Social Justice Jackasses

So I recently found myself in a strange situation. Some work colleagues of mine and I were talking about Suicide Squad, the upcoming DC movie, and the topic of Sexual objectification came up, regarding Harley Quinn. because of how I'm wired, I refuted the idea, as I have done many times, including a few times on this blog while ranting about Anita Sarkeesian, and their response baffled me, I wouldn't get it because I'm a guy. These people aren't idiots, they're not SJWs, I'd assume this expression comes from a place of misunderstanding more than anything else, they've heard feminist buzzwords and phrases online and just went with them, not looking into them. ignoring the subtle sexism of their response for a second; just imagine if I pulled that shit myself, flipped the situation, and fucked all chances of getting a girlfriend into the dirt in the process, I figured that given my vocal stance on Sarkeesian and her expression oppressing feminist nonsense, and the many stupid things happening at an ever more frequent rate in our slowly dying western civilisation, I'd just ramble a bit about the lunacies I've caught wind of lately, just for some dumb fun, some dumb, soul destroying fun.

Let's start with Ghostbusters, since some things I said in my review might not have been entirely clear. From my closing segment a few people I know who've made the mistake of reading it think I thought the film was good, I don't think it was good, when I said it was surprisingly enjoyable for what it was, I meant I was expecting the film to be a complete dog turd, and it wasn't, having seen it twice now, I've had time to really process it, what is good and what isn't is now more clear to me, and while I said it wasn't a complete waste of time, I still would absolutely not recommend it, for all the reasons I mentioned in my review. But as could only be expected, the Feminist media went into full on battle mode once more to laud this film as a masterpiece of cinema. And a few really stood out to me as, honestly, pathetic. Let's start with Quartz and Noah Berlatsky; "Ghostbusters with women is 100% less sexist than the original." in this article Berlatsky claims the emotional core of the first film was sexual harassment, Berlatsky goes as far as to indirectly call Rick Moranis a rapist, more directly call Bill Murray a harasser, and seems to have completely misinterpreted the tone of the film. "Louis also pursues her. When he becomes possessed, he actually gets to have sex with the possessed Dana. Again, this nonconsensual violation is presented as amusing—and even sexy." You might not like to hear it, but if you actually watch the film, you'll know that they're both possessed, it's the same as the drunk sex argument, 2 drunk people have sex, only one is a rapist, because women are always the victim, according to feminists. But Louis, again, if you watch the film, isn't much of a threat, pre-possession he's just more of an annoyance for Dana, and she pays him very little mind. Venkman on the other hand is more forward, and I understand it, Berlatsky, I know that seeing someone who's sexually and romantically assertive makes you uncomfortable. But Venkman is a womaniser, that is what he is, he's a shit talking rogue who loves the ladies, and it is funny when he throws in the towel on subtly and confesses his love to Dana in his usual, half arsed style, that's a big part of his character, and it's one of the reasons he's so likable, I don't see how you could appreciate that though, but I'll hold back on the insults. He never rapes her, and neither does Louis, the sex is only implied, and Zuul and Vinz Clortho are the ones in the drivers seats, not Dana and Louis, I suppose it's a good allegory for drunk sex, but it's not rape, violation of their minds for sure, they've both under the influence of demons, but it's not a violation of Dana. But what really is stupid here is your comparison of Rowan to the original Ghostbusters, because sure, 3 nerdy scientists and a black friend is totally the same as a sad little man that is no doubt an insult to the so called misogynists. If anything though I personally see him more as a reflection of people like Paul Feig and you, Berlatsky, sad men who had no luck with women, but while Rowan took the path of bitterness and revenge, Feig and you took the path of subjugation and self flagellation, you and the misogynists are just 2 different branches on the same tree. And I like that you mention Erin lusting for Kevin, but don't consider that harassment because after all, it's only sexist when men do it, right. As a refutation to your argument, this reboot is 100% more sexist than the original, because that original didn't demean or insult anyone, where as this film is very much demeaning and insulting to men, something I mentioned in my review, Dana was a strong character, stronger than any of the 4 new Ghostbusters, and easily stronger than the weak little object you seem to think she is, you misogynist.

http://qz.com/732293/ghostbusters-with-women-is-100-less-creepy-than-the-original/ Link to the full article.

So, Next topic, Battlefield 1 is sexist, according to a former DICE dev, let's dig into this thing on PCGamesN. The Article is about a former DICE coder named Amandine Coget, who claims that female soldiers in historical war shooters is "way overdue." I tried to find some numbers on this subject, but surprisingly all I could find was articles from the left about how there were totally loads of women in the war, not very reliable sources. I didn't have numbers, but I found that, curiously, Russia was the only country to deploy female Battalions, and they did so for less than a year. So let's get to Coget. It's striking that the article would start with a comment about how the fields are full of men shooting at each other, and seem to find issue with the lack of women, never mind all the men shooting each other and, by extension, dying; a certain Hillary Clinton quote comes to mind right now. And right away we have the issue here, 'boys' wouldn't find it 'believable', that's a very slanderous way of saying historical accuracy, it's not a  reflection of history, it's a problem with boys, let me guess, because of sexism and patriarchy. But let's get to her reasons for thinking its sexism, she commented on how the game was throwing out accuracy in some areas while keeping it in others, and this is true, but it's apples and oranges. first and foremost, Battlefield 1 is a game, and for a game to be successfully, especially a multiplayer game, primarily it must have fun gameplay. A game that went wild with realism is Far Cry 2, a game where guns constantly jam, there is no fast travel, and you have to take malaria medicine, sure it was realistic, but it wasn't fun, in their attempt to make the game hyper immersive, they ruined the immersion, and these features were then removed from the vastly superior Far Cry 3 and 4. If you were playing a shooter and your guns didn't work, or your parachute didn't open, and you die through no fault of your own, it's cheap, it's unfair, and it isn't fun. Doing away with realism to make the game fun to play is a good idea. But being a woman wouldn't alter the gameplay, and DICE is clearly going to great lengths to get the aesthetic right, to make it look and feel like a World War 1 shooter, something you seem to be completely ignoring when you bring up Titanfall and Overwatch as examples of female soldiers. Titanfall is a sci shooter set far in the future when war is fought with giant robots, and Overwatch is a stylised shooter with talking monkeys and sexy teleporting Brits, neither of these games are pulling from history or trying to be historically accurate, yet you take issue with a game that is, but doesn't have women in it. If DICE wants to make a game set in a historic conflict and want to make it accurate, let them, don't bully them into including women for the sake of it because diversity and [current year] if that's not the game they're making, and the singleplayer has a woman in it anyway, one who's probably going to have a name, which is more than the billions of nameless men who will die in multiplayer matches will ever have, so stop complaining.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/battlefield-1/battlefield-1-scrapped-female-soldiers-because-boys-don-t-believe-in-them-says-ex-dice-coder Link to the full article.

And finally, the meaty topic. Milo Yiannopoulos, the most fabulously provocative faggot in existence, has been suspended from Twitter following an admittedly vile trolling onslaught towards Leslie Jones, you know, from Ghostbusters. Trolls are arse holes, that much is common knowledge, but clearly Leslie Jones has never encountered internet trolls before, because rule number one in dealing with them is do not engage, once the Trolls get a reaction, they win, and they'll only come at you harder, Leslie Jones made a mistake in engaging with them, and in that regard, while not deliberately, she has unwittingly instigated at least some of this abuse. Enter Milo, someone who I know is an arsehole, but he's one I very much admire, especially in this hypersensitive age of hate speech and trigger warnings, he serves as a reminder that words are just words, and he speaks in support of freedom of speech and against the moral authoritarian progressives that would love nothing more than to shut him up, despite him also being gay, oh well, oppression is an ever changing game. He might have gone a bit too hard on Jones, but that's what he does, or did until Twitter banned him. The likes of Laurie Penny and Leigh Alexander have been doing their happy dance as you'd expect, seemingly not fully aware of just what this means for Twitter. Twitter really has shot itself in the foot with this move, one that I'll bet they've been waiting to do for ages, just waiting for an excuse, and Leigh Alexander may call his legacy poisonous, but his legacy on twitter will be one of someone who didn't care what people thought or said, who didn't care who he offended, and most importantly, represented reason and a sense of humour in a world where those 2 things are being strangled by special snowflakes with political agendas. Twitter is dying, it's losing active users every day, and Twitter must think it's because of all the harassment, which would explain the formation of the trust and safety council, which did them no favours, but now Milo's banned. And this will be an important moment in the downfall of Twitter, a site that censors and bans conservatives while leaving Islamists, feminists and BLM activists to spew hatred as much as they like. Milo was banned for inciting targeted abuse, which curiously is something Leslie Jones, who is the one who reported Milo, has done herself, with no consequences what so ever. The funny thing about all of this is that the SJW's who are celebrating Milo's banning don't realise that the tools they use to oppress him today will be used by others to oppress them tomorrow, as the noose tightens on freedom of expression on Twitter, it's only a matter of time before a new wave of snowflakes flutter in, and determine that the Anita Sarkeesians and the Zoe Quinns of today are problematic, all the while the puppeteers in big government lick their lips at the prospect of the masses welcoming in their own incarceration through self censorship and thought policing. It also goes to show how the progressive left thinks, again, on a level playing field, good ideas will flourish, while bad ideas die, that's why the KKK is such a tiny group now, because their ideas are bad. But they think that they can stop their ideas from being stamped out by better ones if the people with those better ideas are silenced, the Nazi's burned books because they thought it would stop the ideas those books held, ISIS destroys art because it goes against the fundamentalist views, it's the same thing.

I think that's been suitably soul destroying, but these are just stupid things that I have opinions on, so I thought I'd rant a bit. I'll leave it on a quote from everybody's favourite faggot, one that I hope will convey why I have so much admiration for him. "It's not just important to give platforms to ordinary speech, it's important to give platforms to all speech, because sunlight is the best disinfectant. You should have the confidence in your own opinions, and the fortitude and courage to believe you can beat them in a fair open marketplace of ideas, if you believe those things, you have nothing to fear from any speaker." - Milo Yiannopoulos.

Godzilla Resurgence trailer 2 thoughts

I don't even know if I'll have the pleasure of reviewing this film, given the shaky situation of its international release, but with a week to go until its Japanese release, I was surprised to learn that Toho has released another trailer, and I have some thoughts on it, so let's go.

What really stood out to me immediately was the music, while I like the music in the first trailer, I really like the music in this trailer, it's effectively orchestral and carries with it a lot of gravity, hopefully reflective of the awe and terror this film will instil, but that's just me hoping. But this trailer has largely has the same problems the first one had, and this time I am going to call some of them problems. Godzilla still moves robotically in the CG suit hybrid shots, and is very animated in the entirely CG shot at the end of the trailer, which even more unfortunately is the same one from the first trailer, just a bit longer. That said, the effects in this trailer do look better than the effects in the first trailer, and it has the same beautifully haunting cinematography, including a few very familiar looking shots, like one taken from street level where the full view is obscured by power lines, very 54 esque. Speaking of 54, since the last trailer, it's come to light that this film is a hard reboot of the series, one that ignores all previous films, including 54, that's very brave on Toho's part, and to be honest I don't really know why they've done it. 54 was 62 years ago, a soft reboot that recognises 54 is something they did in the 80's, but even Legendary went this route, and in an era of reboots, it really baffles me as to why they've put themselves in a corner. Inevitably this film will be compared to both the 54 film and the 2014 film, and this film isn't just a sequel, it's a de facto replacement of the 54 original, like a certain other reboot that came out recently, that immediately puts it on shaky ground. The action in this trailer is largely the same, the tanks and attack helicopters are the same as what we saw in the first trailer, but with a bit more new footage to drool over. And back to the haunting cinematography, there's more night shots of the G in this trailer, and they all look incredibly, most notably a ground level shot of the lights going out and a distant shot of Godzilla standing in a blacked out city, its good shit. And the second shot in the trailer is also very good, Godzilla from behind, obscured by buildings and people fleeing, I'm interested in seeing what this film looks like, purely from an effects and cinematography standpoint, because it look really interesting. What doesn't look interesting in this trailer is the characters, just like the last trailer, the trailer consists largely of dialogue and interaction with the characters, but it's all muted, I didn't call it a problem last time because the film was still a few months away, but now the film is much closer, so to still have the same hollow, muted character scenes in the trailer makes the whole thing more of a problem, as someone who likes character driven movies, I want to know who these people are, and this trailer, just like the last one, doesn't give me that, these characters exhibit no motivation in either of these trailers, and it's annoying. This trailer is ultimately the same trailer as the one released a few months ago, just with a bit more Godzilla, but there isn't really anything new, it's even the same length as the last one. But this trailer has something the first one didn't, a tease, and one that really tickles my fancy, one that excites me, don't know how much more sexual I can make this, But this trailer teases the iconic atomic breath. The last shot of the trailer is Godzilla dislocating his jaw and his spines and mouth starting to glow; it wouldn't be that surprising if the colour wasn't purple, but the colour is purple. It looks like Godzilla's fire is going to be purple, which is very surprising. The only time I can think of where his fire wasn't bright blue was Godzilla vs Destroyah, and in that film the change was explained away in the plot of the film, since that one was a sequel. But this one isn't, as I've already digressed about, so it looks like a purely cosmetic change coming from the same mindset as the stupid arms and stupid tail, but unlike those 2 things, I think I might like the new colour.

Aside from the fire tease at the end, this is very much the same trailer that was released a few months ago, just with different music and some new footage, and while this is a better trailer, it still has the same down sides; Godzilla's inconsistent appearance, the inconsistent special effects, and the muted dialogue that lacks motivation, but the new music and mouth wateringly good cinematography really make up for it. This is a film I keep flip flopping on, but right now, as I write this, having thought about what I like and don't like, this film is one I do want to see, and definitively will if I get the chance.

Ghostbusters (2016) movie review

Here's what you need to know; Erin Gilbert and her fellow scientists are in a spot of bother, their paranormal research making them a joke among the scientific community. But as New York starts experiencing a sharp spike in paranormal activity, Gilbert, Yates and Holtzmann see a chance to realise their dream of proving the existence of ghosts, now a dire threat looms over the city, and the Ghostbusters might be the only ones that can stop it.
Let's be honest for a second, I have been extremely negative towards this film in the past few months, it's marketing has been utterly abysmal, with a series of really shit trailers and TV spots, not to mention Fall Out Boy's raping of the original Ray Parker Jr song. That would have been bad enough had Paul Feig and Sony not started insulting everyone, and the hard left feminist war machine not gone on a full scale ad hominem rampage against anyone who dared be critical of this so very progressive movie. But the movie's out now, and I have watched it, and I'll be honest, I thought this movie was going to be complete shit, but I was wrong.

This film opens in a way that surprised me, while clearly ripping off the library scene from the original film, the Mansion scene here actually wasn't bad, it had a spooky atmosphere to it and establishes that this film is a lot slimier than the original. Things do however go downhill as we are introduced to the new crew of Ghostbusters; Melissa McCarthy's Abby Yates, Kristen Wiig's Erin Gilbert, Kate McKinnon's Jillian Holtzmann and Leslie Jones's Patty Tolan, who are all cartoons. As I expected I would, I took a bit of a liking to Holtzmann, who, while still being a cartoon, had the most character of any of them, even if her wacky inventor persona is very obvious, it's not obnoxious, and I like the wacky inventor trope. Abby and Erin probably have the least personality of all of them, Abby is Melissa McCarthy doing her funny fat girl routine again, with an obsession with Chinese food, and Erin is your underdog with a feely backstory. Patty is everything the trailers would have you believe she is, the big, loud, street smart black friend. While none of them really had any significant depth on their own, and were complete cartoons, it wasn't annoying, if anything it was more cringe worthy than annoying, and they had a lot of energy between them, so it wasn't as boring as I was expecting, at least with the crew. Chris Hemsworth's Kevin was a bit too brain dead for me, personally, I know what the joke is with him, but his stupidity wasn't endearing, it was just stupid, and Erin's lusting for him is really, really cringe worthy. perhaps the character with the most unrealised potential in the film is its villain, Rowan was never really given an explanation as to why he's a genius engineer and physicist with a menial job as a hotel worker, and his backstory and motivation really could have been expanded on; in his character I saw an opportunity for a much more sympathetic villain, but I assume his character was meant more as an insult to the film's detractors/ hardcore projection of Paul Feig's insecurities. Speaking of Paul Feig, his political motivations shine through in this film's supporting line up, most notably the male characters, who are all either Arse holes or idiots to some degree, a lack of knowledge on the delicate subject of Feig's beliefs would make this easy to brush over, but as it stands, it's kind of blatant. What's weird however is that the film's only notable female supporting character is a really unlikable character, she's a bitch, and she's easily the most grating side character in the film, I don't really know what good little puppy Paul Feig was thinking to be honest, it's not very progressive is it. The Film's plot is very in keeping with the original, Ghostbusters are attacked by ghost, set up base in a less than optimal location, catch a ghost and get famous, the film even ends with a showdown with a giant puffy white thing, while it's clearly not the most original formula ever, it's inclusion of a villain actually gave the plot more focus, and the energy the crew has kept things moving at a good pace, weirdly I can't really say the film bored me, even if it's probably done serious damage to my spine.

That's one of the film's most glaring issues; the cringe, while the film did actually have some funny moments, a sizable number of the jokes really don't work, the Leslie Jones crowd surf scene from the trailer was really bad, in fact a lot of Leslie Jones' jokes were cringe worthy, Abby's Chinese food addiction was cringe and so was Erin's lusting for Kevin, but Holtzmann, while still being cringe worthy at times, was easily the most endearing character in the film. there was a lot of stupidity in this film, and not good stupidity, awkward, poorly handled stupidity, Kevin's a good example, but all of the characters have moments of vapid idiocy, a certain Erin scene from the trailer comes to mind, and when the film tries to be witty, it has a habit of failing really hard, again, just coming across as vapid and awkward. Which isn't to say the film was never funny, while I never laughed out loud, and it's certainly not remotely as funny as other comedies I've seen this year like Grimsby or Deadpool or even Lazer Team, its energy never really let the mediocrity of a lot of its jokes drag it down. Yes the film made me groan a few times, but they were far less frequent than I was expecting, and a particular scene I was really not looking forward to was not even in the movie, which was very relieving, it was shown in the end credits however, which was a good place to put it. Another thing the trailers painted a bad impression of was the effects. At first, it was tolerable, the stupidly vibrant neon ghosts floating around in dense clouds of particle effects like vapour and sparks and arcs, for the first couple of ghosts it's something I could get over, but as the film entered its final act and there were ghosts everywhere in a big battle, it just looked like a mess, the blatant fakeness of its CG completely ruined whatever illusion the already poorly handled effects were able to muster, and as I said at the beginning, this film has lots more slime. Bigger isn't always better, and in an effort to make the ghosts look cool, they've just made them look really fake, pulling back on the vapour and brightness would have made the ghosts look a lot better. Other than being really fake looking however, and being really overdone, the effects aren't really that bad. The film also breaks its own rules from time to time, I won't go into details here, but one in particular bugs me, the film establishes that a proton gun can't kill a ghost, it can only weaken and contain it, but the film throws that rule out completely in the final battle when the proton guns start straight up killing the ghosts, and they start playing with their more nonsensical gadgets like a Proton grenade and a machine that sucks in and literally shreds ghosts, it's a nitpick, but it's a buggy one.

All in All this film caught me off guard. Make no mistake, this film is not brilliant, its jokes are often cringe worthy and awkward, its effects are over done and fake looking, and its characters are flat cartoons. But I went in expecting it to be a shitty, lazy propaganda film, and I came out having seen something that was, at least for the 2 hours I was watching it, surprisingly enjoyable for what it was. I'm glad I was wrong about this film, and while I think the damage has already been done with its marketing and feminist pedestalising, this is a film that isn't a complete waste of your time.

*Addendum
While I stand by what I wrote in my review, regarding my expectations and shit like that, I want to make it clear that this film isn't good. It was better than I thought it would be, and, admittedly, hoped it would be, but it's still a sloppy comedy. While I would discourage going into this film with any kind of bias, regardless of where you swing on that issue, subjectively, this isn't a film I enjoyed to any meaningful degree, and I would not recommend it.