this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
894 points (98.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
6017 readers
1689 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m still waiting for a good corollary to movies like American Psycho, that instead of playing up any awesome feeling of these tilted psychos, exposes how pathetic and illogical they are.
No Country for Old Men came close when the woman rejected the coin toss.
Except that was the whole point of American Psycho. People miss the subtext (not that it's subtle) and think it's about glorifying Patrick Bateman, but the whole point is that he's pathetic and overestimates his own importance on every possible level.
I agree that people that see obviously evil protagonists as antiheros need to be given a reality check, but American Psycho is a weird film to use as an example of "glorifying psychos." Joker would have been a better example, IMHO.
I actually agree with you, and yet I still see so much merchandising and celebration around Patrick Bateman. I think visually, they didn’t quite land that impact they wanted on audience impressions.
Kind of like how Pyramid Head has somehow outlived his role as James Sunderland’s fractured psyche for the sake of stardom.
For me it's ironic and a funny joke, but I see how people are actually real about it.
I agree. I think that filmmakers should have an understanding of how their work may be interpreted. American Psycho is a great example.
My go to examples are Fight Club, in which the protagonist is seen as a hero, and American History X, which is seen by the white power community as a justification of their viewpoint. In the former case, the misinterpretation is possibly more common than the intended portrayal of mental illness. In the latter case, it’s more of a phenomenon restricted to the already converted. The film Wall Street is another one.
I’m really on the fence about this. On the one hand, I love and respect art and how it reflects society. On the other hand, if A Modest Proposal actually resulted in people eating Irish babies, that would have been horrible.
Where’s the dividing line between something like that and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Is it the intent of the author, or is it the consequences of the publication? If Fight Club resulted in an increase in misogyny and inceldom, does the creator bear some responsibility? I find that the fanbase spoils a movie like Fight Club for me, at least a bit. AHX, though, is so blatant in its message that I find it hard to reject.
I’d say Joker was sympathizing more than glorifying.
To-may-to, to-mah-to
Javier Bardem's role as Anton Chigurh is often cited as the best portrayal of as the most realistic move psychopathic killer in films. The extremely uncaring way Chigurh is shown is one of the defining features. Along with how he has no need for validation, he never does anything he doesn't have to and never lets anything distract him be it pretty girls or injury.
One of my favorite serial killer movies is Serial Mom.
I love how it’s all goofy except for one moment in the movie where it’s serious and horrifying, then goes back to goofy.