MovieChat Forums > kuku > Replies
kuku's Replies
<blockquote>Ah no, I’m not going to start naming names, how odd that you would push me to do that. Read the other comments, I’m not the only person to have noticed.</blockquote>
Well, naming cases is way to check if there's a reasonable cause for your statement. People often notice what <i>they wish</i> to notice. Doing some fact checking is a healthy habit, not only in debates, but to keep your own wishful thinking under control.
<blockquote>I didn’t say that your anti-woke crusade was anti-female, it just seems that your dismissive attitude when it’s suggested these threads may make our female friends uncomfortable is telling.</blockquote>
The question is: if those threads are not anti-female, why should they feel uncomfortable?
There's another likely cause for it: some people repeating that they're anti-female. The same way that, if you keep repeating that all men are rapists, chances are women will feel uncomfortable when men are around... even when the real rape stats are extremely low.
<blockquote>Perhaps I should have said I wouldn’t be surprised if this is why we don’t see some of our regular female members</blockquote>
Which ones?
<blockquote>For someone who is constantly rabbiting on about how men are demonised in popular culture you seem oddly ambivalent to the suggestion that there is an anti-female bias on this forum.</blockquote>
Because that's a different topic. Indeed, men are demonized in modern popular culture, but it's mostly other men the ones behind that. Complaining about that demonization is <b>not</b> anti-female.
<blockquote>WHY SO DEFENSIVE?</blockquote>
Because I think that's not true. I have seen here complains about women, but not real hate. Women are not stupid, they know the difference.
As an example, you were calling your wife a bitch and your grandmother a racist bitch a few days ago. I don't think any female user is gonna leave because of it. Men complain about women and women complain about men, that's life.
He said 'anti-women'. The problem is that nowadays any complain about women becomes 'anti-women' or hate speech or whatever.
And I haven't seen here real hate. For example, in a recent thread you were calling your wife a bitch. But that's just a sadly unhappy bitter marriage, it's not anti-women or that you hate women or anything like that.
<blockquote>I'm not surprised that some of our female members have had enough and left.</blockquote>
Can you link some thread where a female user explicitly states that she's leaving the forum because there were some male user complaining about men?
Or you're just making up that?
In general, most of people here are men. It's normal to find posts complaining about women. Check any forum with a majority of female user and you'll find posts complaining about men.
That's normal, and <b>there's nothing wrong with it</b>. Men complain about women and women complain about men. Employers complain about employees and employees complain about employers. Children complain about parents and parents complain about children. That's life.
You eat your cake, you don't have cake anymore. It makes perfect sense.
Not likely the mortality is 3%. It's gonna be much lower.
<i>Yeah, Star Wars nerds ruin everything</i>
Of course. Modern Star Wars movies are so shitty because of... fans. They ruined them!!! Directors, writers, producers? They're innocent! Blame the fans! 😄
When you control the narrative, you can create a problem... and then declare yourself a victim.
CONTINUE
By the way, conceptual design doesn't really work anymore. The original idea in conceptual art was to hijack an existing language and create a contradiction. If you place an apple in a gallery art, the accepted conventions tells you that this apple must be art because it's placed in a gallery art, and however, it's just a common apple. Here you have a contradiction an that contradiction is the ultimate purpose of this art. It's not the object. It's the concept. However, once the mainstream design becomes conceptual there's no language you can hijack anymore. Nobody is using a language, everybody is trying to be the one that hijacks it.
---
The author of the Neverness cover wasn't Moebius. It was Toni Garcés. He was a minor comic author in the 80s/90s, very influenced by Moebius:
https://www.lambiek.net/artists/g/garces_toni.htm
Yeap, I agree that identifying the genre by its artwork shouldn't necessary. However, the artwork should definitely give you some insight about the book. It shouldn't feel like a random pretty image put on the cover.
Of course, as it happens with any language, it's easier to transmit information if you use pre-existing patterns and idioms. That's why pulp covers are so useful conveying information in the horror genre and at the same time, so easy to create: they have been there for years and they have become a standardized language. Trying something new, on the other hand, is far more difficult, since you don't have a pre-existing set of established language patterns.
Moebius was so good because he was able to create a very distinctive style, conveying the feeling of exploration and awesomeness in big scifi words. In a nutshell: he created a new visual language. He's not the only one. Another example is chic-lit novels. They created a wonderful visual language https://williampeaceblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/picture-26.png
But creating new languages requires talent. When you try to break the existing language <i>without talent or purpose</i>, you end up with images that don't convey any information... which is a recurrent problem in modern covers. They feel random and exchangeable because they've failed to become part of a language. In short: they say nothing.
CONTINUE
Mmmm... yes and no.
The problem with subverting genre conventions is that it has become an end in itself. Not only in covers, but in art in general. And it shouldn't be that. It should be a <b>consequence</b> of people having some new ideas that go beyond the usual conventions.
When you have people trying to subvert genre conventions <i>for the sake of it</i>, at the end of day what you get is a pile of art that lacks distinctive style and looks strangely similar, the same way random noise textures look similar.
Does that mean that pulp covers should become some kind of mandatory standard? Not at all, but new styles should have some clear idea behind it, not just being new.
During the 80s, for example, there was a trend in European scifi publishing that took inspiration in French and Belgium comic. Here are some examples published in Spain:
https://cloud10.todocoleccion.online/libros-segunda-mano-ciencia-ficcion-fantasia/tc/2016/09/19/09/60742543.jpg
https://cloud10.todocoleccion.online/libros-segunda-mano-ciencia-ficcion-fantasia/tc/2017/10/15/00/100405875.jpg
https://cloud10.todocoleccion.online/libros-segunda-mano-ciencia-ficcion-fantasia/tc/2015/07/04/21/50163520.jpg
https://www.ttrantor.org/mul/4/44029201.jpg
https://www.ebookelo.com/images/cover/50862.jpg
It was different. It was beautiful. It was useful giving info about both the genre and the story. And it had a distinctive style. You can compare for example the covers in Jerry Pournelle, the exact same novel both cases.
this is a pulp original - http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510BRQVJNCL.jpg
this is a comic inspired version - https://cloud10.todocoleccion.online/libros-segunda-mano-ciencia-ficcion-fantasia/tc/2013/12/06/21/40390671.webp
That's how you subvert conventions.
I think it depends of what causes your anxiety.
For example, I have an extremely hyperactive mind, which can be very stressing, to the point that I've studied methods to cope with it. I make breaks to use relaxation and breathing techniques during the day. In my case, some weed after dinner does wonders.
But that's my case. Each person is different.There's people who feel very anxious when they have some weed because they feel they're losing control. If you need to be constantly in control, chances are it will increase your anxiety.
Some people will find weed relaxing, some people won't. There's no universal answer to that question.
I like it. It feels more like a plate armor. Since Batman has no superpowers (except his training and his money), it makes sense that he uses as much protection as possible.
I'm not saying it's better than the traditional suit-like approach. It's different, I think both approachs work well.
As a related topic, it's interesting how you can almost immediately tell what's the story about from those old covers.
Last week, I was watching a youtube video about how modern horror covers have become so generic that they give you no clue about what's the story about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOr5ALigmHA
They've blackwashed Gordon and Selina Kyle. The main non-villain/non-cuck characters in the movie are Batman himself, Alfred, Gordon and Selina.
That's not a minor character, that's half of them.
0 x10 = 0 😆
Obviously. Back then, making derogatory comments about Jews was not taboo in US. Blacklisting happens when you break the official or non-official taboos in each period.
1. Taxi Driver
2. Pretty Woman (1990)
3. Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo (1999)
4) Leaving Las Vegas
5) Trading Places (1983)
6. Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
7. Personal Services (1987)
8. Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)