Or maybe you don't believe that they even do? Clearly there's a principle with the Arts that lend themselves that a personal expression and artistic expression that inherently is "Left" artistically/politically - that's why most artists and the industries that sustains them do so.
On the other hand there was a time when films you could clearly argue as great were clearly on the Right as works of Art too - Man For All Seasons, several John Wayne films, etc.
Currently no "young" or hot actor would identify themselves as Republican (or on the right), actors who do link to the right are few and far between (um..............James Woods? Jon Voight?) - is there a deeper meaning to this and is it permanent or is transitional now. Can you even make a great film on the "other" side - ie, a film that is a "When They See Us?" in reverse - ie could you make a film that works as strongly as an artistic statement of saw the Tawana Brawley case? Could you make a great anti-abortion film?
Which films in recent years would qualify as such - great movies on the wrong political side of an issue maybe? (by wrong I mean one you disagree with)
^ There have been recent movies against abortion (Roe vs Wade, Unplanned, Gosnell) but I haven't seen them, mostly due to distributors boycotting them, so I can't judge if they were good or not. I doubt many people here have seen it, but there's a movie among my favourites that shows a point of view that's different from the most common nowadays on love, marriage and life. It's called Casomai (if by chance) and I think it's a hidden gem, both because of the narrative, direction, and actors ' performances.
I'd add Clint Eastwood to your Republican list...
Which films in recent years would qualify as such - great movies on the wrong political side of an issue maybe? (by wrong I mean one you disagree with)
It's weird you define "wrong" associated with conservative views. You assume all redux members are leftists /liberals. No wonder people, even in the show business, don't feel free to express their thoughts.
^ There have been recent movies against abortion (Roe vs Wade, Unplanned, Gosnell) but I haven't seen them, mostly due to distributors boycotting them, so I can't judge if they were good or not. I doubt many people here have seen it, but there's a movie among my favourites that shows a point of view that's different from the most common nowadays on love, marriage and life. It's called Casomai (if by chance) and I think it's a hidden gem, both because of the narrative, direction, and actors ' performances.
It's weird you define "wrong" associated with conservative views. No wonder people, even in the show business, don't feel free to express their thoughts.
Perhaps that is a language barrier because you misunderstand I'm afraid - "wrong" is being used to express that it is the minority view relative to those who create Art and potential audiences for Art now. It is not weird at all - in fact you're first sentence echoes that point too.
I am not associating wrong with conservative views at all - on the contrary - I was just looking for a way to frame the whole discussion .......
Post by Film Socialism on Jun 6, 2019 12:46:55 GMT
i think liberals tend to control the arts these days, the last time you could argue the left controlled the arts was when the soviets ruled the world and they made state funded stuff.
that said, i think it's difficult to make films that portray right wing narratives because, well, it's hard to cinematically portray evil ideologies in a positive light
i think liberals tend to control the arts these days, the last time you could argue the left controlled the arts was when the soviets ruled the world and they made state funded stuff.
that said, i think it's difficult to make films that portray right wing narratives because, well, it's hard to cinematically portray evil ideologies in a positive light
You just mentioned the Soviets controlling the arts and you say right wing ideology is evil without a hint of irony. Also liberals are left you nonce.
i think liberals tend to control the arts these days, the last time you could argue the left controlled the arts was when the soviets ruled the world and they made state funded stuff.
that said, i think it's difficult to make films that portray right wing narratives because, well, it's hard to cinematically portray evil ideologies in a positive light
You just mentioned the Soviets controlling the arts and you say right wing ideology is evil without a hint of irony. Also liberals are left you nonce.
i don't much care for the soviets other than lenin. this was also more talking about general popular control, not necessarily what i think is good (in my headcanon, the left has always controlled the arts because they're the best at it, but i realize this is not what the question was asking).
liberals, using united states terminology (although i've been told by my non american buds that this is more true outside the states) aren't left. they're centrists that occasionally swing a bit left or right.
i feel like that film isn't very hard to get ahold of, though. plus it's not like they allow most movies on the site (in that, if they're owned by another group)
while i'm all about the precedent (that is: removing/demonetizing nazi content from your website), i'm not entirely sure about this move. is anyone actually radicalized by reifenstahl anymore? i feel like ben shapiro --> alt right --> nazi or libertarian --> ancap --> nazi is more common, and neither of these groups have much interest in films made before the year 1980. but hey, they demonetized crowder and such so i'm generally okay w that.
until the left begins actually destroying art, i think this whole thing is sensationalized. this film can still be easily found online, is an isolated example, and to my knowledge isn't something that any leftists are actually clamoring about destroying in the current era anyways.
i feel like ben shapiro --> alt right --> nazi or libertarian --> ancap --> nazi is more common,
You have to be a troll.
i suppose i don't have a solid source for the second one apart from observations, but some of the rightwing terrorists named shapiro and his ilk as major inspirations
You could hold up classic Hollywood and much of the western literary canon as conservative works of art that are superior to much of what is being made today. The issue is that most of today's conservatives don't like stuff like that because they're so anti-intellectual. Fans of old movies and classic literature are almost across he board liberal/left even though the works themselves aren't. Look at the composition of our own board on the political ideologies poll.
For example I happened to see a bit of Mike Huckabee's television show on some cable channel recently and he was bemoaning the decline in popular entertainment. The example he gave of the "good old days" where there was quality entertainment was The Dukes of Hazzard, not Gone With the Wind or Casablanca. All they want is a montage of American (or Confederate) flags set to country music, they don't care about quality. I've had to sit through some of these "faith based" movies and even if I 100% agreed with the messages they would still be complete crap.
I know this is a "coastal elitist comment that is why Trump won" but I'm just calling it like I see it.
You could hold up classic Hollywood and much of the western literary canon as conservative works of art that are superior to much of what is being made today. The issue is that most of today's conservatives don't like stuff like that because they're so anti-intellectual. Fans of old movies and classic literature are almost across he board liberal/left even though the works themselves aren't. Look at the composition of our own board on the political ideologies poll.
This is a particularly good point I think and some of this at least now comes down to an absence of humor as far as I can tell within artistic expression on the Right but humor/satire is actually key component of their actual mindset and political POV.
For example Steven Crowder is actually fairly funny (or can be, you at least get the jokes), PJ O'Rourke while not a traditional Right wing person has riotously written satire - much of it rather brilliant - against Democrats or the Left, there is a humor/entertainment aspect to many Right political commentators obviously - Ben Shapiro for one, and Andrew Klavan an actual Hollywood writer himself incorporates much satirical presentations with his views.
Weirdly that subversive element which is profoundly intellectual in theory (ie satirical thought and conception) never makes it into the Art we most quickly label as Right wing..........that's a bit odd. Jordan Peterson used to talk about "when the Left has gone too far" - ie you know when the Right has gone too far because it manifests itself in totalitarianism.
But there is a corresponding idea in that ripe for the Right that never gets explored (heck even the removal of Triumph of the Will from Youtube has an element of fanatic Left thinking - you can satirize and not be fair or see the other side - that's the whole point after all)
i suppose i don't have a solid source for the second one apart from observations, but some of the rightwing terrorists named shapiro and his ilk as major inspirations
i suppose i don't have a solid source for the second one apart from observations, but some of the rightwing terrorists named shapiro and his ilk as major inspirations
You're an idiot.
mosque shooter and christchurch shooter were both big fans of his, i don't make the rules
Reading the replies here, I get the question is basically only about Hollywood. In the US, there are basically only two parties, with different nuances, whose political programs can't differ that much because they have to attract the votes of about half of the population. The word "left" doesn't have the same meaning as in other countries where communism was never banned. In most European countries, for instance, you can find dozens of parties who get represented in their Parliament, some of those are extreme left or right. I have the feeling you call "left" the ones that can be defined as liberals (again, "liberals" in Europe are a totally different thing). Referring to the political poll that count John named, I gave up taking it for instance because it's clearly made for Americans. I mean, if you ask "do you think rich people pay too much taxes?", the answer clearly depends on the taxation level in your country.
Anyway, I saw great artists boycotted because of their (center right) political views, at least in my country.
Let's say that the genocide of Italians (up to 300.000 people) living in Istria after WWII operated by Yugoslavia communists was a taboo in Italy til few years ago. Or a movie like Malga Porzûs, about the murder of Catholic partisans by communists in the final phases of the war, wasn't distributed.
mosque shooter and christchurch shooter were both big fans of his, i don't make the rules
Wait, are you seriously calling for Ben Shapiro to be kicked off Youtube? You're not really calling for that right - I mean I get that you and ITD have a little back and forth (which is fine) but if you start looking at censoring people for being misunderstood by mental cases that's ..........well it's way beyond a slippery slope.
That's something he actually speaks quite articulately on the weaponization of speech and the linking of speech (wrongly) to violence - I mean that's a necessary right wing voice ..........if he were to go.......who's next on the left - Chris Matthews.........then Tucker Carlson on the right............then Cenk Uygur on the left.............then removing critical analysis of Mein Kampf........then removing historic Art like Triumph of The Will ............oh wait......
mosque shooter and christchurch shooter were both big fans of his, i don't make the rules
Wait, are you seriously calling for Ben Shapiro to be kicked off Youtube? You're not really calling for that right - I mean I get that you and ITD have a little back and forth (which is fine) but if you start looking at censoring people for being misunderstood by mental cases that's ..........well it's way beyond a slippery slope.
That's something he actually speaks quite articulately on the weaponization of speech and the linking of speech (wrongly) to violence - I mean that's a necessary right wing voice ..........if he were to go.......who's next on the left - Chris Matthews.........then Tucker Carlson on the right............then Cenk Uygur on the left.............then removing critical analysis of Mein Kampf........then removing historic Art like Triumph of The Will ............oh wait......
shapiro probably could do with some demonetizing, i think he has dangerous views and shouldn't get paid for them at the very least. tucker carlson is the closest thing we have to an actual fascist voice in america, mostly because he uses left wing rhetoric at times to try to garner a sense of crossover appeal while being just as reactionary as his contemporaries.
this slippery slope argument really has no bearing as a legitimate point of discussion; there are things i disagree with (removing Triumph of the Will) and things i agree with (demonetizing crowder and alex jones, kicking milo off everywhere), like with any political process.
let me also conclude that i don't think shapiro is being misunderstood in this context
mosque shooter and christchurch shooter were both big fans of his, i don't make the rules
Actually both were proven not to be true but even if I was to grant you that; do you blame Bernie Sanders for the shooting on the Republicans politicians at a baseball game? That guy was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
Wait, are you seriously calling for Ben Shapiro to be kicked off Youtube? You're not really calling for that right - I mean I get that you and ITD have a little back and forth (which is fine) but if you start looking at censoring people for being misunderstood by mental cases that's ..........well it's way beyond a slippery slope.
That's something he actually speaks quite articulately on the weaponization of speech and the linking of speech (wrongly) to violence - I mean that's a necessary right wing voice ..........if he were to go.......who's next on the left - Chris Matthews.........then Tucker Carlson on the right............then Cenk Uygur on the left.............then removing critical analysis of Mein Kampf........then removing historic Art like Triumph of The Will ............oh wait......
shapiro probably could do with some demonetizing, i think he has dangerous views and shouldn't get paid for them at the very least. tucker carlson is the closest thing we have to an actual fascist voice in america, mostly because he uses left wing rhetoric at times to try to garner a sense of crossover appeal while being just as reactionary as his contemporaries.
this slippery slope argument really has no bearing as a legitimate point of discussion; there are things i disagree with (removing Triumph of the Will) and things i agree with (demonetizing crowder and alex jones, kicking milo off everywhere), like with any political process.
let me also conclude that i don't think shapiro is being misunderstood in this context
You do know you're a big fascist. Only speech you agree with should be allowed. Textbook definition of fascism.
oh my god, a private video hosting company decided to pull a 1935 Nazi propaganda film. where does it stop?
Not really the point of the thread. Also those Nazi propaganda films are historic and should be preserved so future generations can see the culture the Nazis created and maybe try and emulate.