3 ms·
> Nah, politics in shows is great. It's like CGI. It can really make a show pop if it's well thought out, subtle, and feels realistic. Is this a joke? To me b
by TaLiTr 19d ago
> Nah, politics in shows is great. It's like CGI. It can really make a show pop if it's well thought out, subtle, and feels realistic.
Is this a joke?
To me both CGI and politics have the same issue which is aging poorly.
Nobody thinks The Phantom Menace looks better than A New Hope.
- DonHopkins 18d agoDick aged well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F5bMFSYPvE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F5bMFSYPvE
- Arainach 18d agoEverything is political. If you think it's not, you're just benefiting from the status quo and blind to it. Even ignoring that history loves to repeat itself, plenty of politics in all forms of media has aged excellently, and plenty of politics that haven't aged well are still insightful into the period of the piece.
- krige 18d agoThere's a striking difference between telling and tone deaf preaching and when people complain about politics they always, without fail, mean the latter. The stance of "everything is political" itself is extremely tone deaf.
- UpsideDownRide 18d agoIt reads like you are using tone deaf as a substitute for 'somethign I dont like'
- krige 18d agoSurely you can see that one follows the other.
- norome 18d agoeverything may have a relevance to politics, but there is a line between art and propaganda.
- foldr 18d agoSo is Casablanca art or propaganda? IMO 'art' and 'propaganda' are largely orthogonal concepts. Something can be art but not propaganda, propaganda but not art, neither, or both.
- ajuc 17d agoThe line is usually "do I agree with it". That's why old political writing is good - because the politics has been settled by now, most people won't argue 1984 was unfairly criticizing totalitarianism or Starship Troopers are too hard on fascism. But new political writing is outrageous for half the people, because they disagree with it.
- mrob 18d ago>Everything is political. "Everything is political" is the classic motte-and-bailey fallacy beloved by the most obnoxious politics pushers. The fact that it's impossible to remove all traces of politics from fiction does not excuse subjugating art to ideology. When people complain about "political" works they're complaining about works where the author appears to care more about how you vote than the story.
- moate 17d agoI’ve found when people complain about something being “political” 9 out of 10 times they’re complaining that they dislike the author’s politics. The dictionary definition of “politics” (as in, what the word actually means) would support the statement that “everything is political” to be at worst a smidge hyperbolic. No motte, no bailey, no rhetorical fallacy. Thing is, most art has ideology, it’s the weirdo reactionaries that try to pretend otherwise.
- deleted 18d ago[deleted]
- wisty 16d agoA new hope had lots of effect that are basically cgi in impact. Muppets, painted backgrounds, lightsabres, the death star wireframe plans was cgi. The method of making fake pixels isn't the issue, good taste is, and modern cgi is just easy to make slop effects with. Also compare lotr gollum (cgi but with a good actor and good script, with the actor in a motion suit on stage for actors to interact with) to Jar Jar (a tennis ball who actors couldn't interact with). Gollum is arguavly more cgi (both removing the actor and replacing them) but better.