"Fuck You, It's January" to be specific. It's about the Hollywood dumping ground that is the yearly post-Oscar release season.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
A Critique of Red Letter Media’s Bigoted Content (See Staff Post)
- Thread starter PhoncipleBone
- Start date
"Fuck You, It's January" to be specific. It's about the Hollywood dumping ground that is the yearly post-Oscar release season.
The clip it's from was a video mocking the number of films based on existing properties or sequels. The quality or performance of the film never factored into the equation.
Except that It released in September and Wonder Woman released in June and Power Rangers released March and I could keep going here.
representation in media is undeniably a good thing. but what exactly is the praxis behind just whining about the lack of it in hollywood?
having them in films definitely won't bring about better material circumstances for the minority groups in question, it seems to only be a thing in demand from middle class kids who will watch Hollywood films regardless. it's the only kinda films most people are interested in, I can think of a lot of lesser known films by many directors of different backgrounds, some of demographics you wouldn't ever think of making a film, but it seems like only mass media is important to americans. white people can make so many movies because they're wealthy, not because they're gatekeeping the industry. if economic circumstances were more charitable then they would be making more expensive movies, but just having actors in big movies doesnt fix this. it only brings them up in to an elite. not only that, most hollywood films aren't very good, but more importantly they aren't innovative or have the capacity to be transgressive in the slightest when it comes bringing to light issues facing minorities. the few mass marketed films these days I can think of that truly bring to light race issues in neat ways are Jordan Peele's horror movies, and he is extremely passionate about bringing black driven stories to the big screen. but he's just a minority there, weird token diversity from other films like, say, ghostbusters, this revolutionizes nothing and doesn't even work as a power move. how will, like, people materially benefit from this while there is still longstanding economic problems in the country that hollywood has no capacity to fix
also wonder woman is not a good movie, and gal gadot can't act, and she's a bad person, and also has done absolutely nothing for women liberation
having them in films definitely won't bring about better material circumstances for the minority groups in question, it seems to only be a thing in demand from middle class kids who will watch Hollywood films regardless. it's the only kinda films most people are interested in, I can think of a lot of lesser known films by many directors of different backgrounds, some of demographics you wouldn't ever think of making a film, but it seems like only mass media is important to americans. white people can make so many movies because they're wealthy, not because they're gatekeeping the industry. if economic circumstances were more charitable then they would be making more expensive movies, but just having actors in big movies doesnt fix this. it only brings them up in to an elite. not only that, most hollywood films aren't very good, but more importantly they aren't innovative or have the capacity to be transgressive in the slightest when it comes bringing to light issues facing minorities. the few mass marketed films these days I can think of that truly bring to light race issues in neat ways are Jordan Peele's horror movies, and he is extremely passionate about bringing black driven stories to the big screen. but he's just a minority there, weird token diversity from other films like, say, ghostbusters, this revolutionizes nothing and doesn't even work as a power move. how will, like, people materially benefit from this while there is still longstanding economic problems in the country that hollywood has no capacity to fix
also wonder woman is not a good movie, and gal gadot can't act, and she's a bad person, and also has done absolutely nothing for women liberation
Yeah. They're making a joke about how it's a never ending sea of bad movies. Of course, this was prior to three of those movies coming out and actually being well received, including by the RLM crew themselves.
But the movies aren't January dumping ground fodder or bad, not exclusively anyway.
That's the joke. The segment was literally about "Fuck You, It's January!" being replaced by "Fuck You, It's Forever!"
Which is why it's a bad joke. Which is why defending it is fucking dumb.
Yet that gif is like their most lasting and used meme
Which is hilarious
Your opinion isn't the law. If people like the joke, who the fuck are you to say that it's dumb to defend it?
Who said anything about this? Can't people just want to see themselves represented in diverse casts? Who in the world has ever said that a more diverse hollywood will solve the economic inequality in America?
It's called an opinion. No one said my opinion is the law. Calm down lol
The joke, as I took it, was that FYIT is all-year-'round now. Not that they're... not a part of that?
I'm not sure I follow. It's not trying to make in inaccurate assessment.
You don't have to like the joke, but the way you phrased that post is pretty demeaning to people who liked it. Also, I'm perfectly calm, so kindly drop the "calm down".
The joke was that there would be a never-ending pile of remakes, reboots, and superhero flicks until the end of time. It wasn't necessarily about them being "January dumping ground fodder" or even bad, but just more of the same.
Demeaning? You've gotta be kidding me with this. Why are you getting worked up over someone calling a gif (one that amounts to a shitpost) dumb?
Defending it is dumb as hell. It's a terrible meme that contributes to toxicity in film discussion.
Jesus gosh dang Christ is this an interesting take.
1. Adequate representation in media doesn't have to solve race equality. True equality in society, again, would be where they can have that without people asking "but why does it NEED to happen?" No social problem is being hampered by people trying to fix representation, so I could just as easily say that your complaining about people's grievances is a pointless distraction.
2. The notion that non-white people aren't being actively excluded by powerful white people is some heckin' nonsense. There are non-white people whose success is directly and intentionally hindered by powerful white people.
It doesn't matter if it's funny and people laugh at it... it's still a trash joke.
User Banned (Permanent): Dismissing Concerns on Representation and Inflammatory Whataboutism; Prior Severe Ban for Similar Behavior; Account in Junior Phase
It's middle class people living in already cushy lifestyles who are allowed enough freedom to care about who's in their mass marketed movies. I can tell you people actually in trouble don't give a shit about people who have the same skin colour as themselves, who are the ones I actually care about. All I see when I look at twitter kids or whatever complaining that that there aren't enough non whites or whatever are upper middle class kids not being dripfed the same bad, lazy, exploitative entertainment as they already get but it doesn't have not minorities in it.
Do you have any praxis other than just wanting slightly different shit? Imagine if people went after like, fuckin amazon literally ruining entire communities of poorer working class people with the same fury they do going after Scarlett Johanson for playing a transwoman
Hollywood did that long before the MCU put Iron Man in production.
What does any of this have to do with the MCU or Iron Man, specifically?
You really have no idea how films get made. Understandable if you don't work in the industry but if you do then you have paid attention to jack squat.
On a wholly unrelated note like in your own post Wonder Woman is a good movie though I'm not how it was relevant to your points
That they're the latest trend in genre, not anything new in Hollywood. It's recognising a status quo which has been existing longer than we've all been alive.
Yeah. So? The joke is about the increased prevalence, not the start of some new trend.
Like, okay
1. I better see receipts of why you think it's only middle-class people complaining about this (AKA, people whose income bracket and opinion on the matter is explicit)
2. Bitch I criticize ScarJo AND Amazon's treatment of the working class (might have done better to pick a significant topic impacting trans people specifically instead of comparing trans issues to merely working class issues). This is legitimate nonsense, suggesting that people who criticize ScarJo are inherently not also just as upset about, say, the fact that trans people can legally be discriminated against. Like, imagine if people cared as much about that as you care about... whatever this is that you care about so much.
Lol yes only the bourgeois care about representation.
Minorities who fight for work in film and Tv are class traitors.
Zzzzz
tell me, what is so vital to know about the Hollywood filmmaking process that pertains to my post or are you just gonna try and gaslight
Poor people don't see movies. They're expensive to see in theaters, and streaming services and home releases aren't exactly commodities they can spend a lot on either with the wealth distribution in America. In addition to that, Marvel and shit release so many movies per year it begins to pile up as something lower income people can bother to follow. Poor people have things to worry about...like, not dying. What compounds this for me is that most of the time, only fuckin people who actually voice this are people on the internet who write thinkpieces, make videos and post on forums because their material conditions are of such little concern they can actually bother to do it. In fact, I can prove this right now, because in order to sign up for Resetera (a place where progressivism like this in mass media is championed) at all, you require a private email which you can only obtain by either going to college, which is really goddamn expensive in North America, or having a cushy enough job that grants you one or owning a business. People here are generally wealthy, which affords them the security to actually care about this
I don't think you have a very sophisticated understanding of how media is diffused throughout culture. It isn't simply a case of 'Big movie gets seen by people and people will care'. The visibility of the representations we see on screen isn't limited to those screens - these representations travel through other media, other forms, whether they be toys, games, posters, or any other number of things. Featuring women and people of colour in something like a popular film is only a (potential) beginning of this kind of cultural diffusion. With this kind of media, it infiltrates the culture outside of particular class segments. You don't need to have money to see a large billboard or poster in the streets featuring a woman as a hero or have advertisements and other aspects of media proliferating on television and the internet. This is why we're seeing a backlash from conservative reactionaries in the current era, because they see this - they can't not see it, and they want it to go away.
Additionally, your line of reasoning regarding following one path of socio-cultural change or resistance - amazon, does not negate the necessity of more representation of women and people of colour in media. It isn't a case of 'If only people stopped caring about representation, then they'd all clamour for revolution in other areas'. In other words, I'm sceptical that it's peoples desire for increased representation that is holding them back from other areas of cultural protest. In fact, many of the people I've seen discuss the need for diversity are also people that do indeed have strong thoughts and feelings about other aspects of society like amazon.
This is simply not true. I don't know if you've ever actually participated in any sort of political activism, but many of the people I've seen attend and speak at events, and often events where diversity is a major topic, come from lower income backgrounds.
You really come across like you're infantilizing the poor here.
I like how this thread has devolved into people defending the "Endless trash" gif for some fucking reason, and some nonsense takes about how representation is a bad thing or something
This is fair, but how much does this actually do? My concern isn't the culture and more the material circumstances of people. As a matter of fact, just having more people get used to more diverse entertainment justl looks like it gives elites another avenue to exploit people financially.
Well of course I don't think people would immediately jump to another thing to try and revolutionize. It's more that, criticism of big businesses and awareness of socio economic factors are extremely disproportionate in a lot of liberal communities compared to different identities in mass media and other short lived pop politics. I chock focus on movies and the lack of critical thinking about the elites and actual factors that result in the lack of a diverse industry to a lack of education about socio economics, and the fact a lot of the people afforded the luxury to care are from middle class and above and thus benefit from the system. I've never seen it be a jobs thing, it's just about personalities that can be sold. Why do people only seem to care about the actors and sometimes the directors and not the hundreds of other crew members and elements that go in to making a movie? that's where most of the jobs are!
I think long lasting, impactful diversity can't come about just by having minorities or underprivileged people in big entertainment, there needs to be a strong base for their platform to be built upon. diversity in successful industries happens when a group is fortunate enough to fall in to the right positions
I'm aware. That's why I'm saying the gif is outdated. Some of the movies it's mocking ended up being pretty good, so the joke don't hit the same no more.
They actively try to talk up numerous original films each year.
Good that they try that, but their biggest show (half in the bag) still seems to highlight mostly superhero films and remakes.
Their bread and butter is reviewing famous/popular movies people watch and obscure train wrecks.
You need look no further to see the actualized ramifications of increased diversity than by looking at the enemy of it as such. A lot of people harrass and send death threats over even an inkling of change in terms of diversity. On the other side of things, the emotional and cognitive aspects of people that are underrepresented can indeed be altered for the better through exposure to representations that they relate to. This is a material circumstance. Poor people can engage with this circumstance, as the media that pervades our culture is not invisible to them. The identity of a person is not constructed merely through their economic circumstance, it's a host of things like history (personal and societal), interpersonal relations and many other things that are intertwined with other social and cultural aspects of society. Think of things less from an arborescent perspective and more rhizomatically - or, it's less that we live in a world where things pan out strictly in the sense of one thing following directly from another and more that many things flow from one another and into each other. How we apprehend these things needn't be limited to a discourse based on exclusion, we can pursue deterritorialization in one area, like representation in film, while the reterritorializations surrounding diversity occur through wider swathes of the public.
Again, your reasoning is focused on this exclusionary interplay. This isn't how these things really work - they're intersectional not a case of one aspect of diversity blocking out another. People from all walks of life are critical of a variety of complex issues. It isn't necessarily that 'poor think this way' 'middle class think that way'. Even if the poor don't have as much, or the same access to media as the middle class, doesn't mean that they are significantly less affected by its presence. It is too pervasive to be ignored, essentially.
Perhaps think of diversity in mass media as a scaffolding that can potentially under and over-write the unconscious biases present in a white majority that compel them to be exclusionary towards others. Or think of it this way, when the representation of a particular race is extremely limited, like say Muslims always being portrayed as terrorists or Black men often portrayed as brutes, then it can affect how white people in general view them. This is how cultural depictions have an effect on the day to day living, or material circumstances, of many people poor or not. The police aren't biased against black men out of nowhere, for example. It's because the culture they live in is racist.
There is of course always the threat of expropriation in capitalism, even when it comes to representation, but this doesn't facilitate the notion that we shouldn't strive for certain ideals because they could or would be taken into an exploitative framework. If we're going to live in an exploitative system, isn't it better to live in one that people can at least have some sort of equal representation throughout media? We are stuck with capitalism either way, for now.
Last edited:
Yeah. I'm not even going to presume on people's motives or good faith, but the end result is definitely that as long as capitalism isn't overthrown and human rights abuses fixed everywhere, any struggle is meaningless and superficial, because it happens in a rotten framework. Ultimately, it's hard to take it as anything but "shut up with your issues".
It's much harder to defend the racist shit in the OP, but certain folks feel obligated to go to bat for people like RLM. Gotta pick an easier battle.
I don't really care about the Endless Trash gif one way or the other, but I do care about how it's being brought up in the thread.
Some people were poking fun at it, and then a bunch of people came in here defending it and now we're talking about if we decide if a movie is trash or not based on critical or audience reception, the concept of humor being subjective, and how the gif makes more sense in the context that they're talking about movies coming out in January(???) and who the fuck cares?
This is a thread about RLM saying some suspect shit and we're discussing what the correct metric is for determining a movies trashiness for some fucking reason. It just comes across as posters wanting to cape for RLM while also realizing they don't have an argument (Or can't give the argument without catching a ban.) for the shit in the OP so they're just fighting this stupid fight instead.
Some people were poking fun at it, and then a bunch of people came in here defending it and now we're talking about if we decide if a movie is trash or not based on critical or audience reception, the concept of humor being subjective, and how the gif makes more sense in the context that they're talking about movies coming out in January(???) and who the fuck cares?
This is a thread about RLM saying some suspect shit and we're discussing what the correct metric is for determining a movies trashiness for some fucking reason. It just comes across as posters wanting to cape for RLM while also realizing they don't have an argument (Or can't give the argument without catching a ban.) for the shit in the OP so they're just fighting this stupid fight instead.
