- Feb 9, 2012
Luis Buñuel threw some goats down the mountainside making Tierra sin pan in 1933. Let's start a hashtag.
"Cancelled" seemingly means some people called him out and he's lost at least one fan. The horror.but the man is not cancelled.
Didn't they also get migrant workers to make the sets on Titanic paying them next to nothing? But I guess that's more the systematic explotation of Hollywood rather than someone turning out to be a weird homophobic asshole (both of which are terrible obviously).And we can add my favourite director - James Cameron - to the list of criminally negligent. Ed Harris nearly drowned making The Abyss. Leo and Kate go really blasted with loads of cold water making Titanic and then there’s what happened to Eliza Dushku on True Lies but that’s a whole story unto itself.
You'd have to go out of your way to not hire migrant workers when you're mass recruiting for unskilled/low skilled labour. Not to say its great or good or anything, but yeah you're looking more into systemic factors rather than Cameron being a raving asshole. I mean he IS an raving asshole (and egomaniac) but if the migrant worker story is true there's not likely to be much connection between the two.Didn't they also get migrant workers to make the sets on Titanic paying them next to nothing? But I guess that's more the systematic explotation of Hollywood rather than someone turning out to be a weird homophobic asshole (both of which are terrible obviously).
Nothing stopped him from ensuring they are paid a decent wage, was there?You'd have to go out of your way to not hire migrant workers when you're mass recruiting for unskilled/low skilled labour. Not to say its great or good or anything, but yeah you're looking more into systemic factors rather than Cameron being a raving asshole. I mean he IS an raving asshole (and egomaniac) but if the migrant worker story is true there's not likely to be much connection between the two.
I would 100% guarantee that Cameron neither knew nor cared how much any of them were making. Details like that don't matter in his position; they're the domain of someone below him.Nothing stopped him from ensuring they are paid a decent wage, was there?
How have you been man? We have not seen you in a while.So, color me perplexed.
I thought the 'games' were boring. Sitting there and trying to prevent something from happening to you based on RNG doesn't sound like a good time to me. I've actually learned about the Lore, and I've heard a lot of people put that up on a pedestal of why they actually like the IP. Because it's deeper than Killer Robots. Save the Goddamned stupidity of finding out that the Supernatural is real and located squarely in Animatronics that have roughly ten times the strength as you do, that actually harbors no grudge against you because they know that you're not the person that committed atrocities against them, but still tries to kill you anyway...
And yet you still go back. For four other f---ing nights....
But people loved it. Honestly because of influencer culture. If Pewdeepie and Markiplier (therefore every other Youtube Personality) didn't latch on to it, it would have fell to the wayside with his other dozens of games.
And I mean dozens.
If it wasn't for the screaming youtube faces, the developing force behind "Fart Hotel" and "Pimp my Dungeon" might have just ended up a normal programmer who made enough money to keep his family safe.
But he did make it. And in capitalism mindset, because he achieved wealth means that he must be important and exalted. Never really got that, but ok. People seem to go with that. n
But let's not kid ourselves, even though in this day and age that's all we try to do. This is about your own personal morality. What you can personally stomach, and what you personally can't.
If Scott was found using his wealth and influence to invite 14 year old girls to his room to urinate on them, he would receive backlash. But not overwhelming because some people like his work to the point they'll excuse anything. Look at R. Kelly.
If Scott had a political friend who arranged for both of them to hook up with dangerously young girls (and one that was under the age of consent) with taxpayer's money in coked up parties, there would be backlash. But not overwhelming, because if he said the right thing sucking up to the right figurehead, we'll delude ourselves because we can't be wrong. Hey, Matt Gaetz, you're never forgotten.
If Scott used Twitter to send pictures of his Junk under the nom de plume "Carlos Danger", he would be shunned, but not enough because politically he was ok to some people. And I love that your name is Anthony Weiner.
Scott is a Republican. Something on the surface I do not disagree with. I've long waxed poetic about how I miss the Republican of yesteryear. I do not agree with their ideals, but they at least tried to have some decorum. But we live in an age where the Republican party has passed the ideals or the framework of "Real People" as suggested, and have gone to Gut people's rights because they realized they will never win anything again as they have sided with the Empire way too much for the average person's liking.
It's getting Cartoonishly bad. One can't simply pick lower taxes over ripping families apart. One can't demand to have the vision of storming capitols as expression of rights because masks are icky or "I didn't get my way during voting, so it all must be thrown out so I feel better", yet lambast football players kneeling because they can't respect a flag that will allow citizens to be brutalized by the police because they are apart of the fringe population. One can't opine for smaller government while in turn having the current government do everything that it can to remove the voting (therefore political standing) rights of large swathes of the population because they tend to vote against you... because you tend to vote against them.
I'm not owed your Respect. I have to earn that day in and day out. If I once had your favor, you must not slavishly give it to me until the end of time because I made a few good post here and there. You are free to make up your mind about me. If you ever found out that I sat in with a Militant group of Minorities who are fixated on taking power away from the oppressive white population, you are absolutely within your rights to think of me as a threat. For the record, I never did or will because I do not believe in stripping people of their agency for my benefit. Something that I know others sides take advantage of.
I don't wish for harm to befall Scott or his family. I literally wish them the best as I do every family. But on the same token, while Scott might not wish any harm to fall on family's, he's actively supporting people who will place harm on people's families if they get their agenda across.
So the moral quandary as it were that has been placed at my feet is thus: Do I change my general apathy for Scott and his games to directed ""Hey, this can lead to teh Bad" and... continue to not buy his games and support him in anyway? Or do I continue my non-involvement in Scott's life and continue to not affect anything in his world in anyway.
Popular subjects in Media are popular because of people's general feelings about the subject. If feelings turn sour, they turn sour. That is the way of things. Hemming and Hawing that "NO, THEY SHOULD REMAIN POPULAR BECAUSE IT ALIGNS WITH MY OUTLOOK" is a waste of time. If it worked, my protest of how Wide Leg jeans are still relevant work have worked, and I could still find a good pair of Wide Leg Jeans. Not Jncos, mind you. I never got that big. But Wide Leg Jeans as a whole.
But no, let's perpetuate the I'm mad at you for being mad at that for that person having an opinion about this that is inflammatory to some. At some point, we'll reach complete moral purity and we will level our Social Paladin score up. Two more levels, and we can take the feat 'Groupthink Smite'!
Sorry, stop a moment. Your favourite director is James Cameron?And we can add my favourite director - James Cameron - to the list of criminally negligent.
Yes. Yes he is.Sorry, stop a moment. Your favourite director is James Cameron?
A director doesn’t employ staff that low on the totem pole. In all likelihood the workers in question were hired through a labour company contracted or known to the studio (Fox I guess) via its personnel department.Nothing stopped him from ensuring they are paid a decent wage, was there?
Sure, but if he wanted to make a fuss and demand that someone ensure that people were paid a decent wage...I don't know if that would have helped, but I bet he didn't try.A director doesn’t employ staff that low on the totem pole. In all likelihood the workers in question were hired through a labour company contracted or known to the studio (Fox I guess) via its personnel department.
Um, is that a strange opinion?Sorry, stop a moment. Your favourite director is James Cameron?
Yeah, and Andy Bernard doesn't lose contests - he quits them because they're unfair.Reads article...
Yeah, he hasn't been cancelled. He retired.
Please stop, it's very cringe.I've long waxed poetic about how I miss the Republican of yesteryear.
Here's one/many:If you want to decry cancel culture (and you should), at least use actual examples.
I'd have thought it quite normal to consider him pretty good, but to place him above Kubrick, Hitchcock, Spielberg, Scorsese-- yeah that seems odd to me.Um, is that a strange opinion?
I'd consider Avatar to be "quite (not particularly) good", and Titanic to be very average. The only ones I'd consider genuinely very good are Aliens and Terminator 2. Probably not even near my top 10 as a director.I mean, I wouldn't count Cameron among the all-time greats, but every work of his I've seen has been good to excellent with the exception of True Lies, and that was merely average.
Been having this conversation a lot lately, but it's this:Okay so Im confused. Like I get Scott is a conservative, I get he donated to anti-LGBTQXZY+2 politicians and I get that same group is annoyed. But how is this a betrayal of them? The fuck does FNaF have to do with being trans or gay? #
I mean sure, but that's entirely your fault for thinking A. A company is a person, B. That companies have morals, and C. Companies do or should share your morals.Been having this conversation a lot lately, but it's this:
1. I buy a product from a company, unaware of the company's ethics/stances, because it's just a company selling a product.
2. The company donates to a cause that is actively harmful to me or others.
3. My money is being used to harm myself or others.
4. I feel let down, and I will no longer give them that money.