This was the X-Men's bread and butter. Just about everyone in any oppressed group across the spectrum felt something in the series spoke to their situation. The sentinels represent the fill in the blank oppressing fill in the blank based on some arbitrary condition. Every awkward teenager could find something to self-identify with.Kristatos wrote:It's not just critics, though. Twitter is full of people who, for some reason, seem desperate to see a gay superhero. I can see why a gay teenager might want to see a positive role model depicted on the screen, but a lot of this Cap/Bucky shipping seems to be just bandwagon-jumping. It's the fashionable thing to say, just as "Craig is Flemming's Bond anyone who says different just wants invisible cars and double-taking pigeons" was the fashionable thing to say 10 years ago.
Not sure how true this was there was supposedly a survey of Doctor Who fans/readers of the 1990's Virgin book series the results were the loyal readers were more 'conservative' in their political persuasions and the writers were more 'liberal'. Meaning what exactly I'm not sure, except the writers were probably sure they were writing for their own, people who agree with their philosophies. Yet those bigoted whatevers freely bought and supported writers they would not be joining at the political rallies, I doubt the 'enlightened' writers would have as freely done the same. Only matters to me in the sense of expectations, how we expect people to behave and why we have those expectations, even a writer not being willing to support those they disagree with politically. Forget about the survey trying identifying the politics in my opinion the truth was when it's concerns something people are passionate about the normal labels people would associate like enlightened, bigots, are unimportant because why groups of people come together are unique and personal.
At some point in human evolution we developed a self-awareness of our social standing and wanted to be the right side the correct group of thought. Probably crept out of several thousands of years of staunch religious dogma, meaning those who believed the correct set of beliefs were rewarded socially by those in power. As the modern world came to be this process sped up, instead of every generation changing it flows much faster with social narrative being driven by popular culture. Current writers writing about James Bond, Sherlock, whatever popular character update the sensibilities of the character to match the current age even if there is no way the author intend it, in my opinion this is to insulate themselves form any backlash by rubber stamping the original authors intent.
I have seen too many period dramas updated to reflect current social tolerances, instead of accurately reflecting the attitudes of the time and social realities. Even Foyle's War was guilty of this.
A better example is a generic WWII drama where the main character will be the one tolerant German helping the Jews because it's what current popular culture understands to be the right attitude to the situation instead of the reality. Sure there were people who did do what is today considered to be the right however it was under the oppression of their lives being in the threatened by those with power. To me it cheapens the real history to taint it with popular culture.
Sulu being modeled after George Takei instead of Gene Roddenberry's character is a fine example of characters being altered to suit current political and social tolerances to gain credibility with those in the right circles.
I will enjoy the PRIOR films and am looking forward to the November Potter-esque film as are FBF and others here.
Hopefully your above film with Pierce is not as dark.
