ITT: Authencity

ITT: Authencity

Other urls found in this thread:

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism
dailymotion.com/playlist/x1xv47_BrainwashingInNorway_hjernevask-english/1#video=xp0tg8
sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds
pnas.org/content/112/50/15468
bustle.com/articles/89866-do-girls-really-prefer-dolls-the-science-behind-gender-preference-in-toys
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Furiosa's character and her narrative is so blatantly related to leftist identity politics of 2010s that it cannot be with good conscience called sincere/authentic (then again, barely anything is)

i get triggered by that shit pretty easily but I disagree, didn't really think it was that bad

There is nothing authentic about the video game sensibility masquerading as movies you child of Sup Forumsedit.

I'm not really bothered by it, it's just something in the film that is heavily loaned from current "twitter political climate" or something.

This film really needed Gibson to be Mel. I mean, goddamn that Blood Father film made me sad Gibson wasn't in Fury Road.

I like Hardy but Hardy phoned it in hard in FR.

>Gibson to be Mel
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

>skull isn't chrome

3/10 would make good toilet paper

Wow, it only took one post this time for someone to be completely retarded

Took 7 for the cuck to crash in to defend it.

t tasteless fucking pleb

>I can't enjoy a good movie without forcing my politics into it that aren't even present in the movie
What's it like to be a paranoid wreck? You're like evangelical christians that say Harry Potter is satanic

>"you can't own a human being"
>wow. Why are they trying to push their political agenda in this movie?

Lets pretend the film wasn't angling for the male-female cultural marxist fad that's been so hip and pop in the leftist circles.

>Lets pretend the film wasn't angling for the male-female cultural marxist fad that's been so hip and pop in the leftist circles.
Here's a Furiosa concept art from the 90's.
Let's also pretend that Mad Max 2 didn't already have a Valkyrie 'strong female' archetype or that the pulpy comic-book influenced post-apocalypse subgenre didn't already have iconic similar characters such as Tank Girl.

fpwp

What do you think you are even proving with that? Instead you are strengthening the fact that it wasn't made in the 90s climate but in the 10s, and for an obvious reason when the kike producers saw it fit to their agenda.

>Let's also pretend that Mad Max 2 didn't already have a Valkyrie 'strong female' archetype or that the pulpy comic-book influenced post-apocalypse subgenre didn't already have iconic similar characters such as Tank Girl.
Has nothing to do with the cultural marxist crap going on in FR.

Why do you defend it? Are you some paid shill?

>Dat poster
>It's really just a bunch of annoying chicks in a truck

What a let down

now that's a great poster

t. tumblrina

>I like Hardy but Hardy phoned it in hard in FR.
What? He just didn't have any lines to say, what was he supposed to do except look enigmatic?

He looked confused and constipated. I don't understand what the film meant with it if it was intentional. He was bad in his role.

That poster just proved that furiosa was conceived completely independent of any recent identity politics and instead accepting that fact you going to believe that there's some kind of conspiracy of Hollywood producers to search for twenty year old character designs from a 30 year old cult series in order to...? Promote feminist identity politics?
Don't you see all the mental acrobatics you're making?

You're so fucking stupid lmao

>That poster just proved that furiosa was conceived completely independent of any recent identity politics
Yeah, it is just a complete accident that a narrative story about males destroying the world and keeping females slaves was published in 2010s. You could argue it was premonition even, that he was a cultural marxist identity politics fan before it was popular, a hipster so to speak. A

>conspiracy of Hollywood producers to search for twenty year old character designs from a 30 year old cult series in order to...? Promote feminist identity politics?
Do you think its conpspiracy to pander to current popular trends and make money? lol

>urr stupiddd durrr
good post

>women
>human beings
lmao

This is boring bait I've seen a million times before, here have a reply.

>Yeah, it is just a complete accident that a narrative story about males destroying the world and keeping females slaves was published in 2010s

Open a books once in your life retards. You have stuff like that in every Post-Apocalyptic settings.

Well he was in the desert wasteland where its hot as fuck, not to mention he lost a shitload of blood.

He was also constantly being chased, not much time to take a shit and damn hes only got one pair of pants so its best not to soil them

>reading genre fiction.

I'm a regular Sup Forumslack and if you get so triggered by the very presence of a woman in a film that you can't enjoy fury road you're probably pretty beta
For fuck's sake without Max they would have just drove off into the salt flats and died AT BEST

>Not reading anticipation books

This is why the world is going to shit. People ignore History and don't think about the futur.

Jesus fucking christ, you guys who are complaining are pathetic.

F E M I N I S T R O A D T R I P

>neckbeard NEET calling others cucks

Everything is genre fiction.

>On route to Jurassic Park way back when, I warned my screening pal: “When Spielberg decides to scare you, you’d better duck.” But the millions of people excited by the Internet trailer for George Miller’s Mad Max: Fury Road aren’t just ducking, they’re bowing down. The odd thing is, film culture has changed so much since the 1993 Jurassic Park that trailers (a tool of marketing) have become the end-point of interest in movies. Jurassic Park’s F/X spectacle was the event; now the sell is the event. Those who were teased by Fury Road’s trailer will surely prefer it to the two-hour-plus movie. Who can blame them? But that preference signifies a huge problem.

>Fury Road continues the end-of-civilization premise from Miller’s 1980s Mad Max films, which starred Mel Gibson (Beyond Thunderdome was the best of them). Tom Hardy, playing survivalist-loner Max, joins a group of runaway female concubines, led by Charlize Theron’s Imperator Furiosa, zooming for peace and regeneration in a dystopian world. With few explanatory narrative details other than the elaborate cartoonish freakdom (“Mankind has gone rogue! The Earth is sour! Who killed the world?!”), it’s all just nonstop road-rage violence.

>Director-writer Miller capitulates to the low instincts he originally pandered to more than 30 years ago. He’s gotten better at it — demonstrating lotsa panache — but the problem is that popular taste has degraded into an appetite for outlandish destruction and fantastic cruelty. The pop audience (and not just youth) has become like the crazed yahoos Miller depicts on screen without exactly satirizing them.

>>The most watchable moments of Fury Road offer chase-movie overstatement to a point of laughable shrillness: Among the starving masses begging for water, one can be spotted lifting up a bedpan to catch his rationed portion. Fury Road itself is a bedpan filled with crazed details. Miller overflows it, intending audiences to get drunk on his excess — drunk on what Bill Murray in Quick Change called “used wine.”

>Fury Road offers nothing new; Miller rehashes his 35-year-old formula with a vengeance. There are clear, split-second edits of motorized, diesel-fueled caravans topped by jungle drums and a flame-thrower rock guitarist hurtling through the desert; Max strapped to the front of the juggernaut like a hood ornament; a car outfitted with rusted metal porcupine quills; and assorted branded, tattooed, screaming weirdos — at one point swaying like pole-vaulters across the width of the screen.

>Miller doesn’t simply master this we-are-all-gladiators trope, he celebrates it. None of today’s specialists in nihilism can match this stuff. Not Darren Aronofsky, not Christopher Nolan, not Bong Joon-ho, not Quentin Tarantino. But so what? When Miller put aside the Mad Max franchise and made the marvelous Babe: Pig in the City and Happy Feet, he showed more feeling for a pig and for penguins than for humans. Hardy’s charisma is wasted (masked again, as in The Dark Knight Returns), leaving the film’s emotional core to Theron’s one-armed Furiosa — a grindhouse cliché like the one-legged Rose McGowan in Planet Terror.

>Waaaaaaa, cuck, kike, lieberals, muh marxist agenda waaaaaaaa
Shut the fuck up you tinfoil hat donning mongoloid.
Like the other user said, you're no better than those evangelicals who think harry potter is satanic, looking for a boogeyman in all the wrong places cause you're fucking bored and insecure.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism

>None of this mindless madness is meant to scare you as Jurassic Park did. Miller’s action-cinema ferocity is hollow. His apocalyptic circus has video-game spectacle but no cinematic power; its revved-up imagery is unconnected to an understanding of what sensation and violence have done to our souls. That was the real point of Jurassic Park as well as of Neveldine/Taylor’s unnerving pre-apocalypse satire in the Crank series, Gamer, Jonah Hex, and Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Neveldine/Taylor stepped up action cinema and stepped forward philosophically, whereas Miller applies the intellectual version of what race-car drivers call “drag.”

>By overinflating the biker-movie concept (featuring whips and chains, leather and studs, and a body-pierced, dreadlocked, skinhead chorus line), Miller allows his outré flamboyance to rob subcult menace of its edge. This distracts from the cultural collapse that’s really taking place on screen. His degraded audience mistakes the sentimental ending for narrative satisfaction. That’s what happens when movie culture has moved to a state of entropy. Fury Road is essentially an expanded movie trailer, full of inflated highlights — exactly what everyone expects and has already seen.

>s-s-hut up ur dumb
>rationalwiki link

laughing my ass off rolling on the floor

>With few explanatory narrative details other than the elaborate cartoonish freakdom
That's how I KNOW Armond is a stupid troll.
Fury Road is pure kino, with all the narrative explained within the first 10 minutes, but it's subtle and you have to pay attention. Sorry that you couldn't keep up, Armong!

>(masked again, as in The Dark Knight Returns)

>, but it's subtle
HOLY FUCK. Haha, you think ANYTHING about this was subtle? What the fuck. Please describe what you think was subtle about this piece of crap? Not the nods to classics like Metropolis or the Searchers in anyway, or Furiosa's narrative.

Please go on, I can bet you will describe something very obvious since you have low cinematic IQ

All the other anons in this thread blew your 'arguments' the fuck out, so I don't need to.

>Waaaaa, his link challenges my narrative, so I'm going to not read it and dismiss it with a lmaorofl

Pathetic

>about 99.9% of the time — "Cultural Marxism" is a snarl word used to attack anyone with progressive tendencies. The term alludes to a conspiracy theory in which sinister left-wingers have infiltrated media, academia, and science and are engaged in a decades- or centuries-long plot to undermine western culture.

>The associated conspiracy theory asserts that the Frankfurt School, instead of being the relatively arcane strain of academic criticism that it was, actually was a Marxist plot to destroy the capitalist West from within, supposedly spreading its tentacles throughout academia and indoctrinating students to hate America and freedom. Thus, rock'n'roll, the Sixties counterculture, the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement, homosexuality,[13] modern feminism, and in general all the "decay" in the U.S. and elsewhere since the good old days of the Fifties are literally products of this conspiracy.[14] It's also the work of the Jews.

>Despite its widespread popularity among the hard-right, many both on the right and left have thoroughly debunked the concept as not being Marxist at all, including Christian Dominionist Gary North[17] and actual Marxist Michael Acuña from Common Ruin.[18][19] How to Paint Your Panda has debunked it as well

>I copy paste a retarded contrarians opinions because I can't form my own!

I'm amazed this guy has a job as a writer. Self fellating to the extreme without any real substance.

Funny to read though I guess.

Cultural Marxism can exist without the memefurt school idea as a simple generational brainwash.

Why do you think libtards are having the biggest cogntive dissonance blowout to the extenf of worshipping rick hollywood actors when they go against Trump?

And it's not a conspiracy theory when it's realer than real life.

Imagine being this insecure lmao

Dude nihilistic consequencless mass-murder of cartoons in an overblown car chase lmao

no matter how many times you repeat this Sup Forums it still makes no fucking sense

Furiosa might be viewed as an "empowered female" type character (which everybody knows is nothing new regardless) but the women she is trying to save are still the prototypical damsels in distress
furthermore she succeeds in her goals in the end but only with the help of a man

where is the "leftist identity politics" in that?

will mad max threads ever not be filled with Sup Forums fags?

Never agreed with Armond more than this.

>where is the "leftist identity politics" in that?
The narrative of men destroyed the world vs. females make it better which is appararent if you have seen it (and is exactly the sort of silly supposition cultural marxists use to simplify their world and politics to cartoon levels)

All the world building and character introduction that happened was subtle. At least, it was subtle for Armong, cause he didn't fucking pick up on it, that's for sure

>reminder its bechdel score is 3/3

Legitimately none of it was subtle. You couldn't even be specific because you know you are lying to yourself about this film being subtle. Hawks directing very small moments of physicality is subtle for example (without going into minimalism), Bresson and Rosselini are subtle in many ways too.l FR was a big fucking bang, even its cinematic "nods" (more like ripoffs) were 1:1 contextless empty aestheticism .

Literally how is:

>Women shouldn't be held as breeding sex slaves

a cultural marxist agenda. What type of hole did you crawl from where you think people not being slaves is a challenging political idea?

feminism helped the movie, after the trailer hype but before all those articles were made people stopped talking about it, I member

>I'm going to appropriate this word and apply it as a term to describe my conspiracy theory, which has no defined boundaries and can change its outlines to fit my narrative!
>It's a real conspiracy you guys! I should know!
>I've been perusing Sup Forums for a year now and reading all their shitty macro pictures with garbage links and citations and cherry picked data and fallacy ridden arguments!
Fucking climate change deniers, anti vaccers, gmo fear mongerers, 9/11 truthers, and fucking Sup Forums kike cumspiracy losers, why do I keep arguing with you morons?

>Men traditionally have been in power throughout all of history
>Caused all the wars, all the genocide, etc
>When men and women join hands together, a better world can be made
Doesn't really sound anti male to me, just progressive- OOPS, I said that naughty word, progressive!

>>"you can't own a human being"

Actually you can. It's called slavery and it has worked since its invention. It still works if someone is so inclined.

>a cultural marxist agenda

Again the leap of faith from a retarded leftcuck twisting the world into the cultural marxism supposition of female-male with regards to things that has nothing to do with dick or vagina.

Good goy.

>subtle
>literal big bold explanatory text written like dictionary entries

>rationalwiki
Was with you up this point, user.

>introductions in movies are always bad
Are you 12?

Not the guy, what is rational wiki ?

Nevermind I check the about page and it look like someone was butthurt by an article and made is "own" wiki.

Men have been the gatherers of resource throughout all history. In order to compete, they had to use violence to secure access to resources so that there tribe could survive.

They would compete with all other tribes in the vicinity.

Women who don't respect that effort would squander the resource gained, and would ultimately cause the tribe as a whole to die out.

The tribes where women are controlled survived.

The west will either die out completely or will do what is needed.

Jesus christ you autist, I'm not claiming FR to be some 2deep4u arthouse bullshit, I'm just saying that Armond was wrong when he said there was few explanatory narrative details.

The two headed lizard right at the start, Max eats it not to be cool, but to survive. That instantly shows what kind of resources are available in this environment.
With the brief mentioning of gastown, and the shots of the food being grown in the citadel, and with the odd tweaks to the language with names like 'Immortan Joe' and 'Furiosa',you can infer that there's been something wrong with the world for long enough that there's a rag tag society has risen up from the dust of armageddon.

There's a brainwashed culture that Immortan has created with the warboys, a glorification of life after death through strife that you see with the worship of vehicles and their material, which further suggests that there's been serious shit happening since before the movie started.

The world building through heavily detailed visuals and minimal dialogue in the first 10 minutes is so well done that you're completely immersed. But of course, Armond is just a filthy contrarian.

And quit saying it's not subtle because it's not some pretentious arthouse bullshit, it's more subtle than the majority of film out there, you're just more immersed in film than the average person and your reference point is unusually high.

It started out as wiki for fedoras but over time evolved into sjw sanctuary.

>The two headed lizard right at the start, Max eats it not to be cool, but to survive. That instantly shows what kind of resources are available in this environment.

You actually think this is subtle, do you?

I rest my case.

>waah pwentious aaathouse ballshit
insecure plebeian detected.

When is Sup Forums going to be done being ultra right?

Like, it was funny in the first 2 or so years of the Obama presidency, but it's actually concerning now. Trump will flip things around, won't he?

Sup Forums has always been anti-political correctness and anti-establishment

Whether or not it's right or left it doesn't really matter

Fury road was laughably bad and "feminism" is literally the last reason for this.

>Buzzwords buzzwords buzzwords

>Antisemitism
k

Glad to see you deconstructed the arguments presented in the article rather than dismissing the whole website itself without any given reason. Critical thinking is alive and well!

>Women have been sitting around with thumbs up their asses for 200 000 years
Wew

>Admits to being a cultural marxist and try to deflect it by screaming "buzzword
You have been outed, cancer.

You really underestimate how easy it is for the average person to not pick up on something like that

it wasn't many years ago when mentioning christianity used to trigger the fuck out of everyone here. i like it this way better

You can't even define what a cultural marxist is lmao

>Glad to see you deconstructed the arguments presented in the article
Maybe i just don't feel like argue with a fucking article from a fedora hugbox? Pro-tip: if wanna argue your points either use your own words or some source that isn't a complete shithole. At this point in their development i would trust 9gag posts more than i do rationalwiki.

They conveyed a shit ton of information about the world and characters with very few lines, and with little time between the action scenes. Whether or not you want to call it subtle, I feel bad for you if it didn't capture your imagination at least a little bit

"We are, in Marx's terms, "an ensemble of social relations" and we live our lives at the core of the intersection of a number of unequal social relations based on hierarchically interrelated structures which, together, define the historical specificity of the capitalist modes of production and reproduction and underlay their observable manifestations.” — Martha E. Gimenez, Marxism and Class, Gender and Race: Rethinking the Trilogy. Cultural Marxists conceive the culture as central to the legitimation of oppression, in addition to the economic factors that Karl Marx emphasized

It argues that what appear as traditional cultural phenomena intrinsic to Western society, for instance the drive for individual acquisition associated with capitalism, nationalism, the nuclear family, gender roles, race and other forms of cultural identity are historically recent developments that help to justify and maintain hierarchy
Add in a bunch of critical theory & positivism cancer and you got it nice.

Cultural Marxists use Marxist methods (historical research, the identification of economic interest, the study of the mutually conditioning relations between parts of a social order) to try to understand the complexity of power in contemporary society and to make it possible to criticise what, cultural Marxists propose, appears natural but is in fact ideological.

when does the movie imply that exclusively men are responsible for destroying the world?
the war boys are just one tribe and they're obviously so sadistic and crazy because of their leader

also I think its incorrect to say that Furiosa really wants to make the world better
all she really wants is personal redemption
she believes she can obtain this by saving the female slaves who are more than innocent and naive enough that this deed is difficult to misconstrue as anything more than simple heroism
so ultimately there is really no direct connection between Furiosa's motives and the fact that she is female

No, they made civilization worth living for, worth working for, worth fighting for, they're central to self-preservation of a 'tribe'. They put the resources gathered to use. They just can't do ideology well, they fuck it up, badly.

Why are you arguing about feminism in a movie where the majority of women shown are practically slaves?

>Fedora hugbox
Nice ad hominem.
I already copy pasted the parts of the article and linked you to the post so you didn't have to do so much reading, but I guess that's too much for you.
>Some source that isn't a complete shithole
Still haven't seen a single compelling argument as to why that's in any way valid

>Historical research and the identification of economic interest, aka objective viewpoints is a Marxist method of subversion
HAHAHA! Sup Forums fucking cracks me up.
You're probably the same kind of guy that says science is a liberal kike conspiracy, but then uses phrenology and eugenics to 'scientifically' argue racial superiority.

Your one quote from some random chick, mixed with your own interpretation is not a rigid definition of what cultural marxism is, thank you for proving my point.

Fury Road is a good movie, and you're just mad. Get over it

It's a pretty good explanation of the phenomenon of destroying cultures & tradition from within. You can only capslock and call people stupid, but guess that's part of being a low ability individual and not being able to actually discuss. Cultural marxism is deeply entrenched thing that has found its way into much of the social sciences, politics and humanities.

For example take feminism. Many feminists, informed by a background of cultural marxist ideas, unilaterally believe that it should be the case that the sexes should be equal and have no difference between them other than physical and reproductive capabilities, and so they take that to be the truth of the universe and ignore scientific, empirical evidence to the contrary:
dailymotion.com/playlist/x1xv47_BrainwashingInNorway_hjernevask-english/1#video=xp0tg8
(33minutes 40 seconds)
Here we can see a brilliant example of the cultural-marxist mindset in action
>what is your scientific basis for saying that biology plays no part in the genders' choice of work
>Scientific basis? I have what you would call a theoretical basis

I have a feeling that scenario looked like that.

The first version went to feminist editor which later went to Miller - himself a liberal but a reasonable one - or somebody else who turned some of the feminist nuttery into half-joke.

I mean what's the worst thing that could happen to a woman on post-apocalyptic wasteland?

Getting into harem of the most powerful despot around.

There was that western recently about cannibal Indians, they've had crippled(legs and arms chopped short), blinded pregnant women laying in the bare rock, idle - now that's how you make that kind of villains, Fury Road seems to screw it up intentionally. Make it so Joe turns the wives that get old into exotic furniture on life support, now that's a suck fucking bastard.

There's literally nothing wrong about Immortan Joe that isn't shared by Furiosa, which makes the finale where she takes over Joe's "establishment" look like just an ordinary coup with a thaw following it, rather than "liberation from male's oppression" the writer and editor seemed to hint.

Does it trigger you?

sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds
Society and culture dictate differences between the sexes, not biology.
Were your narrative true, women wouldn't be accomplishing many things they do to this day.
Musicians, CEOs, athletes, trades(wo)men, laborers, business owners, record breakers, military accomplishments, heavy equipment operators, racecar drivers, you name it.

My mom could play hockey better than you, my sister would out work you at a blue collar job, my one sister drives a train better than most of the men working in the company and I know plenty of other women who are smart, funny, hard working and skilled.

Get over yourself

>reply is literally "no you" and "sciencemag" article where you project your cultural marxism to it.

I don't even have to do anything.

>There's literally nothing wrong about Immortan Joe that isn't shared by Furiosa, which makes the finale where she takes over Joe's "establishment" look like just an ordinary coup with a thaw following it, rather than "liberation from male's oppression" the writer and editor seemed to hint.

Heh, I always found it quirky how feminists read that as happy ending when she is literally appropriating IJ's status of wealth and power by ascending above everyone else, much like the religious character of communism that people blindly follow.

>Society and culture dictate differences between the sexes
Why do infant girls pick up dolls while boys intentionally pick up cars when given a choice?

>I don't even have to do anything.
Except provide a scientific source that supports your position lol

Here's the actual study I shared, so you can't attack the website I linked without any real argument against it.
pnas.org/content/112/50/15468

Exactly the scenario definitely has some "FUCKING WHITE MALE" rhetoric in it but it falls on its face time after another(stronk independant furiosa has to be saved from being stupid by Max at least once etc.)

It's hilarious how a movie with absolutely great action sequences and special effects has such fucking botched plot.

Show me a controlled study with repeatable results and I'll show you a duck that shits gold

bustle.com/articles/89866-do-girls-really-prefer-dolls-the-science-behind-gender-preference-in-toys

You did read the study, right? You cannot draw the conclusion that being female or male is nurture from a study saying that the general make-up of the brain isn't sexually dimorphic.They aren't focusing on the differences but on the similarities. They even admit there are basic differences.

It's like saying that blacks and asians have no IQ differences because a study shows that there are specific chinese guys dumber than some nigerian guys. We are discussing tendencies, not sharp and distinguishable barriers. And that study says EXPLICITLY that there are inclination between men and women.

And there's also the fact that we know very little about the brain and how its activity directly translates into behaviour. It's like saying that you and me are literally the same because 99% of our DNA is the exact same. In reality the biological process behind this is extremely complex and we barely know how it works, so assumptions based on an external examination of the brain should be treated with care.

how convenient