TychoCelchuuu

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    2800

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TychoCelchuuu

  4. Posted

    9 hours ago, Ben X said:

     

    No, they're victories. That's why they're pyrrhic victories and not pyrrhic failures.

    I know you're joking, but because @itsamoose took you seriously, it's worth pointing out that of course there could be no such phrase as "Pyrrhic failure" because that would be redundant - if it's Pyrrhic, it's already a failure.

  5. Posted

    "They're not failures, they're pyrrhic victories" is just wordplay. Pyrrhic victories are failures. That's why they're pyrrhic victories and not normal victories. And nobody has ever said the movie only has failures. Obviously there are some victories too. The point is just that the movie's main theme is about failure. So all the stuff you say about the very end is neither here nor there. Obviously that victory is a good one.

  8. Posted

    1 hour ago, Erkki said:

    Anyway I have already decided not to see his latest movies, and it bothers me that they get such wide positive treatment, not only from the persons who work with him, but cinemas and industry, and critics.

    Do you think that critics should say that the movie is bad even if they don't think it's bad, because Allen is a child molester, or do you think that they should spend more time mentioning that he's a child molester in their reviews and less time talking about the movie? I'd be fine with the latter, and I'd feel weird about the former, but the latter still sounds to me like "positive treatment" of his movies (albeit combined with negative treatment of the guy) so I'm not sure if that's something you'd be okay with.

  10. Posted

    I don't really see the point in boycotting D.W. Griffith. That's a bit like refusing to read Mein Kampf. It's like, yes, I don't want to support Hitler, but I don't think he's getting residuals...

     

    Also, it's really a testament to how hard it is to stay up on this stuff that, for instance, Tarantino isn't on the list.

  11. Posted

    10 hours ago, Patrick R said:

    The next director to choose to work with him will forever be suspect in my eyes.

    Although I think sometimes the producers/studio get the final say on this? I think it can be sort of tough to know what the right line is in terms of being vindictive about someone working with someone else. Is all the cast and crew on any Wooden Allen film verboten? If so, that wipes out a huge swathe of Hollywood movies, given how many people work on movies, how many movies they work on, etc.

  12. Posted

    2 hours ago, jennegatron said:

    I, personally, am willing to forego seeing Weinstein distributed and produced movies. It seems that even though he was forced to resign he maintains stakeholder status  is unlikely to be removed. I like movies, and have Movie Pass which means I am starting to see a lot more movies in theater, but like I said before, there's enough good stuff in the world to see that I don't need these movies in my life.

     

    Like I said before it's 100% a personal line to draw for yourself. If you continue to see movies produced by his company though, you may face some questioning or pushback from other people, but that's the risk of living in the world no matter what choices you make /shrug

    I'm in the same position except that I often can't remember to check whether it's a Weinstein movie before I see it. I'm not sure if I've seen any Weinstein movies since the info came out, for instance. Also I don't really care about the production company or the guy making money, I just care about whether he keeps working there, so if after his apparently bullshit rehab, if he's back in the office, then I'll probably start making much more of an effort.

  13. Posted

    8 minutes ago, jennegatron said:

    Personally, I refuse to participate in spending my money in a way that supports men (it's almost always men) who are monsters. I refuse to see Polanski's or Woody Allen's movies, I refuse to listen to R. Kelly's music. I refuse to see movies based off of Orson Scott Card's books knowing that he's a bigot who uses his money to fund anti-LGBT campaigns.

    Or, to put it more accurately, you refuse to knowingly participate in spending your money in a way that supports men whom you know are monsters. I think anyone who spends money on anything other than tiny self-published indie games and self-published albums is going to inevitably be supporting men who are monsters, either because some of the famous men haven't been outed yet or because many of the non-famous men are monsters. So for instance if you watch, like, any studio film, some of your money is going to however many monster men work in that studio, which I think we can safely guarantee is way more than zero, because as Erkki has noted, Hollywood is full of monsters.

     

    My own view is that I tend to not give a shit about my own particular expenditure in terms of that money going into a monster's pocket, because I don't care whether or not monsters have money. I do care about my particular expenditure sending some sort of message, like "Woody Allen is a bankable name" or something like that, so I usually avoid seeing movies/buying books/music/etc. that involve high profile abusers. I want those works to fail, not because I care about who gets money but because I think the message we as a society should be sending is "keep making your stuff, but we're not going to support you."

  15. Posted

    Yeah I think the whole "the movie works to the extent you're big on the characters" take is a good one, so if you're not a huge Rose fan or you're not 100% in with Finn and so on, I can understand large parts of the movie falling flat. For me, I'm totally there with every single character: Finn, Rey, Ren, and so on were pretty much the only things I liked in The Force Awakens, so I was totally there for them when they showed up in TLJ and carried the narrative and so on. If I weren't feeling them, I'd probably have your take.

  17. Posted

    I feel like it's the XBox One that's backwards compatible with Far Cry 2? Far Cry 2 seems like now it's forward compatible with the XBox One. Because if Far Cry 2 was going backwards it would work on the original XBOX. But maybe the XBox One is the original XBOX, because there's the XBox One X, which is abbreviated XBOX? Is Far Cry 2 on the Switch yet? Can I roll a cardboard grenade down a hill?

  25. Posted

    I think Kylo Ren is my favorite too. The new movies have a great crop of amazing people - I love Finn, Rey, and Poe, and Hux and DJ and so on... - but Ren is a step above. In a lot of ways he's everything Anakin could've been. Anyways, I don't love this article, but I don't hate it, and it's maybe worth reading because it's short, so check this out.