Dr Handsome
Full Member
...but you can call me Eric.
Posts: 240
|
Post by Dr Handsome on Mar 23, 2011 1:42:05 GMT -5
In my mind the two aren't so different, the geekiest geeks and snobbiest snobs seem to care more about the idea of a film than the film itself.
What seems rare on the internet are writers that don't, in some way or another, treat the film community as an exclusive club, one whose membership is dependent on the number of obscure movies you've seen. It’s may not be on the surface but the sense of look-what-we-know pretension is fairly easy to sense.
It’s like what you said about geeks who approach art house from a sense of responsibility rather than passion or even snobs who distance themselves from quality films that happen to be tagged by a studio- everyone’s caught up in this game and nobody wants to admit it.
It's the reason I found myself basically begging for a Battleship Pretension forums: in the wilds of the internet where strong opinions and geek credibility are currency it's hard to find a sincere point of view, it’s become a competition where everyone’s just trying to out-nerd everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by ikderk on Mar 23, 2011 2:30:06 GMT -5
I think something I didn't catch from the episode was one point about the geeks: They are more likely to be abused by studios. Most of the films snobs love are made already and snobs rarely rely on big studios for their films. The films geeks love (I'm thinking of things like the new Captain America film) are in the hands of big studios and then the property is crushed into something terrible (I'm think of Wolverine). Snobs should feel a little bad for geeks because geeks are at the mercy of studios while snobs could almost ignore new films entirely.
|
|
|
|
Post by wbanks on Mar 23, 2011 12:51:45 GMT -5
The latest episode got me thinking about films that might offer some common ground for geeks and snobs.
A film that possibly fits the bill is The Dark Knight. It was very well received by critics and fans alike and dare I say might be one of those rare films that offers something for both geeks and snobs.
Are there films snobs that should see that geeks love and vice versa?
ps. Jeremy Roenick is a knob. You are right to want better from your hockey shows.
|
|
Dr Handsome
Full Member
...but you can call me Eric.
Posts: 240
|
Post by Dr Handsome on Mar 24, 2011 1:23:16 GMT -5
Ikderk: I think that's why snobs snub studio movies, because it's all perceived as some artless machine. Of course, that's not always true, art does often come out of the studio system and it's childish of them to ignore that.
Wbanks: Academy Awards nominees are usually well regarded in both circles. The Social Network is actually a really good example of a movie that's brought up often by both geeks and snobs.
I absolutely love that Moises Chiullan called out the film “geeks” who act as if covering art house cinema will make them seem more knowledgeable. It’s absolutely not a club but they treat it as one and then go ahead and act as if they’re an authority on the subject. I’ve got no problem with “geeks” enjoying art house, even writing about it but their pretentious posture is all too apparent on the page. I also have to agree: geeks care too much about “pictures of Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law with dirt on their faces.”
I also don’t see you hosts as snobs though, and I think I recall David referring to himself as one. If the definition of “snob” is being knowledgeable on a subject you care about than I’m an aspiring snob- but I think it’s a much more derogatory label and one that I try and keep my distance from. In my mind film snobs care more about seeming knowledgeable on the art than, you know, the art itself.
|
|
vulpix
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by vulpix on Mar 24, 2011 4:00:48 GMT -5
I've always been wary of leaning too much toward either end of the spectrum. I recall perusing other movie forums in which "personal favorite movie" lists consisted entirely of movies virtually nobody has ever heard of. On the other hand, I recall uncritical praise for certain films simply because of the director and/or franchise associated with them. I try not be either of those things, but ultimately, the important thing is simply to be honest about the films you truly love.
|
|
David
New Member
Co-hostin'!
Posts: 5
|
Post by David on Mar 24, 2011 15:56:14 GMT -5
Nothing would make me happier than for all discussions of this episode to devolve into discussions of what an obnoxious clown Jeremy Roenick is.
|
|
|
|
Post by mpwarren on Mar 24, 2011 16:07:12 GMT -5
Who's Jeremy Roenick, and why do people not like him?
|
|
David
New Member
Co-hostin'!
Posts: 5
|
Post by David on Mar 24, 2011 16:12:18 GMT -5
Jeremy Roenick, in the '90's, was admittedly one of the best hockey players in the NHL. But the fact that he played for the Blackhawks added to the fact that he's cocky and not anywhere near as funny as he thinks he is makes me hate him.
|
|
|
|
Post by mpwarren on Mar 24, 2011 16:34:03 GMT -5
Oh yes, of course. I remember that from the episode. I got confused by the thread and thought he was some kind of film blogger guy. Maybe one day he will be.
|
|
vulpix
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by vulpix on Mar 24, 2011 21:12:48 GMT -5
Nothing would make me happier than for all discussions of this episode to devolve into discussions of what an obnoxious clown Jeremy Roenick is. A clown? Does this look like the face of a clown to you?  |
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Mar 25, 2011 10:57:24 GMT -5
I really enjoyed this episode and thought it touched on a lot of good points. I am definetly more on the geek side of things. If I have a choise between something like the avengers or something like the kings speech it's a safe bet on what I'm going to see. Although I would not call myself much of a poser when it comes to art house. I don't useally see films just because it's nominated for an oscar (although I did see inception after everyone telling me I would like it and yes I did like it.) I feel there is a lot of middle ground out there for these two groups. Rocky won the best picture and a lot of the geek crowds like it.
The thing that I don't understand is why the two groups sometimes feel as though they should be fighting each other. Movies are not a war they are more like a city. There are places like wal-mart that appeal to the masses though you might not always find the best quality and then there are small places that appeal to certin groups. There is room for both studio films and art house in the industry. I always thought there was an understanding between the two. Movies like sucker punch take home the big box office and movies like kings speech take home the oscars which is the way it was meant to be. Zack didn't make sucker punch to win best picture he made it to entertain people.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnyunusual on Mar 25, 2011 18:23:10 GMT -5
I feel that I'm somewhere in between. I love to experience new types of cinema and while there's a lot of arthouse I'm not that into, I can often see something interesting their trying to do that just doesn't speak to me.
It's the same in comics. Often, I'll first head for the "fun" comics, but at the same time, I like picking up the works of Daniel Clowes or Seth (Wimbledon Green is fantastic).
Also, I'm sure you didn't mean to pigeonhole people, but I think that each person can be a different case and while some of us are comfortable in camps, others are happy being not quite one or the other. I love watching movies and reading comics for fun, but I also tend to do it with an analytical eye and ear. And besides, aren't geeks and snobs all just a subgenre of nerd?
In the immortal words of the one jock from Revenge of the Nerds; "NEEEEEEERRRRRRDDDDDDDSSSSS!"
|
|
