I don't have to be a cynic to think you suck.

[wednes]

It's been asserted that I'm a cynic who thinks it's cool to rip on stuff other people like. Yeah, because people en masse have such great fucking taste. I wanted to enjoy Cabin in the Woods. I really did. It's not my fault that it sucks, or that so many people who should know better are pacified by pablum. I'm not even going to tell you how much money A Haunted House made this weekend. But it's more money than I've made collectively in my entire life to date. By all means, watch crap if you want to. I do. I love shitty slashers and terrible SyFy CGI movies. But please, don't pretend that they're good or that I'm being mean by not liking them. Please.

It's true that I don't like a lot of things "everybody" likes. As far as I know, nobody likes everything that Everybody likes. Duh. Because "everybody" doesn't actually like it. Shit that's popular for a while often fades into the background and is completely forgotten about by people who swore they'd love it forever. BTW, that's also why there should be a waiting period for tattoos. So no, it doesn't really make sense to bust on someone for not liking something other people like. I actually find people who follow every goddamn trend no matter how stupid to be infinitely more irksome.

As I so often do, I wonder what it is that makes people say "You are wrong" instead of "I disagree." Why people have to assume that there's ignorance or stupidity afoot when there is dissent. A particular peeve of mine is when people say Oh, well if you read such-and-such by so-and-so, you'd agree with me as if I'm so malleable that the right book would instantly change my mind. Books are powerful, but not more powerful than the human mind. Not MY mind anyway.

In fucking stupid news, I'm mildly bummed that sweinberg never talks to me on Twitter. He posts twenty kajillion times a day, but totally snubs me. #drag We used to be such great pals, ten years ago on LJ.

Comments

[groovesinorbit]

I have no problem with our disagreeing about Cabin in the Woods. To each her own. What I have a problem with is being told by implication that I'm "pacified by pablum" and "not a real horror fan." I know you're not speaking to me directly, but it rankles, anyway. It seems that you're saying "you're wrong" instead of "I disagree," too. At least, that's how it feels to me.

[wednes]

Ha! Don't take this the wrong way, but that's the same thing the Twilight fans say.

I was discussing this with The Itch last night on LJ. My segue was lousy, but when I referred to being wrong versus disagreeing, I was really talking more about sociopolitical subjects where common ground is possible--may, necessary to continue. It's pretty much the opposite of commentary on the arts, because whether or not friends like the same thing makes zero difference in other facets of the relationship. I have a friend who hates The Mist--which is a fave of mine. We have long, vehement discussions, and then we grumble and move on. If he hated say, black people, or women who wear right skirts--moving on would not be possible.

Since movies, lit, at, etc are obviously subjective, any opinion expressed is just that, an opinion. Explaining that thoughts on a movie or whatever is an opinion seems unnecessary to me. Anyone who enters a conversation about the arts thinking that there are any absolutes at all--probably shouldn't be there in the first place.

That said, I am legitimately baffled as to how anyone horror fan can say CitW is anything but an insult to the genre. I just can't see it. All summer long I heard how it was a "love letter" to all things horror. All I saw was the most crowd-pleasin' (note: not the best, most influential, scariest, or lasting--merely the stuff the most people were familiar with) scary monsters lumped together around a "plot' that minimized then insulted everything about the genre--adding a twist that looked so desperate to be different it was like putting ketchup on a hot fudge Sunday. Yeah, that's never been done before--but ick.

Make no mistake, I'm not opposed to a lampooning of something I love. But lampoons are supposed to be funny, or failing that--I'd have accepted scary. I found CitW to be neither, even as it reminded me of what my grandmother thought about horror--ski masks and chainsaws and half-naked women running around in the woods screaming. That's what teenagers think horror is. That's a far cry from the true power of the genre. I imagine this is where I get the idea that "real horror fans" won't like it. Or that if they do, it's pablum. Pablum doesn't have to be terrible, it's just comforting and soothing in its blandness. Maybe the movie equivalent to what you eat when you're not feeling well.

Pardon my saying so, but I suspect that if Joss Whedon (who, as you know, I have had almost no interaction with artistically) hadn't made that thing, it wouldn't have had nearly the buzz or praise that it did. Sort of like how I feel about Rob Zombies Halloween movies. Like a macaroni painting that goes on the fridge--it means a lot to me because he made it--but no, it ain't so great. Then again, this could be a Raimi-esque thing where there are just a zillion inside jokes and I don't get them because I didn't watch Buffy or any of his SciFi stuff.

This post was actually inspired by an incident about as meanningful as the one you had with my former roommate, EvilEye. It doesn't matter at all to life on the whole--but at the time, DAMN. It pissed me right off at the time. I can have animated art discussions that rise to the level of raised voices and pounding on tables--but if a complete stranger makes it personal--well, lets just say I have not yet found a way to not feed the trolls. Probably a good thing for me to work on if I plan to continue writing about TV and films.

If I don't like The Following, I'm going to be very sad.

[groovesinorbit]

I agree with you. Opinions on art, other than on technical stuff, are always going to be subjective. And if folks disagree, oh well. Hopefully the conversation is at least interesting.

So, why the belittling of people who disagree with you? Review the work, not the fans. By insulting people (including me) by declaring them fake horror fans and oh so stupid, you don’t come across as a film critic to be taken seriously. Honestly, you come across as a gatekeepery jerk. I love you, Wednes, but do you really want to be in the same camp as the guys at cons who think women can’t be real geeks and shouldn’t be allowed in? Because that’s who you sound like. They don’t have any authority to determine who “real” geeks are, and you don’t have any to decide who’s a “real” horror fan or not. You are a lot of cool things, and you know a lot about horror, but you are not its sole arbiter. Sorry to break that to you, but it’s true.

As far as CiTW goes, whoever told you that it was a love letter to horror films was either mistaken or just yanking your chain. Since you went into the film with that expectation, I’m not surprised you didn’t like it. What Whedon actually called it was a “loving hate letter” to the genre. Warm and fuzzy love was not the intention at all. CitW is supposed to be a satirical dig at what Whedon and Drew Goddard (the director) see as serious flaws in standard mainstream horror movies, specifically their devolution into torture porn. They find these films to be misogynistic, ugly, and ritualistic (I agree) and CiTW was their not-so-subtle takedown of the genre.

In my opinion, if was a fun slap in the face of a horror trope that is long past its prime and in need of a good shaking up. I was totally fine with that and loved it dearly, especially the ending when the whole ritual is knocked for a loop. To have the survivors—the victims—end the world rather than continue to play the game? I thought that was priceless.

I found CiTW to be sharp, funny, and well-done, and I say this knowing I probably missed a good quarter of the references. If someone else had made it, I would have enjoyed it just as much. It was nothing like an obligatory macaroni sculpture on the fridge to me. Warm and fuzzy love is not Whedon’s thing, never has been, so I wasn’t expecting any of that. Everyone thinks he’s so funny (which he is), because of Buffy and Firefly, but he’s also freaking dark. The combination is one of the reasons I like his stuff so much. His cynical existentialist meta-pondering philosophy is all over this film.

[wednes]

I can't help but notice that when someone takes issue with my snarky review style, it's because they don't agree. When I say Glenn Beck fans are pacified by pablum, not only do you have no problem with that--but you tend to stop by and agree. But if I'm insulting people who like what YOU like, then suddenly it's a problem. Obviously, that's a normal human reaction--but lets not pretend that it's something other than what it is.

I certainly won't deny that my style is snarky, even rude. (as I recall, we're both fans of the Rude Pundit--who makes my snark look like a broken middle finger) One of my oldest friends called me out of nowhere one day to bitch me out for ripping on Twilight. That can only mean that my rips were pithy and on point. I will certainly continue to deride anyone who thinks Twilight is good literature to give to young girls--or hell, that it's good literature at all. Literature, movies, etc are not people. If they suck, they deserve to be insulted and slapped right out of the discourse so we can all get back to the good stuff. Obviously, we're all gonna disagree on what deserves the insults, but the important thing is that we're talking about it.

I'm not sure how I gave the impression that I wanted to be a serious film critic. I'm not qualified--not by a long shot. I want to be a serious horror writer. Failing that, I just want people to learn my fucking name. ;-] Posting polite reviews about shit I hate is not the way to do that.

I'm curious to know what kind of pre-release buzz you got on CitW. It was called "Whedon's love letter to the horror genre" (or similar paraphrase using "love letter") by FEARnet, Fangoria, Entertainment Weekly, Peter Travers, and Premiere. While I loathe one of those and have mild distaste for much of the rest, I'm not sure that they were all yanking my chain. After hearing fans online blowing it all summer, I was really surprised at how much I didn't like it.

That said, the idea that mainstream horror has devolved into torture porn demonstrates a shocking lack of awareness as to what's actually happening in the genre. Granted, there's plenty of low budget or PG13 studio shit out there--but talking about Hostel, SAW, or Martyrs as if they have no societal value save for fodder for mockery? Poppycock! Yeah, it's no wonder I don't like him if that's what he thinks. Until this happened, I had no idea Whedon had any love for horror at all--I always thought of him as a Sci-Fi guy. But again, he's never actually been on my radar. I think because the only friend I know in person who really, REALLY liked Whedon/Buffy was pretty open about not being a horror fan. He hasn't even seen NotLD until I sat him down and made him. Then, he was blown away.

I'm not even clear on how CitW references the TP subgenre. Yeah, there were some bloody scenes and all. But aside from the implications of the room where they made their choice, I didn't see any of the psychology of torture porn.

On the subject of horror fans, I def do maintain a hipstery gatekeeper mentality. The horror genre gets shit on more than any other (except maybe romance--whose fans don't care what anyone thinks of their tripe) even though most people don't even know what the hell it is. I don't think someone is a horror fan because they've seen every Scream movie. It's not quantitative--but a knowledge and love of the genre is essential.

While I feel badly that my comments obviously hurt your feelings and pissed you off, I don't think anything I said about the film itself was unfair or untrue. On a personal note, I probably could (nay, should) have been much less bitchy in my reply. You did not deserve such a high level of sarcasm and pointed snark. I am sorry for that.

[groovesinorbit]

Thanks for the apology. I appreciate it, and am glad that we both know there’s a real person on the other side of this screen. We're never going to agree on this, I'm guessing, but here's my take.

As you said in your previous comment, politics and art are two different things. The folks who love Glenn Beck are complicit in the fucking up of the world, I feel, so mocking them is kind of called for. Mocking people in power the way Lee Papas does is necessary and called for. Fans of stuff you don’t like? Meh, not in the same ballpark. And really, the only time your hipster attitude hits me is when you talk about real horror fans and how downtrodden the horror genre is.

Yeah, like science fiction is treated with the respect it deserves all the time. ;)

You would be wrong, if you think that. I could go on about how no one really understands science fiction and how its looked down upon as a genre and not taken seriously (and then you could laugh at me because The Avengers is the largest grossing movie in history, and you’d be right. Of course, the SAW movies have done just fine at the box office, too, so your own pity party is a little laughable, as well). I have, in fact, gone on about the ghettoization of literature and how, to a lot of people, there’s “real” literature and “genre” literature. I know people who feel that way, and they annoy the crap out of me. As you might have guessed, I really don’t like gatekeepers in any situation because, among other things, I feel they get in the way of people actually discovering a genre they might like if they’re curious enough to check it out. Being stopped at the gate by another fan with a chip on her shoulder demanding credentials just brings out the snark in me. I'm not ever impressed.

To paraphrase John Scalzi, in his post about fake geek girls, my opinion is this: Who gets to be a horror fan? Anyone who wants to be, any way they want to be one. There is no harm in that. I feel the same way about science fiction and anything else I’m a geek about.

If that doesn’t float your boat, fine. Have fun in your little club, but be aware that at least one person on the internet who ordinarily thinks quite a lot of you, thinks it’s an asshole move. I didn’t say that you wanted to be a serious film critic, only that you want to be taken seriously (i.e. have your opinion respected). If that’s how you want your name to be known, that’s fine. Not the way I’m approaching this writer-marketing business, but our approaches to things have always been different. Other than that we’re both snarky cynics, of course. ;)

I completely agree with you that if something you don’t like sucks, talk about it, insult it, have at it. And really, I do not care that you didn’t like CiTW. I really don’t. And I’m not going to try to convince you otherwise. I just wanted to explain why I liked it and point out that you had been misled into what to expect from it. All those sources you mentioned got it wrong.

Fancy that, people in the media getting shit wrong. Go figure. A simple click-through to the CITW Wikipedia page would have cleared that right up. ;)

I didn’t get any pre-release buzz on CiTW, other than what I heard on Whedonesque: just that it’s Whedon, it’s going to be weird, Fran Kranz and Amy Acker are in it, yay! Another good friend saw it and loved it as did a reviewer I follow; our tastes are very similar, so, I went in pretty sure I would like it. R didn’t as much (he had problems with the tech), and other Whedon-fan friends didn’t, either. It’s definitely a YMMV film. And I would also argue that it’s more science fiction film than horror, but that’s getting into genre nitpicking, something else I’m not too fond of.

Having never seen Hostel, SAW, or Martyrs, I can’t venture an opinion on those and what Whedon got wrong or right. I have no interest in seeing them either. That kind of graphic violence turns me right the hell off and is a subgenre of horror I avoid. I like my horror to be more in-the-head, and a sense of humor doesn’t hurt. Gore doesn’t scare me but up to a point can be useful in the story; after that point it just grosses me out, and when women are the victims, pisses me off. But yeah, I still love the Evil Dead movies. Consistency is not a human trait, to quote Harold and Maude.