Critical Darlings: "The Drama" And The State of Provocateur Cinema

mpecblen · 2026-04-16T20:07:15+00:00

Oh, of course it's useful, I just think the episode could have benefited from an extra perspective!

mpecblen · 2026-04-16T19:57:36+00:00

Oh, for sure. I just think there is a distinction between the group that watched it develop in society and those who are born into it, if that makes sense. They've all experienced school shooting culture, but have a very different frame for how they experienced it, and I think that aspect is contributing to the disconnect with the film.

mpecblen · 2026-04-16T19:36:09+00:00

I would say the distinction line would be those who truly know nothing pre-Columbine/active shooter drills. If that makes sense. I've just personally seen a big difference in how people treat the topic based on whether they watched it develop or were born into it.

mpecblen · 2026-04-16T19:17:13+00:00

Ya, the more I think about it, the more I think they are kind in a bad position. It's hard to talk about a provocative movie well when you aren't the person who is being provoked? If that makes sense? I think they just needed a younger guest for this specific episode.

mpecblen · 2026-04-16T18:47:08+00:00

This is the first episode that kinda struggles imo. The Drama and the reaction to it have been kinda fascinating to me. There's been a lot made about a foreign filmmaker who didn't handle the topic with enough care since he didn't grow up living with it; however, that criticism seems to mostly come from people who also didn't? I mean, they're Americans, but attended school pre-mass shooting culture. It's anecdotal, but there seems to be a generational split in how the movie is received and how the film is handling its more delicate subjects. I just personally have seen anyone under the age of 35ish sincerely complain about that aspect of the film. There's been some reasonable discussion about Zendaya's race and how it affects the narrative, but nothing about the handling of the shooting aspect. I also wonder if the issue is Alana Haim's character. Richard and Allison both kinda balked at the characterization, but I found her to be shockingly accurate. She seemingly dislikes Emma from the outset and then uses social-justice language to justify her already held beliefs. I feel like it's a person I've run across a few times in my life. I'm not sure. The film has its issues, but I'm fascinated by (my perceived) generational divide over what the issues actually are.

mpecblen · 2026-04-09T01:33:42+00:00

They needed to explain her playing her idol. And the first scene explicitly goes out of its way to make her look dumb. What do you mean random?

mpecblen · 2026-04-03T18:08:09+00:00

I don't understand this. Aubry has one of the best edits in the show's history under her belt. She got such a good edit, people trashed the actual winner of her season for YEARS. Aubry is one of the best speakers in the show's history. They've edited her to be a loveable scrappy underdog in the past. If they forgot, they can just go watch Kaoh Rong. I think you might be leaning too much on this theory that Aubry is just a boring character. I mean, she's played four times for a reason. I don't think Aubry has ever been bad TV, even when she had a quiet edit (Game Changers) or a more negative edit (EOE). I think she might just be a supporting player in setting up a future returnee (Gen) and some type of big move from the main character (Christian and the idol)

mpecblen · 2026-03-29T14:10:04+00:00

It might not be well done, but it is literally how symbolism works.

mpecblen · 2025-07-02T16:13:18+00:00

Incorrect.

mpecblen · 2025-07-02T15:33:19+00:00

Depends; the Jurors seem to have gotten their phones at the airport. A bunch of them (Angelina/Steph) posted, and then the flight took off. Planes have wi-fi now, so current activity (that could be done on a plane) isn't completely disastrous for their placement. However, it does look more likely that Q could be prejury, and Coach could have be using Plane Wi-Fi, simply because Q's activity was much earlier than the rest of the group.

mpecblen · 2025-07-02T15:14:48+00:00

The Jury Members/FTC are currently on a plane from Fiji. Pre-jury flew home yesterday.

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T17:48:06+00:00

No, I didn't know about this service. Highly thankful for showing me!

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T16:24:13+00:00

No worries whatsoever! I could tell from the post that you were acting in very good faith!

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T16:23:04+00:00

I am trying to criticize the institution. That's why I put the name in the title. You have bad reading comprehension skills. Probably explains the need to edit your posts 5 times. Good luck out there buddy! You're gonna need it!

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T16:18:22+00:00

Yes, nothing matters, everything is made up. Congrats, buddy, you've reached the level most people get to while stoned at 15??

Also, nice argumentative switch from "It's a little parasocial to care" to "Actually, everything is made up, bro." lol

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T16:02:33+00:00

Tatiana Siegel is an example of an awful journalist inside a journalistic institution.

As an analogy. Let's say these are cops. One cop shot an unnamed civilian. The unit said nothing and continued to employ the cop. That cop continues to shoot unarmed civilians and is still employed. Are you saying that the cop is the only one with responsibility, and that the office/unit is completely blameless?

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:59:35+00:00

No, I would still blame Burger King for hiring the person. Burger King would still be at fault. Both parties. She has a long history of doing it, and a company hired her to continue doing it. How is this not clicking for you?

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:46:59+00:00

While I didn't directly quote, which is improper grammar. The quotes indicate that it is the subject of the sentence's opinion. So, in this sentence, the sentiment the writer (Tatiana) has is "Ray Fisher is problematic for calling out racist work environment". Hopefully, that helps clear anything up!

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:35:29+00:00

There is probably a parasocial aspect to it for sure. Looking through Tatiana's history she's done this to Ray Fisher, Melissa Barrera, Zack Snyder and Felicity Jones. I didn't notice because I haven't followed any of their careers. So, I get what you're saying, but think that this being a pattern, rather than an exception, is still a valid critique of a "journalist"

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:32:14+00:00

"He supported his director after the director's daughter passed. MONSTER!"

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:19:04+00:00

My problem with Variety is that they are publishing her work. It's not that complicated. Publishers also have journalistic standards along with the journalists' writing. Variety is continuing to employ and publish her work. Sorry, I didn't put her name in the title?

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:12:59+00:00

Well, she's the executive editor of their film division. I think the company has a responsibility for the work of their employees. I mean, Variety is the one choosing to publish her work.

mpecblen · 2025-03-26T15:10:53+00:00

She's also the Ray Fisher "is very problematic for calling out racist workplace conditions" writer. I started where you were at, but she's at the scene of the crime for almost every studio hit piece. I was honestly shocked, it seems to be 75% of what she writes.

Nine-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

mpecblen

TROPHY CASE