Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 25, 2015 Author Share Posted November 25, 2015 This is regarding a story that broke last year that I think relates to this discussion in a few ways. I posted it up on another messageboard back when the story broke. I'll just copy and paste it here... I'm not very good at setting this sort of thing up, as it includes so many angles and sources, but try to bear with me and we'll see if I can pull off a comprehensible post here... It starts with a bit from the Colbert Report that aired on Wednesday night...The bit in question starts at 4:54 on the clip that's provided at the bottom of the post in this link. http://www.uproxx.com/sports/2014/03/stephen-colbert-weighed-redskins-name-debate-sport-report/ In it, Colbert lambastes Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder's efforts to deflect concerns regarding the racist nature of his team's nickname. He has started a charitable organization which he's calling The Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation. It's more or less a ham-handed attempt by Snyder to buy off the controversy surrounding the nickname of his team. So Colbert mocks this attempt by creating a charitable organization of his own. The Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever. This ties in to an old bit that Colbert did back in 2005 and references on his show from time to time. It was more or less a parody of racial criticisms being leveled at a public figure. Long story longer, the bit ends up being posted as a tweet with no context provided on The Colbert Reports twitter page which resulted in immediate Twitter outrage... http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2014/03/lot-people-upset-colbert-reports-ching-chong-ding-dong-joke/ Hashtag Activist (yes, apparently that's a real thing) Suey Park called for #Cancel Colbert, which resulted in that hashtag trending highly for the past couple of days or so. Colbert has to this point only responded to the outrage on Twitter and maintains that he had nothing to do with the out of context tweet... http://www.uproxx.com/up/2014/03/stephen-colbert-responds-cancelcolbert-movement/ To wrap things up, this bit and the ensuing outrage has been the topic of conversation on many "click-bait" sites such as Salon, Gawker and UpRoxx and the like for the past couple of days. Most of the conversation centers on the limits of satire when dealing with racism, particularly when a white male is the person making the satirization. Here are a few examples... http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/colbert-redskins-asian-foundation-joke-sparks-outrage http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/03/28/stephen_colbert_versus_the_hashtag_activists.html http://deadspin.com/gooks-dont-get-redskins-joke-1553907157/all http://www.salon.com/2014/03/28/in_support_of_cancelcolbert_why_stephen_colbert_needs_to_make_this_right/ I realize that this is a lot to digest, and many of you probably don't really care enough about the story to sift through it, but I thought it made for some interesting discussion. Satire has historically been fairly bulletproof to these sorts of criticisms, so I found it interesting that this generated as much controversy as it did. Being a fan of the Colbert Report made it all that much more interesting to me. Any thoughts? Was Colbert out of bounds here or is this just an overreaction to an ill-timed tweet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 25, 2015 Author Share Posted November 25, 2015 Just to clarify, I realize there are some important differences between this and the Zoolander controversy. Colbert's joke had a political point that his detractors more or less chose to ignore. That being said, I do think there is some connective tissue between the two stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I still think calls for a boycott at this point are too hasty. We don't even know if Cumberbatch is a trans character.That said, there is an important thing to keep in mind about comedy sequels; they almost always mirror the structure of the original film, which is in part why they're usually not as good.With that in mind I wouldn't be surprised at all if Cumberbatch's role replaces/mimics the type of character arc WIlson's Hansel had in the original film. Cumberbatch could be the new wave fashion model that displaces Zoolander and Hansel and starts as an antagonist, but over the course of the film becomes a hero, which if the character is trans, would generally place the character in a favorable light and could help normalize a trans person to a wider audience, which would be a net positive. Or everything I just said could be dead wrong, and if so, I'll eat my crow.All I'm trying to say is wait for someone to be able to review the finished product before you determine if a boycott is warranted. If Cumberbatch is just a quick cameo to make fun of trans people then shame on him and I'll gladly join a boycott (and this is a film I want to see because I love the first one). But it's possible the movie will portray a trans woman in a good way (assuming the character is trans), unnecassery demeaning joke aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I think the concern over standup isn't really justified. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Stand up comedy and have seen more comedy gigs than music gigs - stand up comedians are just being pushed to be smarter and less lazy/offensive with their humour - that's all. You can have comics whose act relies on them being a miserable git and a bit of an asshole (Stewart Lee) who are genuinely intelligent, socially aware and fucking hilarious all whilst being creative and not relying on stale stereotypical jokes that are out dated and not funny anymore (if ever) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arch-MaesterPhilip Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I'm not sure guys like George Carlin or Lenny Bruce would be able to perform these days. Even Rodney Dangerfield might be questionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I'm not sure guys like George Carlin or Lenny Bruce would be able to perform these days. Even Rodney Dangerfield might be questionable.I disagree. Look at Bill Mahar, Daniel Tosh and Anthony Jeselnik, to name a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arch-MaesterPhilip Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I disagree. Look at Bill Mahar, Daniel Tosh and Anthony Jeselnik, to name a few.I'm not really familiar with Anthony Jeselnik to be honest. But I guess you're right about Bill Maher and Daniel Tosh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 25, 2015 Author Share Posted November 25, 2015 To be fair, an outspoken attitude followed by a controversy did cost Bill Maher a job back in 2001. His comments regarding 9/11 cost him his show.http://www.snowspotmedia.com/2010/09/11/the-comments-about-911-that-cost-bill-maher-his-job-video/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I'm not really familiar with Anthony Jeselnik to be honest. But I guess you're right about Bill Maher and Daniel Tosh. He's a deadpan insult comic. He's funny, but super offensive. To be fair, an outspoken attitude followed by a controversy did cost Bill Maher a job back in 2001. His comments regarding 9/11 cost him his show.http://www.snowspotmedia.com/2010/09/11/the-comments-about-911-that-cost-bill-maher-his-job-video/I know. I just cited him because he's similar to Carlin. And that was more of a blip than a trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 25, 2015 Author Share Posted November 25, 2015 He's a deadpan insult comic. He's funny, but super offensive.I know. I just cited him because he's similar to Carlin. And that was more of a blip than a trend.Yeah, Jeselnik is amazing, but I'm not sure he'll ever have a career that goes past stand-up, due to the fact that his material is so offensive.And Maher has clearly bounced back, but that comment cost him quite a bit at the time it was made. I'm glad it didn't cost him his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I think the concern over standup isn't really justified. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Stand up comedy and have seen more comedy gigs than music gigs - stand up comedians are just being pushed to be smarter and less lazy/offensive with their humour - that's all. You can have comics whose act relies on them being a miserable git and a bit of an asshole (Stewart Lee) who are genuinely intelligent, socially aware and fucking hilarious all whilst being creative and not relying on stale stereotypical jokes that are out dated and not funny anymore (if ever)I love some stand up comedians. Favourite is probably Sarah Millican. A lot of her stuff is "offensive" but she directs it at herself - self depreciating humour, so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindly Old Man Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Jeselnik already had a show on Comedy Central for 2 seasons, sadly the ratings weren't so good. I'm pretty sure this PC thing is mostly about college gigs, plenty of comedians do offensive stuff at clubs.A lot of people in this thread seem to be confused about the difference between boycotting something and censorship. A boycott seems to me to be exactly the appropriate response if one finds something offensive. And if you don't like the boycott you can always support whatever they're boycotting. One person you convince to see a movie is worth way more than one person who boycotts it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arch-MaesterPhilip Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I love some stand up comedians. Favourite is probably Sarah Millican. A lot of her stuff is "offensive" but she directs it at herself - self depreciating humour, so to speak. I loved Rodney Dangerfield because of the self-deprecating humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 I love some stand up comedians. Favourite is probably Sarah Millican. A lot of her stuff is "offensive" but she directs it at herself - self depreciating humour, so to speak. I've seen her live ! She was HILARIOUS. Had me in stitches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 When is it safe to have differently gendered people as the focus of comedy? I would say when there is a generalised social acceptance of such people, before then I think it is easy to cross a line, but it can still be OK. Are we at that point yet? I'm not sure. We have a pretty successful TV show that is all about a transgendered retired person, but the show portrays both social acceptance and social rejection in somewhat equal measure, which is probably a fair reflection of where liberal western society is at.Just like using race as a focus of comedy I don't think you can make it taboo, but whenever it is used there are boundaries of propriety that are very easy to cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 I've seen her live ! She was HILARIOUS. Had me in stitches! I'm so jealous! I think she's touring again nsxt year, will definitely be trying to get tickets for a convenient date Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted November 28, 2015 Share Posted November 28, 2015 Okay I am going to admit I haven't read this whole thread. I have however watched both the first Zoolander and the trailer for this film. I am not going to say that people shouldn't be offended, or shouldn't boycott the movie, that is their right, and to do so with however much or little information they feel is necessary to justify their reaction. Outrage is something that is profoundly personal, and I know things outrage me that do not outrage other, others are outraged by things I am not. If someone is outraged by this trailer, then that is totally a logical reaction for them.However I will say that I would be a little surprised if, when the movie comes out, All (Benedict Cumberbatch's character) is the butt of the joke. Don't get me wrong, I think All will likely be a ridiculous character, because Zoolander resides in a universe of ridiculous characters, but I don't think All will be the butt of this joke. I think this joke will likely play into showing that Zoolander and Hansel are in fact old, out of touch, and threatened by the next generation.Zoolander, the original movie, played a lot with gender stereotypes. Derek is the pretty, vapid, air head, with a heart of good. Matilda is not only the more grounded character, but she also never has a "makeover scene", (though she does learn how to let her hair down.) we never see her trade in her respectable attire for a ball gown, or a mini skirt, she's not monogamous to Derek and that's not viewed as a bad thing. Derek is initially suspicious of Hansel, in part because Hansel lives a very different kind of life style then him, but they over come their differences learn to respect each other, and become allies.Probably the one scene in the original Zoolander that makes me think All will not be butt of the joke though is the scene with Derek and his father. In the scene a commercial that Derek stars in plays while Derek is with his coal mining father. Derek's father is humiliated that his son is on tv wearing make up, and dressed in a mere person's tail; he states that he's glad that Zoolander's mother died before she could see her son dressed up as a "mermaid"; Derek gets very emotional and states that he's a "mereMAN", before storming out. That is the last scene in that Derek's family is in the movie. Zoolander goes on to save the day, and start the institute for "kid's that don't read so good"; but you never see a reconciliation with is family. The moral of the story seems to play out that accepting people for how they are, even when you don't understand them leads to friendship and success. Lashing out at people because you don't understand them only lessens you. They used that scene to show how out of touch Larry Zoolander was with his son. It wouldn't surprise me if they are using the All scene to show how out of touch Derek and Hansel are with the modern world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 29, 2015 Author Share Posted November 29, 2015 Alright, now to officially flip the script. We now have the "Internet activist group" One Million Moms (who have 3,333 followers on Twitter) taking offense to this Cambell's Soup ad which features a less than traditional family... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rZOMY2sOnEOne Million Moms claims that "Campbell's Soup is glorifying this unnatural marriage" and "This Gay-inclusive commercial is attempting to desensitize viewers." http://onemillionmoms.com/current-campaigns/new-commercial-for-campbells-soup/I have to say this trumps the call to boycott Zoolander 2, but I do think there are some similarities in terms of overreaction. Check out Steven Colbert's hilarious reaction here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Pesci Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 Alright, now to officially flip the script. We now have the "Internet activist group" One Million Moms (who have 3,333 followers on Twitter) taking offense to this Cambell's Soup ad which features a less than traditional family... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rZOMY2sOnEOne Million Moms claims that "Campbell's Soup is glorifying this unnatural marriage" and "This Gay-inclusive commercial is attempting to desensitize viewers." http://onemillionmoms.com/current-campaigns/new-commercial-for-campbells-soup/I have to say this trumps the call to boycott Zoolander 2, but I do think there are some similarities in terms of overreaction. Check out Steven Colbert's hilarious reaction here...Just when you think you've seen it all...this is absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 30, 2015 Author Share Posted November 30, 2015 Just when you think you've seen it all...this is absurd.It really is. I don't know how that organization can even call itself "One Million Moms" with a straight face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.