Film Criticism

Discuss films and filmmakers of the 20th century (and even a little of the 19th century). Threads may contain spoilers.
Post Reply
Message
Author

User avatar
furbicide
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: Film Criticism

#952 Post by furbicide » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:02 am

Kind of caught between “why would anyone do that” and “why would anyone care if they did”. As far as internet crimes go, this is somewhere below editing your own Wikipedia page, right?

User avatar
tenia
Posts: 3530
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Film Criticism

#953 Post by tenia » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:14 am

With buying fake Twitter followers being allegedly so widespread, I'm wondering rather why he's the one getting fired for it. I mean, if this is becoming the fair punishment for it, an awful lot of people are going to be unemployed soon.
Last edited by tenia on Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ribs
Posts: 2887
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Film Criticism

#954 Post by Ribs » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:22 am

I think the main concern is it's possible he leveraged his Twitter following into salary negotiations, in which case spending the $500 or whatever to get an additional 100k+ followers is deceitful and taking advantage of their employer.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Film Criticism

#955 Post by DarkImbecile » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:25 am

Ribs wrote:I think the main concern is it's possible he leveraged his Twitter following into salary negotiations, in which case spending the $500 or whatever to get an additional 100k+ followers is deceitful and taking advantage of their employer.
I know what you mean here, and you may well be right, but my immediate reaction was:

"Oh no! An employee manipulating information in order to take advantage of the employer?! Everything is upside down!" <clutches pearls>

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28728
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Film Criticism

#956 Post by domino harvey » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:20 am

It is shockingly easy to spot accounts that use fake follower providers without clicking a single profile, since there are countless free sites that will show you the span of new followers and these don't form an organic rise. I think it's highly likely Roeper was already someone they wanted to ditch and this was an excuse to get him out of his contract, though

User avatar
tenia
Posts: 3530
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Film Criticism

#957 Post by tenia » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:22 am

domino harvey wrote:It is shockingly easy to spot accounts that use fake follower providers without clicking a single profile, since there are countless free sites that will show you the span of new followers and these don't form an organic rise.
So it's pretty much the same than for some reviewing websites where bad movies' 5 stars Spectators reviews are all from brand new account with no other activity than posting this 5 stars review ?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28728
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Film Criticism

#958 Post by domino harvey » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:24 am

I have no doubt there are fake follower, subscriber, or reviewer providers for other platforms like YouTube or whatever else

User avatar
Big Ben
Posts: 1079
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Film Criticism

#959 Post by Big Ben » Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:02 pm

I've seen quite a few people come to his defense of Twitter and they're echoing what's being said here. It seems slightly ridiculous when politicians have the same thing happening to them. I myself have fake followers (You don't get to choose who follows you if your Twitter is open.) and have had on more than one occasion been spammed with pornography from a bot.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Posts: 3808
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Film Criticism

#960 Post by cdnchris » Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:10 pm

Starting to read that sentence I was expecting it to finish with a sexual assault charge. So yeah...

User avatar
colinr0380
Posts: 8445
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Film Criticism

#961 Post by colinr0380 » Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:25 pm

Big Ben wrote:I've seen quite a few people come to his defense of Twitter and they're echoing what's being said here. It seems slightly ridiculous when politicians have the same thing happening to them. I myself have fake followers (You don't get to choose who follows you if your Twitter is open.) and have had on more than one occasion been spammed with pornography from a bot.
I barely post on my Twitter page and have had the same thing, though on logging in I have perhaps the worst fake follower ever: The Donald J. Trump, although it cannot be the President himself as that account only joined in August 2015 and has not tweeted since 4th September 2015! (Presumably that was the point when the joke about Trump becoming President one day stopped being funny!)

But yes buying followers seems like it is another facet of the Rotten Tomatoes effect, where your salary or success is tied into an arbitrary count that definitively calculates your 'worth' through your 'popularity'. I haven't managed to get to Series 3 of Black Mirror yet, but didn't Bryce Dallas Howard act in an episode all about that?

User avatar
med
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:58 pm

Re: Film Criticism

#962 Post by med » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:07 am

DarkImbecile wrote:
Ribs wrote:I think the main concern is it's possible he leveraged his Twitter following into salary negotiations, in which case spending the $500 or whatever to get an additional 100k+ followers is deceitful and taking advantage of their employer.
I know what you mean here, and you may well be right, but my immediate reaction was:

"Oh no! An employee manipulating information in order to take advantage of the employer?! Everything is upside down!" <clutches pearls>
To continue speculating, if Roeper did it for monetary gain, why would the Chicago Sun-Times prioritize the number of Twitter followers their writers have? Do they think it generates extra traffic? Because it doesn't. What Roeper did was silly and, at worst, embarrassing for him, but his employers shouldn't be placing financial importance on the number of Twitter followers he—or anyone else—has.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Posts: 4193
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Film Criticism

#963 Post by hearthesilence » Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:32 am

Filmmaker Jon Jost hasn't seen most of the Oscar nominees, so he's slowly making his way through them and posting reviews on his FB page. He's not known to be much of a fan of studio films (he already trashed Dunkirk last summer), so needless to say, it hasn't been an enjoyable experience for him thus far.

(Comments on those posts are also entertaining. Jost gives Tarkovsky the highest praise, Mark Rappaport thinks he's vastly overrated. A few people who knew Stan Brakhage talk about his habit of seeing nearly every film screening at the local theater and finding something to love about everything, even Hope Floats.)

User avatar
colinr0380
Posts: 8445
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Film Criticism

#964 Post by colinr0380 » Thu May 31, 2018 6:35 pm


User avatar
DarkImbecile
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Film Criticism

#965 Post by DarkImbecile » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:48 pm


User avatar
Big Ben
Posts: 1079
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Film Criticism

#966 Post by Big Ben » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:28 pm

Film Twitter was all over this one and has been all day and I won't lie I've been getting a kick out of the "What the hell?" responses to it. This is sadly not the weirdest oversexed response I've seen to a movie in the last six months. Be sure to check out the people who thought Venom and the new Predator are worth fucking. I imagine come release time it'll be even worse.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Film Criticism

#967 Post by DarkImbecile » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:31 pm

Big Ben wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:28 pm
This is sadly not the weirdest oversexed response I've seen to a movie in the last six months. Be sure to check out the people who thought Venom and the new Predator are worth fucking. I imagine come release time it'll be even worse.
Sure, but none of those people got published in The New Yorker!

User avatar
Boosmahn
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:08 pm

Re: Film Criticism

#968 Post by Boosmahn » Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:24 pm

This is gold. "And Daddy rested his cooling soda in his lap... watch out for flying popcorn."

What makes it even funnier is that this went through at least one other person who thought it was appropriate.

User avatar
furbicide
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: Film Criticism

#969 Post by furbicide » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:19 pm

I'd say that boredom does strange things to people, but Lane actually seems to have liked these films (Egyptian religious references and all). Each to their own, Anthony – I still haven't forgiven my family for dragging me along to the first film when I was a teenager.

The question for me is less whether animated Disney characters are sexualised/fetishised (of course they are) and more whether The New Yorker's film review choices are leaving their writers sexually frustrated. If so, perhaps he and these Twitter types have something in common.

Post Reply