… again.

But the thing is the New Republic wasn’t really all that important to this story.

The issue arises when people like us come in expecting a full on sequel to ROTJ, with all the questions about what’s happened since then answered. This is kind of the problem with how many view TFA, they want a direct sequel when that’s not really what it is. As a film by itself, I think it made perfect sense to streamline this aspect.

Again, that’s not to say neglecting explaining the situation at all was what should have been done (I’m not saying I completely agree with all of what they did, more just I understand where they were coming from and think it works), but I think, in the case of cutting this scene, it was the right choice.

Handman said:

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

And if you aren’t personally offended why act offended? Saying something is offensive to a particular group without being involved or a part of that particular group isn’t really much of a favor to them. In fact, it’s a tad bit condescending, isn’t it? Figuring they can’t complain themselves, that you have to do it on their behalf – not even factoring in the group in question is made up of a bunch of individuals who don’t even agree completely!

So, a business is selling a potentially offensive t-shirt, I should just ignore it because it’s not my problem?

I prefer to show some empathy.

It’s not empathy, it’s coddling. Taking the moral high ground here is wrong, honestly I find people going out of their way to protect minorities from things that might hurt their feelings as if they’re children who can’t do it themselves patronizing, and I’m not alone there. When everything is potentially offensive, as offense is subjective by nature, where’s the line drawn? How far are we going to go to hide people from simple harsh realities?

Who asked for your empathy?

Well, it’s not as if these minorities don’t have a history of significant offenses against them. I mean that’s just a fact that you can’t get around. Instead of pretending that history never existed or pretending that there’s nothing wrong anymore, we should be working to make things right. We can’t just throw our hands up in the air and say “that’s life!” We should be better than that.

JawsTDS said:

DominicCobb said:

JawsTDS said:

Tobar said:

KumoNin said:

(SORT OF SPOILERS FOR SW:BLOODLINE MAYBE)

Having just finished reading Bloodline, I’ve only just realised it was Korrie who Leia sends to her vainful death…

It’s a shame they cut this scene.

J.J. prioritized ‘fan service’ over effectiveness.

What? I think this is proof of the opposite.

He wanted Leia to appear at a certain moment in the film, for maximum “nostalgia” effect. Thus, important scenes like this were left on the cutting room floor.

Maximum nostalgia or not, that was the most effective place to put her introduction. I think having her in the film from the start would have been fan service when she only becomes important to the story halfway through.

That being said, I think Leia’s introduction in the final cut is perfect, but we lost scenes that could have provided much needed context.

Is that context really necessary for this film though? Whether the Resistance has the full support of the Republic isn’t something that really affects the story of TFA in any significant way.

Not to say there couldn’t or shouldn’t have been more context, but it wasn’t worth sacrificing the pacing and structure of the film just for the sake of these Resistance scenes.

JawsTDS said:

Tobar said:

KumoNin said:

(SORT OF SPOILERS FOR SW:BLOODLINE MAYBE)

Having just finished reading Bloodline, I’ve only just realised it was Korrie who Leia sends to her vainful death…

It’s a shame they cut this scene.

J.J. prioritized ‘fan service’ over effectiveness.

What? I think this is proof of the opposite.

xxtelecine 7xx said:

I used to access this site quite frequently but recently original trilogy resolves as a bunch of garbage html code. This happens on Safari and Chrome both in which I have installed on my iPhone 6. Is there a issue that recently caused this?

I even tried this on more than one iPhone, same issue…

Yeah, this seems to happen to me every once in awhile (seems like usually when I’m not on wifi?).

Wrong subforum though.

Popstar was one of the best movies I saw last year and probably the best comedy I’ve seen in a loooong time.

Ryan McAvoy said:

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:
You can’t just call everyone doing things you don’t like “political correctness.”

Right, just like how you dismiss everyone acting on what they believe to be politically correct as not being “political correctness”.

Sorry, I’ve just been trying to look at the topic through the prism of a set definition of the term. Other people (on both sides) love to twist the concept. This frustrates me, but I guess I can’t really do anything about it.

But you’ve never explained how anyone is twisting the concept. The reason PC can and does go too far is because it’s so broad.

I guess I just expect people to act within reason. “Eenie meenie miney mo” is an extremely common phrase that nowadays has essentially no racist component to it. Most people don’t know the history of it and most of those that do surely understand it’s use now. There’s no reasonable reason to think that it’s offense.

In isolation that is 100% true but isn’t the phrase when coupled with a blood-stained baseball bat covered in barbed wire a tiny bit questionable and threatening?

Hmm I didn’t know. That’s a bit much. I have seen the scene it comes from, so I know it’s not actually racist, but at the same time it’s a pretty disturbing scene. I don’t know why anyone would want this on a T-shirt in the first place.

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:
You can’t just call everyone doing things you don’t like “political correctness.”

Right, just like how you dismiss everyone acting on what they believe to be politically correct as not being “political correctness”.

Sorry, I’ve just been trying to look at the topic through the prism of a set definition of the term. Other people (on both sides) love to twist the concept. This frustrates me, but I guess I can’t really do anything about it.

But you’ve never explained how anyone is twisting the concept. The reason PC can and does go too far is because it’s so broad.

I guess I just expect people to act within reason. “Eenie meenie miney mo” is an extremely common phrase that nowadays has essentially no racist component to it. Most people don’t know the history of it and most of those that do surely understand it’s use now. There’s no reasonable reason to think that it’s offense.

I had no idea of the history, but now that I know, I’m not going to tell a black person they shouldn’t be offended.

Fair enough. I somehow doubt any would be, but of course it’s alway better to defer to the people being potentially offended.

If it were just the phrase, I think it might be a bit much to be offended (I mean seriously, people use the phrase all of the time?). But with the bloody bat, I don’t know, that’s kind of pushing it.

Either way, it’s just a fucking T-shirt. Who cares?

Yeah, from what I understand he did the majority of TFA, and Mayhew only did a handful of stuff (mostly things where Chewie’s sitting down), but also worked pretty closely with Suatamo to get the right movements. Seemed to work.

I think the question is how that person got caught. If we know that, it would be very easy to presume a firing would follow.

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:
You can’t just call everyone doing things you don’t like “political correctness.”

Right, just like how you dismiss everyone acting on what they believe to be politically correct as not being “political correctness”.

Sorry, I’ve just been trying to look at the topic through the prism of a set definition of the term. Other people (on both sides) love to twist the concept. This frustrates me, but I guess I can’t really do anything about it.

But you’ve never explained how anyone is twisting the concept. The reason PC can and does go too far is because it’s so broad.

I guess I just expect people to act within reason. “Eenie meenie miney mo” is an extremely common phrase that nowadays has essentially no racist component to it. Most people don’t know the history of it and most of those that do surely understand it’s use now. There’s no reasonable reason to think that it’s offense.

People always make things binary and it drives me crazy. There are nuances. Not everything that has a racial history is racist anymore. So we don’t have to police all of that stuff, but we also shouldn’t neglect policing the stuff that is still racist.

I hate that people make things all or nothing (on both sides). Political correctness should have a place in society. Just because some take things to extremes doesn’t mean we should completely reject the concept entirely.

Ryan McAvoy said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jeebus said:

Another case of political correctness going too far.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle/style/primark-pulls-racist-the-walking-dead-t-shirt-from-stores/ar-AAnaXiW

That sickens me. If someone is offended, then they shouldn’t buy the shirt. Them being offended by something innocuous is their problem.

One customer writes letter to boss of company to point out offensive T-shirt. Boss looks into the t-shirt for them. Agrees it’s offensive. Removes t-shirt

(Much later people on the internet get all het up about it being “PC gone mad!!!”)

Strange thing to be sickened by? I’m usually more offended by companies ignoring complaints from their customers.

Honestly the silliest thing here is the boss removing the shirt out of fear of a backlash when there almost certainly wouldn’t be any (of any significance anyway).

Handman said:

DominicCobb said:
You can’t just call everyone doing things you don’t like “political correctness.”

Right, just like how you dismiss everyone acting on what they believe to be politically correct as not being “political correctness”.

Sorry, I’ve just been trying to look at the topic through the prism of a set definition of the term. Other people (on both sides) love to twist the concept. This frustrates me, but I guess I can’t really do anything about it.

It’s possible this is true, but I think some skepticism is warranted. With the 40th around the corner, it’s only natural that more rumors about this than ever would be cropping up.

Oh I defitinetly want way more special features than we’re getting. I want to see those deleted scenes as much as anyone, but I’m just being realistic about that.

I’ll probably wait on this. I’m not sure a double dip is as guaranteed here as it was for TFA, but I’ll still wait and see.

The trailers were made before the film was radically altered. They don’t owe us anything.

Did you guys seriously think they’d include any of that stuff? I can’t think of any film doing anything like this upon its initial home video release.

Again, it’s rare that any studio releases scenes that were reshot or nullified by a radically different cut. I think everyone should stop expecting this. If it happens, it won’t be until many years from now.