|Posted on June 10, 2013 at 12:05 AM|
A short doc about NeoGaf. What is NeoGaf? Well, that's hard to answer. The easy answer is a videogame forum with insiders, journalists and so forth of the industry. The longer answer is a videogame forum with insiders, journalists and a lot of snarky comments and nerdrage that makes most people have a love/hate relationship with it.
Just wanted to put up Kyle's latest video. He's made a name for himself because, for once, someone isn't screaming at the camera or trying to be snarky and whatnot. He, as noted in this video, has a nice dose of sincerity which most do not have.
Plus I kind of know him. Well, I kind of met him at a party one time and know people he knows so I stress the "kind of" part. So I just wanted to bring attention to it. He has been fully accepted by NeoGaf, you know. (see previous post).
In other Gametraielrs videos, this is just brilliant. If anything because I used to watch a TON of Unsolved Mysteries way back in the day. I loved that show.
Director's first color films are here, and they're all pretty amazing. Also, Criterion has had a sale going on if you haven't checked it out (Best Buy and Amazon I think).
Somebody had a lot of time on their hands, there's a ton of pics here. Here's some I liked:
And this one gets the "genius" award.
I was going to post this comic, but then realied it would take up about four pages, so click the link.
If you know movies, you know these. So here they are, if anything just to solidify and re-confirm your awesome movie knowledge.
Though, to be honest, they could choose any number of often-used locations. Even in LA, there's a ton. Hell, Union Station didn't even get on this list, which had flicks like Blade Runner (most famously because the convert almost the entire place in to a set), The Hustler, Them!, The Dark Knight Rises etc….maybe that's a Part 2.
Seriously, this teapot thing pisses me off. You're getting upset because, from a certain angle and in a certain light (and in most cases when it's slightly blurred and put next to actual photo of Hitler in a similar pose), a teapot looks like Hitler…this shouldn't even be an issue. In fairness, the media is blowing it out of proportion, as usual, when it was probably just one person complaining. One lonely, overly-sensitive person who's trying to hunt down anything seemingly racist for whatever reason.
It's a teapot. Get over it. I'm buying one now because I'm so against someone complaining about something so insignificant and dumb, just like I went out and bought a couple of boxes of Cheerios because they had an interracial family in a commercial and, for some reason, people were upset about that. Because I have a strong distain to people complaining about seeing interracial couples, as though they don't exist, I have an equally strong distain (I won't say hate here, but it's borderline) to people complaining about stupid shit like a teakettle. Hell, it's why I do those parody blogs of people writing open letters about people writing open letters about stupid shit.
Can't say I'm a fan of these one, but I love this video.
A bit predictable, but I'm glad there's a good chunk of Harrison on here. Go back and listen to his poset-Beatle albums, he was doing stuff that was, I feel, well beyond what the others were doing. All Things Must Pass is one of my favorite albums.
The guy's a legend, so read up.
Oy. Let me first say that just because someone, like I'm about to be, might be critical of this doesn't make them a misogynist.
While I can agree there's a certain degree of immaturity in "geek culture" - here directed towards cosplay - I feel she's making a bad case. Now I can't speak on the whole "slut shaming" portion, that's something men don't deal with and aren't qualitified to speak on. If there are really women who go up to other women and make them feel like shit because their costume is "slutty" then they're just awful people. Plain and simple...and probably very jealous that your costume is actually better.
But I can speak on the "objectification" portion. Namely that, while I understand that a woman can be frustrated when objectified, if not outright creeped out as she gives examples, I don't understand why that comes as a surprise to anyone dressing up in a costume that was entirely meant to be sexy and objectify them. Costumes, mind you, that were designed and created by men for that sole purpose.
She doesn't really bring that up, and is often contradictory in a very overwritten piece. She notes that she wants to be sexy, but doesn't want to be objectified. Is that even possible? The purpose of being sexy is to be an objectification of yourself: to point out the curves and size and whathaveyou that most clothing covers up. Superhero and fantasy heroines are sexy and objectified because they were created and designed mostly by men, hergo when you dress up in those outfits that objectification comes with that territory.
Whether she likes to say it or not, it is a male-dominated culture. Does that suck? Yes. Women are constantly objectified, but you know this. I know you do. And I also know you don't have a choice which sucks even more. There's not a ton of female writers and artits out there, and even then you have find one that goes away from what was created and designed by men to get something that isn't overly sexy and objectified (quick example, Jill Thompson tends to make a more realistic female form even in popular superheros)they are few and far in between
It's reasonable for women to not want to be ojbectified and unreasonable that they have so little non-objectifiying costumes to go on (then again, when it comes to geeks, a woman could be wearing a poncho and they would probably objectify her...now that is something worth writing an editorial about and not bring up costumes at all). When men were designing all these costumes they had two purposes: males need to look "cool" and women need to look "sexy." That's it, and as a result women have no choice but to wear those costumes of their favorite heroines and men have no concept or understanding beause they were always designed to be "cool" (objectification of a male persona but without the gawking and creepiness).
Her best bit here is the spectrum arguement, but at the same time it sounds like a need to be "accepted" by men, whether it be accurracy or sexiness - those are the only two things men care about. Maybe that's where I have the issue - that there's this throughline of wanting to be accepted by men but without being objectified in the process. That's great, but impossible if you're going to wear that thing that was designed to objectify you by them, for them, in the process.
I don't know where the whole "geeks are accepting" thing started, but that's a myth. It's never been an accepting group of people, it's just another group of people and they can reject or accept you like any other. They're still judgemental and critical of everything (seriously, read any comments anywhere on the internet about a videogame or comic book, it crumbles in to nerdrage every time).
That being said, here's some advice: Fuck 'em. Who cares what they think? It's not about being accepted, it's about accepting yourself and feeling confident to walk in to a place in a costume and just having a good time. If they love you for whatever reason, then great, if not, say "fuck 'em" and find good people that do. They're there, trust me. For me personally, if I'm hanging around a crowd of people that I don't know that well, I'll leave in mid-conversation if they say or do something I don't like. I move on without even a second thought. In other words: I can not accept just as easily and will eventually find those friends that I do accept.
Acceptance is, as she notes herself, amongst like-minded friends. Those are the people that matter. Those are the people that acceptance is all about, and over time that group grows and grows and the next thing you know, all those creepy dudes and slut-shamers simply won't matter and will fade away.