Tag Archives: Ambivalence please

A fight against big brother or two minutes of hate?

20 Aug

Sooo…

I made a video…

………………….

And here are some youtube comments during debate.
OnlineDebate

I find it fascinating how some people are so passionate about defending bullying.
MoreOnlineDebate

Like we lose our freedom  if some children cant be cruel to other children. What is the end goal here, anyway?

 

Movies

Blog 2.0 – Dont agree with me? CUCK!!!

Advertisements

Me being PC. Almost full SJW.

23 Jun

Sooo…

I am a Christian Concervative and I hate SJW and Political correctness. Then I watched a video that made me almost go full SJW. Here is the ressult.

 

 

Bruised ring

Blog 2.0 – May be working for the devil.

 

Stieg Larsson sucks. Also his books.

5 Feb

I have read the book and seen the swedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and I hated the book but found the movie far better. The book directly translated into english is called “Men who hate women” and was about female abuse and how evil rich men are and how good Communist journalists are.

The character of Mikael Blomkvist seemed to be the erotic extension of the author himself. Getting laid with three women during the books one year story. I may not be the biggest playah in tha world, but isnt having sex with 3 women over one year a lot? At least in a fictional setting. I get that whoremasters are gonna whore and all, and I am sure some people bang 3 (or more) women a day etc. But as a character trait in a book it does seem a lot. Especially in a book where feminist seem to think the message is pro-women.

I mean; I´ve read many James Bond books and usually he bangs seldom more than one or two women in each book. And they call him a “womaniser”. I guess its okay if the “hero” is a apathetic communist.

So the title of the books should have beenMen who *bleep* women.” The book was boring to read, filled with red herrings and the most detailed and well written part seemed to be the disturbing rape scene, which also says alot if you ask me.

The swedish film removed most of the annoying parts and was great improvement. I dont think he *bleeped* more than one women. Perhaps the american version is even better. I guess I have to give it a try.

I also find it funny that Stieg Larsson was a flaming communist but this book franchise is big business with his family still fighting over the rights to his posthumous fortune.

Blog 2.0 -  Whoremasters are gonna whore.

Blog 2.0 – Whoremasters are gonna whore.

Errant Signal – Pompous, Patronizing & PC

21 Oct

I keep coming back to this channel on youtube. I don´t subscribe to it, but every so often I have to go back to it to see what has been uploaded. The channel is called Errant Signal and I am attracted to it for its pompousness, its thick layers of smugness, and its highly leftwing ideologies used as tools for analyzing games.

Its a study in academic narcissism. You can write down all kinds of patronising nuggets from every video he makes. I just need my fix sometimes. It bugles my mind. Its like a riddle. Why does he make it? Why do people watch? Its like with Anita Sarkeesian. The question becomes: Why do people dedicate their lives to something they hate?

And he does hate games. He would probably say; “I don´t hate games. I just want to be critical and analytical about it”. And I get that. Being critical and analytical and trying to understand art in all its forms is important to understand humanity and who we are. But being critical is not the same as being negative. You can address issues, themes and ideas without saying its bad.

Take this last one I saw of him titled Errant Signal – SimCity 2013 Part 2


—————————————————-

It´s just a perfect example of his attitude and views. In this video he talks about the game Sim City 2013. A game I have never played. Reasons being that I never felt the need. I loved playing SimCity 2000, and I bought SimCity 3000, but found that game to be to plastic-y and strange for my taste and so I never wanted to play any newer ones. Its also a EA game and EA games feels cold and “by the numbers” at times. I can´t remember playing any games by that company that I have loved.

But what does Errant Signal say about SimCity 2013? Let´s look for some nuggets of pure elitism he wants to share. He says “Last time we talked; we sort of broke down how SimCity maaaaaaybe doesnt work from a game system perspective”. “Broke down”? “Game system perspective”?. That is the first line of the video. It really sets us in the mood for what is in store.

Now if you excuse me for being abit narcissistic myself; I am smart. I know, its sickening to read, but there is a point here. I am smart, and one of the privliges of knowing this is that you are not afraid of being seen as stupid.

I can say “I dont understand this” and if people smirk and laugh at me for saying that I will ignore them. I do not need to be seen as smart, cuz I know I am. I will therefor take on the douche cap ones again and say: What the hell are you talking about Errant Signal? You broke down the game? You found flaws in the game system?

What he of course means is that he looked at the different sides of the game and found things he viewed as flaws. But he takes on those nice words to seem smart.

Having a good vocabulary is… well… good. Or great. Or nice. Or superb. Or favourable. There is nothing wrong with knowing big words, but when used excessively (eh? Eh?) it just seems vain and stupid. At least to me.

But let´s press trough this digression and see what he really says about SimCity 2013 beyond his vocabulary mastrobation.

Errant Signal says that the gametries to do a lot of things, but non of it very successfully or with a sense of focus.” That is his complaint. I do not know the validly of this claim. If you have played the game, please share your opinion below.

Errant Signal then says: “This time we are gonna talk about how SimCity 2013 approaches its subject. What does Sim City think of cities? What does it do with this BIG [!] simulation its build?”

He then goes on about a game called Skyline and how that game, to him, is so much better cuz it focuses on “the process of growth is based on physical space and legislative action[…] [Skyline] has build up its own little niche in the city building simulator pantheon” aka governmental control, where as older SimCity games focuses on “the demand of jobs, labour and goods drive growth” aka. Capitalism. The latter is of course bad data for Errant Signal.

But there are more gems to be taken out of this video. Like this little piece of revealing idiocy: “Both games problematically fetishise growth.” What can I say? Its mind boggling. Especially since SimCity is called SimCITY. CITY! Meaning “a large and permanent human settlement.” (wikipedia). Large! The Sim franchise even has a spin-off called “SimTown” for people like him and if that isnt small enough for his small mind (sorry, but that guy makes me sick) he could play SimTower and if that didnt have the right political message he could play SimEarth for the right eco-friendly narrative. But no. Every game has to be correct or it is faulty. Bad data.

Errant Signal hates games (and probably art in general too).

Let me show you, trough this video, why I say he hates games. As that is what I mainly claim he does ,as so many other critiques on the interweb. Let me show you by excerpt of the distain he has for the concept and ideas about games being fun, entertaining without clear political messages that he likes.

As he is halfway trough ditching SimCity 2013 about how bad it is when it comes to showing how the state can interfere in social and cultural areas that is so important to him (I am sure he wish that SimCity 2013 should have “Allow gay marriage” option and if one chooses not to, then entire city burns to the grown. That has the right message, doesnt it ErrantSignal?) and how he don´t want a game that has a goal of “big city” but something other, unspecified goal.

After this he asks the question:Why was SimCity 2013 made?”. An interesting question. I sometimes wonder the same thing about lots of things. One could even ask the question about Errans Signal´s video project itself. Reasons for doing and creating is always a subject I like to think about. Let´s see how Errant Signal dissect, deconstruct or “ brakes down” this subject.

The reason why SimCity 2013 was made is *drum wirral* “To do stuff”.

Its a content delivery system”, he says. “A game as content-delivery system”, he continues. He then mentions Guitar Hero, Rock Band and Assassins Creed as games that makes you do stuff. Mind blowing, huh? A game that gives you tasks? How about that?

Let me just quote him on this:Games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero popularised the idea that games were made primarily to sell [Andy´s Edit: Yes, no games before that was made to sell] or experience specific content [Andy´s Edit: WHAT? Games have specific content? HOW DARE THEY!].”

Do you see why I find his videos so interesting? Its like he is some kind of extraterrestrial, experiencing games for the first time, trying to make sense of something and failing miserable. It´s like he doesnt get games, but he know he hates them.

I bet that if he analysed a screensaver of the colour changing fog type, he would love that as a game. “It doesnt force me to do anything, the goal is vague, and it was free as it came with the computer and the colours mixing is a great metaphors for diversity. And no DLC´s!”

I am just so fascinated by people like Errant Signal, Anita Sarkeesian and the like cuz they do not understand anything, but they sure like to talk. The only way they know how to appreciate art is to hate it. To tell us how its bad and faulty. They seem to have this ideal in their head, but seldom to never really mentions any games (or music or books) even close to this ideal of theirs.

His complete lack of understanding and appreciation of art is so ridiculous and extreme at times it becomes art itself. To put it in a clisje: He just doesnt see the forrest for all the wood. He is the kind of guy who would read Brave New World and say “Finally someone writes a book about a beautiful utopia” cuz he lacks the meta-cognition (I know big words as well) to see himself in his relation to the art. He is “objective”, he thinks, but what he really is, is cold, distant, even hateful and completely oblivious to what art is.

A game that has “all this STUFF it wants you to experience” and “gamefize” is what a game is! Its like complaining that music has rhythm or movies have moving pictures. It is what it is. If you do not like it, you just have to stop participating in it. Again, he seems to want screensaver games. Simplistic, non-interactive and lecturing us on important Social Justice issues.

I first discovered ErrantSignal in what I would call his defining youtube video. It´s called “Errant Signal – “Keep Your Politics Out of my Video Games” ”I´ll post it here—>


…………………………………………….

In it he says, like Sarkeesian, and like most nutjobs (sorry, but I have to say it), that politics in not just a perspective one can have on art, but the most important one.

I think we can analyse art for political views, but weigh its worth on how close to representing a political ideology it is unjust. When we talk about movies, games or books with “bad female representation”, or “bad gay characters” or whatever, instead of saying “this movie/game/book is bad” ask the questions: How does it make you feel and why? That is the interesting aspect of art. The feelings and questions it may wake in us.

That is why I love ErrantSignal. Cuz he evokes feelings of irritation and perplections in me and makes me ask the questions: Why does someone who do not like art, or understand art, say so much about art and why do I keep watching his videos when all I feel is annoyed?

I love video games, I love movies, music, books. I do not dedicate my life to tell people how much I hate bad music, movies and books. In fact I applaud bad text cuz it tells me I can do better (although… that is often a lie ;-).

Blog 2.0 -  Often a lie!

Blog 2.0 – Often a lie!

Prometheus (2011) – A prequel for a sequel

15 Mar

“ There’s a man sitting with you today. His name is David. And he is the closest thing to a son I will ever have. Unfortunately, he is not human. He will never grow old and he will never die. And yet he is unable to appreciate these remarkable gifts for that would require the one thing that David will never have. A soul.”

– Peter Weyland ,Prometheus (2011)

Where someone sees plot holes, other see mystery. In Prometheus (2011) I saw both.

So now, when Prometheus 2 has been announced, and time has passed from the first film, I want to reflect on the movie´s good sides and bad sides. Of all movies I have seen, I think Prometheus is one of the movies I have been most ambivalent about. I kind of love it and I kind of hate it. The reasons, as with the meaning of this film, I will reflect on now.

PrometousIntroPic

I expect that the reader of this entry have already watched the movie as I will talk about spoilers. Also this is more of an analysis of the movie and not a “review” where I value it by giving thumps up or down. You can decide that yourself.

Also if you are thinking; “Its just a movie” I refer you to some weed smoking, the hand book “Being a dullard for dummies” and will beg you please not to talk to me again.

My expectations:

This is the Space Jokey as seen in the movie Alien from 1979. Although a very small piece of the original movie it created alot of mystery about it and fans have speculated loudly about what it was and what it did out in space.

This is the Space Jokey as seen in the movie Alien from 1979. Although a very small piece of the original movie it created alot of mystery about it and fans have speculated loudly about what it was and what it did out in space.

I remember when I heard that Ridley Scott was going to make a prequel to Alien (1979) where the genesis of the “Space Jokey” was going to be explored. It blew my mind. This very alien thing, that played a very minor role in the original Alien movie, has fascinated many and been inspiration for many sci-fi nerds like me to speculate as to what it exactly was and what it was doing on that dead planet. I waited with great anticipation in a way I havent done since christmas as a child. The POSSIBILITIES!!! The endless possibilities!

Then came the trailer for the movie and it blew my mind again.


……………………………………………..

Look at that great trailer!They came looking for our beginning, what they found could be our end.” The tag line still gives me goosebumps and the trailer is still awesome. When the movie got released I refused to read anything about the movie and went on the premiere alone to watch this movie. I never go to the movies alone, but I just had to watch it! I couldn’t wait a day for any friends to be able.

My initial response:

Big Questions

Big Questions

After watching the movie I felt I had watched a great extension of the alien franchise. I knew it would not be another alien movie and didnt expect more of it and what I got had just the right dose of xenomorphs-ishness to make me feel it was a spin-off and not a completely new movie series.

I loved the BIG questions the movie had asked. I loved how they treated religion and science. The character of Elizabeth Shaw is a sympathetic representation of at least how I as a Christian view sciences. And like most good movies it kept lingering on in my mind for days after watching it. I kept thinking about the different ideas it had presented and how the movie´s plot had developed.

But…

It wasnt all that good, was it? Although when I walked out of the cinema I was very impressed, for the next days my pondering turned into nagging. The flaws I may have ignored at first became more and more apparent. This movie wasn’t very good. In fact it was kind of awful!

My secondary response:

Good or bad? I just don´t know. Pretty though. No doubt of that.

Good or bad? I just don´t know. Pretty though. No doubt of that.

As the days went passed I did something I hadn´t done in a long while. I started using my IMDB account again and started to read the Prometheus threads there. Reading the different views and trying to understand what to make of this movie. Was it a good movie or was it downright awful? I just couldn’t make up my mind.

Soo I watched the movie again when it came out on DVD and yet again I am not sure. I have not yet watched the extended cut of the movie (where “all questions would be answered”) although I have seen some of the scenes on youtube. Its been 3 years since the movie came out and I am still not sure what to make of it.

The plot:

A holograpic point presentation. Anything else is soooo... 2050.

A holograpic point presentation. Anything else is soooo… 2050.

Prometheus tells the story of a crew of scientist who travel to a distant planet after discovering clues and signs in different locations of earth all pointing towards that particular set of plantes. Their theory is that the planet they are going to will answer the biggest question of all: Why are we here?

As the story progresses the crew realizes that they were not prepared for what they could meet and different interest by different characters slowly sabotages the expedition leading to a big showdown where reasons and motivations are left ambiguous. The very end leaves most of the crew dead, answers left unexplained, problems left unresolved and Elizabeth Shaw leaving the planet with the android David to find another planet (and another sequel) where answers may or may not be given.

The Good sides to this movie:

It dares to ask questions!”, as Randy Marsh from South Park may have said. This movie, although not the first movie in history, ask the question “why are we here?”. The questions that arrises about creation or abiogenesis (from dead to alive).

To quote the character Peter Weyland from the movie

“ I have spent my entire lifetime contemplating the questions: Where do we come from? What is our purpose? What happens when we die? And I have finally found two people who convinced me they’re on the verge of answering them.

Which Star Trek episode is this from?

Which Star Trek episode is this from?

Big question and Prometheus uses the fringe theory of Ancient Astronauts as a way to explore and play around with this problems. The ancient astronauts in Prometheus are the “space jokey” men who it is implied came to earth and created us for some reason left unexplained in the movie.

This question is so big that any clear explanation will often be seen as too on the nose. I guess the blue men could have said “We created you to take care of the environment!” or “To love each other!” or some other simplistic view like that, but fortunately they leave that vague. Unfortunately they leave it so vague that we are not even given clues and food for thought. But complaints come later.

Reasonable faith

Prometheus also explores the relationship between religion and science. This mostly through the christian character Elizabeth Shaw, which I think is one of the more interesting aspects of the movie. The dialogue is not filled with ridicule of people believing in mythology and still does not seem anti-science either. My interpretation of this, is that it shares the same view as me, that one thing does not negate an other and all roads may lead to the truth as long as we keep seeking the truth and keep believing there is such things as the “truth”.

There is also many ways of interpreting “God” in this movie. God as in a ultimate “God” of beginning and end. He is only mentioned as the Christian God through Elizabeth Shaw, but could of course be any kind of ultimate being. Then it is the gods of creation, which is the blue men for humans, and humans for androids and everyone seems to hate each other.

The question is if the blue men have again been created by the some entity in the sphere seen at the beginning of the film or if that is just another space craft for the “space jokeys” and that they have spontaneously been created trough random events.

Most of the movie is us interpreting the characters motivations and listening to them interpret the aliens motivations. And the entire movie is like mixed bag of stupidity and brilliance. Like the extraordinary interesting dialogue between David and the bi-polar (?) scientist Charlie Holloway.

Charlie Holloway: What we hoped to achieve was to meet our makers. To get answers. Why they even made us in the first place.

David (an android): Why do you think your people made me?

Charlie Holloway: We made you because we could.

David: Can you imagine how disappointing it would be for you to hear the same thing from your creator?

"Why are we here?", Scott asks us. "To have painful abortions of alien creatures of course", he quickly continues.

“Why are we here?”, Scott asks us. “To have painful abortions of alien creatures of course”, he quickly continues.

Then David tries to “impregnate” Charlie in the same scene, and the grotesque aftermath of that. It feels more like body-horror shock piece than anything. The problem then is that Ridley Scott doesnt seem to know wether to make a philosophical piece about why we are here or to make another Alien movie with zombies and alien squids. These things come in contrast throughout the movie as its not scary enough to be a new alien and its not deep enough to be really good sci-fi adventure. It is somewhat entertaining though. The squid thing is nasty and the abortion scene couldnt be more disturbing.

The plot holes and the mysteries.

I have never been much for a nitpicker, although I have noticed that many people online likes to do nothing but. To point out any work of arts flaws, be it how Mona Lisa smiles or how ridiculously strong Jason Vorhees is, seem to be a great past time for some.

I guess it makes them feel better about themselves? Idunno. Myself, I try to watch a movie and accept premises of a movie if it is coherent with the story being told. Nitpicking, like being a grammar nazi, distract us from the point; The message, the meaning and the ideas that art and entertainment tries to give.

In Prometheus there are things I can accept and thing that I can´t. Somethings I agree with the criticism of and something I do not.

Alien Parasite in my eye? No worries and doctor needed.

Alien Parasite in my eye? No worries or doctor needed.

Take for instance how the planet was discovered in the beginning of the movie. A bunch of cavepaintings having the same stellar alignments and iconography. This I can accept. Of course it could have been elaborated on a bit, I guess, but how they got there is not the focus of the film. I can accept the premise of ancient civilizations having great knowledge of space as I can accept that the maya calendar ending means the world is ending or ancient astronauts creating us. Its an idea. Its a “what if”? Prometheus isnt and wasnt suppose to be a documentary. But a work of art or entertainment.

Alien controls kind of look like a child´s toy.

Alien controls kind of look like a child´s toy.

Some people seem to think that art should be slave to a sense of realness, but art isnt bound by rigorous logic (although coherent plot is nice) and sci-fi isnt science. Fiction is speculation, dreams and ideas, free from the shackles of what is. Like a unicorn is not a horse, or a goldmountain has yet to be discovered. They are concepts meant for food for thought, not dissecting for how much in sync it is with contemporary knowledge.

Good sci-fi ask questions that can´t be answered and tries to look beyond the curve of what we now know. Its not a tool for education as some seem to believe. Its about plausibility, not facts. And I for one, can accept the idea in this film that ancient cultures knew something that they could only explain trough mythology and signs.

Another thing that has been criticized is how the alien holograms look like. Even I found that stupid. On rewatching the movie now it appears to me that it may not be holograms at all but “particalogram”. They seem to be partially physical. They cause wind to rush and can press buttons. That isnt stupid, that is brilliant.

Many things in this movie can be both seen as plot-holes or mysteries. Stuff left unexplained for us to pounder on. This especially comes to the motivation of certain characters like David, Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) etc. But other things, especially outcomes of certain events and natural human responses to threat seem often far fetched and/or annoying.

"Remember me as a mysterious woman who had daddy issues!"

“Remember me as a mysterious woman who had daddy issues!”

One thing especially that annoyed me was the “mysterious” Meredith Vickers who walks in the shadows and just observes everything. Then when push comes to shove they crush her by the spaceship cuz the movie needs to end and no character can live cuz that would be a loose thread.

If I were a Prometheus apologetic I could perhaps argue that the character was established as a very calculated woman who always thought more about her own safety and gain than other people and that when one unforeseen thing happened she got killed. But this is not thoroughly explored before hand, and the “mystery” of this character is not either thoroughly explained as no real pay-off was told. So when she finally get crushed at the end it just feels anti-climatic and pointless.

This scene was interesting. I kept wondering if it was all a big misunderstanding or if the alien got angry that humans had created life as well or if it was just fear of the pandemic.

This scene was interesting. I kept wondering if it was all a big misunderstanding or if the alien got angry that humans had created life as well or if it was just fear of the pandemic.

The same goes with Peter Weyland who also gets killed off rather fast and anti-climatic. This scene is arguably better though cuz it leaves the question of the Space-jockeys view and relationship to us unclear but clearly threatening. But two mysterious characters being killed off, without any real interesting pay-off by any of them makes some parts of Prometheus a real slap in the face.

Its fine to leave questions open, and its fine to have mystery, but then you can´t kill the characters off, as that ends the mystery. Death is the end, also to plot.

Some mysteries are also solved too quickly, as they seem to be just a nuisance for getting the plot along. David discovers and uncover stuff quickly for no reason. It seems that the “space-jokey” technology is fool proof and pressing random buttons makes everything work. Yes, David is an android and is very smart, but pressing random buttons and trial and error does demand SOME error.

And the Darwin award for 2093 goes to: Stupid guy who think he can pet strange alien thing.

And the Darwin award for 2093 goes to: Stupid guy who think he can pet strange alien thing.

Then it is the scenes with the crew members lost behind on the alien station that discover a pile of dead aliens and gets report of “something alive” only to get killed off while the captain was off with Theron, and no other crew member seemed to give a damn either. It just get so frustratingly annoying and stupid.

All in all Prometheus balances between what can be accepted in suspension of disbelief and then threads over with gusto. Its just too many big and small stupidities, many of them pointed out other places on the interweb. And when mystery is mixed with stupidity one tends to stop wondering cuz the answer may be just as dumb as some of these characters and events.

Peter Weyland: There's nothing. David: I Know. Have a good journey, Mr. Weyland.

Peter Weyland: There’s nothing.
David: I Know. Have a good journey, Mr. Weyland.

Prometheus II – Burnt child fears fire.

Like a burnt child, I fear to look forward to Prometheus II, but I do have dreams. I dream that Ridley Scott acknowledges that Prometheus had many flaws and tries to correct them somewhat in the sequel by some magic trick. I do not know how and its a feat I do not even think he has. How can one retcon so many flaws? Well, if its not going to correct the flaws of the first one, at least I hope it will not make so many more.

I still am looking forward to Prometheus II, cuz I am more like a burnt child with teaching disabilities.

Blog 2.0 - Not 4 Dullards

Blog 2.0 – Not 4 Dullards

Dullard for dummies have a special chapter on pointing out spelling and grammar mistakes when you have nothing to add to the argument.

Dullard for dummies have a special chapter on pointing out spelling and grammar errors when you have nothing to add to the argument. Also there is a chapter called: “TL;DR- Best comeback ever!

Sia – Elastic Heart feat. Shia LaBeouf & Maddie Ziegler (Official Video) – Pedophilic? An analysis.

14 Jan
What is this music video about?

What is this music video about?

Sooo…

Sia! The best thing to come out of pop since… The 80´s? She is an artist in every sense of the word. I have a great respect for her work. Both before she had a real break trough and the later hits. She has a quirky sound, exciting music videos and sings about interesting themes without falling into an -ism.

The last couple of years or so Sia has had a couple of mainstream big hits. Two songs with DJ David Guetta (Titanum and She Wolf) and the songs Chandelier from her album A 1000 forms of fear. These videos have accompanied music videos which were the style of the time.

Her last single Elastic Heart and [one of the] the music video for Chandelier used a very talented child dancer called Maddie Ziegler to do some impressionist dance to accompany the music. Some people have called pedophila on those videos as it is a child in the center of the video. Now let´s watch the lates video to see what we are talking about —>


——————————————————-
So the question is: Is this video pedophilic in some way? Let´s answer that question by looking for the videos meaning. I will use David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson analytic tools for interpreting meaning explained in their book Film Art. I will therefor look for the referencial, explicit, implicit and symptomatic meaning of this video before coming to a conclusion on this “controversy”.

Referencial:

Joking and playing
Let me start by saying one thing; A perverted person see perverted things in anything. To look for the referencial meaning is just pointing out what we see without giving to much interpretation.

This video is about a girl and an adult man dancing in a cage with dirty clothes. The girl wears a wig also used in former music videos by Sia. The dance is expressive and intense with lots of jerking movements and grimaces accompanying the song Elastic Heart song by Sia. Most of the time the dancing seems playful and comedic but at points during the video it goes slower, more intimate.

I do not know a lot about dance as an art, but I can say that it technique seems to be good and interesting to watch. The dance moves goes from averting to more aggressive. The actors goes from being distant from each other to jumping on to each other. They use the entire space of the cage to explore.

At one point the girl goes out of the cage but the man can not go trough the bars. The girl then goes inside again to continue the dance. Then at the end of the video and song the girl goes outside of the cage again, this time staying while the man reach out for her, grabbing her. First he has an intense pleading look and then goes over to a more stale and dead look. This end scene goes on for a while, long after the music has ended and the sounds are just silent ambience of the room. Then the video fades to black.

There is nothing referentially pedofilic in this video. At no point is there kissing, touching of bad parts or any other perverted imagery. Its just an adult man dancing with a girl.

Explicit:

Idunno

Very little can be explicitly stated about this video. There is no explanation to the girl and the mans relationship (other than outside in the real world, where he is an famous actor, and she is a child dancer). There are no cue card pointing out “Father” and “Daughter”, or “Pedoman” and “Victim” or anything else. So we as an audience has to guess what this dance is about. In 2015 that is not a good idea cuz people are too emotionally stumped to use empathy to understand what is going on. It needs to be hammered in with a nail.

The only thing that is explicit is that this is a music video for the song Elastic Heart and that the dance is suppose to represent the music or the lyrics somewhat. So let´s look shortly at the lyrics song during this dance.

The song starts of with

And another one bites the dust
Oh why can I not conquer love?
And I might have thought that we were one
Wanted to fight this war without weapons

So it is some kind of love song. The way I interpreted that song its about a love relationship with a lot of baggage. The singer has issues that makes it hard to keep the relationship going. It seems she leaves when things get to complicated. That the song is accompanying the dance and that this is a music video is the only thing explicit in this video.

Implicit:

Bad touch?

Bad touch?

So I at least couldnt find any pedofilic references neither referencial or explicit. So I guess that the pedophilia must be interpreted and implied. So I will now analyse this video for deeper implicit meanings. I will make two interpretations of this video. One that I think is the most “normal” one and most people will see and that may have the most evidence for, and then my interpretation that may or may not be a little more far fetch.

But first… A coffee break.

Okay. So I think the most common, non perverted, interpretation of this video is that its a dance representing a coming of age between a father and a daughter. The daughter is playing with her father as a child, but also wanting to be alone and explore on her own. The father then fights with himself to accept that the daughter is growing up and soon will be moving away. I think this is a sound interpretation that fits in with what we see in the video. It´s not my interpretation, though.

I interpet the music video as having a symbiotic relationship with the song. That the video´s dance is meant to be seen as an henanchement of the songs meaning, which is a song about a woman struggling to find ease in a relationship. The cage then represent the relationships bounderies, the man represents the love interest and the girl represents a immature woman not being able to do the “adult” thing. I will add that I also think the girl is a representation of the artist Sia. I base this on the use of the wig, that looks much like the artist own hairstyle.

We, as a mature audience, could see the girl as a metaphor of an adult woman with childlike mentality. This does not make the video pedophilic as their is nothing sexual going on and if you accept a) child is an adult, you need to accept b) this does not mean the video is about an adult and a child, and c) this does not make the video pediophilic in nature since purely referentially its about a man and girl dancing which isnt strange or perverted.

Symptomatical:

Angry Pedo

Symptomatically interpretation is when we look beyond the video/movie/book we are interpreting and see how this text is seen from a societal or historical context. I would therefor ponder a bit about why this video has been accused of being pedophilic when there is nothing sexual going on in the video itself.

I stated earlier, and I´ll state it again “A perverted person see perverted things in anything“. We don´t live in innocent times anymore for better or worse. We see dangers everywhere and think badly of any seemingly good intention. Not to sound anti-american, but USA is perhaps worse in this area. They see faults and dangers in everything.

Pedophilia is a rarity, but its not unknown anymore. There are no more pedophiles now than in the 1950´s (I think) but we talk more about it now. The consequence is that this sows a seed of perversion in our minds. An example of this is the norwegian song “Blåveispiken(eng: pennywort-girl) which is a song about a man walking on a rural road and meeting a girl with a bouquet of flowers. They talk and then she gives him the flowers and he gives her candy. The songs end with a reflection of ease from the man who felt she gave him more than he gave her.

In the “innocent” times this song was written there was nothing wrong with an adult man talking to a child and giving her candy. Now we “know” that men can be perverted and giving candy to children can be a trap for a sexual predator. This means that we as audiences are a bit… fu**ed up. We can no longer see innocence where innocence were. That is a fault we need be conscious about and work against. Yes, in this world there are people doing evil, that does not mean every person in this world is evil. Sometimes an adult talking to a child is not the start of a perverted and evil act.

You may think this seed of perversion in our minds is a small issue, but this goes beyond our understanding of text. This is also put out into actions. One warning sign was when Men Seated Next to Unaccompanied Minors is Forced to Change Seats. That is a sign of sickness that is downright madness.

If people see pedophilia in Sia´s music video its not because the video in anyway condone or romantizese this, it because they themselves have a f**ked up view on the world. It´s themselves they mirror in this. It´s themselves they see. Not as pedophiles, but as people seeing pedophilia and perversion where there is non.

Conclution:

Come with me
I think the most profound text I have read about understanding art was the preface to A Picture of Dorian Grey by Oscar Wilde and I have quoted it regularly. So let me again quote it as a final thought

Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.

Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope. They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only beauty.

[…]

All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.

-Oscar Wilde, Preface of The Picture of Dorian Grey

I will probably quote it again cuz this needs to be said time and time again.

Blog 2.0 -  In Sovjet Russia art mirrors you.

Blog 2.0 – In Sovjet Russia art mirrors you.

My views on politics.

30 Nov

I hate politics. I think it boring and I think is should be boring. The best politician is an ineffective political who does nothing or little. I am not an anarchist. I do believe we should have laws and a government, but the government should have as little power as possible on individuals. They should not care what we do on day to day basis as long as its not infringing on other people´s rights.

I think also that the word «rights» is a word used to liberally. There is a lot of «human rights» that isnt as much a right as a desire for privilege. If you want something, that does not make you entitled to it. In fact to take something that doesn’t belong to you is stealing and if its a human being that is a form of rape.

Yeah, I think that explains it.

Blog 2.0 - Politics should be boring.

Blog 2.0 – Politics should be boring.

How to write an objective review (about games).

11 Nov

Sooo… Jim…quisition.

The fat, leftwing, game critique is at it again. Why do I watch his videos? Oh, yeah, cuz I like to hear others opinion to. That’s right. Oh, and also we have one thing in common. Passion for art (here; games).

Anyway he made a video where he ridiculed people who wanted a “objectivity in reviews“. His video wanted to point out how boring that kind of review would be, not acknowledging that objectivity doesn’t exclude opinion, it just demand honesty and humility to the facts.

Here the video is —->

So… I wanted to educate him on how to make an objective review.

Check your privilege.

A highly left wing phrase calledCheck your privilege” has been stated from many Social Justice Warriors, and has a clear condemning tone towards certain people. Although I sigh with contempt towards the phrase implications, there still is some truth to it. “Check your privilege” could also mean “know thy self” and that is a very important step towards objectivity. If it wasnt such a patronizing statment that says only certain groups should “check that”, no one would disagree with that.

To know oneself, where one has been, and how that has shaped oneself for good or bad most be the cornerstone before one starts to analyses anything. Know what one believes and why. To quote Wilde:

The highest as the lowest form of criticism is a mode of autobiography. Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. […] All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.

The road to self-insight is a lifelong travel and is not always a nice one but essential to objectivity. Cuz to remove oneself from the judgement means to know what to remove. One knows oneself by reflecting by themselves and reflecting in others. To think and talk with others, preferably not just ones peers.

Soo… Who am I?

AndyAce83 is a private person who still wants to express his opinions in public. His views has gone from left to right over 5-10 years but he has always been a irreligious Christian. Knowing this about myself let’s review a game.

A Review of Bioshock Infinite.

Official_cover_art_for_Bioshock_InfiniteI loved the first game (2007). It blew my mind. I loved the second one (2010), but my mind was unblown. I waited with great anticipation for the third game and my mind was blown, but still I don’t love Bioshock Infinite (2013).

Bioshock Infinite is about a man looking for a girl called Elisabeth in the flying city of Colombia. As the story progresses he has to make allies and enemies and experience betrayal throughout time and space.

The story and the setting of Colombia touches on many themes; Both theological, political and philosophical. Among them are extreme patriotism, Marxism, racism, fundamental Christianity and the chance that our universe may be just one of an infinite amount of others (thus probably the title).

The story is both complex and laughable banal at times and although it has some weak tie ins with the other Bioshock games it feels mostly like a separate story. The graphics has changed from the previous games as it’s more bright with higher focus on violent portrayals on more human enemies. This made the game less enjoyable to me and this is what I gather from other players of the game as well. The extreme focus and details on violence may be intentional though as the story also has a anti-violence message that may work for some, but I found it a bit preachy and out of place sometimes. This anti-violence message gets stronger and stronger throughout the DLCs as well until the final chapter where you can’t even kill anyone and the gameplay goes from action shooter to more stealth based.

The complex themes touched in this game seems to be dealt with in a neutral, almost apathetic fashion where no ideology or philosophy presented are the heroes. This neutral depiction makes the game seem abit directionless at times. If you want a game with a clear message I don’t think this is the game for you.

All in all I enjoyed the game and it’s DLCs but it is my third favorite Bioshock game. The graphics and style of the game is great. The city of Colombia feels like a real city in the sky and the events and characters in the game are facinating enough to keep you playing to the end. The gameplay is more or less like the previous games with weapons and “magical powers” to mix up the battles and keep it interesting. As I’ve said before, the violence in this game can be a bit disturbing at times and this did stump some of the action enjoyment of the game.

All in all I recommend this game for people who like first person action shooters with RPG elements who don’t mind abit of food for thought as well.

Why was this review objective?

Soo… what made this review objective? First off, I was humble. I used words like “probably“, “maybe” and “I think”. This differentiate what I know for a fact (which is very little) and what I think or believe (subjectivity).

I then don’t give too much focus and analysis towards the subject matter of the game (implied meaning) just how much the subject matter enhanced or reduced the games enjoyability for me as a player. I also use other people’s opinion as a reference in my review. A luxury that arguably isn’t so easy for critics of newer games but the point is that wether or not I use others as point of reference I at least try to think what other’s who isn’t like me, think of the game.

Blog 2.0 - The point is not to be 100% objective, is to not be a smug patronizing SJW.

Blog 2.0 – The point is not to be 100% objective, is to not be a smug patronizing SJW.

Resident Evil 6: A review and a defense.

8 Sep

Sooo…
Resident_Evil_6_box_artwork
Resident Evil 6 came out October 2, 2012 on the consoles. I bought the game on release and I thought that it was about time I wrote a little review of that game. It being out for almost a year now. The main reason is that today I got fedup once and for all with the hate this game has gotten.

Resident Evil 6 is a fun game that expands on the Resident Evil storyline, improves gameplay and has an interesting storytelling technique that will appeal to fans of Resident Evil and new gamers alike. Its not the best resident evil game, but it certainly isnt the worst either.

The Story:
The game expands on the Resident Evil universe by introducing new characters and reintroduce old characters that has not been seen in a while. Jake Muller, is the son of Wesker, the main antagonist for most of the other games, is a cynical man that grows throughout the game. Sherry Birkin, is a classic character that got a well deserved comeback in this game.

Most of the classic characters are also in the game like Leon Kennedy, Chris Redfield and Ada Wong. The mysterious Umbrella corporation is long dead in this game-world (got bankrupted between the third and fourth game) but still seems to linger on in the background, never really gone.

The storytelling technique is also fascinating as it uses a non linear style. The plot is revealed through four campaigns that focus on different characters experience of the same incidents.

The gameplay:
The gameplay is an improvement from the last games in that the characters are far more flexible now than they have ever were before. Resident Evil games have never had great controls of their characters as this “lack of control” often lead to more adrenaline when playing the game. In the first 4 games (including Code Veronica) the gameplay was restricted both by strange locked camera angels, controllers that made the characters bad shooters (they either shot in the ground, shot them in the gut or in the air) and made them run into walls constantly.

This changed in Resident Evil 4 where the camera became more flexible and so did the controllers. This has been further expanded upon in Resident Evil 6. Now we got a 360 degree camera angel, fully moveable characters that can both run, slide, crouch, load and shoot while moving. The result is that although some of the nerve of having little control is lost, we get adrenaline through exiting action gameplay.

Not only is the controllers more flexible than ever, but also the gameplay itself. In Resident Evil 6 there are four different campaigns that focus on different aspects of gameplay. In Leon Kennedy´s campaign we are going retro survival horror both in style and gameplay. In Chris Redfields campaign, its more action oriented, much like Resident Evil 4 and 5. Ada Wong´s story focus more on stealth while Jake Muller does a mix of all of them.

The game also offers a bunch of exciting minigames like Mercenaries and the DLC games Predator, Survivors, Onslaught and Sieg that will keep people playing long after the campaign is done.

All in all, we get a varied game that is an exciting experience.

Conclusion:
Resident Evil 6 is a great game for true Resident Evil fans. People who do not understand what Resident Evil is all about may not like the game, but we that do will. It is not the best of bunch (most 6th installments usually aren’t), but it holds it´s own. Its way better than the 5th one, thats for sure.

Blog 2.0 - "Resident evil... 6"

Blog 2.0 – “Resident evil… 6”

The Ninth Configuration (1980) – Good movie to watch

31 Jan

In order for life to have appeared spontaneously on earth, there first had to be hundreds of millions of protein molecules of the ninth configuration. But given the size of the planet Earth, do you know how long it would have taken for just one of these protein molecules to appear entirely by chance? Roughly ten to the two hundred and forty-third power billions of years. And I find that far, far more fantastic than simply believing in God.

Col. Vincent Kane – The Ninth Configuration (1980)

DVD Cover

DVD Cover


Why are we here? Is there a God? What is insanity? What is normal? What is up and what is down? I have a suprise for you; This movie doesnt answer any of these questions, but it ask them and forces the viewer to ask them to0.

The Ninth Configuration (1980) is a good movie to watch and is called the true sequel to The Exorcist by the writer of the book, and the script and director of the movie the Exorcist (1973) William Peter Blatty. So if you hated the The Excorist 2 (1977) then you should watch this one. And if you didnt hate the The Excorist 2* then you also should watch this one.

Its a surreal movie with fun parts, dark parts, and plain strange parts where its unclear whats what. The Ninth Configuration gets AndyAce83´s Seal of Approval. It may be a bit artsy-fartsy, but it pays off.

Blog 2.0 - Maybe we're just fish out of water?

Blog 2.0 – Maybe we’re just fish out of water?

(The Excorist 2 isnt that bad it just is bad in comparing with the greatness that is The Excorist)