Internet Outrage Culture

So, after all this discussion, "Who you gonna call?"

robeiae said:

You know, I watched about two minutes of the rant from Angry Bird Nerd, or whatever the hell his name is, and frankly, he's a dipshit. He's built up Ghostbusters (the first one) into some kind of holy artifact. It's not. It's an hilarious movie, true. The remake is probably going to be less than the original, true. But man, it's been 30+ years. And the movie is special effects driven. So the greedy bastards in Hollywood want to to remake it, big deal. It will be what it will be. It won't get any of my money, though. I can definitely wait for NetFlix.

Click to expand...

GENERIC "YOU" THROUGHOUT

See also: the outrage when Raven-Simone came out as a lesbian. People were posting all over Hell's half acre that she just eff'ed up their childhoods because they grew up watching her on The Cosby Show and loved her on That's So Raven on the Disney Channel and they're SO HORRIFIED that she might have been a lezbean THE ENTIRE TIME she was a dancing mess of light and sound on their TVs! COULDJA EVEN STAND IT?! How DARE she have the nerve to do something like that! (*pause for indignant pants wetting and teeth gnashing and foot stomping*)

Look. I get it. You might be more than a little surprised that she came out. But you couldn't have come across more of a homophobic asshole if you'd tried with these comments. Same goes for the Ghostbusters remake/reboot/sequel/prequel/whatevs. You loved it as a kid. I get it. But nothing's truly sacred in pop culture. Jesus Christ, you're talking about an industry that wants to put out a movie trilogy based on Tetris, FFS. There's money to be had, especially when they can play on somebody's nostalgia (the movie versions of The Honeymooners and Car 54, Where Are You?, about 30 years too late, anybody?), so they're going to siphon it out of your wallets and pockets in any way they can. If you don't go see the new Ghostbusters, there are probably three others who are going to take your place in the theater.

(And I won't be going to see Ghostbusters because I really didn't care for either of the movies that came before it.)

CassandraW said:

Meh. I thought the original was driven more by Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and pure silly fun than by special effects. I heartily wish filmmakers would make new movies rather than lame remakes of movies that don't need remaking.

Click to expand...

Damned right on remakes. Spin offs and sequels fine, but remakes? Why not remake shit movies better? I'll watch ghostbusters remake but it ain't the original, and I loved the original and I'll inevitably compare them like all other remakes.

Don't get me started on the bad feng shui of the 2009 Enterprise.

The remake of Ben-Hur is better than the original, imo. Far better. But the original wasn't a shit movie. I'm glad we have the remake.

robeiae said:

The remake of Ben-Hur is better than the original, imo. Far better. But the original wasn't a shit movie. I'm glad we have the remake.

Click to expand...

Wait -- which remake? The 1959 remake of the 1925 film? There's a 2016 movie that will be released in August.

I'll consider seeing the 2016 movie because Morgan Freeman is in it, but I'm a screaming fan of the 1959 version. Never saw the 1925 version. I do see a point in remaking a silent film in sound.)

Yes, the '59 remake is better than the '25 original. But the original is still awesome. The remake is just more awesome.

I'll have to check out the 1925 version.

I still haven't forgiven the Clash of the Titans remake. I am extremely biased here, though, I admit -- I adore the 1981 version down to every last cheesy detail. A remake was never going to cut it for me.

Amadan said:

Really? Seemed to be an awful lot of BOLD-FACED CAPS-LOCKING as he declared that the Angry Nerd is "scared of women." If not rage, it's certainly some pretty hyped outrage.

Click to expand...

The "scared of women" thing was at the very end of a long piece about how Ghostbusters is not that big of a deal, anyway. That was his main point. That seems to be the main point of all if it really.

Yeah it's getting out of hand, including the SJW I consider myself part of. Now there's a pic of a dad showering naked with his sick kid to keep his fever down. People are all, "OMG child abuse!", "OMG porn!", "OMG offensive!", "OMG creepy men!". Because a father is trying to help his sick kid and is doing so naked, because, shower. Now, I don't get why some people even have to share all that super private stuff, but I don't like the outrage and attacks such parents receive as they are usually attacked for what is actually good parenting.

There is so much of it. A father filming his tearful face while ranting about how someone has said something not nice to his son. Outrageous. A waitress photographing a receipt with no tip. Outrageous. A woman being sneered at by a cashier. Outrageous. Some men not wanting to date overweight people. Outrageous. Or a classic: someone seeking to rehome their dog! OH MY GOD that one always "breaks the internet"! Oh, or the guy who parked in a handycapped spot. And turned out to be handycapped. But by that time, the damage was done.

I remember a guy in Israel who took his 2 dogs to the beach. One died on the shore while he was playing in the water with the other. He stopped people from trying to help the dying dog and was promptly photographed and shamed all over Facebook as a dog murderer who "killed" his dog in front of upset children. He even made the actual news.
Turned out the poor man had set a euthanasia appointment for that dog for the next day as she was suffering and not holding on. He had taken his dogs to the beach so she could have one last good day. So while he was in the water with the other one, she died. People brutally tried to violate her into one last breath after another, and violated the man in all kinds of ways, even sent the police on him and called for his murder. Because he let a sick old dog die. That is how he now remembers the last "fun" day with his dog. No apologies of equal magnitude. Ever.
Or that one story of a boy with autism not finding a prom date and hence taking his sister. While I find it petty and stupid to turn him away, the reason is legit - rules were broken. She can't be 27, and she can't come unregistered. But people went mad, made it about the school being mean to a boy with autism. Part of the argument was that his condition makes it hard for him to find a prom date, but you don't need to be autistic for that. His autism had nothing to do with the story. It was dragged into it so the story would have outrage value. So often, the internet takes the story about a person belonging to an underprivileged minority, and turns it into a huge drama of persecution when the matter was so NOT about that. Many stories are, and they run the risk of being discredited by all the fake whining.

Or setting yourself up for outrage. You post a nude to a site like Facebook. You hashtag it with some cause, and BOOM! Its presence on a page is justified even if in violation of the ToS. It gets removed. You take to Diply. You take to BoredPanda. You take to Facebook. Because somehow, removing that picture is sexist, ableist, homophobic etc. Nothing to do with such degrees of nudity, and sometimes even explicit stuff, being forbidden on the site. I don't mind nudity, but the rules are what they are and your violation being penalized isn't outrageous just because you hashtagged it with something of social relevance.

People on the www have become so self-important that they're actually seeking out stuff to upset themselves over, and then compete over who is a better person for being more outraged at a fabricated evil.

Sam Argent said:

Posting a video about why you're not reviewing something is pretty much gunning for outrage clicks, which is why I just ignored the guy. That situation is a prime example of how a lot of people refuse to walk away from clickbait. Which I don't get. If something is written or recorded to gather negative attention, why is it so hard for people to just leave it alone and not waste energy on it?

Click to expand...

CassandraW said:

Meh. I thought the original was driven more by Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and pure silly fun than by special effects. I heartily wish filmmakers would make new movies rather than lame remakes of movies that don't need remaking.

Click to expand...

Here's the truth of the matter. I thought the original Ghostbusters was an okay, occasionally funny, mostly dry comedy whenever Bill Murray wasn't saying something sardonic. It's nowhere near a classic and I don't remember anything about Ghostbusters 2.

The way I see it, the studios tried for years to get Murray to do Ghostbusters 3. He wouldn't do it. Murray had fallen out hard with Harold Ramis, his one-time collaborator and friend during the making of Groundhog Day and they didn't speak for 21 years though Murray reconciled with Ramis before his death. Dan Akyroyd and Ghostbusters director Ivan Reitman tried to talk Murray into doing Ghostbusters 3, but he steadfastly refused any and all offers. There was talk of making the movie without Murray but they realized that made about as much sense as a Led Zeppelin reunion without Robert Plant.

So why do an all-female Ghostsbusters? Maybe because Melissa McCarthy is the biggest name in movie comedies today and she wants to do it. Yeah, the first trailer was awful and nobody was well-served by it, but poor Leslie Jones suffered the worst as she was the Big Loud Scary Black Lady You Don't Want Yelling At You.

The new trailer was designed to take some of the stank off of its predecessor. Now not having a rooting interest for or against the new Ghostbusters means I don't care if its a hit or a flop. I'm not a fan of Melissa McCarthy as she has fallen into a rut of playing variations of the same character, the loud overweight woman who curses, does gross stuff and falls down a lot. Whether her newest effort soars or tanks at the box office doesn't involve me in the least. An all-female cast could be interesting, but I wish it would be in something new and fresh instead of just another remake.

The Internet is outraged. Because the Internet always is.
Now, let's all get outraged over Blake Lively's L.A. face and Oakland booty. It's cultural appropriation time! YAY!

they're remaking ghostbusters?

Yes. They're calling it The Magnificent Seven, however.

Now I'm outraged.

Shadow Dragon said:

Declaring that someone doesn't like a movie just because they're afraid of women is pretty insulting. Especially when many female fans of the old movie and animated series are giving some of the same criticisms to the new movie.

Click to expand...

Are you outraged at the insult?

Helix said:

Are you outraged at the insult?

Click to expand...

I'm not only outraged, I'm triggered.

Is that how internetting works these days? I've been without my laptop since about November, so I'm out of touch. I've nothing to add, really.

Shadow Dragon said:

Declaring that someone doesn't like a movie just because they're afraid of women is pretty insulting.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it was a cheap shot at the end of a long essay about something else entirely. I don't think Angry Nerd's response to the movie was all that great, just because other responses have been worse. I can understand why people would take issue with it.

Shadow Dragon said:

Especially when many female fans of the old movie and animated series are giving some of the same criticisms to the new movie.

Click to expand...

Not really. The idea that, "it can't be sexist if there are some women who agree with you," just isn't true.

Celia Cyanide said:

I don't think Angry Nerd's response to the movie was all that great, just because other responses have been worse. I can understand why people would take issue with it.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Seriously, there's nothing there.

"The original was a classic and the remake won't be as good."

Wow, what an original premise. Tell me more. Repeat the same essential idea for six minutes. It's fascinating. Not.

Celia Cyanide said:

Not really. The idea that, "it can't be sexist if there are some women who agree with you," just isn't true.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is what Shadow was trying to imply. For example, I'm a female fan of Ghostbusters. I grew up on and love that franchise. But I feel the special effects seen in the trailers will date the new film very quickly, and I don't like the fact the film doesn't pass the torch as other continuations tend to when tied to a franchise. When talking about something tied to an iconic franchise both those things are important, and I would feel the same if the leads were four men. Someome who simply assumes a woman is agreeing with a guy for sexist reasons, however, would actually be the one acting in a sexist manner because they're making assumptions which imply fellow female fans can't think for themselves.

Leave Angry Video Game Nerd alone!

Diana Hignutt said:

Ah, the battle between the "gun-loving, bibletard fundies" and the "Cultural Marxist SJW's" generates the outrage that the internet runs on. Otherwise, it's just cat vids and Facebook

Click to expand...

But you repeat yourself...

Cyia said:

Your first point is invalid, as you're not making an equal comparison. It should be Mac vs. PC, not Mac vs. Windows. Your inaccuracy is an outrage and I will never be able to take another point you make seriously.

*forgets whole thing in three seconds / 2-clicks*

Click to expand...

that really pisses me off. I must be remembered!

Lillith1991 said:

I don't think that is what Shadow was trying to imply. For example, I'm a female fan of Ghostbusters. I grew up on and love that franchise. But I feel the special effects seen in the trailers will date the new film very quickly, and I don't like the fact the film doesn't pass the torch as other continuations tend to when tied to a franchise. When talking about something tied to an iconic franchise both those things are important, and I would feel the same if the leads were four men. Someome who simply assumes a woman is agreeing with a guy for sexist reasons, however, would actually be the one acting in a sexist manner because they're making assumptions which imply fellow female fans can't think for themselves.

Click to expand...

Yeah, good thing nobody ever said women were agreeing with a guy for sexist reasons, or that female fans can't think for themselves.

Celia Cyanide said:

Yeah, good thing nobody ever said women were agreeing with a guy for sexist reasons, or that female fans can't think for themselves.

Click to expand...

Outright? Nope. Not at the moment. You? Nope. But that is often the concensus when female fans have the same reasoning as male fans for not liking a heavily female centered piece of film, Literature, or whatever. And there's always that implication in the background when talking to other fans too,male, female, neither, or somewhere in between. It's quite ridiculous because, as I already said and as I'm sure is obvious to people familiar with fandom culture, equally as sexist.

Lillith1991 said:

Outright? Nope. Not at the moment. You? Nope. But that is often the concensus when female fans have the same reasoning as male fans for not liking a heavily female centered piece of film, Literature, or whatever. And there's always that implication in the background when talking to other fans too,male, female, neither, or somewhere in between.

Click to expand...

I don't agree that it's the consensus, really at all.