…and another…
Bluray:
Bluray regraded:
Comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1CMCNNNU
Here’s the next shot.
Bluray:
Bluray regraded:
Comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1C11NNNU
Has anyone been to any of those live orchestra screenings recently? I’m going to one of ANH in Boston next month, and I’m wondering if it’ll be the same old Lowry master or something else, like the version shown at the Alamo marathon a little while back that was purportedly a hybrid of the long-teased new master with the CGI shots from the Lowry. I know I shouldn’t get my hopes up, but the last time I went to one of these it was Amadeus, and they showed a previously-unknown HD version of the theatrical cut for that, so I wouldn’t be too surprised to see something new.
I went last summer, and it was just the old master sadly. Still an awesome experience, though. Will be seeing Empire with a live orchestra this summmer. 😃
Here’s another frame from the same shot.
Bluray:
Bluray regraded:
Comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1C1MNNNU
Here’s the second shot.
Bluray:
Bluray regraded:
Comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/YZYWNNNX
It’s been a little quiet on this front. Having to divide my time between being a parent to a wonderful young boy, and these projects is challenging, but I found a way to go forward. I will be attempting to create the best shot possible given my own capabilities, and the references available. I will try to get at least one shot finished each day. As I will be using NeverarGreat’s great work as the source, I hope to get a V1 out there relatively soon, that takes advantage of the good consistency in NeverarGreat’s work. Anyway, I’m focussing on getting the most of of the bluray, and so quality to me matters more than speed. I already shared the first shot in NeverarGreat’s thread.
Bluray:
Bluray regraded:
Comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1CJJNNNU
Here’s a short video I made to show how the colors look in motion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpKrtzV57Gs&feature=youtu.be
Here is a link to download a higher quality version, since the youtube conversion seem to have affected the brightness and saturation somewhat:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dakoKSU56NaFfIpshNGhHF-fvl6-XbDp/view?usp=drivesdk
Here’s a short video I made to show how the colors look in motion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpKrtzV57Gs&feature=youtu.be
Edit:
Here is a link to download a higher quality version, since the youtube conversion seem to have affected the brightness and saturation somewhat:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dakoKSU56NaFfIpshNGhHF-fvl6-XbDp/view?usp=drivesdk
I’m hoping to get the fully complete version of this out soon, but in the meantime I decided to use the updated Color Correction tools in Premiere 2019 to see if I couldn’t improve one of the shots that I felt never got its due in version 1:
https://diff.pics/hPh52iqZu7jm/1
The second image is the Tech V1, notice the flat and orange skintones versus the update.
While I would say the shot is improved, I still think it could be better. Judging the shot on its own terms, I personally feel it is too contrasty, and the skin tones are still too orange. The orange push that affects the skin tones seems to affect other areas of the frame as well, as officer Bast’s clothes take on a reddish/brownish tone in certain areas. I actually have frames for this shot at home:
The skin tones are less orange, and the overall look of the scene is noticeably cooler, due to the use of blue lighting. Using these frames as a reference, and taking into account the issues I have mentioned, I would grade the shot like this for a technicolor version:
Here’s what it looks like when corrected for the technicolor green cast:
Here’s a comparison:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/121JNNNU
That looks really good!!! 😃 The project is going slowly. I’m trying to get a color correction for TESB finished asap, so that’s taking up most of the time available to me. I did do a correction of the Derann print preservation, that might come in handy for this project:
A funny thing happened at work today that I thought could be good for discussing TLJ.
I work at a Maths Tutoring facility and was tutoring two ten year olds through their course work and we got on the topic of Star Wars for whatever reason, during that we were talking about the Prequels and the Originals, going over how the Wampa scene is freaking awesome and Darth Maul looks so scary.They just kept telling me all of their favorite things about all of the movies, and in that same breathe of excitement for the orignals and the prequels one of the kids started describing the scene where Kylo kills Snoke as this amazing thing and how it was “so cool.” I know that us older fans are looking into the “Metaness” of all of the implications and the fact that were invested in where the story threads are going, but it really hit me how this kid didn’t think of any of that. All he saw was an amazing scene that he thought was so cool and showed Kylo’s genius.
I’m not trying to say that this in any way discounts the faults of TLJ or the perceived faults of Disney Star Wars, but it was so great to actually see it through a child’s eyes again.
I personally feel the ST actually works better as a reboot of sorts than a natural continuation of an existing story, which in a sense is how children and new fans experience the story, without baggage so to speak.
I started wondering why we as a movie viewing audience are so uncritical of this Trojan Horse in our wallets feeding on our nostalgia?
I don’t think this is just a recent Disney thing. I know guys who have had Trojans in their wallets for years.
I agree, but it is the first time, that a company like Disney has this much power, and openly embraces the remake strategy with big budget remakes, adaptations, and sequels planned for years to come. Even Pixar which thusfar had a very good reputation for making original content, is now churning out mostly sequels to past hits. In this atmosphere we might expect Disney to keep milking existing Star Wars lore, rather than adding to it, or at most add to it in very small doses.
I suppose having the galactic state of affairs be somewhat of a parallel to things in the OT does offer something fittingly parallel for Luke to forsake, especially related to a new call to adventure with his father’s lightsaber.
I can see how TLJ, being written by someone receiving TFA as a complete entity in need of a follow-up, would want to set it up like that. It gives Luke something to rise to and comment on the phenomena of galactic civil war itself, transcending the concrete manifestations of it, just as Luke does so with himself, becoming a legend and departing this mortal coil.
That is an interesting way of looking at it, although technically Luke did forsake his calling long before the FO took over so to speak. I also believe the same sentiment could have been achieved by having the New Republic losing ground rapidly in the wake of the events of TFA, rather than writing it out of the story, and turning the Resistance into rebels overnight. There were also interesting parallels to be made between the FO and terrorism in our real world, where Kylo Ren’s dedication to Snoke was similar to those indoctrinated by extremist ideologies; that and the FO’s position in TFA mirrored the position of the rebels in ANH, begging the question what the difference is between rebels and terrorists, and why Ben Solo might consider himself a rebel.
Dre - Not to speak for Biggs Audio Dynamite here, though I think she was stating you may get a wider, indepth and more meaningful (and maybe higher quality?) discussion on the issues like ‘Disney remake strategy’, either ‘in general, or for the ST?’, and other subjects mentioned in their own respective threads?
There’s a good chance of more people would likely know where to find them on the site, at least.
(bloody hell, Dre - you edit your posts quicker than me - impressive… 😉)
Edit: It doesn’t seem it is so much about positive or negative reviews or statements - or not liking to read critical posts, or be in an echo chamber - it’s the repetitiveness of them she was referring to? (ie, She ‘see start of posts saying like ‘for all the good things’ but people don’t then say what those things are. The same for those who post ‘for all the bad things’, and then mention focus or mention on the good. It comes across as empty lip service, to me anyway’.
Though you may be better asking that of BAD.
I get where she’s coming from, and I sympathise, but what started with a respectful post about repetiveness very quickly devolved into a post, which was dripping with sarcasm (in regards to lip service), and a rather angry undertone. I get that she’s annoyed, though.
Although, one might ask whether The same for those who post ‘for all the bad things’, and then mention focus or mention on the good might not be considered lip service as well, since I somehow doubt she would be so critical of a somewhat repetitive positive post in regards to TLJ? I could be wrong though, as she hasn’t been on this board very long. 😉
Anyway, I am interested what her opinion is of TLJ, and what positives she took from it. There are too few positive analyses of TLJ in this thread. That’s for sure.
‘the main reason I made the last post actually comes from watching a few videos analyzing the business model of the Disney coorporation, and forming my own opinion on it in relation to the upcoming remakes of Aladdin, The Lion King , Mulan (in addition to Dumbo this year, and the slew of remakes or adaptations we got in previous years), and placing the ST in that context, and not liking where things are headed. I started wondering why we as a movie viewing audience are so uncritical of this Trojan Horse in our wallets feeding on our nostalgia? I like a good remake, or adaptation just like the next person, but should the underlying corporate strategy that drives this business model affect our enjoyment of them, especially when every dollar that gets spent on remakes, and adaptations isn’t spent on new content?’ - surely this is worthy or a new thread to discuss? rather than in here?
‘Let me end this post with the following question. Does the ST thusfar, and TLJ specifically fit within the Disney remake strategy: same meat, different gravy? If no, why not?’ what is the Disney remake strategy? In general, or for the ST? Again surely worthy of discussing in a new separate thread? (or a thread on these subjects, if one already exists?
Why not in here? It relates to TLJ, and the creative choices within. It affects the enjoyment of TLJ to some of us here, and we might want to express that point of view. What are you suggesting, that we should only discuss TLJ in a positive light in this thread? You do not like reading critical posts, and so we should make separate threads, such that you can avoid them, and stay in your echo chamber? No, thank you. If you have a more interesting perspective on TLJ (positive or negative), I will be happy to discuss it with you, or anybody else. Maybe that would be a better strategy in the future. Take the time to write your own analysis open to scrutiny (on content), rather than to criticize other people’s posts, and where they put them. You want to discuss positive aspects of TLJ, then write a post, and argue your case.
I am sorry DrDre, I feel like you have already said these things before in this thread, on a few occasions? I apologize if not, yet I seem to have a feeling of deja vu when reading it.
It doesn’t make your well-made points any less valid, but I can now see why some people no longer wish to read this thread, or visit this thread, or talk about TLJ on here, if we are just going to repeat what we have already said again and again. My apologies again if I am wrong on this.
You’re not entirely wrong, but in a way my post and your reaction to it are emblematic of the state of the franchise and the fandom.
“I feel like you have already said/shown these things before in this thread/franchise, on a few occasions? I apologize if not, yet I seem to have a feeling of deja vu when reading/watching it.”
Your sentiments about my post echo the sentiments of a lot of fans with regards to the franchise these days, but that’s not the whole story on my post.
It is a shame we do not have a ‘what we didn’t like’ type thread, or ‘what they nailed’ type thread for TLJ, as there was for TFA and some of the other films on here, to maybe help keep topics and this thread from less repetition? Or a ‘what is the political situation of the Republic and First Order in the Sequel films’ thread?
I see start of posts saying like ‘for all the good things’ but people don’t then say what those things are. The same for those who post ‘for all the bad things’, and then mention focus or mention on the good. It comes across as empty lip service, to me anyway. Maybe mention what are all the good things you enjoyed actually are?
I don’t think it’s empty lip service, since I’ve never pretended to actually truly like the film, although I’ve gone through phases where I like it more, and where I like it less. It’s a simple statement of fact, that I enjoyed some elements, some of which I’ve mentioned in the previous post (visuals, acting, some of the character moments, specifically the Luke/Rey/Kylo/Snoke dynamic, and Luke’s illusion, and its implications for the future of the rebellion at the end, though not his dying from it), but found the movie overall to be not very good, partly when seen on its own terms, but mostly when seen in context of the rest of the saga.
However, the main reason I made the last post actually comes from watching a few videos analyzing the business model of the Disney corporation, forming my own opinion on it in relation to the upcoming remakes of Aladdin, The Lion King , Mulan (in addition to Dumbo this year, and the slew of remakes or adaptations we got in previous years), placing the ST in that context, and not liking where things are headed. I started wondering why we as a movie viewing audience are so uncritical of this Trojan Horse in our wallets feeding on our nostalgia? I like a good remake, or adaptation just like the next person, but should the underlying corporate strategy that drives this business model affect our enjoyment of them, especially given Disney’s omnipresence, when every dollar that gets spent on remakes, and adaptations isn’t spent on new content? Why is TLJ celebrated as novel when so much of it is clearly a repetition of what we’ve seen before? Have we come to expect so little? Is changing the order of a few events, and some characters really enough to call this a new story? How will people in the future look back on this period of film making? Will TLJ be seen as this generation’s The Empire Strikes Back, and I just didn’t get it, or will it be seen as part of a trilogy, that is just one of many examples of Disney’s cynical (though competent) attempts to cash in on the golden goose, our nostalgia?
Let me end this post with the following question. Does the ST thusfar, and TLJ specifically fit within the Disney remake strategy: same meat, different gravy? If no, why not? If yes, is it a good thing, or a bad thing?
Here’s the LUT:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15Ja_iIQfQ6GRI-39Ewj6j6y63vCP9fEV/view?usp=sharing
For all the good elements in TLJ I have to admit I’m having a very difficult time accepting how RJ hit the reset button on the galaxy and its heroes. What doesn’t make sense to me is, that after the destruction of SKB the FO would reign the galaxy as stated in the opening crawl, later revised to controlling all major systems within weeks. Some here have claimed, that the FO doesn’t yet control the galaxy, and that the ending of the film suggests they might never reach that point, because of how inspired everyone is, because of Luke’s big illusion. However, this completely ignores the fact, that the Resistance suddenly becomes the rebellion again in this film, and is literally stated to be reborn by the end of it.
rebellion
/rɪˈbɛljən/
noun
an act of armed resistance to an established government or leader.
“the authorities put down a rebellion by landless colonials”
synonims: uprising, revolt, insurrection, mutiny, revolution, insurgence, insurgency, rising, rioting, riot.
In other words the Resistance can only become rebels, if the FO now represents the established government, otherwise the whole rebel designation makes no sense. For all its rehashing of ANH, and poor explaining of the bigger picture, TFA managed to at least present a state of the galaxy that seems pretty realistic. It makes sense that there would be Imperial remnants. It makes sense that Leia, given what she went through in the OT, would consider them a threat. It makes sense that the Republic, tired of war, would want to believe the FO can safely be ignored. In other words it provides a setup for a potentially very different conflict between a government struggling to maintain stability (and at what cost?), and a ruthless organization bent on terrorizing the galaxy, and destabalizing said government, whilst expanding its sphere of influence. However, despite the risks TLJ took in some of its character moments, its narrative outcome is a New Republic wiped from existence, and a tiny band of rebels resisting an Empire, the starting point of ANH. So, in terms of the big picture, the story has completely regressed back to where we started in 1977.
So much of what was established in the OT (and PT) was undone in the ST both from a narrative and a character perspective, and the best explanation we’ve been given thusfar is, that a lot can happen in thirty years (as long as what happens ultimately places us narratively in OT territory). Two of the big three turned into shells of their former selves, because of past failures that are only hinted at in flashbacks, and conversations, then find an ounce of redemption, and then die. Ben Solo was seduced by Snoke for some reason, Snoke was able to revive the Empire for some reason, the entire galaxy just gave up fighting once the Hosnian system was destroyed for some reason, the FO ends up with unlimited resources, despite the fact that SKB was destroyed for some reason. This kind of lazy storytelling to me is very unsatisfactory, and makes it very hard for me to get excited about the upcoming episode IX. For all the good acting, plot twists, great action and visuals, I can’t shake the sense, that the entire premise of the ST thusfar remains on very weak footing, and sadly fits perfectly in Disney’s currently successful business model of feeding off the nostalgia, that the general audience has for classic stories, whether it be through a modernized adaptation of the OT, or live remakes of their animated classics.
So many of these types of arguments are made in bad faith though, and many misrepresenting the events of the film. It’s not always the case, but many people taking issue with the execution of this perceived agenda are actually taking issue with the agenda itself, whether consciously or not.
It is an assumption, that these arguments are made in bad faith, and whether critics subconsciously take issue with the agenda. It is also a manner to invalidate an opposing opinion, which makes such assumptions suspect.
the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !
Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:
The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.
A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.
Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.
Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.
Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.
Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.
You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.
The point is not to focus on sides, but on compassion, and understanding. History tells us, that it is not about sides, and the threat is not in persuing ideals, but how we choose to persue those ideals. It’s always too easy to conflate the ideals with the methods used to persue them.
Isn’t that exactly the issue with using SJW as a pejorative though? Some “SJWs” use methods that annoy (or worse), but now people throw around the term to describe anyone championing those ideals. Rian Johnson is an SJW because his film features more women in it than any other Star Wars film (amongst other things). But that’s an incredibly low bar, so it’s not like he cut all the men out to make it work. The ideal is something any decent person should agree with (better gender parity) and his method is highly innocuous (putting more women in a fantasy movie). But he’s an “SJW.” The term is dogshit.
The criticisms against TLJ go beyond putting more women in a fantasy movie. It’s directed against what some percieve as the dumbing down of male characters to make the female characters shine by comparison. It’s about what some consider a rather contrived conflict involving the witholding of crucial information to make a point about gender relations. It’s about a protagonist who obtains powers faster than any protagonist before her, and displays a distinct lack of character flaws, as if the creators are afraid to make her too vulnurable, thus making her a boring character to some. The term SJW follows from the assumption, that percieved flaws in the story, and characters follow from a conscious effort to push a political agenda. The pursuit of this agenda in the view of some critics allegedly took precedent over good story and characters. Now, we can debate, whether such flaws exist, or whether the creators were pursuing an agenda, but for the vast majority of TLJ’s critics it is a massive oversimplification to state it’s just a matter of more women in a fantasy movie.
Am I mistaken in believing politics was banned as a topic from this forum?
Regardless, I don’t believe this is the appropriate thread for it.
I suppose you’re right. Let’s drop this.
the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !
Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:
The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.
A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.
Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.
Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.
Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.
Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.
You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.
The point is not to focus on sides, but on compassion, and understanding. History tells us, that it is not about sides, and the threat is not in persuing ideals, but how we choose to persue those ideals. It’s always too easy to conflate the ideals with the methods used to persue them.
the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !
Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:
The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.
A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.
Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.
Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.
Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.
Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the pursuit of many so called ideal societies, whether they be considered left wing or right wing.
so , how are those goals pursued and what are their methods ?
Well, as I stated it generally involves a lack of respect for other points of view, and an attitude of superiority, that gets on people’s nerves. I would charactarize a SJW as a person who so zealously persues his or her goals, that it even turns off those that generally might favour their point of view. In other words it becomes a counterproductive endeavour, which often devolves into an us versus them mentality, pointing fingers, and passing blame for the ills of society.
the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !
Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:
The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.
A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.
Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.
Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.
yeah . wikipedia is a credible source…
You could use any dictionary. It is usually a derogotary term, that much is clear, and that negative connotation is clearly related to undesirable behaviour (in the eyes of critics of such behaviour).
Collins dictionary:
usually derogatory
a person who campaigns zealously and vociferously for causes associated with social justice
The urban dictionary:
A person who uses the fight for civil rights as an excuse to be rude, condescending, and sometimes violent for the purpose of relieving their frustrations or validating their sense of unwarranted moral superiority. The behaviors of Social justice warriors usually have a negative impact on the civil rights movement, turning away potential allies and fueling the resurgence of bigoted groups that scoop up people who have been burned or turned off by social justice warriors.
