Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it • Hacker News Board

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#191

Post by JabavuAdams » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:27 AM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #179

monoideism wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think there is good reason we may see violence as less of a big deal than it would be in reality. Then again, America is fairly violent as a country.

Relative to where? Looking up some statistics on violent crime rate by country, it doesn’t seem like the US is particularly an outlier.

Any other first-world nation?

EDIT> It doesn't make sense to lump murder in with generic violent crime. The US is an outlier among developed countries for murder. This is much worse than having comparable levels of generic violent crime.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#192

Post by BurningFrog » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:27 AM UTC

lurquer wrote: post #164

ChuckMcM wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if the answer isn't more mundane, money. Parents today seem to have no problem with their children seeing a movie where people are eviscerated on screen but won't let their kids see movies with sex in them. I found it funny that "Bridgerton", and "Game of Thrones" both produced with more sex, have been quite popular.

Putting aside parenting choices, the two types of images (sex and violence) are not equivalent. Sexual images produce a physiological response... you get horny. Violent images don’t really do much, maybe revulsion. But, other than that, not much at all. A picture of a bullet-ridden corpse will not make you want to shoot people. A picture of a naked chick having sex, on the other hand, will elicit a desire to have sex…

The important difference between violence and nudity on film is that the violence is completely fake, while the nudity is actually real.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#193

Post by nimbius » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:28 AM UTC

>Modern action and superhero films fetishize the body, even as they desexualize it.

The simple truth for the reasoning behind this is the same as why the average TV show is written at the fifth grade Kincaid reading level. In late-stage American capitalism delivering a product with consistent and maximized returns has become a critical priority.

Sex in cinema isnt used to tantalize moviegoers to buy the ticket anymore as its now a foregone conclusion you will consume the product. Marketing knows precicely how many of you will watch. The challenge is to maximize consumption.

the average Bollywood flick is hypercapitalism. Each piece taylor crafted to appeal to an entire family, their demographic spans 60 years in age. Theres romance, dancing, action, mystery, and comedy all rolled into every single production because its guaranteed to cast the widest net.

creating a one-size-fits-all product with set limits in 2021 is only running into concerns or difficulties when actors themselves break their eternal character with audiences as a role model and post something online thats in poor taste that outs them as a human being.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#194

Post by porknubbins » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:28 AM UTC

EdwardDiego wrote: post #14

I think this is why British crime dramas / police procedurals seem to feel more real (to me, raised in a post-colonial country) - very few people look like temporarily financially embarrassed models slumming it as detectives.

I love this about British/ Nordic tv. It feels as though every show injects more gritty realism compared to US polish. There is a spectrum though and US is actually on the better end. Most Asian tv shows feature the a tiny pool of the same gorgeous people who may or may not have acting skills.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#195

Post by astrange » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:28 AM UTC

gibbonsrcool wrote: post #64

Animats wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the War on Terror explanation a little far fetched. Yes, that was a bit much. The Cold War produced a much more serious fitness boom, especially during the Kennedy Administration.[1] It also produced an education boom. Today, 71% of young Americans are ineligible to serve in the military.[2] Too fat, too dumb, too criminal, or too drugged. There seems to be little concern about this at political levels. [1] ht…

I wonder if the lack of concern is because of the future of autonomous warfare. There's drones of course, but also tech that enables things like aircraft carriers to run with much fewer crew. I'm betting that national healthcare will cause a fitness boom. We'll start seeing each other's poor health as tax money, and there will be more stigma for being overweight.

My understanding is that a lot of people who join the military now come from military families, so they're kind of already prepared for it. (This is different from AOC's claim which is the military preys on poor students and gamers.)

If you're going in just as a drone pilot, the fitness standards wouldn't be needed for anything, so presumably they expect people to still be doing something up close and physical though?

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#196

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:31 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #67

brushfoot wrote: post #16

There are interesting ideas here. Personally, I find the War on Terror explanation a little far fetched. I think a more likely possibility is that movies started specializing. In the decades before the Internet, cinema was one place where the average person who didn't buy dirty magazines could glimpse more skin than in everyday life. Then the Internet came along. Suddenly pornography was in everyone's home. Soon it w…

I wonder if the answer isn't more mundane, money. Parents today seem to have no problem with their children seeing a movie where people are eviscerated on screen but won't let their kids see movies with sex in them. I found it funny that "Bridgerton", and "Game of Thrones" both produced with more sex, have been quite popular.

[deleted]

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#197

Post by astrange » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:32 AM UTC

pronlover723 wrote: post #151

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a sign of how messed our society is that we can depict torture but not a naked person.

Violence in media doesn't lead to violence in real life for various reasons. Most people are generally taught not to be violent to others and laws help enforce that social norm. Sex in media does lead to more sex real life because there's no social norm or law against not having sex and sex leads to STD and unwanted pregnancies. Hence, there is a logic to violence in media is okay and sex in media is less ok. One has…

I once read a reader question in a mainstream game magazine (GameInformer I think?) where they asked why it was ok for games to have violence but not sex. The answer was extremely angry they had to explain this, like a parent lecturing a child who'd just embarassed them in public.

But anyway, their answer was the opposite of yours. Violence in games is good because you "shouldn't do it in real life". Sex in video games is bad because you "should do it in real life". The kids currently call this "touching grass" or "getting some bitches".

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#198

Post by kbutler » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:32 AM UTC

kbutler wrote: post #87

gibbonsrcool wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if the lack of concern is because of the future of autonomous warfare. There's drones of course, but also tech that enables things like aircraft carriers to run with much fewer crew. I'm betting that national healthcare will cause a fitness boom. We'll start seeing each other's poor health as tax money, and there will be more stigma for being overweight.

The covid relief plan would prove a definitive counter to your hypothetical concern over tax money.

The public clamor for “$2k” checks, which comprise less than 1/4 of the $1.9 trillion dollar package that’s now entering reconciliation proves pretty strongly that the public is not sensitive to the cost of their government “benefits”.

The Democratic Party has never been particularly concerned about taxes and debt. The Republican Party is periodically concerned about it, but mostly when they don’t control the government.

I used to think Democrats would tax and spend, and republicans would borrow and spend. It looks like both will now print money (expand the money supply) and spend.

The next few years will be an interesting test of “Modern Monetary Theory”.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#199

Post by renewiltord » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:34 AM UTC

jjcon wrote: post #160

kyledrake wrote: post #141

Wanted to add this RE the shower scene in Starship Troopers: "Two nude scenes were kept in the original version (the co-ed shower and a bedroom scene with Rico and Dizzy), although these were modified in the broadcast version. The cast agreed to do the co-ed shower scene only if Verhoeven agreed to direct the scene naked, which he did. Verhoeven found it strange "Americans get more upset about nudity than ultra-viole…

> A bare breast is more difficult to get through the censors than a body riddled with bullets. I see this point a lot and I think it is a good one but I have some theories on it too. I think that violence (at least to a point) is part of our natural play instincts, think cops and robbers as a kid. We aren’t disturbed when young children mimic violence, we even see it in nature fairly ubiquitously. Animals play fight…

Children also play doctor all the time and look at stuff. They're curious about stuff like this and don't get damaged by it.

Re: Modern action films fetishize the body even as they desexualize it

#200

Post by aksss » Mon, Mar 08, 2021, 4:34 AM UTC

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #121

I feel like this article/author wanted to connect a lot of things when the reality of the situation is far more simple. People and young people have having less sex and less of everything because of poorer circumstances combined with an inability/reflectance to compromise. Applied to housing this means that it is economically harder to afford a house so people stay home in their parents mcmansions. It's hard to affor…

I always wonder if expectations are set correctly for “kids these days”. I bought my first house at about 26, halfsies with a friend, but we were above average income for our age being programmers back in the very early aughts. I don’t think my parents had their first home until they were in their thirties. There are certainly zoning issues in cities, there are legitimate issues with living wages, but the idea that you could step out of your parent’s house at less than 26 years of age and have the capital, credit history, etc., much less maturity, to own a house (and all that entails) seems like a mis-calibrated expectation. Kids need to allow for the idea that most people spend years amassing wealth in order to buy a home, and adults now were just as broke when they were young and starting out. It’s the difference between being level 1 and level 20. You don’t get the same cool stuff at lvl 1. If anything, I see far more economic opportunities (thank you, Internet) for young adults now than at any time in the past. There’s far more money in the United States than there is talent. Disposable income is crazy.