Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
The reason it's 'politicized' is because it's a big-budget blockbuster with a primarily black cast. That's not something that happens, because studios have always played to the median population under the expectation that audiences wouldn't watch emptier entertainment that didn't directly reflect themselves...something that has led to plenty of 'whitewashed' characters in adaptations in the past. Films like 12 Years a Slave and the like are catering to a different, smaller audience, with budgets to match; it made $50m at the box office, whereas the most recent Avengers movie had a budget of $300m, and made $1.4b in receipts.

What makes Black Panther important is that it looks likely to disabuse the notion that the coveted younger adult market will only turn out to a popcorn movie that is Americanized and centered around either white primary protagonists, or non-white actors who have, ahem "crossover appeal" for white audiences. And thank **** for that; I don't mind superhero movies, but they're pretty generic save for when they veer away from the normal formulae, and anything that convinces the studios to invest big in something other than the safest path is a good thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint and Schrodinger's Cat
Schad said:
The reason it's 'politicized' is because it's a big-budget blockbuster with a primarily black cast. That's not something that happens, because studios have always played to the median population under the expectation that audiences wouldn't watch emptier entertainment that didn't directly reflect themselves...something that has led to plenty of 'whitewashed' characters in adaptations in the past. Films like 12 Years a Slave and the like are catering to a different, smaller audience, with budgets to match; it made $50m at the box office, whereas the most recent Avengers movie had a budget of $300m, and made $1.4b in receipts.

What makes Black Panther important is that it looks likely to disabuse the notion that the coveted younger adult market will only turn out to a popcorn movie that is Americanized and centered around either white primary protagonists, or non-white actors who have, ahem "crossover appeal" for white audiences. And thank **** for that; I don't mind superhero movies, but they're pretty generic save for when they veer away from the normal formulae, and anything that convinces the studios to invest big in something other than the safest path is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is what I was trying to say earlier when I was talking about how MotD etc only show saints because they feel they have to but would much rather show as much of Manchester United and the big clubs as possible as that's where the biggest audience is.


I think that kind of got lost a bit as people focused more on discrimination but I think think this is an important point and you've shown it better than I did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint
ImpSaint said:
Or listen to Sir Vince (WTF has he done to get knighted for) and raise tax on the little people because they've given up on trying to get money off those who don't pay what they should.................or maybe that is why he got the knighthood...........for dropping the idea of going after the rich people.

Vince Cable comes out with some very original ideas...............NOT. A tax that covers just health eh? And he wants to call it NHI.........Hmm nice idea that..........Just like it used to be called.

Seeing as Soubry knows she can't win her seat next time she may as well jump over to the Lib Dems for the remaining 3 years. She only just won her seat last year and she is still ignoring her leave voting constituents.
Click to expand...

Her constituents knew where she stood pre-election, so depsite being a "leave" constituency, they still opted for her. She is one of the saner voices in the Conservative (UKIP in reality) that I like to hear, and I admire her for standing up to the bullies in her party like JRM, fat BJ, the awful Goldsmith. These guys have views that belong in the Stone Age. We need more progressives in politics. The Greens have excellent policies and not stupid ones like the "New Conservatives."
 
ImpSaint said:
Vince Cable comes out with some very original ideas...............NOT. A tax that covers just health eh? And he wants to call it NHI.........Hmm nice idea that..........Just like it used to be called.
Click to expand...
Really? You're making the mistake of thinking that NI funds the NHS - it largely doesn't.

In the United Kingdom, National Insurance (NI) is a system of taxes paid by workers and employers, used primarily to fund state benefits. It was initially a contributory system of insurance against illness and unemployment, and later also provided retirement pensions and other benefits.

The NHS is funded mainly from general taxation and National Insurance contributions. In 2001, an increase in National Insurance rates intended to boost NHS funding increased the proportion paid for by National Insurance, although general taxation still accounts for around 80 per cent of NHS funding.
 
Schad said:
The reason it's 'politicized' is because it's a big-budget blockbuster with a primarily black cast. That's not something that happens, because studios have always played to the median population under the expectation that audiences wouldn't watch emptier entertainment that didn't directly reflect themselves...something that has led to plenty of 'whitewashed' characters in adaptations in the past. Films like 12 Years a Slave and the like are catering to a different, smaller audience, with budgets to match; it made $50m at the box office, whereas the most recent Avengers movie had a budget of $300m, and made $1.4b in receipts.

What makes Black Panther important is that it looks likely to disabuse the notion that the coveted younger adult market will only turn out to a popcorn movie that is Americanized and centered around either white primary protagonists, or non-white actors who have, ahem "crossover appeal" for white audiences. And thank **** for that; I don't mind superhero movies, but they're pretty generic save for when they veer away from the normal formulae, and anything that convinces the studios to invest big in something other than the safest path is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

It's only political in the sense that it's getting the usual superhero blockbuster treatment despite casting that doesn't conform to the norms. That makes it a more interesting film and also represents a step forward culturally and artistically. In a sense, it's different because it's NOT different.

But see, ImpSaint hadn't heard of it until it was released. Therefore, it must be some kind of conspiracy to foist an all-black exclusive mindset on the unsuspecting public instead of his ignorance of current pop culture.
 
SaintinSerbia said:
really? how does that work?
Click to expand...

They aren't part of the UK. They are a crown dependency along with Guernsey and Jersey. The UK is the only thing in the EU. The Cayman Islands is an overseas territory and not part of the EU. The exception to this is Gibraltar (also a British overseas territory) which is in the EU and is affected by Brexit.
 
SaintinSerbia said:
really? how does that work?
Click to expand...
The EU treaties apply to European territories of member states so Gibraltar is in the EU but the Caymans and Falklands, not being in Europe, aren’t. The two UK territories in Cyprus are also exempt because they’re basically just military bases and residents aren’t entitled to British citizenship.

As Whiteley has said, the Isle of Man is a crown dependency rather than a British Overseas Territory. From memory that means its relationship with the UK is technically through the monarch rather than the UK government.
 
I saw an article about how someone’s tax and NI deductions, for the tax year 2016-17, has been spent, which made quite interesting reading. (The notifications are being sent out, apparently, so I hope to receive one).

Total earnings £23113.00
Total deductions were £4227.00, of which:-
£1027.00 was spent on Welfare.
£858.00 on Health.
£545.00 on Pensions.
£520.00 on Education.
£46.00 on overseas aid
£30.00, a tad under 58p per week, on the EU Budget.
What the remainder was spent on I don’t know.

I’m thinking that leaving the EU is going to cost me a lot more than 58p per week, based on the various economic forecasts. It probably already is, plus I am still paying a contribution through my deductions.
I’m also thinking that those who complain about the amount of money we spend on overseas aid, may want to put it into context, although I do understand the desire to spend the money on home grown issues.
 
Puck said:
The EU treaties apply to European territories of member states so Gibraltar is in the EU but the Caymans and Falklands, not being in Europe, aren’t. The two UK territories in Cyprus are also exempt because they’re basically just military bases and residents aren’t entitled to British citizenship.

As Whiteley has said, the Isle of Man is a crown dependency rather than a British Overseas Territory. From memory that means its relationship with the UK is technically through the monarch rather than the UK government.
Click to expand...
I'm amazed at your (and Whiteleys) knowledge but have no idea how the Isle of Man has escaped all this ****. Now on my bucket list to visit the Isle of Man (if they'll let me in)
 
SaintinSerbia said:
I'm amazed at your (and Whiteleys) knowledge but have no idea how the Isle of Man has escaped all this ****. Now on my bucket list to visit the Isle of Man (if they'll let me in)
Click to expand...
It actually hasn’t totally escaped. I’ve just looked and it’s in the customs union so presumably will be affected in some way.

I know a bit because I’ve got friends who live there. It’s sort of a tiny, separate country that has an arrangement with the UK allowing the UK to govern its foreign policy. The UK government has no right whatsoever to make laws in the Isle of Man, Jersey or Guernsey (although I think a lot of UK law is sort of copied and pasted by the Manx government) but the UK government could in theory take direct control of Gibraltar or the Caymans.

If you really were to go then I’m told the TT races (early June time I think) are pretty cool but I’ve never been myself and I guess hotels etc would be fairly expensive at that time of year.
 
Puck said:
It actually hasn’t totally escaped. I’ve just looked and it’s in the customs union so presumably will be affected in some way.

I know a bit because I’ve got friends who live there. It’s sort of a tiny, separate country that has an arrangement with the UK allowing the UK to govern its foreign policy. The UK government has no right whatsoever to make laws in the Isle of Man, Jersey or Guernsey (although I think a lot of UK law is sort of copied and pasted by the Manx government) but the UK government could in theory take direct control of Gibraltar or the Caymans.

If you really were to go then I’m told the TT races (early June time I think) are pretty cool but I’ve never been myself and I guess hotels etc would be fairly expensive at that time of year.
Click to expand...
ok, I think I've got this now. Brexit is based on the isle of man. The EU will have no right whatsoever to make laws in the UK although all their laws will be copied and pasted by the UK government. (although hotels will be cheaper in the UK in June because we don't have the TT races?) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back