Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Assuming that you live in a neighborhood like Zimmerman, feel free to google maps it, so you think that you know ALL of your neighbors? I'm pretty sure there are answers to the first two questions. As for dispatch, he asks if Martin is white, black, or Hispanic. Looking black could mean that he's possibly Hispanic with a dark complexion.

I googled it earlier this morning just so I could have an idea of what type of neighborhood it was. I'm not 100% certain it was the right house (it was the address Spike Lee tweeted, correct me if I'm wrong because I definitely could be). It's a little bigger than my neighborhood, and mine is a little more "upscale" I guess would be the wording (larger homes, more land etc). I don't "know" all of my neighbors, but I could recognize the faces of people who live in it and those who don't.

Seeing as the shooter is Hispanic, I don't really know what it matters if he meant black or hispanic. From my googling and reading different stories I haven't found the answer to the location of the shooting vs the car.

Originally Posted by Clak I saw the movie, it wasn't some sort of social commentary work of art. It could have been, but it's for kids sop they don't take the real chances or make some of the points they could have. ...... The movie and book series is basically Twilight mixed with Mad Max and then watered down for a teen audience, not The Great Gatsby. It almost feels like 1984 for tweens.

elitist much?

Plus I love reading commentary from someone who hasn't even read the books. ing awesome.

Look I am not going to claim the writing was epic and the story was original but certainly there are societal issues within the book that are ripe for deeper discussion- role of gov't, role of media, the haves vs. have nots, the role of women, etc. But I guess because it's not 100 years old or Japanese, it must suck.

Originally Posted by dohdough It's important to understand that there are always stories behind the stories. The Last Airbender, 21, Avatar, Thor, and even ing Transformers are vapid movies, but the controversy around it also teaches us things. Just because things weren't purposely put into the movie, and sometimes they are, doesn't mean that we can't look at it with a critical eye to see what's really there. Depending on the lens we used, a movie as vapid as Hunger Games can yield some interesting observations both inside and around the movie. For example, a sociology professor might give extra credit for students that watch it and describe how concepts they learned in class are applied in the movies. I personally don't think it's a great way to engage students because there are plenty of other vapid movies to choose from that are free, but that's an argument for another thread.

But that's what I'm talking about, I don't know if you've seen this, but there was more real norse mythology in Thor than sociological substance in this movie.

I mean for the target audience it's fine, 13 year olds aren't going to understand anything too deep anyway, but It's ridiculous that grown adults are looking so far into such a shallow movie, especially when there are better examples.

Originally Posted by perdition(troy I googled it earlier this morning just so I could have an idea of what type of neighborhood it was. I'm not 100% certain it was the right house (it was the address Spike Lee tweeted, correct me if I'm wrong because I definitely could be). It's a little bigger than my neighborhood, and mine is a little more "upscale" I guess would be the wording (larger homes, more land etc). I don't "know" all of my neighbors, but I could recognize the faces of people who live in it and those who don't.

Even if that's the case, should visitors be accosted(more like stalked) like Martin was?

Seeing as the shooter is Hispanic, I don't really know what it matters if he meant black or hispanic. From my googling and reading different stories I haven't found the answer to the location of the shooting vs the car.

One drop rule? Really? And you're right, it doesn't matter even when you brought it up as a defense to Zimmerman's predilection for racist mentality when there's something called the Paperbag Test.

Originally Posted by Clak But that's what I'm talking about, I don't know if you've seen this, but there was more real norse mythology in Thor than sociological substance in this movie. I mean for the target audience it's fine, 13 year olds aren't going to understand anything too deep anyway, but It's ridiculous that grown adults are looking so far into such a shallow movie, especially when there are better examples.

This. It's a good book for the age demographic, I thought the movie was cool, but yeah, not a book I would pick for a college course for social commentary.

Originally Posted by usickenme elitist much? Plus I love reading commentary from someone who hasn't even read the books. ing awesome

Was the book that much different from the film, because I've been told by those who read it that it was pretty much spot on. I doubt I'm going to find much substance in a series of books written for children. Hell, mgiht as well give medieval european history students extra credit for watching The Da Vinci Code...

And yeah, I'm an elitist for criticizing adults gushing over a children's movie, right. I thought Twilight was trash too, guess I'm a big ol' elitist because I thought it was ridiculous that middle aged women were freaking out over it too.

Grow the hell up.

Originally Posted by Clak Was the book that much different from the film, because I've been told by those who read it that it was pretty much spot on. I doubt I'm going to find much substance in a series of books written for children. Hell, mgiht as well give medieval european history students extra credit for watching The Da Vinci Code... And yeah, I'm an elitist for criticizing adults gushing over a children's movie, right. I thought Twilight was trash too, guess I'm a big ol' elitist because I thought it was ridiculous that middle aged women were freaking out over it too. Grow the hell up.

Well, I wouldn't go as far as to compare Twilight and the Hunger Games. Twilight is complete garbage, pure and simple.

Even if that's the case, should visitors be accosted(more like stalked) like Martin was?

Oh I'd never leave my car in a million years to follow someone, but I have no problem watching someone walk down the street in front of my house while I am still in my car. It isn't my place to "police" my neighborhood. I've already said Zimmerman should have never even had the opportunity to fire on Martin, he should have listened to the dispatch officer from the get go.

One drop rule? Really? And you're right, it doesn't matter even when you brought it up as a defense to Zimmerman's predilection for racist mentality when there's something called the Paperbag Test.

I had to google the one drop rule, and don't really get how it applies to what I said. I don't know if Zimmerman is black if that is what you are meaning, just that he is Hispanic. You just mentioned that "looked black" could be code possibly Hispanic, and I just said the shooter was Hispanic, and that I didn't know if it mattered much whether he meant black or "possibly Hispanic". The dispatch wanted to know the race, and he gave his best guess.

Originally Posted by soulvengeance Well, I wouldn't go as far as to compare Twilight and the Hunger Games. Twilight is complete garbage, pure and simple.

Love triangle, typical Hollywood happy ending, same demographic, I'd say they have quite a bit in common. It did have a bit more substance, but it relied on a lot of the same stuff Twilight does to appeal to it's target audience, which appears to be young girls.

edit- I'll stop derailing this thread any further.

Originally Posted by Clak Love triangle, typical Hollywood happy ending, same demographic, I'd say they have quite a bit in common. It did have a bit more substance, but it relied on a lot of the same stuff Twilight does to appeal to it's target audience, which appears to be young girls.

To a certain degree. I mean, Twilight was all about the love triangle, and while there was one in Hunger Games, it wasn't as front and center. Anywho, I think we're way off topic at this point.

Originally Posted by perdition(troy Oh I'd never leave my car in a million years to follow someone, but I have no problem watching someone walk down the street in front of my house while I am still in my car. It isn't my place to "police" my neighborhood. I've already said Zimmerman should have never even had the opportunity to fire on Martin, he should have listened to the dispatch officer from the get go. I had to google the one drop rule, and don't really get how it applies to what I said. I don't know if Zimmerman is black if that is what you are meaning, just that he is Hispanic. You just mentioned that "looked black" could be code possibly Hispanic, and I just said the shooter was Hispanic, and that I didn't know if it mattered much whether he meant black or "possibly Hispanic". The dispatch wanted to know the race, and he gave his best guess.

I wasn't implying that Zimmerman was black, but that because his mother is Latino, people say that he's Hispanic(there's a difference btw). Hence, the one drop rule.

As for Zimmerman making the "looks black comment," there are lots of Latinos with dark complexions, which is a possible explanation, albeit a highly unlikely one.

Originally Posted by HaloSucks both twilight and hunger game is GARFARKINGBAGE!!!! Why is the Hunger Game even called Hunger ( what kinda farking title is that ) How come we would widely popularize a movie about kids battling to the death, but a movie with kids having sex gets controversial ( Larry Clarke )

Cause a movie about kids having sex would be really ing weird and creepy.

Yeah I have to say, seeing a young girl brutally stabbing someone to death over and over again was a little unsettling. If that had been an R rated movie and actually showed details of some of the deaths, it probably would have caused a stir.

Originally Posted by dohdough For example, a sociology professor might give extra credit for students that watch it and describe how concepts they learned in class are applied in the movies. I personally don't think it's a great way to engage students because there are plenty of other vapid movies to choose from that are free, but that's an argument for another thread.

I don't know the first thing about this series of books to be honest, so I can't speak to whether or not giving extra credit assignments based on this film is a good idea. But I can say that, without fail (and this is a phenomenon that is not going to improve over time due to the technological shift becoming permanent), students will immediately dismiss almost every effort they are offered if they can't immediately access it via their web browser or smart phone.

But the idea that people read a book, read phrases like "dark skin" and then become *upset* that the character is cast as black in the films - that's a great example of white privilege. That doesn't make those individuals klan-loving-the-south-will-rise-again racists, but it does reinforce the default of "whiteness" for most people - and how that perception is never really recognized by those who act on their white privilege daily (i.e., it's the same reason people cry about "BET," but lament that there's no "White Entertainment Television" - ignoring that television programs on EVERY OTHER NETWORK are dominated by whites).

Originally Posted by mykevermin I don't know the first thing about this series of books to be honest, so I can't speak to whether or not giving extra credit assignments based on this film is a good idea. But I can say that, without fail (and this is a phenomenon that is not going to improve over time due to the technological shift becoming permanent), students will immediately dismiss almost every effort they are offered if they can't immediately access it via their web browser or smart phone.

I don't disagree at all. I find it problematic that it's considered extra credit and maybe you can shed some light on this, but in my experience in a few graduate/doctoral level courses, critiques are much more common?

But the idea that people read a book, read phrases like "dark skin" and then become *upset* that the character is cast as black in the films - that's a great example of white privilege. That doesn't make those individuals klan-loving-the-south-will-rise-again racists, but it does reinforce the default of "whiteness" for most people - and how that perception is never really recognized by those who act on their white privilege daily (i.e., it's the same reason people cry about "BET," but lament that there's no "White Entertainment Television" - ignoring that television programs on EVERY OTHER NETWORK are dominated by whites).

This reminds me of that chain letter that makes its way around the internets every so often. But yeah, this is what I was alluding to when mentioning Airbender, 21, and Thor, although the Green Lantern was a very interesting case because a lot of people grew up with Jon Stewart as the Green Lantern.

The most recent similar controversy was when there was a campaign to get Donald Glover to play Spiderman. I remember that shitstorm well.

Re point #1: I dunno, certainly that's true at the graduate level - your work would never need to demonstrate superficial applications of concepts, because understanding the concepts is the least that is expected of you. You're right, a critique would be far more expected. But if this is a SOC101 course or somesuch, I wouldn't be too offended if the assignment was to find concepts in that film. Or any film, really. After all, aren't we critiquing Airbender for its whitewashing?

(n.b. I had to look up John Stewart b/c the only dude I know by that name is on The Daily Show, though I know enough about comics to have successfully gleaned "oh, hey, I bet that's the black Green Lantern.")

I recall the Spiderman shitstorm. How did that end? There's a new film coming out. Did they successfully find a white dude to appease the people who complained?

As far as I can recall, the only Black actor who didn't get a bunch of shit was Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin in (Daredevil?). Which I could have simply misremembered - maybe there was a shitstorm. This is, that dude is (from a visual standpoint) a *PERFECT* Kingpin. That is, as long as we're talking about comic book adaptations.

I read this book a few years ago. It wasn't very good, but the points it makes about representations of whiteness in film is unmistakeable: http://books.google.com/books/about/...d=6ZAPD2YdBXYC

I don't feel as if we've strayed too far off topic, since race and privilege are a huge part of this discussion. The presumption of Zimmerman's innocence, poor investigation, and poor follow up by the police in a scenario where someone's life was taken is an astonishing display of privilege. I'm a white dude, I never had to deal with that.

I know I get upset when source material is changed for movies, even the race of a character, but it's universal as well. If they made a Luke Cage movie and tried to cast a white guy I'd think that was wrong too because it would change who the character is, especially a character like Cage. But that's more of me being a fan boy who gets pissy when history is changed.

Luke Cage for those not familiar.

Originally Posted by mykevermin Re point #1: I dunno, certainly that's true at the graduate level - your work would never need to demonstrate superficial applications of concepts, because understanding the concepts is the least that is expected of you. You're right, a critique would be far more expected. But if this is a SOC101 course or somesuch, I wouldn't be too offended if the assignment was to find concepts in that film. Or any film, really. After all, aren't we critiquing Airbender for its whitewashing?

Hahaha...we are! My only beef is that I think it should just be a regular assignment rather than for extra credit.

(n.b. I had to look up John Stewart b/c the only dude I know by that name is on The Daily Show, though I know enough about comics to have successfully gleaned "oh, hey, I bet that's the black Green Lantern.")

Whoops, missed the "h" in John, but yeah, it was refreshing to see that a black male was considered a mainstream-enough hero to have somewhat of a reaction. This goes on to address clak's point though.

I recall the Spiderman shitstorm. How did that end? There's a new film coming out. Did they successfully find a white dude to appease the people who complained?

Yup, they got a nice white guy to play Peter Parker, which is too bad because with the right story(I know...it's a comic book movie for kids) Spiderman with a black Peter Parker could've been AWESOME.

As far as I can recall, the only Black actor who didn't get a bunch of shit was Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin in (Daredevil?). Which I could have simply misremembered - maybe there was a shitstorm. This is, that dude is (from a visual standpoint) a *PERFECT* Kingpin. That is, as long as we're talking about comic book adaptations.

Hmmm...I don't remember because I'm pretty sure that was before I started arguing with people on the internet and the fact that I had a much more active social life...haha.

I read this book a few years ago. It wasn't very good, but the points it makes about representations of whiteness in film is unmistakeable: http://books.google.com/books/about/Screen_saviors.html?id=6ZAPD2YdBXYC

I'll try to thumb through it tonight eventhough I'm sure I'm already familiar with the issues raised.

I don't feel as if we've strayed too far off topic, since race and privilege are a huge part of this discussion. The presumption of Zimmerman's innocence, poor investigation, and poor follow up by the police in a scenario where someone's life was taken is an astonishing display of privilege. I'm a white dude, I never had to deal with that.

Yeah, there's a broader discussion to be had beyond to be had about the different things at play in this particular case.

Originally Posted by Clak I know I get upset when source material is changed for movies, even the race of a character, but it's universal as well. If they made a Luke Cage movie and tried to cast a white guy I'd think that was wrong too because it would change who the character is, especially a character like Cage. But that's more of me being a fan boy who gets pissy when history is changed.

I think black superheroes are different due to the sheer lack of them in comics. I can be a bit of a fanboy too, but you don't strike me as someone that would get upset about a black Heimdall in Thor or Glover as Spiderman. I can see a colorblind argument against me to be made here, which I speak out against a lot, but considering the lack of black superheroes, it's not exactly the same.

Yeah, there were complaints on forums about casting a black actor as Kingpin in Daredevil back in the day.

Mellowed out once it came out as most seemed to like his performance. But there was some fanboy bitching on forums about them changing the race of the character.

Not as much as the Spider-man announcement, but it's not as major a character either.

But race can be such a personal thing, it'd change any character to a certain degree. i mean, Spider-Man is supposed to be some nerdy kid who deals with bullies and social awkwardness, change his race and that introduces new things he has to deal with too. Which I'm not entirely against in an experimental situation, I think there has actually been at least one spider-man variant that was of another race, and it's certainly interesting to see what can be done with the character like that. It's just that I know who these characters are, their history, the things they struggle with, changing a variable, especially one that can be as major as race can radically change the character. Now in some cases I don't think it would matter as much, Thor himself could be made black and, even though it'd seem a little strange given his norse origins, I don't think it would radially change the character. I think that's because Thor is an outsider anyway, he freaks people out even being white.

But it's like the Luke Cage example, change his race and that radically changes the character because his racial identity is so integral to the character. On the other hand, Blade's identity isn't as focused on him being black, if they'd made him white in the movies I don't think it would have radically changed the character cause he'd still be a badass vampire hunter with a sword.