Why does it seem that way to you? I have not quite noticed that.
I think when you are younger, there are movies that profoundly affect you. When you get older, and you have seen a lot of movies, its rarer to get the same kind of feelings. But that's just a part of growing up, it isn't a problem of censorship. I wonder even if, upon re-watching now, you'd think Fight Club is really the pinnacle of edginess and a profound art you attribute to it now, or if maybe you were just young when you watched it. And I also wonder if there are some great, profound works being made now that, for whatever reason, you have simply missed or felt the need not to see. Is "American History X" really leagues above "How To Blow up a Pipeline" in terms of "uncomfortable and ugly topics"? What about "Beau is Afraid"? Is that one censored by the modern zeitgeist? What about the films of Yorgos Lanthimos, Ruben Östlund, Harmony Korine, or Nicolas Winding Refn? Trying honestly, its hard for me to pinpoint what in particular you might think is censored these days. People are definitely still making good, uncomfortable movies.
I had the exact opposite reaction, i.e. that the sudden concerted effort to suggest Biden had said he was going to do this seemed so forced and fake to me, that it immediately made me think Russia would be the culprit.
But I guess that kind of propaganda generation is semi-uncontrollable and just happens, with whatever seems to work bubbling up as successful (literal) memes replicating.
And there's probably similar people throwing stuff against the wall about why it was Russia until they find something with enough versimilitude that it sticks in the mind.
It also made me revisit the recent book "how to blow up a pipeline" as I had the same question when I heard that title. How can you justify the short term ecological damage against the long term. I assume it's possible, I just hadn't read an in depth argument on it. Interesting to read it and see if the author has been asked to comment yet.
edit, seems they have a film out, so now publicity stunt is a plausible theory:
Hacker Cinema
2 comments on Hacker News
Why does it seem that way to you? I have not quite noticed that.
I think when you are younger, there are movies that profoundly affect you. When you get older, and you have seen a lot of movies, its rarer to get the same kind of feelings. But that's just a part of growing up, it isn't a problem of censorship. I wonder even if, upon re-watching now, you'd think Fight Club is really the pinnacle of edginess and a profound art you attribute to it now, or if maybe you were just young when you watched it. And I also wonder if there are some great, profound works being made now that, for whatever reason, you have simply missed or felt the need not to see. Is "American History X" really leagues above "How To Blow up a Pipeline" in terms of "uncomfortable and ugly topics"? What about "Beau is Afraid"? Is that one censored by the modern zeitgeist? What about the films of Yorgos Lanthimos, Ruben Östlund, Harmony Korine, or Nicolas Winding Refn? Trying honestly, its hard for me to pinpoint what in particular you might think is censored these days. People are definitely still making good, uncomfortable movies.
I had the exact opposite reaction, i.e. that the sudden concerted effort to suggest Biden had said he was going to do this seemed so forced and fake to me, that it immediately made me think Russia would be the culprit.
But I guess that kind of propaganda generation is semi-uncontrollable and just happens, with whatever seems to work bubbling up as successful (literal) memes replicating.
And there's probably similar people throwing stuff against the wall about why it was Russia until they find something with enough versimilitude that it sticks in the mind.
It also made me revisit the recent book "how to blow up a pipeline" as I had the same question when I heard that title. How can you justify the short term ecological damage against the long term. I assume it's possible, I just hadn't read an in depth argument on it. Interesting to read it and see if the author has been asked to comment yet.
edit, seems they have a film out, so now publicity stunt is a plausible theory:
https://boundingintocomics.com/2022/09/26/how-to-blow-up-a-pipeline-director-claims-that-a-high-level-counterterrorism-official-helped-with-the-eco-terrorist-thriller/amp/