Published on August 2nd, 2019 | by Kevin Given0
Given To Me: SJW’s and Internet Trolls
Q) What do Quentin Tarintino and Blake Northcott have in common?
A) Both were attacked by SJW’s.
Quentin Tarintino is one of the last great filmmakers in Hollywood. I have seen every Quentin Tarintino film and more than once or twice. As of this writing, I just saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and I plan on seeing it again tomorrow.
Blake Northcott is an up and coming writer that I think will go a long way, admittedly, I haven’t read any of her novels yet, but I have read a few of her comics and enjoy them very much. I had the privilege of interviewing her for one of the web sites I do comic book reviews on.
Before I enlighten you as to how each of these writers was attacked by SJW’s, I want to let you know why I think that QT is one of the last great filmmakers in Hollywood. I haven’t seen a film by this auteur that didn’t have love written all over every moment. Oh sure, some of the old giants are still around, Spielberg, Eastwood, and DePalma they’re still churning out great films here and there, but I think their prime has long since passed. Then I look at the hit or miss styles of a J.J. Abrams or M. Knight Shyamalan as they throw whatever at the screen and hope that it sticks, without really knowing why one of their previous films resonated so well. For instance, if Shyamalan, whose work I like, please don’t take me wrong here (I like J.J. too, bear with me as I explain,) knew his strengths as a filmmaker, he never would have attempted to adapt the Last Airbender. His style is subtle, not action-packed and the Last Airbender suffers from way too much exposition and is a sluggish film to get through. Abrams takes things in the opposite direction. His action never stops, and his films barely have time to dispense any exposition. He picks up the pace and never slows down. It’s almost like he hopes that with all the action we’ll never see the mistakes, plot holes or lack of character development and a healthy dose of lens flares will cover a multitude of cinematic sins. If he had done the Last Airbender I believe it would have made more money at the box office, at least it would have been action-packed, like it’s original source material. I believe that most of today’s filmmakers are hit or miss because they don’t have the love of cinema like Tarintino does. Oh, they love making movies or they wouldn’t be in this business, but they haven’t figured out why they make hit films when they do make them, that’s why they have as many successes as they do failures. The majority of Tarintino films are critical and commercial successes. Why? Because they’re all his stories, no one else’s. He makes his own movies. So, when was Tarintino attacked by an SJW? Just before the release of his latest film Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
At a press conference, New York Times reporter Farah Nayeri asked Tarintino about Margot Robbie’s supposedly limited time in the movie with the obvious implication that her role was reduced because she was a woman. Tarantino rightfully said, “I reject your hypothesis (1).”
The quick answer is that this isn’t Sharon Tate’s story, it’s Rick Dalton’s. But, if you look at Robbie’s screen time in the film, she has more screen time than any other actor that’s playing a real person. There’s one awesome scene where Sharon Tate goes into a movie theatre to watch her latest film The Wrecking Crew which is one of Dean Martin’s Matt Helm movies. But if you took this scene out of the movie, it wouldn’t change the story in any way, shape or form. Why is the scene important then? Because it helps us to care about Tate as a person, fleshing out her character for those who may only be vaguely familiar with who she was, or, in this generation, may not know at all. If anything, Tarantino gave her more screen time than other actors who played real people in the movie.
And, point number two. Are you serious SJW reporter?!?! Quentin Tarintino giving limited screen time to an actress because she’s a woman? Have you even seen either of the Kill Bill movies? Uma Thurman’s Beatrix Kiddo is probably the strongest female lead in the history of film making. The character literally takes out an entire gang of Yakuza by herself in one scene. The Kill Bill movies are only behind Pulp Fiction as my favorite Quentin Tarintino movies of all time and my Kate Bryant character in my own Karl Vincent Vampire Hunter universe is an homage to the Kill Bill films with the character being a composite of Uma Thurman’s Beatrix Kiddo and Lucy Liu’s O-Ren Ishii (Beatrix Kiddo = B.K. while Kate Bryant = K.B.). She is also the strongest lead in my universe.
And now we come to Blake Northcott (2). What SJW attacked her? For those who aren’t familiar with Blake, she has her own series of novels you can find online but for the comic book enthusiast, she has written for Aspen comics Fathom and worked with Scott Lobdell on Dynamite’s Vampirella. They are working on a new graphic novel called Everglade Angels. Obviously, someone who doesn’t know who Blake is went on an ignorant rant. His rant insulted her and the artist as “Trump Bros.” and said they’re over-exaggerated depictions of the female anatomy were Misogynist. Blake is a Canadian and the artist is Italian, neither one can vote for Donald Trump even if they wanted too. Both are women. I think the SJW was confused about this because of Blake’s name, which is interchangeable and can be used for both sexes. This particular person went on a rant and called out these comic book creators for the sake of calling them out without even bothering to find out who they were. I find these people who have way too much time on their hands and try to destroy creators’ visions just for the sake of destroying them disturbing. Too many people are listening to their B.S. and that brings me to the second part of my article.
Hollywood: Stop listening to SJW’s and pandering to political groups.
Now we come to Hollywood elitists who don’t get it and who are doomed to see their films fail. We heard from SJW reporter Farah Nayeri who tried to intimidate Quentin Tarintino over the screen time he gave Margot Robbie which was misguided but we also see Hollywood filmmakers who do give in to such intimidation, or who simply want to fly in the face of convention just for the sake of woke and identity politics. It started when Paul Feig and Josh Trank accused people who criticized their films Ghostbusters 2016 and Fant4stic of being misogynist and racist. That trend has continued with filmmakers like Rian Johnson, J.J. Abrams (3) and, sadly, even Ron Howard (4), a filmmaker I respect, calling out fans that criticized their films as internet trolls. Howard even blamed the failure of Solo: A Star Wars Story on the internet trolls But let’s break this down.
First Paul Feig’s Ghostbusters. Yes, the film got negative backlash on YouTube, fairly or unfairly before the film’s release being one of the most “unliked” trailers on the channel’s history. But Feig only added insult to injury by lashing out at the fans who disliked the trailer by calling them “Misogynist” Therefore leading to a box office disaster and, though the film couldn’t match the original for quality, was not badly made at all. Feig is a good director, the pacing was good, the characters were funny and even though some of the humor missed, a lot of it hit right. The plot wasn’t anything new, but it should have done better box office than it did. They also had Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Ernie Hudson, Sigourney Weaver, and Annie Potts. But instead of having them play their iconic characters, they were all in throw away, unfunny, cameos that had nothing to do with the story. If it were me, I would have had these actors play their iconic roles in a story that had them training the new Ghostbusters and passing the baton. I think it would have done better box office then what we had and put some salve on open wounds and help the healing between original fans and potential new fans. Instead, Feig completely ignored the original.
As for Josh Trank’s Fant4stic That is just one horrible movie with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. The failure of the film had nothing to do with Michael B. Jordon being African American, it had to do with the filmmakers not knowing the source material. None of these characters resembled their comic book counterparts in any way, with the possible exception of Kate Mara’s Sue Storm. But none of this was the actor’s fault. Josh Trank “directed” his cast to not read the comic books. One gets the impression that he didn’t read the comics either. When did Ben Grimm ever get the catchphrase “It’s Clobbering Time” from being abused as a kid? By contrast, the Black Panther movie had a largely African American cast, including Michael B. Jordan, and was one of the best received comic book movies, both commercially and critically, of all time. Why? Because they got the source material right and didn’t deviate heavily from it.
Now we come to Star Wars. First The Force Awakens. A well-made film with characters we care about. Han Solo was given an awesome death scene which pulled at fans heartstrings. It was a poignant moment in the film and remains, domestically, the biggest moneymaker of all time. Not even Avengers End Game could touch it (well, internationally it did, but I’m talking domestically.) Then we come to Last Jedi which was far less successful and treated the iconic character of Luke Skywalker like a whiny child. I didn’t mind that Luke had become disillusioned with being a Jedi after the fall of Ben Solo as he transitioned to the dark side and became Kylo Ren, but the character should have redeemed himself by the end of the film and he really didn’t. Showing up as an astral projection doesn’t count, he should have been there in person. As a result of Rian Johnson’s inconsiderate take on this iconic character, Last Jedi underperformed and I believe Solo, A Star Wars Story tanked because of fan backlash (not internet trolls Ron Howard) against the direction Disney has taken with the iconic characters.
The last of the X-Men movies caused a rift between the male and female characters with Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique dissing the male members and suggesting that the female members saved the male members so many times that “You might want to think about changing the name to X-Women.” Really? Do you have to insult the male members of the team to show female empowerment? Not only does this movie not pay attention to continuity by killing off the Mystique character and having Charles retire (with Jean Grey taking over) even though these films are supposed to take place in the same universe as the Patrick Stewart and Ian McLellan movies, which has Charles in Charge (no pun intended Scott Baio) and Mystique still alive, but do you really need to create such a division between male and female characters? The film wasn’t even identified as an X-Men movie. This is why I believe the film failed and was one of the worst money-making superhero films in the history of superhero franchises, down there with Fant4stic. To his credit, Simon Kinberg hasn’t jumped on the blaming fans bandwagon but takes sole credit for the film’s failure (5). Woke politics is now dictating our franchises and I believe this is turning fans off. From comic book sales and now to ticket sales. Dark Phoenix, in my opinion, was a better movie than Apocalypse, but that film at least did respectable box office while Dark Phoenix lost a ton of money for the studio.
And since we’re talking about Marvel-based characters, we now enter phase 4 of the MCU and Kevin Feige is promising more “diversity” and now Thor is turning into a woman. If anyone criticizes this, I’m sure they’ll be called sexist or misogynist or whatever the current derogatory term would be. But I digress. It isn’t that we’re against Jane Foster becoming a superhero, it’s that we don’t want anyone but Odinson to be Thor. Just like we don’t want anyone but Peter Parker to be Spiderman. We’re not racist against Miles Morales, but he needs to be his own character in my view. Stay faithful to the source material
In an act that reeks of desperation director Tim Miller promises that Terminator Dark Fate will scare the f__K out of Misogynists (6) because they have a female terminator. It’s like he’s trying to bait the “Internet Trolls” to start being negative about his movie. And it’s working YouTube channels like Nerdrotic, Geeks and Gamers the Critical Drinker and many more have all taken to talking negatively about this movie based on the first trailer. I believe the reason he baited them is simply that no one is talking about the film because no one cares about it. Miller is trying to get people interested in this movie by baiting these critics. And, if the rumors I’m hearing are true about its plot, then it is destined to fail. I seem to have read somewhere that they brought back Edward Furlong just to kill off his John Conner and now they have a young girl they must protect from the future terminator. I don’t know if this is true, but if it is, I’m telling you right now this film is going to fail big time. Not because they have a female terminator and now must protect a young girl. But because THEY ARE DEVIATING FROM THE SOURCE MATERIAL. I can name dozens of examples where this fails; Speed racer, Land of the Lost, Robocop and the list goes on. The future hinges on protecting John Conner in this series and if they kill his character off, then the whole series has no purpose. A female terminator is nothing new, the third film in the franchise had one and that film did respectable numbers. No one got their panties in a bunch over having a female terminator back then and no one is going to get their panties in a bunch about it this time either. What will cause fan backlash is the disrespect for the source material, as we’ve been discussing in this entire article. The third Terminator was different enough and raised a few questions about Skynet and its inevitability to do decent enough without being disrespectful to the source material. Everything since then has failed to match the third films box office, and this one isn’t going to either. Incidentally, Sarah Conner was killed off in the third one but now she’s back. Are they going to explain this paradox or just ignore everything that came out since the second film?
Bottom line, Hollywood is going political and listening to SJW’s and will suffer a backlash, not because of sexism, racism, homophobia, or any other politically incorrect reaction. It will be because they are deviating from the source material. There is no need to cater to SJW’s, since many of them, as we’ve seen with Blake Northcott, have no idea what they’re talking about in the first place. Movies like Kill Bill, Wonder Woman, and others have strong female leads. People can dislike Fant4stic and not be racist. People can enjoy Black Panther because it stays true to the source material. Michael B. Jordan is in both of those movies. He didn’t fit in the first one and is great in the second. There are gay characters in movies and there are movies with no gay characters. Not all white males have to be villains post End Game, nor do they have to pander to politically correct propaganda. Let’s have everyone be equal and not change any iconic characters for the sake of political correctness.