Playing the “Name Game” With Progressives and Liberals (Part 2)

Letter from the Chaditor: If you haven’t already check out Part One of this article!

SJWs and the concept of DEAL WITH IT


In all my dealing with SJWs a noticeable through line with its writers is a notion that it’s your fault if something they wrote made you “feel bad”.  Alternatively, because of your ignorance you can’t handle what they’re “saying”. It’s a concept of “Sorry not Sorry” and SJWs are pretty good at this when they’re high up in the social justice ivory towers.

However, it’s in the push-back they receive where these special snowflakes start to evaporate. This is odd that considering in no other sphere do you have the tendency to revel in being an asshole like the SJW sphere. Look, they’re just “telling it like it is”, why you got to get so butt hurt about it?

SJWs are always quick with the knee jerk reaction when the content is soundly rejected. They’re quick with the “it’s not me, it’s you” and if possible disable comments and actively block people who are not willing to cooperate with their batshit frothing offerings.

Even more insane is those who are critical are said to be driving the SJW out of their respective field! The SJW cries, “The critics are actively against progressive ideals! Look they’re hating on my articles and videos!”

Never once does the SJW look at their output to see that maybe their shitty tone is “problematic”. Those critics are rejecting the hubris and arrogance of the author related along with their content, not their “firmly held ideals”.

This disrespect of audience and by extension, people, is one of the main reasons I reject SJWs admission as a “progressive” movement.

This is to say nothing of the SJWs constant need of outrage culture to propel what little “message” they have on offer. Often in the face of real issues affecting women and minorities. Nah, let us just focus on tertiary make-believe bullshit like a comedian misgendering someone, or how some piece of pop culture is doing irreparable harm to a tiny group of people.

The term slacktivism comes to mind when I look at the limited SJW ideological landscape. It seems that SJWs do the bulk of their work online. Because of their tribal nature, they don’t tend to have many actual friends, or a REAL community for that matter. So they become the busybodies of The Internets and spend vast amounts of their time “policing” people.

But to actual go outside and partake in REAL activism…play the game as it’s meant to be played to affect REAL change? The SJWs refuse to do so…which at least is in line with the bulk of liberal activism.

SJWs are of the mistaken idea that they’re intellectuals


How often do intelligent people boast of their intelligence? One tends to believe someone is overcompensating if they feel the need to constantly boast about how smart they are. SJWs are no different.

In the age of The Internets you would think that people would be able to possess greater intelligence…sadly it appears we’ve only gotten dumber, and with SJWs the notion of debate and healthy discourse is out the window because they can only be bothered with winning an argument, not flexing and testing their flawed ideology in the hopes of becoming stronger.

SJWs apparently believe that if they actually lose an argument or concede a point then the entirety of social justice is doomed and flawed. Which isn’t even the case…you win some and you lose some. Often you’re going to be bested by someone who better believes in their argument more, and can hide the flaws therein and present a sound case. This is where the relative youth, physiologically (and oftentimes) mentally, does SJWs in.  This is why SJWs have an utter allergy to anything outside their purview. And mostly they’re shit debaters.

If SJWs somehow find permanence in the political ideologies on their own then perhaps an upgrade to “progressives” should be in order. But I highly doubt that’s ever going to happen. Not only because I don’t think SJWs have the heart to carry their message that long, but also they don’t have the ability to widen their cause to the mainstream.

To the mainstream observer all they see if a group of people attempting to censor things they don’t like under the guise of oppression and feelings. The right-wing is already hyper averse to any political correctness, and SJWs embody that to the hilt!

The way SJWs have weaponized shame to their advantage is going to be very off-putting to people who may truly be ignorant and just need to learn. These very people could be useful allies, but SJWs are too busy finding anyone with questions about transgender, gay and minority people guilty of bigotry, misogyny and racism to offer help or marketable solutions.

Oftentimes, there is actually very little out there resources to regular people…even with the advancements of The Internets. SJWs could answer the questions that they find viscerally insulting and dumb, but they choose not to, in the vain attempt to maintain their marginalized status.

Keep the Chad dream alive! Donate Today!
Buy Now Button

Playing the “Name Game” With Progressives and Liberals (Part 2)

Playing the “Name Game” With Progressives and Liberals (Part 1)

Letter from the Chaditor: This was meant to be one article, but as I was writing, it ballooned to a giant article that I know for a fact you wouldn’t bother reading. I have now broke it up in to two easy to digest pieces. Enjoy!

Recently Youtuber Sargon of Akkad and Dave Rubin livesteamed a discussion about the modern left. Contrary to popular opinion, Mr. Rubin suggested that progressives differ from liberals in a few key areas. According to him while they “agree on 90%” of most things, there is now a noticeable difference and they should be labeled as such.

Problem is, we’ve already have a name for these types of liberals: social justice warriors…SJWs for short.


Mr. Rubin should know better than anyone that progressives and liberals are all the same to the right-wing, GOP, republicans…and the vast majority of people who don’t give a shit one way or the other. The GOP is the same party whose pundits proclaim all the time they are anything but republican. Be it center-right, conservative, “true” conservative, TEA Party Patriot and so on.

SJWs are fairly analogous to the TEA Party. Both are ideological tribes of people that just so happen to find themselves under the umbrella of an ideologically tinged party.  Yet, they choose to eschew the community within that ideology and do little for it aside from elevate themselves and their fractured worldview of things.

They both promote and exalt very bad figures from their tribe that do little to engender their cause to more mainstream support. As a whole both do not completely embody the ideals of their ideologies being as they are so fractured and tribal as to truly be able to have culpable deniability if and when a representative figure or idea implode on them.

The idea that SJWs “mostly agree with liberals” is pretty fallacious. SJWs are liberals mostly because they’re just beginning their political idealism. They’re young, college educated, which is the life force that feeds liberal ideology.

Modern Liberalism also has a weird tendency to claim to be the underdog, and has a constant marginalization streak going for it that attracts SJWs and their perpetual victim narrative.

However, SJWs take the cake in terms of blatantly ignoring the tenants of the liberal ideology and instead transforming their narcissism, hubris, arrogance and general political idiocy in to something that isn’t even remotely liberal. To say its “progressive” is an insult to both parties.

SJWs are intellectually incurious people

If SJWs were remotely liberal; they wouldn’t be nearly as allergic to differing opinions and thought. In all of my time researching and dealing with SJWs, I couldn’t believe the amount of inclusion based behavior on display. Echo chamber doesn’t even do the idea justice.


SJWs aren’t herd creatures, as you would think most ideologies go. Instead, they are small packs…the aforementioned tribes. On top of this, even being SJWs does not mean that an ideological thread holds true across all SJWs. Vary degrees of tolerance and what is allowable is different from SJW to SJW. It’s why it appears there is a constant shifting of the goalposts when arguing with an SJW, there are no real ideologically fast rules.

SJWs are ideologically lazy…to a fault

On top of refusing to engage in “the other” viewpoints and opinions, SJWs tend to stay well within the safety of their own hubris and arrogance. The term “special snowflake” is very apt for the SJW, as they tend to be very fragile with their ideology and can’t really hold their own in a debate or withstand marginal ideological resistance from the opposition viewpoint.

You’ll see them on twitter blocking people, regular people responding to SJW grandstanding-as-shitposting, not trolls. Disagreeing with SJWs is now somehow akin to harassment. Sometimes causing them to develop PTSD over merely refuting their nonsense and stating factual evidence to the contrary of their twisted arguments.

Oddly enough, you can see the allergy to truth manifest through their gender as well. With the male SJW tending to view himself much too intellectually superior to deal with the stupid people disagreeing with him. These are the more volatile of the two SJW camps, and when they lose, they lose big.

With the female SJW, it’s the same old song and dance repeatedly: The “other side” is misogynistic, sexist, bigoted…you know the drill. It’s doubly effective, as it allows her to never engage with any viewpoint not her own, and it gives her that sweet victim narrative to wave around if she does happen to engage and winds up looking foolish.

SJWs are flawless practitioners of the “Us vs. Them”

Anything outside of the SJW purview is just wrong, plain and simple. This is where being stunted ideologically and politically serves them well. Present a concept they can’t comprehend? Presto, it’s wrong or harmful on some level.

It’s where the idea of something might lead to something bad has found new resonance. When a SJW attempt to shame someone when they espouse an opinion that might make someone, probably a minority figure, harm themselves over it.

An example would be from my Reaxxion article about Chico being Quiet in MGSV. To have someone say that Hideo Kojima has a trans persons life in his hands and best step with caution IF Chico is Trans is disgusting. To then publish that in an article is ludicrous. It’s a brazenness that would not even be tolerated from SJWs had a cis gendered man said it, even JOKINGLY.

Be sure to check back soon for Part 2 of this article. While you’re down here, why not donate to the Toxic Dumps site? It’s easy and fun!
Buy Now Button

Playing the “Name Game” With Progressives and Liberals (Part 1)

Movie Review: American Ultra

In a review for American Ultra, a reviewer posited that August was the month where studios dumped their lesser movies; in the attempt to wring out just a bit more money out of summer moviegoers. Sadly, it’s not August that’s the true dumping ground, that distinction would go to February.

If it is a dumping ground, at least August has way better movies in it than the turgid, miscast, shelved-for-years nonsense that mucks up a February movie release calendar. This is why I hold out great hope for Deadpool, seeing at its only real competition will probably be another Katherine Heigl starring romantic-comedy abortion that a studio sneaks out.

As I stated in my The Man from U.N.C.L.E. review, August is home to the cable movie incubator. Sadly, this means that American Ultra joins its ranks as well.

From what little he has done between American Ultra and Chronicle, screenwriter Max Landis seems to be the king of great concepts that somehow lose something in the translation to the big screen. Perhaps in it’s the low risk/high reward budgets of his movies. Seeing as no studio in their right mind would give American Ultra the kind of budget that would do the material true justice. So instead, we get a modest $12 million dollar budgeted film that wisely uses that money for star power and less for action movie bang-pow.

American Ultra also lends itself to the notion of “it’s not for you”, a concept that a movie might not be for everyone. Sometimes old ass Peter Travers isn’t going to be the intended audience of a movie like this, even with his lackadaisical review style that inexplicably finds itself blurbed on every turd movie that’s released in a calendar year.

The movie is clearly aimed at a younger audience who doesn’t really have the necessary touchstones to better action movies.

Another problem that American Ultra is contending with is the idea that since its protagonists are potheads this is supposed to be a stoner movie. The movie clearly labeled itself as an action movie first, with comedy coming in a distant second. If this were to be a comedy, why would the two leads be Jessie Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart? Hell, the only real comedic elements in the film come from John Leguizamo and he’s barely in the film!

From left: The
From left: The “comedic” stylings of John Leguizamo, Jessie Eisenberg.

The limited budget means that the “action” in this action film is bare minimum. Many shaky-cam-laden and obscured camera fights scenes try to disguise that Eisenberg, or any of the other actors, didn’t spend six months learning how to fight or train in any kind of movie-kung fu. There are explosions, but they’re small and wimpy and if you’ve seen an action movie at any time in recent history, you’ve seen what’s on offer here.

The concept of Eisenberg’s super-spy Mike Howell being able to kill anyone with anything is awesome. Unfortunately, it’s never really used to great effect, outside of the first scene in which he uses a spoon and a cup of ramen. You’d think the climax taking place in a hardware store would yield great results, but it does not. It mainly reveals the budget constraints of the film and the need to keep things small. No unique kills with a brass wing nut or anything, just typical screwdrivers and hammers type maiming. And guns lots and lots of gunplay.

I still remain firmly unimpressed with Kristen Stewart and while she and Eisenberg have great chemistry, and help ground the film in the real human stakes the story tries to imply, she’s just…Kristen Stewart. She’s boring and constantly has her mouth open just this much to be annoying. You’d think she’d use all that Twilight money and get some acting classes.

“Acting” as seen in every movie Kristen Stewart has EVER been in.

American Ultra‘s true problem is pacing. If it is indeed an action movie then it can’t have so many pudgy parts padding out the time. Again, budget constraints are probably more to blame than anything else is, but in between the action set pieces is a lot of downtime. Some of it is used to great effect, especially considering the kind of actors they got for the film. It’s fun to watch Bill Pullman, Connie Britton and even Topher Grace kind of flex some semi-over-the-top acting.

But when it’s to the determent of the action, that’s where it begins to lose its edge and starts to become that cable movie masterpiece, languishing on TNT and AMC the rest of its days.

There’s an animation sequence at the end that reveals the true heart of the film. Its black light tinged color palette and over-the-top violence are only merely hinted at in American Ultra. Had this end scene informed more of the movie tonally and stylistically, perhaps it would’ve been better than cable movie average.

Buy Now Button

Movie Review: American Ultra

Movie Review: The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

August is what I like to refer to as the “Cable Movie Month” for releases: most of the movies are solid, but they lack that “Wow!” factor that most summer movies have. They make great background noise entertainment as you do something else while it plays on the television. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. is that movies in spades.

The trailer for Man from U.N.C.L.E. definitely sold a sexier movie than the one I saw in theaters. I also had NO IDEA that Guy Ritchie was at the helm of this flick. Even during the run-time I couldn’t tell you who the director could be, that is just how vanilla The Man from U.N.C.L.E. is.

To be fair, there is some great comic book panel-type work that plays well in action scenes and helps mask the utter cheapness that sits at the edges of the film. Made for an estimated $75 million one supposes that Ritchie spent all that money on sexy locations and great clothes for all the main characters and villains of the film.

1960's Movie Checklist: Sexy Clothes? Check. Sexy Locales? Check. Sexy People? Check.
1960’s Movie Checklist:
Sexy Clothes? Check.
Sexy Locales? Check.
Sexy People? Check.

The Man from U.N.C.L.E., based on the ‘60’s television series of the same name, and from the geriatric laden crowd in attendance when I went to the movie theater this weekend…was the main audience of this film. As I stated earlier, I came for the sexy spy film that is teased in the trailer, and I was GREATLY disappointed that that really wasn’t the case with the movie.

According to good ol’ Wikipedia, The Man from U.N.C.L.E. was supposed to be a Tom Cruise starring jam, and it reeks of the kind of middling end of summer film that he would get up to in the odd years between his bigger blockbusters. He would’ve elevated The Man from U.N.C.L.E. with his Cruise-like powers of riding a motorcycle in a few scenes, running around sexy locations in a sexy suit, climbing sexy architectural marvel buildings in a sexy suit and other cliché ass Tom Cruise things that fill his movies. Instead, we settle for Henry Cavill as Napoleon Solo, gentleman spy.

Cavill is the only actor in this film that I really liked. Illya Kuryakin, played by  Armie Hammer, who pretty much does the only thing he’s good at, being a straight man, and Alicia Vikander as “the girl” is cute and does what she can with what little she’s given. Cavill seems to be the only one having a real good time.

I may be the only reviewer that found Napoleon Solo’s aloofness endearing and infinitely watchable. Apparently he also saw the same trailer I did and somehow been ripped out of that and jammed in to this by-the-numbers spy movie with the same tired twists and supremely uninteresting villains with a rigid ass boring plans as far as that goes. I was half surprised they didn’t have a scene wherein the villainess held the world hostage for one million dollars or some trite bullshit.

The biggest problem that I had with this film, surprisingly, came from Jared Harris’ American accent. It’s fucking atrocious. Perhaps he was trying to impersonate the television series Saunders character or be in that campy movie that Henry Cavill thought he was starring in, but it just doesn’t work. On top of that his pronunciations are off as well, with been persistently being pronounced “BEAN”. I guess we can chock this one up as a paycheck for an otherwise great British actor.

Unintentional comedy is unintentional.
Unintentional comedy is unintentional.

Astonishingly enough with four credited writers, The Man from U.N.C.L.E. doesn’t have any tonal issues, and manages to only bog down in a few spots. They’ll be completely unnoticeable to the cable movie crowd, and more than likely truncated for run time and more commercials.

Ritchie as director-for-hire one would think he would lend more of his visual language to the film. Maybe his “influence” on younger directors is such now that even he is indistinguishable from your run of the mill director-for-hire as nothing in this film particularly stands out.

The use of the comic book style panels are used to great effect at the end of the film as both Napoleon Solo and Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer), descend on the villains’ compound (naturally) they essentially montage the entire event. Stylistically it’s kind of cool and essentially works as a fast forward to the films denouement. Nevertheless, realistically looks like they hired MAYBE six people to play bad guys, and they plainly use them repeatedly in various shots.

The biggest problem of The Man from U.N.C.L.E. is that is doesn’t pick a side and stay there. Is it a campy romp reminiscent of its source material, or is it a Guy Ritchie movie with modern overtones set in the 1960’s because of the source material? Which is very well why it wound up in the middling vanilla graveyard of an August instead of the bombastic awesome flavor of July? Doomed to live out the rest of its days as a cable movie mainstay played as background noise to folding laundry or midday sex romps.

Buy Now Button

Movie Review: The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

Rise of the Outrage at gamescom 2015

You had to have known that there was no way gamers were getting out of gamescom without some SJW pearl grasping fainting spells and firing up the ol’ Outrage Machine™ over nothing. This time SJWs favored power animal, Lara Croft and her upcoming game, is the focus…or perhaps continued focus of all this needless outrage.

Typically, the only way I really know what’s the haps with SJWs is hate listening to my favorite SJW cesspit the Isometric podcast. By now we all know the typical SJWs in this show, and as such, I will not waste my time with names, and will just pour out their nonsense.

Rise of the Tomb Raider was given a hefty gameplay demo by Microsoft during gamescom last week. If you played 2013’s Tomb Raider, you know what you’re getting in to with the sequel, and as such, there really should not have been anything worth noting out of the SJWs.

But of course there was. Again, they get in the Way Back Machine™ to scrape up some good old-fashioned outrage…from the games E3 2014 trailer…for some odd reason comparing and contrasting it to last week’s gamescom gameplay demo.

It’s always amusing to watch SJWs twist themselves in to knots over their rigid ideology. One of Isometric’s hosts deeply loves Tomb Raider, and identifies strongly with Lara Croft. They excuse Tomb Raider 2013’s extreme violence because Lara’s life is in danger (and something about people being in a cult or whatever). Yet somehow they find Rise of the Tomb Raider’s violence “problematic”.

This is juxtaposed with this notion of “dudebro” games having wanton violence. There aren’t “bad guys” per se or actual gameplay in first person shooters…just pure uncut violence against everything. That is why they are always “problematic”. It’s true because Isometric purports to be a “gaming” pod cast…they totally know what they are talking about.

Even more insane is that one of the hosts contacted the head writer of Rise of the Tomb Raider, Rhianna Pratchett, to level their concerns over the violence in the game.

What’s great is that this kicks in the SJWs long held fallacy that putting a woman in charge of something will only make it better. This proves only one thing: regardless of gender, when you work on something that costs millions of dollars, you do as told.

On top of this, a “good narrative justification” for violence? What? Because it’s a fucking video game is justification enough! Is Lara Croft just supposed to hug out all the problems in the game? Whisper lullabies in to enemies earfaces until they fall asleep?

Ms. Pratchett does fall in to that trap of making SJWs think they’re in on a conversation over the development of a game that’s gameplay was locked down long ago. I’m surprised she didn’t respond, “Do I have to explain the concept of game trailers, you fucking imbecile!” When asked to “justify” all the violence in Rise of the Tomb Raider.

It would be on par with a dipshit tweeting the director of the next Fast & Furious movie “So I saw a scene where people are sitting in their cars and talking to one another…is that the ENTIRE movie? Cuz if so, I’m out! That Shitz week! HAHN NEVER FORGET RIP (SPOILERZzZzZZzz)!”

Pictured: "narrative justified" violence
Pictured: “narrative justified” violence

What is odd is that the Isometric hosts don’t really get in to the meat of what was wrong with Tomb Raider 2013. Namely a first scene at the beginning of the game in which Lara struggles emotionally over killing a deer, but then proceeds to kill dozens of people, often brutally, in the rest of the game.

Perhaps I was just deaf and couldn’t hear Lara’s muffled “I’m so sorry”’s over the screams of her bludgeoned-to-death foes?

Granted there is some prattle over that other favored SJW “gamer” buzzword ludonarrative dissonance, but that is quickly squashed in favor of more pearl clutching and outrage.

What’s odd is the juxtaposing of the SJW approved E3 2014 trailer with the ultra-violent “duderos” only gamescom footage. Isometric’s hosts desire Rise of the Tomb Raider to have more elements like the therapy scene in the 2014 trailer. However, not discussed is Lara shooting an armed man in the head with an arrow, presumably on the way to raid a tomb? Who is the “bad guy” in that scene? The hosts would lead you to believe the obvious cis-gendered armed male, who was probably thinking only about rape like all the time, which is why he had to go.

Later on in the discussion, the notion is raised that since Microsoft is publishing the game that Rise of the Tomb Raider is being aimed at the “dudebro” audience and watering down all that great feminism that was established in the first game. Never you mind that Tomb Raider 2013 was viscerally heavy handed with it’s violence, even up to the very end of the game where Lara get’s to dual wield her iconic Desert Eagle handguns to finish the big bad boss (and presumably save her “implied” lesbian lover Sam).

According to SquareEnix, Tomb Raider 2013 didn’t meet their lofty sales expectations, selling a measly 4 million copies, probably because it had TOO much of the mushy girl stuff in it.

Again, watching SJW “gamers” trying to justify their ideology with games is beautiful. The guilt and shame of having the temerity to just like a game that’s “problematic” is often a heavy burden to bear, and they can‘t just outright admit how wrongheaded their ideology fits when it comes to video games.

It’s the problem of the self-righteous rigidity of adhering to an ideology like social justice. Kotaku’s Patrick Klepek encapsulates this perfectly with Gawker’s recent spate of events being Satan’s barbed cock to several people. Telling those who asked him why he failed to leave Gawker in light of what it has done to the personal lives of many people, to be reasonable and understand that he doesn’t ACTUALLY work for Gawker, and that he has to live and provide for his family. But hey at least he found it “distressing” and lost sleep over it for one night.

It’s odd that he would ask for understanding when he had no problem lambasting #GamerGate as a hate movement and it’s supporters as women hating harassers and harboring nothing but contempt for gamers who asked for levity and reason. But social justice and taking a stand against malfeasance can be tossed aside when you need to eat? Hypocrisy doesn’t even begin to describe this bullshit.

So it’s even more absurd that SJW “gamers” would have the hubris and arrogance to believe that somehow Rise of the Tomb Raider isn’t going to be this safe space hug box simulator that they desperately want it to be. What were they expecting? Because a woman wrote the story that somehow that would dictate gameplay and that what gamers REALLY want out of Tomb Raider game is veiled lesbian overtones and deep discussion laden therapy sessions in a TellTale Games-esque adventure game?

And they expect this game to be bought by whom exactly?

Buy Now Button

Rise of the Outrage at gamescom 2015

Movie Review: Fantastic Four (2015)

You have to wonder just exactly movie critics were expecting out of this Fantastic Four reboot. Better yet, was this movie an excuse for critics to expound on all their pent up dislike of the current, seemingly endless, barrage of comic book superhero movies clogging up mainstream pop culture at this point?

Like it or not all comic book movies are only middling to good. There’s not really one you can point to and say “Yes, this was all worth millions of dollars to final realize [Insert Comic Book Hero]’s journey to the big screen.”

As I said in my Ant-Man review, Marvel Studios is just making genre films and wedging superheroes in to them. Even the most middling of the Marvel Cinematic Universe are buoyed by this ridiculous idea that you need to watch all of them in order to be “in” on the overarching story arc that all these movies portend to.

That being said, I love the general “Fuck You, Marvel!” nature of the 20th Century Fox and Sony Marvel licensed movies. They keep making movies as a way to hold the licensed superheroes like X-Men and Spider-Man hostage, and Marvel just has to watch in horror as each successive “remake” or “reboot” comes to theaters. And critics are there to gleefully pan the shit out of them.

Fantastic Four harkens back to the late 90’s/early 00’s way of making comic book movies: Hire a director to put their “take” on a license, then drown the film in studio notes and general malfeasance and hope that whatever comes out is watchable. It is in the regard that Fantastic Four doesn’t disappoint.

Josh Trank’s Choronicle proved that if given a proper budget, he could do great things with a superhero movie. The bulk of Fantastic Four’s plot proves this out. It’s in the odd seemingly forced in action bits and clearly filmed many months later re-shoot scenes that the movie starts to unravel.

Look at that horrible ass wig on the right! Who approved that?
Look at that horrible ass wig on the right! Who approved that?

There’s some awful continuity shots in the movie, which I found so-bad-to-be-great and humorous. Sue Storm’s (Kate Mara) hair is a major culprit. One scene it looks normal, then a horrible ill fitting wig in the next, and then sometimes a less horrible wig, perhaps more of a bad dye job filling in. Towards the end of the film Johnny Storm (Michael B. Jordan) sports a clean shaved face only to magically grow a full goatee in the very next scene. Richard Reed (Miles Teller) also gets in on the game with a scruffy five a clock shadow and zitty chin only to be clean shaven and mildly LESS zitty in the next scene. Apparently only The Thing (Jamie Bell) was able to keep up continuity wise.

The humor in all of it is the notion that this movie cost $120 million dollars to make, and no one seemingly gave a shit that the movie played and looked patched together. From the continuity, to the shitty workman like heroes costumes, you have to wonder where all that money went?

Keeping with what I hope will be a continuing trend Fantastic Four clocks in about an hour and forty minutes. Even in its shoddily patched together framework, it doesn’t mess around plot wise. It even has the temerity to just move the film forward a year, because why waste time watching the heroes come to grips with their powers? The film leans on the audience being somewhat familiar with the source material, and perhaps a lot of this “Now the Fantastic Four will be used by the military ‘for reasons’” was more of a studio move than a directorial intention.

Aside from Trank’s recent (now deleted) tweet at dissatisfaction at the finished product, Fantastic Four is a pretty solid movie, outside of the clearly studio added elements that bog down the rest of the film. There are glimpses of a more grounded, less superhero-laden narrative that keeps getting pushed aside for scenes of the Fantastic Four using their powers. The “You’re Only Strong as a Family” sentimentality of the film seems more forced and out of place in this ramshackle version of the film.

Dr. Doom...or just Doom in this film.
Dr. Doom…or just Doom in this film.

It’s also too bad that they had to front load Victor von Doom (Toby Kebbell) with so much “he’s totally going to be the bad guy” nonsense before he becomes the vaunted archvillian of the movie. Plot-wise it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for him to want to destroy Earth. If he loves Planet Zero sooo much, then why not go back to it and leave well enough alone? Instead he’s all “Y’all be killing the Earth anyways, so fuck you, I’ll kill Earth for you!” and the Fantastic Four are compelled to stop them because they have superpowers. The End.

So if you were wanting an uncut version of a superhero movie, perhaps Fantastic Four isn’t for you. It’s not as a bad as critics are making it out to be, and it’s no less horrible than any of the other dozens of middling comic book movies cluttering up the movie theaters this summer.

Buy Now Button

Movie Review: Fantastic Four (2015)

Thoughts On Reaxxion’s Closure

I recently guested on Matt Forney’s podcast about Reaxxion’s closure with my fellow writers, but really didn’t get to say much. Between the staggering verbosity of some of the others, Skype being Skype and my butthole The Internets connection reeking havoc, I just sat back and listened.

As I stated when I got the chance to talk, I never found my footing as a writer on Reaxxion. I was brought on fully at the beginning of June, and hit the ground slipping and sliding as hard as I could. My output looked a lot like one of Billy’s maps from Family Circus, it was ALL OVER the place. Due mostly to the lack of direction, which I appreciated, I kind of had to feel things out for my self.

I never got a real good bead on the reader of Reaxxion. Were they just Return of Kings readers that liked video games? Were there actual gamers reading the site? Was #GamerGate even bothering with patronizing the site? I mean, the site was founded as an outlet for masculine gamers…but I don’t think it was married to the concept.

So I just did whatever the fuck I felt like doing, which turned out pretty well. I turned out only of couple of duds in the two months I wrote for Reaxxion.

If I could relate the failings of Reaxxion, there are several. Least of which being that it’s summertime and ALL the video game related sites are pretty much content bare at this point. It’s why having that stable of personalities is really helpful for those dark days where no game dare roam. Did Reaxxion have any breakout stars? Author’s content you just HAD to see?

That’s not to say that there wasn’t some great, awesome writing being done. There was plenty of it, we just weren’t finding any way in to that vaunted gamer purview.

Personally, Reaxxion was the biggest venue I had worked for up to now, so ANY views were great. I’ve always written like no one is reading my shit anyways. You have to be somewhat fearless in your work, the reader always sniffs you out if you aren’t.

Reaxxion needed more time to find it’s OWN voice. It was still mostly cribbing from it’s sister site Return of Kings, both in tone and incestuously content-wise with it’s writers. Reaxxion always felt like it was perpetually on the back burner. and serving too many masters.

The site moved from mostly gaming to focusing on pop culture media (movie, music, television), but I don’t think anyone told the readers. Several of my articles were hit with the “What does this have to do with video games?” comment.

Another aspect was the politics of the site. Since there wasn’t really a constant stable of writers the tone and politics of Reaxxion were all over the map. I would read an article from early on in the site where an author would praise the ideological neutrality of the site, then click on another author only to read about how leftists were ruining game culture through one thing or another.

#GamerGate proved that it was an amorphous apolitical mob long ago and wasn’t going to be drawn one way or another ideologically. Sure, you’ll grab a few dozen curious onlookers, but you’ll never grab the whole of #GamerGate. It’s the quality that makes the movement so great but so infuriating all in the same breath.

Gamers themselves tend to be apolitical, or at the very least internet libertarians. You’re not going to trick them by writing about video games and then jamming in rhetoric, they’re just too savvy for that. Reaxxion’s readers proved that out.

The one thing I could continuously count on for views was sharing my own rage at social justice buffoonery. Something  I’ve always loathed about the media and it’s pundits were the peddling of ignorance as truth. I’ve always had a problem with the hubris of those who have a soapbox and use it for ill. As video games have gotten bigger so too have the people that cover it in the games press, and so we have the rise of a pundit class of sorts, and lo, there are found wanting.

In an article I hope to write one day, I would submit that video games should never be classified as art because our critics are too stupid to properly critique anything intelligently. I wouldn’t even trust them to tell me what restaurant has anything worth eating.

The games press could be filled with shaved apes in hipster glasses and I don’t think anyone would notice. #GamerGate gave rise to this fact when thousands of gamers said “No.” and games writers turned to hysterics, having lost their authority to tell people how to think and act when it comes to video games.

In their boredom for ANYTHING new, the games press allowed social justice and politics to enter their writing. Slowly as a trickle and then a full torrent, and gamers who spoke out were silenced and shooed away. Disenfranchisement within the gaming community has been brewing for years.

The games press allowed SJWs to take an argument about ethics and turn in in to a narrative about sexism and harassment. For that, they will NEVER be forgiven.

Most of my work at Reaxxion was coming to terms with a games press I no longer enjoyed. Though valiant efforts were made to upend them, it became readily apparent that the games press we currently have is deeply rooted and connected. They aren’t going anywhere, and it seems as though no one has the time (and honestly the money) to form new outlets and foster new writers for all those gamers who want to start anew.

I also wrote about people that clearly weren’t gamers, who were less interested in learning the games culture, and more interested in changing it wholesale through a twisted worldview and their own biases. This constant notion from them that only “monsters”, “misogynists” and “bigots” would be against social justice became absurd. And when they were told to get fucked by gamers, they tried to burn the games culture to the ground with their bullshit narratives.

I knew these SJW gamers were not real gamers because I read their bullshit writings. At first to understand them, then later to be able to refute them at every turn. It’s why SJW gamers are starting to tiptoe away from social justice topics in their gaming output, or just leaving games culture altogether. There’s no cache in it anymore, arguably ever, that’s why I constantly wrote that #GamerGate had won. If any SJW games writers “moved up”, it was only laterally to sites where they don’t write about games as much or at all. I’ll take that any day.

I’m still unimpressed with what has risen up in the aftermath of #GamerGate. I’ve been following more YouTubers as of late, but find the rat race of their need to keep up with other YouTubers to be arduous viewing material.

I’m very unimpressed with the abuse of crowdfunding that has also become the norm as of late. The sheer audaciousness of some talentless, worthless, shallow “creative types” to ask for money from people to do LESS than what they were doing at any point in time is ludicrous to me. The quality of said content has only gotten worse, not better, as if the sheer quantity of lackluster content more than makes up for its shoddiness.

That being said, I am very proud of what I accomplished at Reaxxion, as I was unhindered in doing what I wanted to do. There was only one time where something I wrote was questioned and that is why I started this site. I am very certain that even more things will find their way here as I tend to use satire to cut as close to the bone as possible when I write. I find that sacred cows make the best burgers.

There is tentative talk of a goodly amount of Reaxxion staffers forming a new outlet to continue the work we started not so long ago. If I am brought on, I will bring my same sardonic nature and general lack of seriousness to the things that people take WAY too seriously.

Buy Now Button

Thoughts On Reaxxion’s Closure