Progressive messaging in media.

"Fascist" being anything you don't like, because if you confine yourself to a dictionary that exists in reality, the word does not apply.

Authoritarian racist nationalists who use political violence to gain and keep power.
And you are the dupe of their propagandists, yes.
Sad thing is, they aren't even using their best tricks.
It's sloppy stuff.

There’s filmmakers on record blaming fans for their movies flopping.

"Political violence."

You're just incapable of NOT being full of shit, aren't you?

Words aren't violence. Denying your imaginary right to never be offended isn't violence. People endorsing and voting for the candidate they like isn't violence. Violence is violence. Now if you have wrapped your decayed thinking meat around that, feel free to point out where I have encouraged your "political violence."

You won't. Why? Full of shit.

No shit.
At the same time, every killing starts with "boy, I'd like to kill that guy".
January 6th was planned out. And it wasn't with fucking sign language.
Maybe they can't get your ass to kill, if for no other reason that you can't pump your trike to the events fast enough, but you're singing their song, and I've every right to say the song sucks, and its intent sucks, and you're a sucker for thinking it's catchy.

(As UA's Youtubers)
(Singing)
Pink haired women scare the shit out of me!! Something ought to be done.
Superhero actresses scare me too! Something ought to be done.
Pronoun use on Star Trek is gross!! Something ought to be done.
Black women get too uppity! Something ought to be done.

(UA)
Yeah!! Yeah!!

You're entitled to whatever idiotic fucking opinions you want. Doesn't mean your "rulings" are binding.

You need to stop letting third parties tell you what these youtubers say.

Oh, I didn't have the slightest illusions you'd give up your favorite new song.

About as likey as you giving up arguing with strawmen.

(Mirror .jpg)

Melissa Barrera, star of Scream 5 & 6 has been fired from part 7 for tweets deemed "anti-Semitic".
They won't show the tweets, but apparently, she linked to a charity that turned out to have Hamas infiltrators who participated in October 7th.
Now, this could be an innocent flub, except she doubled down, and called everyone who dies in Gaza "a martyr".
Not a good look.

The free speech warriors are noticeably absent from this obvious case of Twitter cancelling.

Gee, almost like free speech warriors only care about alt-right sentiments.

Make it a brown woman spouting tankie/alt-left, it gets awful quiet.

Hmmm....interesting.

https://comicbookmovie.com/horror/s...oversial-social-media-posts-a209194#gs.3zr1e6

The "charity" is UNRWA and "martyr" literally means people killed in the conflict. It wasn't a "flub" and should be completely uncontroversial. Her treatment is outrageous.

Tara Strong got in trouble for sentiments that amounted to "fuck Hamas" so it's a hot potato on both sides.

That's equally stupid.

enlighten us (like we're olive complected snow white)

It depends on whether you care to be accurate to the source material.

A Japanese Snow White with 7 Oni...
Might be an interesting take...

That would require hopping in a time machine, and tracing down some ancient French guy in a hovel who never got credit.
The Grimms just wrote that shit down, and it had Chinese telephone-ed a couple centuries before it got to them.

Being accurate to the source material isn't an end-all, be-all. Some changes enhance the source material because they are imaginative and breathe new life in it, because they fill in plot holes in the original, because special effects, casting possibilities have advanced and yes, because in some ways the originals could only have limited vision. Sometimes, people mess up a perfectly good original by screwing with the spirit.

Sometimes things that are faithful to the original are so much so that they do not bring enough to the table.

The trick is when which is which.

Most every contemporary production of, say, Romeo and Juliet is inauthentic to the original because they actually cast women as their Juliets and other roles. That's not what Shakespeare did!!!

The source material is already there

It exists for you to watch it any time you want, no one's going to touch it or change it

The new story does not impact the classic at all, it doesn't infringe on it, it doesn't vandalize it, it does nothing to it

And wait......this may blow your mind.....you don't ever have to watch the new one

So you have the ability to not even know if the new one is being inaccurate to the original

I'm glad I could help solve this for you, you Snow White watching homo

I think that's a bad example because in the story Juliet is meant to be a girl, they only cast men at the time because women weren't allowed to participate in society in that manner.

Careful, your feelings are showing.

They also cast adults. Juliet was 13 in the original. What does UA think of that?
Or of changes in the sexual politics in modern re-tellings of Greek tales?

You're so close to realizing something here.

What's that?

So you're saying it's fair game to cast someone with a different background than the original author would have if you think it fits the role well?

I say you try to cast someone as close to the source material as possible. Juliet being a female is the source material not a man playing a woman. You don't cast Kristen Dunst as Peter Parker and Tobey Maguire as Mary Jane Watson. That literally would make no sense. You also don't say Peter Parker was bit by a metallic drone spider built by Ozcorp and that's how he got his powers. Sam Rami changing the webs to organic is less of a big deal, IMO.

still waiting...