The "I Just Watched..." Thread

Theres finally a discussion on TNL, quick lets talk about something else.

P.S. Sats is wrong but it's probably because she's a woman.

I like that arobimi's post had an olé in it. I'm hoping it's either intentional or an auto correct because he's typed it ironically before.

of course it’s intentional. He’s a professor now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me

Definitely. For the first 2/3 of both.

---

No, it’s for the 3/3 of both. Her: “I’m omnipresent, is that a problem?” “Wahhhh I’m sad because I didn’t think about this.” Ex Machina: “We are omnipresent and are going to punish you for being stupid. Blam blam, you’re dead”

It’s like when I think someone listens to garbage music because of This Reason and This Other One and This One Too, but it doesn’t matter, and they keep on listening.

Upon further consideration “someone” really means “Doc”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Satsuki

No, it’s for the 3/3 of both. Her: “I’m omnipresent, is that a problem?” “Wahhhh I’m sad because I didn’t think about this.” Ex Machina: “We are omnipresent and are going to punish you for being stupid. Blam blam, you’re dead”

---

Ah, okay, I get what you're saying now.

But I still don't agree!

Seems like saying it's more the monster's fault he killed William than it is Victor Frankenstein's fault for being irresponsible with technology in creating a monster incapable of recognizing its power to begin with.

If the movie/book revolves 90% on Frankenstein and 10% on the monster, I’d have the same critique. There are adaptions that do that and they are bad. I want to hear the monsters story, I don’t give a fuck about Victor. I know what’s wrong with victor!!! I’ve seen and read Frankenstein a gajillion times!! I don’t need any more adaptions of it!! TELL ME ABOUT THE MONSTER!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Satsuki

To address these points directly, I disagree with just about everything you’ve said. I think it’s exactly what Mzo said - I’m coming at this from a vastly different experience than the target audience, and on top of that cyborg feminism is like an academic hobby of mine so. It’s not a critique if it follows the same exact trope - it doesn’t matter if the robots win in the end or live happily ever after with their creator. The ending makes zero difference. The women, personified, are made into idols. If we have identified women as gods, why are they devalued constantly? Again, why are they portrayed as crazy ex girlfriends? It places the fault of the emotional experience that the male human is feeling into the hands of the tech. It’s a lazy trope! It’s pretty much the exact same as Weird Science, but worse. Weird Science was a funny critique of male gaze because it was a comedy, it was over the top. It’s stated, explicitly. It was parody. Her and Ex Machina are faux intellectual, and just play into the same narrative but with spooky music and sad main characters. The loser male lusting after an idealized woman is the same no matter what the genre.

---

The execution is tired. And the place where the narrative ends up may have a pro-feminist spin but it is derivative and steeped in male perspective. You want better stories to support novel female centric ideas and place them right in the story and set pieces not as an ending morality.

I actually felt the same way. Oooh some fancy high minded whiteboy is dabbling with leftist virtue signalling but doing absolutely nothing new artistically with it. I’d love to watch a robot movie as Fe described — any male friend inevitably wants sex.

[emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44][emoji44]
Man drew and I are getting more alike every day.