Daredevil Season 3 gets political

The place to talk about your favorite movies, tv series, cartoons, music and theater.
greycrusader
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by greycrusader » Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:33 pm

Paul GIaforte plead guilty in Montana, where the assault took place, not D.C.; he admitted his initial account of the incident was a lie when audio surfaced AND eyewitnesses came forward, including Alicia Acosta of a Fox News affiliate. Giaforte and his campaign manager first claimed the reporter grabbed HIM by the wrist and the two fell to the ground together. What actually happened-as attested to-was Giaforte grabbing the Guardian reporter by the neck with both hands, slamming him to the ground, then punching him at least twice while the man was prone. So yes, he flat out lied until confronted with evidence. At least be man enough to own up to what he did from the get-go, especially if he felt justified.

Giaforte was running for high office-he doesn't get to physically assault a journalist, or anyone else for that matter, just because they aggressively shout questions at him during a campaign. There was nothing stopping him from either walking out of the room or simply calling security guards or the police if this was not an open forum. And I stand by my statement-he wouldn't have gotten physical with someone who looked big enough or tough enough to fight back effectively. Ben Jacobs is skinny and considerably shorter than Giaforte.

And I can concede he was angry about fielding questions he didn't like and from someone he didn't expect, but that doesn't give anyone a license to assault another person, and again the whole "I was so enraged I lost control!" excuse doesn't play well with me-I've been angry at people many times and not resorted to attacking them.

And if we want to discuss media narratives, what's your take on Fox News Network refusing to cover the beatings perpetrated by the "Proud LiL' Boys" (while changing anti-gay epithets, of course), then having a segment discussing Antifa members brandishing swords-while showing video of Gavin McInees getting out a car and flashing his sword-cane, while not mentioning who he is-namely "Proud Lil" Boys" founder and professional instigator?

BriarThrone
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by BriarThrone » Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:08 pm

greycrusader wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:33 pm
Paul GIaforte plead guilty in Montana, where the assault took place, not D.C.; he admitted his initial account of the incident was a lie when audio surfaced AND eyewitnesses came forward, including Alicia Acosta of a Fox News affiliate. Giaforte and his campaign manager first claimed the reporter grabbed HIM by the wrist and the two fell to the ground together. What actually happened-as attested to-was Giaforte grabbing the Guardian reporter by the neck with both hands, slamming him to the ground, then punching him at least twice while the man was prone. So yes, he flat out lied until confronted with evidence. At least be man enough to own up to what he did from the get-go, especially if he felt justified.
What evidence? There was no evidence, only testimony, and the testimony of the reporters supported the reporter. Woo.
Giaforte was running for high office-he doesn't get to physically assault a journalist, or anyone else for that matter, just because they aggressively shout questions at him during a campaign. There was nothing stopping him from either walking out of the room or simply calling security guards or the police if this was not an open forum. And I stand by my statement-he wouldn't have gotten physical with someone who looked big enough or tough enough to fight back effectively. Ben Jacobs is skinny and considerably shorter than Giaforte.
That was not the scenario. Giaforte did not charge the man. No one claimed Giaforte approached him. Grabbing someone is a close range technique. Therefore, the reporter was very close. If, as you say, he was shouting, that means he was screaming in Congressman Giaforte's face, just from the facts you presented. That is ALSO assault, based on the law and the facts as you present them. As for whether or not he would have gotten physical with someone else, that is supposition about his character.
And I can concede he was angry about fielding questions he didn't like and from someone he didn't expect, but that doesn't give anyone a license to assault another person, and again the whole "I was so enraged I lost control!" excuse doesn't play well with me-I've been angry at people many times and not resorted to attacking them.
Were they screaming in your face at the time?
And if we want to discuss media narratives, what's your take on Fox News Network refusing to cover the beatings perpetrated by the "Proud LiL' Boys" (while changing anti-gay epithets, of course), then having a segment discussing Antifa members brandishing swords-while showing video of Gavin McInees getting out a car and flashing his sword-cane, while not mentioning who he is-namely "Proud Lil" Boys" founder and professional instigator?
Are you talking about the incident with video evidence proving that the Proud Boys were confronted by black-clad masked terrorists, not the other way around, and tried to walk away until they were attacked? Where they were victims of terrorist violence, except they won?

Couldn't speak to the FOX thing. I don't watch FOX. It's just that I've seen no evidence of the Proud Boys even starting fights, and TONS of evidence of vandalsim, robbery, theft, incitement to violence, and the entire spectrum of assault, battery, use of deadly weapons and those meant to permanently injure, and actual murder perpetrated by Antifa and BLM.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by RainOnTheSun » Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:13 pm

If you click on the link I provided, there is, in fact, an audio recording available as evidence. It also demonstrates that the only shouting came from Gianforte.

greycrusader
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by greycrusader » Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:18 pm

Actually, you can listen to the audio of the incident right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMr8Z5-d98

Hey, I was wrong; I thought Ben Jacobs might have been shouting (not screaming, just raising his voice as we've ALL seen reporters do on multiple, multiple occasions when questioning politicians who are waving them off, walking away, or just in a crowded room) but he wasn't even doing that much.

Oh wait-since he was close enough not to have to raise his voice at all, then that makes it an even MORE threatening situation, so being in normal talking distance means Jacobs was close enough to lunge at Giaforte and assault him if he suddenly lost his temper and...oops, guess I kind of did a thing there.

Giaforte assaulted a man, lied about it, tried to blame the victim, got busted, and plead guilty. Oh, and he's enough of a deadbeat that after his (insincere) apology, he promised Jacobs an interview but then reneged.

And YES, BriarThorne, I HAVE had people scream in my face and violate my personal space. The last time was about a decade ago, involving a drunk at a steakhouse. I still tried to defuse the situation by backing off and it didn't turn physical until he decided to follow me to my car.

Actually, the police have several of the "Proud Lil" Boys" in custody, as the video evidence shows several of the Lil' Boys kicked people in the stomach and head while those being struck were on the ground. Oh, and yelling anti-gay slurs while doing it. Legal presumption of innocent until proven guilty, but its hard to make a case for self-defense while kicking a prone target.

Good Lord, grown men calling themselves "Proud Lil' Boys", joining a man-child fraternity founded by a functional alcoholic, and feeling a sense of accomplishment if they can remember kids cereals while taking a few powder-puff punches.

BriarThrone
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by BriarThrone » Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:27 am

greycrusader wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:18 pm
Actually, you can listen to the audio of the incident right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMr8Z5-d98

Hey, I was wrong; I thought Ben Jacobs might have been shouting (not screaming, just raising his voice as we've ALL seen reporters do on multiple, multiple occasions when questioning politicians who are waving them off, walking away, or just in a crowded room) but he wasn't even doing that much.
It starts with hearing "get the fuck out." To me, that supports the reporter being intrusive, and since no context is provided, it does not in any way prove what the reporter was doing.
Giaforte assaulted a man, lied about it, tried to blame the victim, got busted, and plead guilty. Oh, and he's enough of a deadbeat that after his (insincere) apology, he promised Jacobs an interview but then reneged.
Giaforte did assault a man, yes, by the standard of "misdemeanor assault." Which is punishable by a sentence of "don't do that again." His initial testimony was contradicted only by eyewitness testimony. If he attacked a reporter for absolutely no provocation while surrounded, it would be an indicator of extreme psychological issues. As this is not the case, I can only conclude that he reacted inappropriately to provocation.
And YES, BriarThorne, I HAVE had people scream in my face and violate my personal space. The last time was about a decade ago, involving a drunk at a steakhouse. I still tried to defuse the situation by backing off and it didn't turn physical until he decided to follow me to my car.
What if he was in your office and would not "get the fuck out"?
Actually, the police have several of the "Proud Lil" Boys" in custody, as the video evidence shows several of the Lil' Boys kicked people in the stomach and head while those being struck were on the ground. Oh, and yelling anti-gay slurs while doing it. Legal presumption of innocent until proven guilty, but its hard to make a case for self-defense while kicking a prone target.
Film the end of any brawl, and the winners look like the bad guys. In this case, the beginning was also filmed. Antifa started it. The Proud Boys finished it. Yeah, it's best not to stomp the enemy after they've gone fetal, but you try coordinating restraint in a brawl.
Good Lord, grown men calling themselves "Proud Lil' Boys", joining a man-child fraternity founded by a functional alcoholic, and feeling a sense of accomplishment if they can remember kids cereals while taking a few powder-puff punches.
You can't talk about the immaturity of a name when you're adding a diminutive. Seriously, what are you thinking?

I'm not a fan of Daddy Hipster either, but the group he founded has some solid ideals and a proven counter-terrorism record. Thinking about looking into it.

greycrusader
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by greycrusader » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:00 am

In response to your questions:

1. There are actually these people called police who could be called if someone was drunk and belligerent at my place of work, though if the person was threatening violence I would likely try to subdue him/her, assuming they didn't have me at gunpoint or the like. But Ben Jacobs was not drunk, belligerent, or threatening violence. If someone is just standing there asking me questions and refusing to leave, I wouldn't assault them.

2. Its undetermined at this point which group initiated conflict, but the "Proud Lil' Boys" weren't acting lawfully or defending themselves in the video. See, in the U.S., we don't routinely let mobs of people just go at each other and mete out what they think is correct.

3. I'm thinking I'd rather be a proud American than a "Proud Lil" Boy"-you know, someone who doesn't follow an emotionally stunted middle-aged hipster, yell out homophobic slurs, need to be told to make my bed, or give a $h1t about children's breakfast cereals.

Now since this is Ares' house, not mine,and I don't want matters to get more ungracious, I've decided to leave it at that. If you want the last word on this, be my guest.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by RainOnTheSun » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:10 am

greycrusader wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:18 pm
Actually, you can listen to the audio of the incident right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMr8Z5-d98
That is an edited video with added voices and sound effects for comedy purposes. The real video is here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhoH4v8xYlU

BriarThrone
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by BriarThrone » Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:28 am

greycrusader wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:00 am
In response to your questions:

1. There are actually these people called police who could be called if someone was drunk and belligerent at my place of work, though if the person was threatening violence I would likely try to subdue him/her, assuming they didn't have me at gunpoint or the like. But Ben Jacobs was not drunk, belligerent, or threatening violence. If someone is just standing there asking me questions and refusing to leave, I wouldn't assault them.
"Police response times" mean that if you are being threatened right now, it is up to you to deal with it until they can arrive. That's why self-defense provisions exist. Also handy for when the police are reluctant to act for political reasons.
2. Its undetermined at this point which group initiated conflict, but the "Proud Lil' Boys" weren't acting lawfully or defending themselves in the video. See, in the U.S., we don't routinely let mobs of people just go at each other and mete out what they think is correct.
Uhh... watch the full police video. The Proud Boys were attacked. Clear as day. They then defended themselves. That makes it a case of self-defense. Whether or not getting carried away in the brawl is actionable is a legal question, but barring any serious harm, I doubt it.
3. I'm thinking I'd rather be a proud American
I do believe you're trying to lecture a disabled US Army infantry veteran about being a proud American. Fascinating.
than a "Proud Lil" Boy"
At this point, I'm curious. Do you legitimately not know the proper name for the group, or are you a MASSIVE hypocrite on the subject of maturity?
-you know, someone who doesn't follow an emotionally stunted middle-aged hipster,
I'm not a fan of Gavin, but he's the group's founder, not their messiah, as I understand it.
yell out homophobic slurs,
One or two people did, in a brawl, a situation where people shout obscenity. This does not reflect the group. How do you feel about Antifa shouting racial slurs while enforcing an illegal roadblock?
need to be told to make my bed,
Again, not sure if you're ignorant or immature. This looks on the surface to be a reference to Dr Peterson, but it takes some serious effort to distort the idea of beginning incremental improvement by exerting your control on your immediate surroundings first into being literally and exclusively about cleaning your room.
or give a $h1t about children's breakfast cereals.
Not sure what you're referring to here, but I'm sure it means the same high standard of intellectual rigor as the rest of your argument.
Now since this is Ares' house, not mine,and I don't want matters to get more ungracious, I've decided to leave it at that. If you want the last word on this, be my guest.
Why don't we take it to Debate? This lolcow surely has milk left to give.

User avatar
Arkrite
Posts: 1132
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:16 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by Arkrite » Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:36 am

It's never a good sign when somebody approaches a show or movie with the thought of "I'm going to leave my mark on this" instead of "I'm going to try to make the best show I can"

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by Ares » Sat Oct 20, 2018 4:21 am

Arkrite wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:36 am
It's never a good sign when somebody approaches a show or movie with the thought of "I'm going to leave my mark on this" instead of "I'm going to try to make the best show I can"
To me, that's emblematic of a large problem with the modern comic industry, perhaps the largest part. I know I've said this before, and I apologize for giving the same spiel over and over, but back in the 70s, 80s, 90s and the early 00s, it felt like comic writers realized that they were basically stewards of cultural icons. Guys like Roger Stern, Jerry Ordway, Kurt Busiek and the like were less about being the definitive take on a certain character or leaving their mark on a character, likely because of two reasons.

One was that these characters were cultural icons, and would change over time, and it was likely that their work on a character could be undone by the next writer that followed them. The second was that these characters are actually, to some degree, important to American culture, even global culture, and have the weight and importance of history on them. However silly the concept might be on the surface, who the characters are and what the characters represent should be treated with respect.

So these guys just focused on telling good stories, and you'd get amazingly consistent runs like Stern's Avengers, Spider-Man and Superman books, or Busiek's Avengers and Astro City.

If I had to pinpoint it, I'd say the seeds of it started with Jim Shooter's firing from Marvel and Ron Perelman's acquisition of Marvel. Shooter was by no means perfect, he had a reputation for micromanaging and other things, but under his stewardship you got some of the most highly acclaimed Marvel runs. Unfortunately, with his firing, lesser editors were placed in charge and Perelman acquired the company. This lead to a series of events where we saw the rise of the superstar artist like Jim Lee and Rob Liefeld (for some reason that still baffles me), which lead to Image Comics, and an era of "style over substance" and the birth of a lot of trends that still hurt comics today, such as generally darker and more violent themes, constant mega-events, the dedication to short-term profits over long-term profits and consumer stability.

Things stablized to a degree in late 90s up to around the mid 00s, but then we got the rise of the superstar writer, to where now each writer sees themselves as a brand in the making and want to leave their mark on a character. They want it to be known as "their" run of Superman or how "their" change affected the character, and receive royalties from "their" versions of characters (one reason Jason Aaron and Geoff Johns refuse to let JaneThor and Nu-Shazam die).

And when it becomes about pushing themselves and making their mark on a character, during a time when identity politics and politics in general have become such hot-button topics, why not insert their own politics into things to really try and be topical, make a statement and tie this run of a character to them.

In short, it feels like a lot of creators today are using comics characters as a means of self-aggrandizement, of making their run of a character about themselves rather than about telling good stories, about twisting characters to fit their conception of them and use them as mouthpieces for their own politics, rather than just telling good stories. Our buddy Kreu did a "Where I Read" of the Death and Return of Superman, and it's amazing both how entertaining the story is and how there's not a lick of politics in it. It wasn't some run these guys came up with to be the definitive Superman story, it was a way to kill time thanks to the showrunners of Lois and Clark not letting them get around to marrying . . . well, Lois and Clark.

Basically, it feels like some people in creative positions a lot of folks would love to be in are putting themselves and their own egos before the characters and good storytelling.

FuzzyBoots
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:20 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by FuzzyBoots » Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:33 pm

Arkrite wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:36 am
It's never a good sign when somebody approaches a show or movie with the thought of "I'm going to leave my mark on this" instead of "I'm going to try to make the best show I can"
Eh, although the "leave a mark" can be "leaves this better than it was before". I kind of see a parallel with computer game developers. There was a time when they didn't even get credited for their work, the reason why we had the original video game Easter Egg in Adventure, and eventually we hit the days of American McGee and John Romero before it all fell apart. I suspect many writers made their mark, and just weren't credited before the days of writers actually being recognized.

Honestly, early comic book characters were a bit bland, and continuity was loose enough that every writer was more or less automatically making their own mark because they would add new elements and just forget what came before. Somewhere along the line, we not only got better continuity, but a few cases of writers substantially changing the character and coming out with something better. I personally blame Frank Miller. :) It never got quite as bad as in the computer game industry (these writers / pencilers aren't actually running their own major companies for the most part), but I think we just haven't quite hit that crash point.

And because I'm kind of into disorganized points, I think we might also just have better memory for it with all of these wikis and comics news sites reporting on the twists and turns.

Ultimately, though, I'm willing to give it all a chance. For example, American Horror Story: Cult jumped into politics with both feet, and managed to survive (yes, lower ratings than the season before, but that's been a trend, and it's still as highly rated as the first two seasons).

WendellG
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:32 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by WendellG » Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:09 pm

I'm not a fan of bringing up political stuff in my entertainment, but it's kind of inevitable to an extent. I've stopped enjoying comics for this reason. It just became too much at some point. I'm still enjoying Daredevil, but I sure as heck hope this was just a one-off thing.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Daredevil Season 3 gets political

Post by Ares » Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:38 pm

WendellG wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:09 pm
I'm not a fan of bringing up political stuff in my entertainment, but it's kind of inevitable to an extent. I've stopped enjoying comics for this reason. It just became too much at some point. I'm still enjoying Daredevil, but I sure as heck hope this was just a one-off thing.
From what I've heard, Season 3 of Daredevil was really good, so perhaps the politics of the show were over-stated by the show runner in an effort to generate buzz and discussion about the series. Or to simply garner points with the right people.

Post Reply