[ SECRET POST #4560 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4560 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Soldier's Girl]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Good Omens]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Clone Wars 2008 cartoon]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Sleepaway Camp]


__________________________________________________



06.
[When They See Us]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Dominic Keating/Star Trek: Enterprise/Diablo III/Dragon Age: Origins/Beowulf 2007]








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 30 secrets from Secret Submission Post #653.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

+1

[(Anonymous)]

It doesn't make you a wuss, it makes you hell of a lot better than the assholes who make these shows in the first place, using 'awareness' as another excuse to make a profit.

Re: +1

[(Anonymous)]

Ava DuVernay did not make When They See Us to turn a quick buck. She made it because she thinks it's an important political statement. It's cynical to an absurd and wildly unreasonably and frankly assholish degree to write off all political art as assholes using politics as an excuse to make a profit. wth

Re: +1

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

The people who actually try to make a statement with these things are few and far in between, and most often surrounded by idiots who do want to make a quick buck. Most people already know what's going on, most people don't need to be told, and it's fine if Ava or someone wants to inform the few who don't, but by making it a spectacle takes away from the actual people who suffered, not all who want to be portrayed in some false cinematic version of what went on.
I really just have a very deep and personal aversion to this sort of thing, so I have a hard time with the idea of publicizing real life events without hostility. Political art is just that. Art. It can be construed by whomever wants to paint the picture. I'm not okay with that.

Re: +1

[(Anonymous)]

Most people already know what's going on, most people don't need to be told,

It's very unclear to me whether or not this is actually true. It's definitely not something you can just take as a given

Political art is just that. Art. It can be construed by whomever wants to paint the picture. I'm not okay with that.

I'm honestly not trying to be hostile here but like... this just doesn't make sense to me? I don't understand? What do you mean you're not OK with that? What?

Re: +1

[(Anonymous)]

If people don't continue to produce various forms of media about historical events, those events get forgotten. Even people who will happily go off and research on their own still need to have their interest piqued. Just look at how Google searches for things like "nuclear reactor" and "roentgen" spiked with the release of Chernobyl. People could have gone and researched all of this long before HBO made a popular show about it, but not as many people did as did after. Maybe they weren't born yet and didn't hear about it at the time and had little reason to think about it before. That's probably true for many people regarding Central Park Five. I was alive, but young and living far away and I have no memory of hearing about the incident at the time. I learned about the Central Park Five later via a documentary on PBS. I'm not sure what separates this movie from that documentary or from any books, articles, interviews, or other documentaries on the subject. Different points of view, different spins on the subject, different pieces of information highlighted or ignored, yes... but it all adds up to history and catches people's attention so they don't forget.