From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: 12 STRONG: The Left is Upset (Again)
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin3!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx43.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: 12 STRONG: The Left is Upset (Again)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <atropos-FADE79.12261328012018@news.giganews.com>
<pwsbC.537981$iX.302982@fx39.iad>
<atropos-AB6580.15160828012018@news.giganews.com>
<45GbC.1718$Ia3.404@fx44.iad>
<atropos-485159.08560429012018@news.giganews.com>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <atropos-485159.08560429012018@news.giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 111
Message-ID: <wVIbC.3044$at7.117@fx43.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:33:16 UTC
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 12:33:14 -0500
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3334591018
X-Received-Bytes: 6589
Print Article
Forward Article
On 1/29/2018 11:56 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <45GbC.1718$Ia3.404@fx44.iad>,
>   moviePig<pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 1/28/2018 6:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <pwsbC.537981$iX.302982@fx39.iad>,
>>>    moviePig<pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/28/2018 3:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> This guy has some serious issues to work through. His obvious issues
>>>>> with the military aside, he can't even stand that Hemsworth is
>>>>> good-looking. "Greviously handsome"? WTF?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, and contrary to the writer's claim, Hemsworth's Marines did a lot
>>>>> more than decimate the Taliban forces. They annihilated them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----------------
>>>>> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/27/12-strong-war-movies-masculinity
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Maass
>>>>> January 27 2018
>>>>>
>>>>> The Hollywood Reporter published a surprising story earlier this month
>>>>> about film studios turning away from movies about sex. A biopic about
>>>>> Hugh Hefner is stalled, gone for the moment is a James Franco film about
>>>>> a 15-year-old Russian prostitute, and a remake of A STAR IS BORN is
>>>>> being re-thought, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> "As Hollywood begins to navigate the #MeToo landscape," Tatiana Siegel
>>>>> reported, "one of the first casualties appears to be big-screen erotica.
>>>>> In the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal, studios are steering clear
>>>>> of sex." Alyssa Rosenberg, writing in the Washington Post, hopes that
>>>>> Hollywood's embarrassed executives are navigating "the end of a very
>>>>> narrow way of thinking about what's alluring." Instead of movies that
>>>>> objectify women, she suggests more films that portray sex and sexuality
>>>>> in intelligent ways.
>>>>>
>>>>> This reckoning is long overdue. And it can be extended to another genre
>>>>> that has distorted how men behave: war movies. Hollywood has shown
>>>>> itself capable of making excellent war movies (think THREE KINGS, PATHS
>>>>> OF GLORY, and THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES), but most are problematic.
>>>>> Some of the biggest war movies of the post-9/11 era don't just show
>>>>> violence in ways that are often gratuitous and occasionally racist. They
>>>>> model a cliched form of masculinity that veers from simplistic to
>>>>> monstrous.
>>>>>
>>>>> For instance, you can see Rambo and John Wayne return to life in the
>>>>> latest war blockbuster, 12 STRONG, which was produced by Jerry
>>>>> Bruckheimer, who also brought us BLACK HAWK DOWN. 12 STRONG is an
>>>>> extravaganza about a Special Forces team that fought the Taliban in
>>>>> Afghanistan in the weeks and months after 9/11. During the movie's
>>>>> pivotal scene, the leader of the Green Berets, played by Chris Hemsworth
>>>>> (the grievously handsome star of the THOR franchise), decimates a hive
>>>>> of Taliban fighters with his rifle ablaze as he gallops ahead on his
>>>>> fearless horse (yes, he's riding a horse). In the same way that
>>>>> Hemsworth's assault weapon goes rat-tat-tat and the bad guys fall like
>>>>> bulleted dominoes, the scene itself checks off one born-in-Hollywood
>>>>> cliché after another: of the rugged gunslinger, the warrior in camo,
>>>>> good versus evil, the modern vanquishing the profane, a man at his
>>>>> fullest.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whenever I write about the real-world impact of war movies-- and I've
>>>>> gone to bat against AMERICAN SNIPER, ZERO DARK THIRTY and 13 HOURS-- I
>>>>> always get responses along the lines of "Relax, these are just movies.
>>>>> Don't take them so seriously. They're harmless." That's when it becomes
>>>>> necessary to say that movies can create or reinforce narratives of
>>>>> history and gender that influence what people think and what they do.
>>>>> Boys and men develop their notions of masculinity from a variety of
>>>>> sources that include the films they watch (the extent to which this is
>>>>> true is, of course, open to debate). The time has come for Hollywood to
>>>>> turn away from war movies that, while satisfying to both a studio's
>>>>> bottom line and a flag-waving concept of patriotism, perpetuate a model
>>>>> of masculinity that does violence to us all.
>>>>
>>>> Though I (fwiw) am neither upset, nor upset if the Left's upset, I'm
>>>> curious to know which of this guy's ideas you find particularly absurd.
>>>
>>> Um... all of them?
>>
>> Then let's take two:
>>
>>      "Instead of movies that objectify women, [I suggest] more films that
>> portray sex and sexuality in intelligent ways."
>>
>>      "[Most war-movies] model a cliched form of masculinity that veers
>> from simplistic to monstrous."
>>
>> If each of those points is absurd, what's your alternative view?
> 
> That they're neither simplistic nor monstrous and Hemsworth's looks are
> hardly 'grievous'.

So, I infer that you in fact *don't* contest the first quote (about 
objectifying women).

In the second quote, he actually called Hemsworth "grievously 
*handsome*", which seems entirely analogous to "awfully good-looking" or 
"terribly attractive".  Moreover, in (non-Oscar) combat movies, 
'simplistic cliched masculinity' seems a rather common trope.

Point being that, while some of the Left-leaning loons you dig up and 
post here do occasionally illustrate a degree of entertaining lunacy, my 
sense is that you didn't bother to actually read this guy...

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com