The Energon Pub

News Credits: 7 · by **Noideaforaname** » Sun May 22, 2011 9:54 pm

Capt.Failure wrote:You do know Michael Bay is Jewish, right?

As is Steven Spielberg and Shia LaBeouf.
Leaving Israel off the map is just poor proof-reading skills, nothing more.

News Credits: 5 · by **5150 Cruiser** » Sun May 22, 2011 9:55 pm

ZGMF-X88S wrote:
Lastjustice wrote:All that said the movies have made the franchise more popular than it's ever been. Even if you hated every minute of them you can't deny that it's been more positive than negative for Transformers.

Actually, I can deny that. I am quite capable of doing so. What's positive and what's negative is a matter opinion. Therefore, it's entirely possible that what you see as a positive, I see as the worst possible thing that could happen.

In a sense thats true. What one sees as a positive, one can see as negative. But in this case....

ZGMF-X88S wrote:The fact that Transformers has become so damned popular because of these movies, in my opinion, is actually a terrible thing

Ahh, and there is my proof. I didn't quote the rest of your post because like them or not, the TF franchise has become more popular, and recognizable to a new generation of kids and fans alike. This is fact. Period. I don't see how anyone can aurgue this point. Whether or not you agree with the content on which made them popular is irrelevant.

ZGMF-X88S wrote:
shamone wrote:G 1 designs really wouldn't work, too blocky and basic. Cartoons don't translate well in direct port to live action. Now thats not saying i wouldn't have loved to see bumblebee as a vw beetle mind you.

Somehow, I find that these kinds of moronic attacks on the G1-style are completely missing the point. I haven't seen anyone specify that they should be blocky to the point of being unable to realistically move. I suspect they'd like to see something that doesn't make the robots impossible to tell apart, something that looks more like an armored fighting machine than a skeleton wearing cutlery.

I don't believe he was "attacking" G1, style in any way. But at the same time saying that many of their designs wouldn't work well on the big screen. The "plated amour" has been done time and time again. I can understand wanting to have more "recognizable" characters. But This was an opportunity to do something different. One thing i don't get when people say they want more "recognizable" characters, is what about all the other generations of characters? People act like every character has had the same look all through out even incarnation of the TF franchise. Sorry, but this just isn't the case. The only one that probably has stayed someone recognizable throughout 25yrs has been optimus. Nearly everyone else has gone through major changes, but no one ever seems to bring up a fuse.

by **Capt.Failure** » Sun May 22, 2011 10:17 pm

ZGMF-X88S wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
ZGMF-X88S wrote:And all of that fails to mention in racism and antisemitism

We've gone on at length about the supposed "racism," but antisemitism? You do know Michael Bay is Jewish, right? It was Megan Fox calling Bay Hitler that got her booted off the film.

Leaving Israel off the map has raised accusations of antisemitism. I can certainly understand that.

Do me a favor and remind me of the scene were Isreal isn't on the map? And after that tell me how it's somehow more important in a film with several geographical errors? And after that, justify to me how it's not being oversensetive on the matter. :roll:

News Credits: 5 · by **5150 Cruiser** » Sun May 22, 2011 10:37 pm

Capt.Failure wrote:
ZGMF-X88S wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
ZGMF-X88S wrote:And all of that fails to mention in racism and antisemitism

We've gone on at length about the supposed "racism," but antisemitism? You do know Michael Bay is Jewish, right? It was Megan Fox calling Bay Hitler that got her booted off the film.

Leaving Israel off the map has raised accusations of antisemitism. I can certainly understand that.

Do me a favor and remind me of the scene were Isreal isn't on the map? And after that tell me how it's somehow more important in a film with several geographical errors? And after that, justify to me how it's not being oversensetive on the matter.

And this is the real kicker here. People being overely political correct on so many matters is what's actually making things out to be bigger than they actually are. To this day i still believe many are just using this as a scape goat to justify why they don't like the movie.

by **shamone** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:15 am

ZGMF-X88S wrote:
Lastjustice wrote:All that said the movies have made the franchise more popular than it's ever been. Even if you hated every minute of them you can't deny that it's been more postive than negative for Transformers.

Actually, I can deny that. I am quite capable of doing so. What's positive and what's negative is a matter opinion. Therefore, it's entirely possible that what you see as a positive, I see as the worst possible thing that could happen.

The fact that Transformers has become so damned popular because of these movies, in my opinion, is actually a terrible thing, if for no other reason than, in my experience, popularity and quality are nearly always antithetical to each other. These movies only seem to prove that point as the stories for both of them were horrible, the character development for the robots was non-existent and was hardly noticeable in the humans, the robots were so over done it was impossible to tell who was who in a fight scene, and it was impossible to care about any of the characters. There were just special-effects movies with loud noises, and no redeeming qualities.

And all of that fails to mention in racism and antisemitism, which more than anything else leaves me more embarrassed to be a fan of Transformers now than I could ever have imagined being.

shamone wrote:G 1 designs really wouldnt work, too blocky and basic. Cartoons dont translate well in direct port to live action. Now thats not saying i wouldnt have loved to see bumblebee as a vw beetle mind you.

Somehow, I find that these kinds of moronic attacks on the G1-style are completely missing the point. I haven't seen anyone specify that they should be blocky to the point of being unable to realistically move. I suspect they'd like to see something that doesn't make the robots impossible to tell apart, something that looks more like an armored fighting machine than a skeleton wearing cutlery.

These fans probably want something more like what was done with Iron Man when they brought his armor into a live-action setting. It's recognizable while still, I assume, being altered to suit the format. If another attempt was made at a live-action Gundam movie, I'd expect them to stick to a design that respects the origins of the franchise, and not completely discard the elements of the classic mobile suit design that have remained constant though every design variation I've seen.

Maybe it's just me, but I think a successful middle ground is possible.

Bravo with the first part of your post. its spot on. Teching kids that its ok to mock everyone who isnt white american, with a military bent is prevalent throughout the movie

as for the moronic comment, you dont need to insult to make points. if you rad other posts you would have seen i said

dont mind the design so much. I think the filming and editing is a bit too hectic and you cant appreciate the machines, battle scenes need to be rewatcehed a number of times as you dont kno where to focus due to the rapid edits.

by **shamone** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:24 am

Noideaforaname wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:You do know Michael Bay is Jewish, right?

As is Steven Spielberg and Shia LaBeouf.
Leaving Israel off the map is just poor proof-reading skills, nothing more.

well i am not going to say the creators of the rotf are antisemites, however omitting israel means one of two things

- they are slapdash and careless, and dont bother with the simplest of research for a multi million movie

- they are antisemetic and decided to wipe israel off the map

im going for option one, which is sill pretty damning

by **shamone** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:27 am

Capt.Failure wrote:
ZGMF-X88S wrote:
Capt.Failure wrote:
ZGMF-X88S wrote:And all of that fails to mention in racism and antisemitism

We've gone on at length about the supposed "racism," but antisemitism? You do know Michael Bay is Jewish, right? It was Megan Fox calling Bay Hitler that got her booted off the film.

Leaving Israel off the map has raised accusations of antisemitism. I can certainly understand that.

Do me a favor and remind me of the scene were Isreal isn't on the map? And after that tell me how it's somehow more important in a film with several geographical errors? And after that, justify to me how it's not being oversensetive on the matter.

here you go :APPLAUSE:

http://izgad.blogspot.com/2009/06/trans ... f-map.html

why is it more important. read up on recent history and then wonder why its more important (im not pro or anti -zionist/state of israel btw)

then ask yourself why there are so many geographical errors

And one does not have to justify why they feel sensitive about an issue to you, people have different thresholds of offence and sensitivity, the trick is to respect them

News Credits: 5 · by **5150 Cruiser** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:40 pm

shamone wrote: here you go

http://izgad.blogspot.com/2009/06/trans ... f-map.html

why is it more important. read up on recent history and then wonder why its more important (im not pro or anti -zionist/state of israel btw)

then ask yourself why there are so many geographical errors

BUt thats just the thing. There were several errors in this movie. The way people are reacting (as well as in that particular blog) is that Bay and Co. were specificly targeting the muslim comunity. And i'm sorry, that was just not the case.

shamone wrote:And one does not have to justify why they feel sensitive about an issue to you, people have different thresholds of offence and sensitivity, the trick is to respect them

Your are correct. People have different thresholds of what they find offensive. Your also correct that the trick is finding the middle ground. BUt at the same time, that respect goes both ways. This goes back to our previous debate on if you look hard enough, people can find racisim in just about anything. At some point, you need to just let things go, and IMO, (again, this is just my opinion. I'm not forcing it on anyone), complaing that they asked Jordan for military help instead of Isrel in a fake movie is ridiculous, and blowing things out of proportion. Isrel wasn't put in any negative light, it just wasn't included a military scene. In this paticular case, one needs to take this movie for what it is...
I could possibly see an uproar if this was a serious movie based on current events, or even past events based on real time. But it wasn't.

It was An action flick about giant alien robots that transform into cars and trucks.

As you said, people will have different levels of whats going to offend them. But i also believe that they they need to be prepared to be called out on it as well. Other wise its just going to be an endless loop that we've never get through.

by **Capt.Failure** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:50 pm

Might I also point out that if Isreal had been requested for aid,some Muslim viewers would have complained because Jews were allowed free reign over Egyptian airspace. Also the Jewish viewers who complained about not asking Israel for help would have STILL complained because the Iraeli forces got shot down, which is clearly* antisemetic.

See the problem here? This has nothing to do with antisemitism, planned or accidental. This has everything to do with reading too much into things. How do you think I'd feel if I got mad every time a lisping, limp wristed sissy was used to portray gays in a movie? Pretty damn terrible, but I've learned to grow a thick skin.

*Italics are sarcastic.

News Credits: 7 · by **Noideaforaname** » Mon May 23, 2011 10:13 pm

shamone wrote:- they are slapdash and careless, and dont bother with the simplest of research for a multi million movie

Yep:

TFWiki's RotF page wrote:Geographic discontinuities
Note: The on-film splicing together of disparate filming locations is a common movie phenomena; however, we wouldn't be good pedants if we didn't point out a few of the more glaring disconnects.

* The Shanghai "industrial district" is... interesting, to say the least. There's a company sign that translates as "Empire Import and Export" (which would be the Chinese equivalent of a US company named "Soviet Import and Export") right next to a huge steel mill, dozens of civilians are being evacuated... and at least Demolishor thought that a giant mining excavator wouldn't be terribly out of place there.

* The aerial view of Princeton University is immediately followed by a ground shot of the dormitories at the University of Pennsylvania.

* After Lennox is alerted of the Autobot operation on the US east coast, he orders NEST to move out. By the time Optimus Prime is killed in battle with Megatron, it appears Lennox's transport planes are already over the United States, and by the end of the day, the NEST troops are at a US air base. Given the great distance between Diego Garcia and the United States, the short time it took them to arrive to the US is implausible.

* Grindor drops the car with Sam, Mikaela and Leo inside into a factory just outside a huge city. Yet when Optimus Prime and Bumblebee rescue them and flee, they almost immediately reach a huge forest that was nowhere to be seen in the aerial shot of the factory.

* In the basement of Simmons' deli, Wheelie projects dots onto a map of the United States to indicate where the Seekers are located. Simmons' deli is in New York City. One dot hovers over Syracuse, New York. Another hovers over Trenton, New Jersey. Simmons says the closest one is in Washington. There is no dot over Washington.

* When Jetfire is activated at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum (actually the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, an annex of the Smithsonian) in Washington, he leaves the exhibition center and exits into the desert location of the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (aka The Boneyard), which is in Tucson, Arizona. When Jetfire breaks out of the building, we can see a composited image of the Boneyard's rows of planes, so it's arguable that in this universe the middle of Washington DC happens to be a desert full of old planes, and no buildings and... you get the point. Michael Bay actually admits this to be a deliberate choice in his audio commentary for the movie, and suggests that "most people in Taiwan" would probably never notice the error.

* The movie gives the impression that Giza in Egypt and Petra in Jordan are in close proximity to each other—within eyeshot, even. In reality, the two locations are about 416 kilometers (258 miles) apart. What makes this even more problematic is the fact that Egypt and Jordan don't share a common border—there's a country named Israel between them, whose existence isn't even mentioned in the movie...

* Furthermore, the movie gives the impression that the Pyramids of Giza are located near the coast—the soldiers and tanks deployed from hovercraft arrive at the battle site almost immediately. In reality, the closest sea shore, the tip of the Red Sea, is still over 70 miles away from the Pyramids. Worse, when the rail gun is fired, a monitor screen on board the U.S.S. Kidd shows footage of the pyramids with the ocean in the foreground, making it appear like they're no more than a mile or two away from the shore. Worse still, this is immediately followed by a shot of the pyramids that shows nothing but desert in the direction the rail gun shot is coming from.

by **Lastjustice** » Mon May 23, 2011 10:33 pm

Bay's universe follows what I refer to as Simpsons Geography.(like how they said the 4 bordering states are Alaska, florida and 2 others that are no where near each other.) If on the way to Indianna from Chicago we see the Grand Canyon, then that's where it is in that reality. Given how much it's happened in both films I wouldn't for a second chalk up the geography jumble to hatred for any group.

by **Capt.Failure** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:40 pm

* The Shanghai "industrial district" is... interesting, to say the least. There's a company sign that translates as "Empire Import and Export" (which would be the Chinese equivalent of a US company named "Soviet Import and Export") right next to a huge steel mill, dozens of civilians are being evacuated... and at least Demolishor thought that a giant mining excavator wouldn't be terribly out of place there.

That scene was also filmed at Bethlehem Steel in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. I live about eight minutes by road from there.

by **shamone** » Tue May 24, 2011 11:47 am

5150 Cruiser wrote:
shamone wrote: here you go

http://izgad.blogspot.com/2009/06/trans ... f-map.html

why is it more important. read up on recent history and then wonder why its more important (im not pro or anti -zionist/state of israel btw)

then ask yourself why there are so many geographical errors

BUt thats just the thing. There were several errors in this movie. The way people are reacting (as well as in that particular blog) is that Bay and Co. were specificly targeting the muslim comunity. And i'm sorry, that was just not the case.

shamone wrote:And one does not have to justify why they feel sensitive about an issue to you, people have different thresholds of offence and sensitivity, the trick is to respect them

Your are correct. People have different thresholds of what they find offensive. Your also correct that the trick is finding the middle ground. BUt at the same time, that respect goes both ways. This goes back to our previous debate on if you look hard enough, people can find racisim in just about anything. At some point, you need to just let things go, and IMO, (again, this is just my opinion. I'm not forcing it on anyone), complaing that they asked Jordan for military help instead of Isrel in a fake movie is ridiculous, and blowing things out of proportion. Isrel wasn't put in any negative light, it just wasn't included a military scene. In this paticular case, one needs to take this movie for what it is...
I could possibly see an uproar if this was a serious movie based on current events, or even past events based on real time. But it wasn't.

It was An action flick about giant alien robots that transform into cars and trucks.

As you said, people will have different levels of whats going to offend them. But i also believe that they they need to be prepared to be called out on it as well. Other wise its just going to be an endless loop that we've never get through.

well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

Om not on board with the whole israel thing, but that was the first of many issues i found.

i thought the stereotypcal jewish deli was worse, as it again uses short hand to describe a characters ethnicicty

by **shamone** » Tue May 24, 2011 11:52 am

Capt.Failure wrote:Might I also point out that if Isreal had been requested for aid,some Muslim viewers would have complained because Jews were allowed free reign over Egyptian airspace. Also the Jewish viewers who complained about not asking Israel for help would have STILL complained because the Iraeli forces got shot down, which is clearly* antisemetic.

See the problem here? This has nothing to do with antisemitism, planned or accidental. This has everything to do with reading too much into things. How do you think I'd feel if I got mad every time a lisping, limp wristed sissy was used to portray gays in a movie? Pretty damn terrible, but I've learned to grow a thick skin.

*Italics are sarcastic.

So you are going to the lazy and slapdash option, fair enough, i agree. But others are entitled to question why israel was left out. Hell ven independance day, and that was a big dumb US iz great movie, showed israli and arab forces, Bay could have done the same to avoid alienating more people

Again you use your experience as a homosexual and your resilience in an unrelated manner, why ? Just because you dont have an issue with stereotypes doesnt mean others cant

by **Capt.Failure** » Tue May 24, 2011 2:46 pm

shamone wrote:So you are going to the lazy and slapdash option, fair enough, i agree.

You'll need to justify how it's lazy or slapdash instead of true. With the political situation in that part of the world how could Bay not have offended anyone? Israel intervenes: Muslims get offended. Israel sits out: Jews get offended. No one intervenes: Jews and Muslims offended again ("Who not ask Israel/Egypt for help!?") You support the sensetivity of others but then willingly ignore that these are the reactions said sensetivity leads to.

shamone wrote:But others are entitled to question why israel was left out. Hell ven independance day, and that was a big dumb US iz great movie, showed israli and arab forces, Bay could have done the same to avoid alienating more people

Try to analyze each film's situation before throwing out baseless comparisons. Independance Day has mankind on the brink of exinction. The two sides were forced together by an extreme situation in a single scene were they just stood together on the same airstrip (we never saw them work together).

RotF had a small team of US soliders on foreign soil unable to make contact with HQ. They needed to check up on them so Gen. Morshower called Jordan for help. There was no reason to potentially cause an international incident during an already sensetive time (what with the Decepticons threatening mankind) by sending Israeli forces, who have a shakey relationship with Egypt, into their airspace.

shamone wrote:Again you use your experience as a homosexual and your resilience in an unrelated manner, why ? Just because you dont have an issue with stereotypes doesnt mean others cant

It's hardly unrelated. Considering how people jump to defend African Americans and Jews us gays are usually left to deal with it when we become the butt of a joke or targets of homophobia. If I can watch the scene in The Rock, another Bay film, where a San Francisco hair stylist is a skinny, foppish little man with a lisp and two limp wrists who's only worried that Sean Connery liked his haircut after he saw the guy toss someone off the roof of a building and not be offended, then I think it's hardly unrelated.

I just described a scene that went out of it's way to paint gays as sissy girly men, and other films routinely do far worse. You defend accusations of a scene being antisemetic because Israel merely wasn't mentioned during a crisis in another country it boarders. There's plenty of reasons to excuse the scene in RotF, but no reasons to excuse the one in The Rock.

But again, I don't get mad at Bay for the scene in The Rock. Why? Because I grew a pair and learned to deal with it, and even find it funny myself.

Again, look deeper into a situation before you attempt to shut down my opinions and comparisons. All you do is set yourself up as a strawman with nothing to hold up your arguements.

by **Dagon** » Wed May 25, 2011 9:43 am

In reality I think there are a number of good or at least decent points being raised here by most parties. I'm just thinking of the following two at the moment:

--as far as the renaisannce or popularity, if listening to the fandom is to be believed, then the end of this cycle of movies WILL be the start of a downward slide in franchise popularity. Since the movies beginning in 2007 somehow resurected a franchise that had been going for 20 years, then the absence of movies going forward will invariably lull it back to sleep. New fans, fooey. Beast Wars and RID and AEC brought in new fans, but they were not enough according to segments of the fandom to keep the fandom alive, so therefore if only these movies were powerful enough to bring it back, the lack of new movies will lead to another dormant period. It's just logical.

--On the G1-ish designs being unbelievable, there never really has been a good reason as to why. most of them approximate crying about how kids don't want blocky robots, and that's fine, but that's not a solid reason as to why they would be less plausible than the "skeletons wearing armor" that someone else said, which seems accurate. On top of that, now blocky G1-y designs would be unrealistic, but if the Grand Canyon happened to be between Indiana and Chicago, that would be allowable based on it being a feature of the reality the movies are set in? So, we've instantly chucked realism and believability so long as it helps prop up the universe it's set in, but robots with square or rectangular features, that's just beyond the scope of acceptibilty? I'm not being all GEEWUNN about this, but I find that silly. If the default then is that "alien robots can look like whatever they want," that's fine, but then why can't they have smokestacks protruding from their shoulders?

I don;t think the Renaissance is ending, becasue despite what some people want to believe the franchise never went away follwoing the end of G1 and 2007, but by the flip side of that same arguement, it is ending, as there will be no new movie to hold interest, just as there was a vast expanse of wasteland following the Rebirth and 2007, according to a percentage of the fandom. Blurrz mentioned Star Wars, and SW was on hold for a lot longer than TF was with very little of no media to keep it going in the time between ROTJ and PM, and SW is still alive and well. Maybe TF needs to figure out that magic secret since it vanished for 20 something years, so that it doesn't happen again.

by **shamone** » Wed May 25, 2011 11:55 am

1. The slapdash comment was in relation to the omission of israel on the map, as you said yourself that was down to a lack of proof reading, which is fairly unprofessional considering the budget of the movie

2. the israeli intervention doesnt really bother me, i selected one website which had an issue, there were others which felt the movie was anti semetic too. As i said i am not really buying that theory, jsut saying others may beleive it

3. Mankind threatened by extinction by aliens. Decepticons threatening mankind. Seems a similar situation to me. both are extreme situations.

4. I have already stated that i found the movies homophobic long with other issues of equality, so you can preclude me from your sweeping generalisation there.

We are discussing ROTF so waht happened in the rock is unrelated, even if the scene is unnessecary and needlessly offensive to some.

If the twins were called clips and snips and transformed into a hair dryer and a scissors and pranced around limp wristed wearing cravats, then yes we could discuss if this was appropriate or not, but the movie did not.

Im sure you would have been haoppy with this depiction because you are stronger than that, but some others arent, and would find it offensive and needless.

I direct you to this link which explains far more eloquently why people had an issue with the movies depictions

http://www.oafe.net/yo/tfm2_skidflap.php

5. look up what strawman argument means and then tell me where deliberately misrepresented you to make my argument. If i did it it was unintentional. Try using logic and reason in arguments rather tired internet tropes and catchphrases

by **Capt.Failure** » Wed May 25, 2011 8:10 pm

shamone, I was going to make a long winded counter arguement to your previous post. But then I saw this...

shamone wrote:4. I have already stated that i found the movies homophobic long with other issues of equality, so you can preclude me from your sweeping generalisation there.

I'm sorry, but you better have a damn good explanation for were you saw homophobia in the Transformers films unless you want your entire arguement against them thrown out. The antisemitism was just silly, this seems like an outright lie.

And yeah, the thing with The Rock is relevent. It's another example of something someone could get easily offended at, like the Twins or the "Israel being ignored" thing. In relation to my above demand I had to pick another movie as an example because there is nothing that came across as such in either Transformers film. Not merely something I could ignore because I'm not an oversensetive manchild, but because there was nothing.

I await your examples as much as I await your trying to tell me I'm wrong/ignorant/etc. Seeing you try to justify telling minorities how they should feel about issues is almost entertaining.

News Credits: 5 · by **5150 Cruiser** » Wed May 25, 2011 8:51 pm

shamone wrote: well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.

News Credits: 37 · by **SlyTF1** » Wed May 25, 2011 9:03 pm

5150 Cruiser wrote:
shamone wrote: well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.

The way I get over it is to embrace it and laugh at it. Because most of the stuff is probably true anyway. Plus I find most of the racist stuff funny. I know, I'm horrible. :-(

by **shamone** » Thu May 26, 2011 11:42 am

Capt.Failure wrote:shamone, I was going to make a long winded counter arguement to your previous post. But then I saw this...

shamone wrote:4. I have already stated that i found the movies homophobic long with other issues of equality, so you can preclude me from your sweeping generalisation there.

I'm sorry, but you better have a damn good explanation for were you saw homophobia in the Transformers films unless you want your entire arguement against them thrown out. The antisemitism was just silly, this seems like an outright lie.

And yeah, the thing with The Rock is relevent. It's another example of something someone could get easily offended at, like the Twins or the "Israel being ignored" thing. In relation to my above demand I had to pick another movie as an example because there is nothing that came across as such in either Transformers film. Not merely something I could ignore because I'm not an oversensetive manchild, but because there was nothing.

I await your examples as much as I await your trying to tell me I'm wrong/ignorant/etc. Seeing you try to justify telling minorities how they should feel about issues is almost entertaining.

If i did what you say it might be amusing, if i did that.

First of all i never said any minorities should feel anyway. I didnt know you were a "minority" until you proclaimed yourself as such.

You dont need to be a minority to feel offended by something, jsut like you dont have to feel offended jsut because you are a minority, thats what i have said before. Again you use words which are easily applicable to yourself, in this case strawman argument, when you make your points by putting words into my mouth and misrepresenting what i have written

"go tell your boyfriend, pussy" a homophobic slur. Thats the message kids shoudl be thought, gay taunts are ok.

You may not be foffended, othes are, even, believe it or not, heterosexuals

by **shamone** » Thu May 26, 2011 11:45 am

5150 Cruiser wrote:
shamone wrote: well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.

you make some good points, however, what this movie does is reinforce stereotypes which were dying out. It dregresses, which is what i find distasteful;.

The cartoon depiction in coal black and the twins is scarily accurate, and i feel uneasy that in this day and age, hollywood deems it appropriate. But im not telling you you are wrong, jsut that i feel differently

just check out slytf's reply to see why there is still a need for worry

by **shamone** » Thu May 26, 2011 11:46 am

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.[/quote]

The way I get over it is to embrace it and laugh at it. Because most of the stuff is probably true anyway. Plus I find most of the racist stuff funny. I know, I'm horrible. :-(

[/quote]

I can never tell if you are joking or not, or saying things jsut to get a reaction. i hope you are, but if not, what bits of the racism were true for you.

News Credits: 37 · by **SlyTF1** » Thu May 26, 2011 11:53 am

shamone wrote:
5150 Cruiser wrote:
shamone wrote: well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.

you make some good points, however, what this movie does is reinforce stereotypes which were dying out. It dregresses, which is what i find distasteful;.

The cartoon depiction in coal black and the twins is scarily accurate, and i feel uneasy that in this day and age, hollywood deems it appropriate. But im not telling you you are wrong, jsut that i feel differently

just check out slytf's reply to see why there is still a need for worry

There's no freaking hint of worry in my post. Why the hell would I be racist against my own race? I just don't get offended by it.

by **shamone** » Thu May 26, 2011 12:06 pm

SlyTF1 wrote:
shamone wrote:
5150 Cruiser wrote:
shamone wrote: well he point im trying to make is that you have to respect others people and their sensitivities. i accept that what offends others wont specifically affect you, you should acknowledge and accept that what doesnt offend you, may offend others,rather than call them out all the time and tell them to get over it.

If they want to get offended by little things then fine. But i still feel that they need to be prepared to get called out on it. And if i feel someones over reacting to a said situation, then you bet i'll be the first to call them out.

The thing is racisim and stereo types are always going to exsist. This is a fact that i don't believe anyone can argue. Has it gotten better over the last 100yrs? Absolutely. Will it continue to get better over the years? Absolutely. Will it ever go away completely? Absolutely not. Personally, I think the key to getting away from racisim and stereotypes is not to call complain about every little mi-nute detail, but to..

1- Not bring so much attention to such small, and otherwise dismisabal so called "stereo types" and claims of rasicim and antisemitism. (the jewish deli coment and Isrel deal)

2- Prove to the world that said culture does not represent themselves in that manner (the twins). Do so, and people will less and less accociate that kind of behavior with a said race or ethnic group.

Speaking of the twins, now look what we have..
They are not in the 3rd movie due to all the negative light people have put on not only them, but Bay and Co. To the point where he (along with Paramount and Hasbro)go out of thier way to tell everyone they will not be in the 3rd movie. I liked the twins. But even if i didn't, i'd still want them in for continuty sake. Even if they die in the first battle. BUt we can't even get that.

you make some good points, however, what this movie does is reinforce stereotypes which were dying out. It dregresses, which is what i find distasteful;.

The cartoon depiction in coal black and the twins is scarily accurate, and i feel uneasy that in this day and age, hollywood deems it appropriate. But im not telling you you are wrong, jsut that i feel differently

just check out slytf's reply to see why there is still a need for worry

There's no freaking hint of worry in my post. Why the hell would I be racist against my own race? I just don't get offended by it.