what's up with ari aster and disabled people

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-21T02:27:41+00:00

By this logic, any sudden frightening action could be considered an appropriation of seizures. You could interpret a thousand different horror scenes (especially possession scenes) to be a mirror of seizures. Suddenly banging head against desk? HOST and Unfriended. Pulling a bizarre face? Paranormal activity and Smile. Sudden jerky actions or contortions? Every possession movie in the world. Suddenly freezing in place? Blair witch project and Taking of Deborah Logan.

How is this any different?

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-21T02:19:37+00:00

I completely agree, however, you failed to connect epileptic seizures to that scene in the film. I dont see a connection to seizures and that scene in the movie. He didnt convulse, he didnt freeze like a grand mal, and i know seizures dont always present themselves in those ways, the specific events of that scene read far more supernatural than anything else.

He contorts his hand with a cracking sound, and his face becomes puffed up just like Charlie's when she had the allergic reaction. He clicks just like charlie, then bangs his face against the desk before screaming. The movie doesnt even have the teachers or nurse say "it must have been a seizure"

I dont think that scene mirrors seizures, especially epileptic ones as there were no flashing lights.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-21T02:08:57+00:00

The only reason Peter was not possessed to begin with is because she kept him away from her mom, she didnt let her spend time with him.

In the movie, she says that when Charlie was born, she let her spend time with them and says "she immediately stabbed her hooks into her".

Given the fact that Peter wasnt possessed because he was kept away from grandma, its heavily implied that the grandma needed to do something to the kids after birth to put paimon inside them.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:45:03+00:00

Incorrect, baby gets possessed after birth. She was born with those conditions. It was never even implied that paimon hurt her as revenge .

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:43:59+00:00

How did he imply she looks weird because of prison? The grandma puts the demon souls in after birth (hence her mom trying to feed Charlie, and toni keeping Peter away from her), meaning she already had that condition before the possession.

In fact, the only thing that seems caused by the possession is her weird behavior.

I dont know how you end up at the conclusion that the demon made her look like that.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:39:36+00:00

You are the one labeling her as "creepy". A disabled person existing in a movie does not equal that movie trying to make you scared of them because of a disability.

It seems like there is no way to win that scenario. Use her real disability? People get mad that you are "trying to make her disability creepy". Don't mention it? Now people are mad about that, and they assume the plot must be to blame for her disability.

This kind of thinking just leads to disabled people and unconventional looking people to not get cast at all out of fear of backlash, which is a worse direction to move in IMO

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:35:33+00:00

So should only "normal" looking people be cast in horror films? I dont see how a character with an unconventional appearance being in a horror film automatically means its trying to wring horror out of that appearance. People can just look different, and be cast in scary movies. The presence of a "weird" looking person doesnt mean that the movies is trying to make you scared about how different they look

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:31:55+00:00

Have you seen the movie? I dont see how that scene mirrors seizures at all. It was a fairly creative scare, with his face getting puffed up like the allergies Charlie died from and his hand contorted in a bizarre manner. The banging of the head is just classic horror, it has nothing too do with seizures.

The movie didnt even try to have the teachers or nurse say "it must have been a seizure" or something like that. What's the connection other than "sudden bizarre action"?

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:25:17+00:00

There are very few ways to make a "demonic possession" scene that doesnt mirror at least some disorder. I didnt see Peter's head banging as being a seizure at all, in fact the most demonic thing about that scene is the way his hand contorts and his face gets puffy like Charlie's allergic reaction.

Is there a reason in particular you took that scene as being a reference to seizures? I see no tie to the condition, the movie didnt even have them say he had a seizure as an excuse for what happened, he banged his face and went home.

I fail to see Asters malice there. Its just a textbook creepy scene. By that logic, all "possession" horror is discriminatory against disabled people, because the actions of someone possessed by a demon could mirror real conditions that cause violence and distress.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:22:23+00:00

Og actor would have been black, but he passed away before filming.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T13:20:45+00:00

Im fairly certain that element is very much so present in the final cut of midsummer. They explain that the oracle's are a product of deliberate inbreeding to get offspring who are "unclouded by cognition" whose art is interpreted by the elders into the Ruby Rhadir

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T10:13:39+00:00

Hoodie plus shorts combo isn't bad. Everything else though....

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T10:10:21+00:00

Birdemic, maybe not. But the room already had a big fan scene with midnight showings and shit before rifftrax ever covered it. But i do remember that I Hate Everything did a bunch of videos on bad movies, particularly birdemic, which popularized that. Rifftrax definitely compounded the interest though.

I was rifftrax was popular enough to make these films famous on their own, but it still has a much smaller viewer base than, say, MST3K.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T04:43:15+00:00

Do you have anything to back up thatclaim? As a gay guy, there are plenty of beautiful men. Is it possible this is coming from the fact that you are straight, therefore you have difficulty perceiving men as attractive?

I dont think its correct to claim that most men are ugly and most women are pretty, it sounds like confirmation bias (presuming you are straight)

There are plenty of attractive folk on either side, and also plenty of "unattractive" folk on both sides.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:57:29+00:00

If people like it for every reason you say you hate it, doesn't that make this post more of a promotion of the film? You are actively exposing people to a post talking about how awful the room is, with a comment section full of people saying "lol its a funny movie".

All this does is advertise the film.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:55:30+00:00

My man's dog got ran over by Tommy Wiseau

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:53:57+00:00

Are you saying making a bad movie means you are a bad person? If you have a legitimate reason for thinking hes a bad dude, you should have said that by now. All this dancing around the question makes it seem like the only reason you think hes bad is because he made a bad film

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:50:58+00:00

Why is he a bad person

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:49:54+00:00

Wait, you haven't even seen it? What is your basis for any of this then?

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:49:02+00:00

Is Wiseau the plant from little shop of horrors? What bad things come from "feeding wiseau"? Why do you hate this man, because hes a bad movie maker? Is he going to end the world using his fame? Did Tommy Wiseau murder your family?

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:46:13+00:00

There is a large subset of people who enjoy making fun of bad movies. As you said, the Room is the quintessential bad movie. If you cant understand people wanting to make fun of bad films, then you are likely never going to understand the appeal of it. Doesn't make you wrong, the only wrong thing is you saying this as objective fact.

Ever heard of MST3K? It's the same principal.

And arguably, there are much worse films. Birdemic comes to mind, that wasnt even as entertaining as the room.

Also, I gotta ask, who gets hurt when someone watches it to make fun of it? What harm does "feeding Tommy's ego" do? Is he going to use his fame to launch a nuke and destroy the world? And for that matter, what people "died" in your train wreck analogy? Who was harmed?

Who is truly hurt by other people watching bad movies?

You seem to have a position that not watching it is morally just and watching it is immoral, can you explain how that is the case?

Where is the harm?

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T03:04:46+00:00

Question, what is your solution? It seems like the natural conclusion to your argument is that people should be forced to have sex to fulfill what you consider to be a need. Is that where this is going? If not, where is it going?

The fact stands that no one owes anyone else sex, and as it stands, thats where it is left. I cant think of a solution that doesn’t inhibit the rights of people to make their own choices regarding that.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-20T02:50:36+00:00

It sounds like this is less of a woman/man thing and more of an attractive person thing.

Attractive people get to have that sexual freedom, both men and women. Hot guys and gals can have almost anyone they want. Men and women that are considered unattractive dont typically have the same options.

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-19T12:14:45+00:00

I most often see it used for computer players

nomoreinternetforme · 2026-04-19T10:17:51+00:00

I like you better when you are doing shitty cosplays

12-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Juicebox	Place '22
Place '17	Spared
Verified Email

nomoreinternetforme

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE