Patton Oswalt hijacks a twitter hashtag with excellent results
September 8, 2013 11:51 AM Subscribe
So the Toronto International Film Festival is going on as I write this. Their twitter hashtag is #TIFF13. But if you'd rather, Patton Oswalt and his followers have been making a little mischief with it, firing off a string of hilarious and brilliant never-to-be-made movies.
On preview, this feels like "Patton Oswalt does something quite funny but is also kind of a jerk to the Toronto International Film Festival". Probably I just got up on the wrong side of the bed, though.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:03 PM on September 8, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 12:03 PM on September 8, 2013 [9 favorites]
These are funny but it makes me sad because TIFF is a really good festival. I think all their lampooning would have been better suited for Tribeca or Sundance.
posted by cazoo at 12:03 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by cazoo at 12:03 PM on September 8, 2013
Is there a list of all the movies Patton Oswald has worked as a script doctor for?
posted by gwint at 12:11 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by gwint at 12:11 PM on September 8, 2013
"A little mischief"? It's more annoying that that, I'm sure, for folks who are actually there; it kills that tag as anything useful for, say, announcing cancellations and venue changes and such.
Oswalt should have used a different tag, and I hope he tells folks to stop soon.
posted by mediareport at 12:11 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
Oswalt should have used a different tag, and I hope he tells folks to stop soon.
posted by mediareport at 12:11 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
I am loving these. The Fourth Quarter sounds like a brilliant, but never-filmed episode of Strangers With Candy.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:28 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:28 PM on September 8, 2013
Did wonder if this was a real film how many comments the resulting MetaFilter FPP would generate?
posted by Wordshore at 12:31 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Wordshore at 12:31 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
BILL-IONAIRES (Doc) Bill Paxton & Bill Pullman travel the country to see if anyone knows the difference between them
I'm sold, please someone crowdfund this right now.
posted by Iosephus at 12:31 PM on September 8, 2013 [14 favorites]
I'm sold, please someone crowdfund this right now.
posted by Iosephus at 12:31 PM on September 8, 2013 [14 favorites]
FWIW, looking at the raw #TIFF13 tag, it seems to be mostly real stuff, Patton jokes mixed in. I'm not there, of course, so I don't know how it is, but it seems like it might be a nice little levity break.
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 12:38 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 12:38 PM on September 8, 2013
Yea, I thought it was kind of a dick move and then I looked through the real tweets and it's garbage like "@Burberry: Hugh Jackman seen in Burberry jacket at #TIFF13!" "@VanityFair: Juliette Binoche's haircut steals the scene at #TIFF13" so I don't think I care so much after all.
posted by jacalata at 12:45 PM on September 8, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by jacalata at 12:45 PM on September 8, 2013 [11 favorites]
Yeah, I really looked through for a while before I posted. "Hijack" might be a bit strong for what's going on, at most it's adding some noise to an already noisy channel. If they were smart, there'd be a separate hashtag for actual event scheduling.
posted by nevercalm at 12:57 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by nevercalm at 12:57 PM on September 8, 2013
Yeah, I missed that the raw feed (such as it is) isn't exactly being overwhelmed. But to explain a bit, Saturday night I quickly checked Twitter after work during a local festival and found out that an artist I loved was a last-minute replacement for a cancellation. I would've missed a fantastic show if I'd been forced to scroll through thousands of joke tweets to get to the update. *shrug*
posted by mediareport at 12:58 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by mediareport at 12:58 PM on September 8, 2013
I looked through the real tweets and it's garbage like "@Burberry: Hugh Jackman seen in Burberry jacket at #TIFF13!"
Yeah, let's be clear: TIFF, which once upon a time had a certain local flavour and a definite vibe of serious filmgoer's reverence for movies as an art form, has become a grotesque spectacle of imported Hollywood glam. Until Patton came along, my Twitter feed was being inflitrated by breathless updates from the many Torontonians I follow about which rooftop bar Brad Pitt was spotted at. What I mean is, it's not like the #TIFF13 feed was a tidy stream of logistical detail and pithy film commentary before Patton's mob showed up.
Also, stuff like this makes its own justification:
posted by gompa at 1:04 PM on September 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
Yeah, let's be clear: TIFF, which once upon a time had a certain local flavour and a definite vibe of serious filmgoer's reverence for movies as an art form, has become a grotesque spectacle of imported Hollywood glam. Until Patton came along, my Twitter feed was being inflitrated by breathless updates from the many Torontonians I follow about which rooftop bar Brad Pitt was spotted at. What I mean is, it's not like the #TIFF13 feed was a tidy stream of logistical detail and pithy film commentary before Patton's mob showed up.
Also, stuff like this makes its own justification:
RETWEET! (USA) Using a racist Hashtag during a lightning storm sends Gus (Larry the Cable Guy) back to the Civil War.Beats the hell out of "OMG I just saw Kate Winslet's baby bump and she had a latte at the Yorkville Starbucks!!1!"
CLICK BAIT (USA) A @Salon writer has just 12 hours to find the misogynist subtext in a Family Circus cartoon. Gripping. Griping.
posted by gompa at 1:04 PM on September 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
I hate TIFF with the heat of a thousand suns, but... what a dick.
posted by dobbs at 1:18 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by dobbs at 1:18 PM on September 8, 2013
Ah, okay, on preview maybe I was wrong about how it's used (I don't understand Twitter for the life of me and thought it was being used for useful things by the evil people that run TIFF--apparently not). Sorry for calling you a dick, Mr.Oswalt.
posted by dobbs at 1:20 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by dobbs at 1:20 PM on September 8, 2013
DOUBLETAKE (USA) An online commenter goes on a cross-country road trip to personally apologize to a standup comedian whose tweet he misunderstood.
posted by Nomyte at 1:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [19 favorites]
posted by Nomyte at 1:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [19 favorites]
nevercalm: If they were smart, there'd be a separate hashtag for actual event scheduling.
Except there is nothing keeping anyone else from using that hashtag, and thus making it as noisy and useless as the primary TIFF hashtag is now.
Twitter as a way to push instant updates out to followers is a great idea, and could work if there was one official events/updates account, but hashtags are for "trending" topics and conversations.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:30 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Except there is nothing keeping anyone else from using that hashtag, and thus making it as noisy and useless as the primary TIFF hashtag is now.
Twitter as a way to push instant updates out to followers is a great idea, and could work if there was one official events/updates account, but hashtags are for "trending" topics and conversations.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:30 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
INTUSSUSCEPTION (USA): A colon surgeon struggles to differentiate dreams from reality
posted by Renoroc at 1:48 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by Renoroc at 1:48 PM on September 8, 2013
a grotesque spectacle of imported Hollywood glam
As a news event, maybe. As a festival, this is completely not true. There are a zillion tiny films starring and made by people Hollywood has never heard of and will never hear of. Seriously, as a thing covered by press, it may have been taken over by celebrity. But the idea that the little films aren't there anymore is just demonstrably untrue.
posted by Linda_Holmes at 2:12 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
As a news event, maybe. As a festival, this is completely not true. There are a zillion tiny films starring and made by people Hollywood has never heard of and will never hear of. Seriously, as a thing covered by press, it may have been taken over by celebrity. But the idea that the little films aren't there anymore is just demonstrably untrue.
posted by Linda_Holmes at 2:12 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
If they were smart, there'd be a separate hashtag for actual event scheduling.
Not really; what they ought to do is create an account and make all official scheduling announcements from that account. Then various users can retweet them if they so desire, and it'll be obvious where the information comes from.
Anyone can use a hashtag, so it should never be thought of as a seal of approval / correctness / etc. Having an "official" hashtag for an event is just an invitation for spoofing.
posted by Kadin2048 at 2:15 PM on September 8, 2013 [5 favorites]
Not really; what they ought to do is create an account and make all official scheduling announcements from that account. Then various users can retweet them if they so desire, and it'll be obvious where the information comes from.
Anyone can use a hashtag, so it should never be thought of as a seal of approval / correctness / etc. Having an "official" hashtag for an event is just an invitation for spoofing.
posted by Kadin2048 at 2:15 PM on September 8, 2013 [5 favorites]
INTUSSUSCEPTION (USA): A colon surgeon struggles to differentiate dreams from reality
Sounds you don't want to hear during your colonoscopy: BRAUM...BRAUM...
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 2:17 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
Sounds you don't want to hear during your colonoscopy: BRAUM...BRAUM...
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 2:17 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, I could make a hashtag called #nooneleseusethishashtag, but that's no guarantee that someone else won't... use the hashtag. That's kind of half the point of Twitter.
posted by showbiz_liz at 2:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by showbiz_liz at 2:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
EDIT WINDOW (USA): A contributor to an online discussion board is in a race against time to find and correct the typos and grammar mistakes that might detract from the authority of their otherwise well-informed argument.
posted by dephlogisticated at 2:55 PM on September 8, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by dephlogisticated at 2:55 PM on September 8, 2013 [10 favorites]
You'll keep thinking that's funny right up until the moment where you find yourself yelling "DAMNIT, NO!" in a crowded office as the timer runs out on you just a second or two before you could have clicked the submit button.
posted by invitapriore at 3:16 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by invitapriore at 3:16 PM on September 8, 2013
INTUSSUSCEPTION (USA): A colon surgeon struggles to differentiate dreams from reality
Sounds you don't want to hear during your colonoscopy: BRAUM...BRAUM...
Followed by "We need to go deeper . . ."
posted by bibliowench at 3:17 PM on September 8, 2013 [6 favorites]
Followed by "We need to go deeper . . ."
And this.
posted by zippy at 3:33 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
And this.
posted by zippy at 3:33 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yesterday I saw a sandwich board outside a Toronto bar that said something like:
Free food for all Oscar winners!posted by grouse at 3:38 PM on September 8, 2013 [8 favorites]
Must present Oscar at time of purchase.
HELL FOR LAUGHTER - The story of one iconoclast's quest for a bathroom before a comedian's (Patton Oswalt) ComicCon set lead to him getting awesome seats and meeting someone who was on Dr. Who I guess but I don't really watch that show but she is very English and pretty so that's okay...
BIDDING FOR MY LIFE STORY STARTS AT 5 FIGURES
posted by robocop is bleeding at 3:50 PM on September 8, 2013
BIDDING FOR MY LIFE STORY STARTS AT 5 FIGURES
posted by robocop is bleeding at 3:50 PM on September 8, 2013
gompa: a grotesque spectacle of imported Hollywood glam
Linda_Holmes: As a news event, maybe. As a festival, this is completely not true.
Yeah, my impression of TIFF is mostly gained from a pal who lives in Toronto and tweets like mad about all the indie and international gems he sees each year and all the amazing discussions and people he meets. I'm sure there are a ton of big studio films/openings and lots of "imported Hollywood glam" cluttering the place, but I'm not sure he'd agree that TIFF itself has been corrupted.
posted by mediareport at 3:53 PM on September 8, 2013
Linda_Holmes: As a news event, maybe. As a festival, this is completely not true.
Yeah, my impression of TIFF is mostly gained from a pal who lives in Toronto and tweets like mad about all the indie and international gems he sees each year and all the amazing discussions and people he meets. I'm sure there are a ton of big studio films/openings and lots of "imported Hollywood glam" cluttering the place, but I'm not sure he'd agree that TIFF itself has been corrupted.
posted by mediareport at 3:53 PM on September 8, 2013
Dudes. People. It's a twitter hashtag.
The film festival and it's fans will manage as film festivals have managed since before Twitter existed. On the 1-10 scale of mean-prank harm this is a 1.
posted by windbox at 3:53 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
The film festival and it's fans will manage as film festivals have managed since before Twitter existed. On the 1-10 scale of mean-prank harm this is a 1.
posted by windbox at 3:53 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
RETWEET #M FOR MURDER (USA)
THE POSTMAN ONLY TWEETS ONCE (USA)
SORRY, WRONG HASHTAG (USA)
posted by yoink at 4:00 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
THE POSTMAN ONLY TWEETS ONCE (USA)
SORRY, WRONG HASHTAG (USA)
posted by yoink at 4:00 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
But the idea that the little films aren't there anymore is just demonstrably untrue.
Understood but not what I meant. My personal experience of TIFF was roughly '98 to '01; I was back in Toronto at the time of tiff maybe '07 or '08, and was shocked at the scale of the corporate-branded invite-only parties, the celeb-mongering, the way Bloor Street felt invaded for the duration. What I see and hear from afar leads me to believe it's only amped up since then.
The little movies are still screened, absolutely, but in my recollections (which may be sepia-toned) they weren't as marginal to the spectacle as they now are. I remember going to see a screening of Lagaan - an arty film by Bollywood standards - at the 2001 TIFF, and as we waited outside my wife nudged me in the ribs and pointed. Standing ten metres from us was Aamir Khan. (Roughly equivalent to "hey, look, Brad Pitt!") Eventually a few desi ladies in salwar kameez came over and asked for autographs and he was joined by a couple handlers, but he mostly came across as just a guy arriving at a screening. I might be wrong, but I'm under the impression this is not how it would go down, even for a Bollywood actor, at the glammed-up TIFF.
posted by gompa at 4:06 PM on September 8, 2013
Understood but not what I meant. My personal experience of TIFF was roughly '98 to '01; I was back in Toronto at the time of tiff maybe '07 or '08, and was shocked at the scale of the corporate-branded invite-only parties, the celeb-mongering, the way Bloor Street felt invaded for the duration. What I see and hear from afar leads me to believe it's only amped up since then.
The little movies are still screened, absolutely, but in my recollections (which may be sepia-toned) they weren't as marginal to the spectacle as they now are. I remember going to see a screening of Lagaan - an arty film by Bollywood standards - at the 2001 TIFF, and as we waited outside my wife nudged me in the ribs and pointed. Standing ten metres from us was Aamir Khan. (Roughly equivalent to "hey, look, Brad Pitt!") Eventually a few desi ladies in salwar kameez came over and asked for autographs and he was joined by a couple handlers, but he mostly came across as just a guy arriving at a screening. I might be wrong, but I'm under the impression this is not how it would go down, even for a Bollywood actor, at the glammed-up TIFF.
posted by gompa at 4:06 PM on September 8, 2013
I think that ... it's what you make it, you know? Yes, there are still the public screenings that attract screamers (I watched Adam Levine -- ADAM LEVINE -- get screeeeeamed at before the public screening of a film he's in just last night). But speaking for myself, I could spend the entire festival going to press screenings of nothing but things that will never be released in the U.S. at all. I think TIFF, like a lot of other things, is the experience you decide you're going to have. They show like 300 movies. What is even a full-time festival attendee going to see, going full-on the entire time? Maybe 40, if you're a total monster, more like 30 if you're just going to the movies all day? You're picking a little bitty sampling. It's whatever you decide it is.
I don't disagree with you that if you look at it as a media thing, there's way more attention going to the big movies than the little movies. But some of those big movies are helped (not unjustly) by festival build-up. 12 Years A Slave will be more anticipated because of how people are fuh-huh-reaking out over it up here (and did at Telluride), and I'm glad for that, even though it's a big Hollywood movie. Because it's super-good, and I want lots of people to see it.
I would just kind of say, I think, that if you truly care about the films and treat it as a collection of films and not a street carnival, it's still a pretty amazing showcase for small and adventurous movies. (Even some of the Hollywoody ones are intriguing; I saw Ayoade's The Double today, and despite starring Jesse Eisenberg, it is truly, genuinely very weird.) (And cool and imaginative. It sort of takes place in a bleaker version of the Joe Versus The Volcano universe.)
I don't know. I'm really lucky to get to come, and it wears me out, but I kind of agree with those who say shots at the actual movies they show here are an odd target, because there really is a lot of, like, obscure international experimentation going on, and I think that's a good thing, not all that mockable. I like Patton Oswalt, but I don't know that this is my favorite of his riffs. (For reasons having nothing to do with the hashtag, which, yes, is public property.)
posted by Linda_Holmes at 4:27 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't disagree with you that if you look at it as a media thing, there's way more attention going to the big movies than the little movies. But some of those big movies are helped (not unjustly) by festival build-up. 12 Years A Slave will be more anticipated because of how people are fuh-huh-reaking out over it up here (and did at Telluride), and I'm glad for that, even though it's a big Hollywood movie. Because it's super-good, and I want lots of people to see it.
I would just kind of say, I think, that if you truly care about the films and treat it as a collection of films and not a street carnival, it's still a pretty amazing showcase for small and adventurous movies. (Even some of the Hollywoody ones are intriguing; I saw Ayoade's The Double today, and despite starring Jesse Eisenberg, it is truly, genuinely very weird.) (And cool and imaginative. It sort of takes place in a bleaker version of the Joe Versus The Volcano universe.)
I don't know. I'm really lucky to get to come, and it wears me out, but I kind of agree with those who say shots at the actual movies they show here are an odd target, because there really is a lot of, like, obscure international experimentation going on, and I think that's a good thing, not all that mockable. I like Patton Oswalt, but I don't know that this is my favorite of his riffs. (For reasons having nothing to do with the hashtag, which, yes, is public property.)
posted by Linda_Holmes at 4:27 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
HAROLD & KUMAR & MAUDE Ruth Gordon's ghost slaps the shit out of everyone in the film industry
I'd happily watch that.
LIFE OF PIE (US) It's a movie about pie. Seriously. That's it. What the hell else do you want?
That too.
posted by glasseyes at 4:29 PM on September 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
I'd happily watch that.
LIFE OF PIE (US) It's a movie about pie. Seriously. That's it. What the hell else do you want?
That too.
posted by glasseyes at 4:29 PM on September 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
Wow, tacky.
Did this incident make anyone else realize they are tired of, and tired of hearing about, Patton Oswalt?
posted by Unified Theory at 5:45 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
Did this incident make anyone else realize they are tired of, and tired of hearing about, Patton Oswalt?
posted by Unified Theory at 5:45 PM on September 8, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm also tired of hearing about the Toronto International Film Festival, hashtags, Twitter, and people who are tired of things.
Wait, why am I reading this post?
posted by box at 6:12 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Wait, why am I reading this post?
posted by box at 6:12 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
TIFF should be thanking Oswalt. No such thing as bad publicity.
posted by whuppy at 6:41 PM on September 8, 2013
posted by whuppy at 6:41 PM on September 8, 2013
Did this incident make anyone else realize they are tired of, and tired of hearing about, Patton Oswalt?
Ah, that must be exhausting.
posted by gompa at 6:49 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ah, that must be exhausting.
posted by gompa at 6:49 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you think TIFF is bad, just you wait until the Grand Island Filmfest (#GIF). It'll be animated!
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:24 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
Unified Theory: "Wow, tacky.
Did this incident make anyone else realize they are tired of, and tired of hearing about, Patton Oswalt?"
His heart is in the right place, but he is really, really bad at Twitter.
posted by Gin and Comics at 7:47 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Did this incident make anyone else realize they are tired of, and tired of hearing about, Patton Oswalt?"
His heart is in the right place, but he is really, really bad at Twitter.
posted by Gin and Comics at 7:47 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
His heart is in the right place, but he is really, really bad at Twitter.
Nope. Anyone who was responsible for this cleverness is really, really good at Twitter.
You know who's bad at Twitter? Joss Whedon.
posted by crossoverman at 8:05 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
Nope. Anyone who was responsible for this cleverness is really, really good at Twitter.
You know who's bad at Twitter? Joss Whedon.
posted by crossoverman at 8:05 PM on September 8, 2013 [3 favorites]
So. Much. Bean-plating.
The other fun thing that's been happening with the hashtag: celebrity spotting is a BIG thing in Toronto during TIFF (the place is lousy with movie stars, seriously), so people have been tweeting fake spottings. E.g.
"SPOTTED: Idris Elba, outside a Quiznos, popped a man's skull like a tomato, winked at a woman who then exploded #TIFF13
But yes, sorry...hashtags are serious business.
posted by dry white toast at 8:33 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
The other fun thing that's been happening with the hashtag: celebrity spotting is a BIG thing in Toronto during TIFF (the place is lousy with movie stars, seriously), so people have been tweeting fake spottings. E.g.
"SPOTTED: Idris Elba, outside a Quiznos, popped a man's skull like a tomato, winked at a woman who then exploded #TIFF13
But yes, sorry...hashtags are serious business.
posted by dry white toast at 8:33 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Nope. Anyone who was responsible for this cleverness is really, really good at Twitter.
Ah yes. The moment I realized his essay about being sensitive about rape humor meant he was just waiting until the next rape joke he thought was funny.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:53 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ah yes. The moment I realized his essay about being sensitive about rape humor meant he was just waiting until the next rape joke he thought was funny.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:53 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ah yes. The moment I realized his essay about being sensitive about rape humor meant he was just waiting until the next rape joke he thought was funny.
Yeah, as a part of that series of tweets that are deliberate misunderstandings, I think that's being unfair.
posted by crossoverman at 11:03 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, as a part of that series of tweets that are deliberate misunderstandings, I think that's being unfair.
posted by crossoverman at 11:03 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't understand what you think is unfair. My comment, or the fact that he made a series of tweets that were meant to troll casual readers who are likely to read his tweets in isolation, and therefore would read, independent of the setup, what appear to be utterly hateful statements including a grotesque comment about rape?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:36 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:36 PM on September 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you think TIFF is bad, just you wait until the Grand Island Filmfest (#GIF). It'll be animated!
But do they pronounce it with a G or a J?
posted by Evilspork at 1:11 AM on September 9, 2013
But do they pronounce it with a G or a J?
posted by Evilspork at 1:11 AM on September 9, 2013
RUGRAT (Canada) A straight female police officer goes undercover to infiltrate a group of lesbian bank robbers
Hot-cha!
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:29 AM on September 9, 2013
Hot-cha!
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:29 AM on September 9, 2013
KING STREETCAR (Canada) A hapless commuter spends an hour in gridlock after working a 14 hour day. He then gives up and tries to walk, only to find that the sidewalk is closed to peasants. #TIFF13
posted by [expletive deleted] at 8:08 AM on September 9, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by [expletive deleted] at 8:08 AM on September 9, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't understand what you think is unfair. My comment, or the fact that he made a series of tweets that were meant to troll casual readers who are likely to read his tweets in isolation, and therefore would read, independent of the setup, what appear to be utterly hateful statements including a grotesque comment about rape?
At the end of Maria Bamford's Unwanted Thoughts Syndrome album, her show closer was her impression/takedown of the hacky over-sexual female road comic. It's a pretty funny bit, in my opinion. But I remember hearing an interview with her later that year, where she was talking about it as basically, like, there's a lot of people who don't get her stuff or think it's too weird, so she wrote the bit in part to sort of give them something familiar, while also making fun of it. But, she was saying, there's something disingenuous about playing for the ironic laughs and also for the straight ones: that for a lot of people, they're not reading sarcasm or irony into it, and she's confirming their opinions and giving them what they want and expect from a female road comic, not taking down the stereotype at all.
That's kind of where I land on the Oswalt two-part tweets thing. I sort of get what he's doing, but he's deliberately constructing the jokes in such a way as to be "misinterpreted" for the opposite viewpoint. Ok, but what happens then? He and his fans get to laugh about how stupid other people are, and other people get to pass around actual hateful messages with Oswalt's name on them. It's like if he cut up one of his specials into a thirty-second video so that he appears to be saying, over and over, "I...hate...women...and...hope...they...all...die...of...rape", and then laughing at people who think that's what he thinks. Well, ok, but that's a thing you put out there. That's not someone radically misinterpreting you or unfairly manipulating your stuff. That's someone interpreting you in the way that you meant them to and then you calling them an idiot for taking you at face value. It's "I get to say the horrible thing and also get to make fun of people who say the horrible thing". I don't think it really works that way.
posted by Errant at 11:55 AM on September 9, 2013 [2 favorites]
At the end of Maria Bamford's Unwanted Thoughts Syndrome album, her show closer was her impression/takedown of the hacky over-sexual female road comic. It's a pretty funny bit, in my opinion. But I remember hearing an interview with her later that year, where she was talking about it as basically, like, there's a lot of people who don't get her stuff or think it's too weird, so she wrote the bit in part to sort of give them something familiar, while also making fun of it. But, she was saying, there's something disingenuous about playing for the ironic laughs and also for the straight ones: that for a lot of people, they're not reading sarcasm or irony into it, and she's confirming their opinions and giving them what they want and expect from a female road comic, not taking down the stereotype at all.
That's kind of where I land on the Oswalt two-part tweets thing. I sort of get what he's doing, but he's deliberately constructing the jokes in such a way as to be "misinterpreted" for the opposite viewpoint. Ok, but what happens then? He and his fans get to laugh about how stupid other people are, and other people get to pass around actual hateful messages with Oswalt's name on them. It's like if he cut up one of his specials into a thirty-second video so that he appears to be saying, over and over, "I...hate...women...and...hope...they...all...die...of...rape", and then laughing at people who think that's what he thinks. Well, ok, but that's a thing you put out there. That's not someone radically misinterpreting you or unfairly manipulating your stuff. That's someone interpreting you in the way that you meant them to and then you calling them an idiot for taking you at face value. It's "I get to say the horrible thing and also get to make fun of people who say the horrible thing". I don't think it really works that way.
posted by Errant at 11:55 AM on September 9, 2013 [2 favorites]
Who said they were funny? How does the twitter context suggest that he'd joking? A stunt, perhaps, a set of thoughts with a common conceit yes but why does everything a standup say have to be a cheap angle for laughs?
How much of one's reaction to the material presented here speak about this man and how much does it speak to those of us reacting to it? Myself included.
posted by mce at 10:32 AM on September 10, 2013
How much of one's reaction to the material presented here speak about this man and how much does it speak to those of us reacting to it? Myself included.
posted by mce at 10:32 AM on September 10, 2013
Well, this is not really a thread about his rape jokes. I'll just say that I think he is a terrifically talented person whose talent is constantly undermined for me by his myopia regarding privilege and his inconsistency in recognizing when he's using comedy to reveal something and when he's being clever at somebody else's expense.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:14 PM on September 10, 2013
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:14 PM on September 10, 2013
Ok, where I said "jokes", substitute "Twitter performance art". It does not change the substance of my critique in any meaningful way.
posted by Errant at 12:56 PM on September 10, 2013
posted by Errant at 12:56 PM on September 10, 2013
Sure it is. Let's forget for a moment the question of whether his voice has any more value because he is, for some value, famous. What we do have is an individual with access to a reasonably widely distributed audience who used a l communications tool to say something about cultural mores, the relative frequency of some terrible views and the resulting need to over clarify one's non-abject-shittyness in some fairly common discussions to avoid being interpreted as a complete and her whole.
I simply don't see how it's any more likely that this stunt should be interpreted as 'hurrdurr made you look' instead of 'the fact that some saw this, thought I could be wrote saying something this terrible and it wasn't odd enough to wonder why, let alone _agree_with_this_crap_ is the problem'.
Every age has its hurdles in the past of social change. Sometimes they slow progress towards a more civilized future and sometimes they're bulwarks against the tide of incoming vandals pulling society back into the dark. What makes them effective though is the important ability to speak, be heard, and use public discourse to derive new solutions more robust than the products of a singular mind or perspective. It doesn't have to be pretty but if no one's complaining than we haven't found the edges of the argument yet.
Experts on a subject may ask be wise and we'll informed and still not agree. Personal excellence would suggest that on any sufficiently complex topic the more nuanced the opinion the more likely it is that participants will find something to bicker about. And that's OK. What's not I is confusing strong feeling on or about a subject for relevant expertise. I have very strong thoughts on traffic enforcement, I have been run over on my bike by drivers flaunting the law. This does not make me a policing of urban planning guru much as, I admit, my temper can lead me to believe.
Having strong thoughts on rape (even if I think we should all have some very strong thoughts) doesn't endow one with the infallible ability to declare the worthiness of any and all discourse on the subject. It sure as hell lend credibility and motivation to those seeking to speak about it's effects as similarly anecdotal experience is invaluable for anchoring discussion about any other difficult issue.
I can pick out all kinds of things I find silly or song about the content of the original post. Everything from ugh-film-festivals to blech-celeb-whoring to seriously-someone-thought-a-social-convention-on-a-third party-platform-had-any-expectation-of-authority? But only the last one is anything I can back up as misguided and provide constructive feedback for (release authoritative news via an authenticated account or use a controlled and moderated to for publishing).
Pretty much anything else I have to say on any of the original subject(s). I would have a hard time talking about the rest and offering anything other than opinion which I have probably done more than enough of already. If we want to talk about checking privilege it would behoove us all to ask who might read _our_ words and suggest the same. And why. And maybe speak up anyway. And maybe not.
Personal isn't the same as important, there's just a suspiciously high degree of overlap. Every one has an opinion, some more helpful than others, but they also have a body of personal experience that can't be wrong because it actually happened. Only the opinions are subject to change, the experience is only open to reinterpretation.
I have come around the very long way to make a much more generic point about this topic, some earlier comments and a general trend. Maybe it should have gone to the green, maybe it should have gone to my first, but I think if the original lust was interesting enough to be here it's worth conversing about why. I don't dismiss the idea that some things are just poor form or are otherwise irredeemable but I am not sure that this is the case here. When we encounter things that challenge us, or at least challenge us to defend our positions, I think we do ourselves (and any one we wish to speak to) a disservice by calling back onto the ready to hand reaction. If I find something distasteful I hope that I will be able to eloquently have a discussion about why and not stop at the what. I personally think that if I can't than I probably missed something or let me heart (or adrenals) do my thinking for me.
In that vein if it weren't for the early comments I would have passed this by as being completely trivial and uninteresting. 'Passerby found graffiti mildly amusing, no film at 11'. What did I miss that was so important good or bad?
posted by mce at 1:56 PM on September 10, 2013
I simply don't see how it's any more likely that this stunt should be interpreted as 'hurrdurr made you look' instead of 'the fact that some saw this, thought I could be wrote saying something this terrible and it wasn't odd enough to wonder why, let alone _agree_with_this_crap_ is the problem'.
Every age has its hurdles in the past of social change. Sometimes they slow progress towards a more civilized future and sometimes they're bulwarks against the tide of incoming vandals pulling society back into the dark. What makes them effective though is the important ability to speak, be heard, and use public discourse to derive new solutions more robust than the products of a singular mind or perspective. It doesn't have to be pretty but if no one's complaining than we haven't found the edges of the argument yet.
Experts on a subject may ask be wise and we'll informed and still not agree. Personal excellence would suggest that on any sufficiently complex topic the more nuanced the opinion the more likely it is that participants will find something to bicker about. And that's OK. What's not I is confusing strong feeling on or about a subject for relevant expertise. I have very strong thoughts on traffic enforcement, I have been run over on my bike by drivers flaunting the law. This does not make me a policing of urban planning guru much as, I admit, my temper can lead me to believe.
Having strong thoughts on rape (even if I think we should all have some very strong thoughts) doesn't endow one with the infallible ability to declare the worthiness of any and all discourse on the subject. It sure as hell lend credibility and motivation to those seeking to speak about it's effects as similarly anecdotal experience is invaluable for anchoring discussion about any other difficult issue.
I can pick out all kinds of things I find silly or song about the content of the original post. Everything from ugh-film-festivals to blech-celeb-whoring to seriously-someone-thought-a-social-convention-on-a-third party-platform-had-any-expectation-of-authority? But only the last one is anything I can back up as misguided and provide constructive feedback for (release authoritative news via an authenticated account or use a controlled and moderated to for publishing).
Pretty much anything else I have to say on any of the original subject(s). I would have a hard time talking about the rest and offering anything other than opinion which I have probably done more than enough of already. If we want to talk about checking privilege it would behoove us all to ask who might read _our_ words and suggest the same. And why. And maybe speak up anyway. And maybe not.
Personal isn't the same as important, there's just a suspiciously high degree of overlap. Every one has an opinion, some more helpful than others, but they also have a body of personal experience that can't be wrong because it actually happened. Only the opinions are subject to change, the experience is only open to reinterpretation.
I have come around the very long way to make a much more generic point about this topic, some earlier comments and a general trend. Maybe it should have gone to the green, maybe it should have gone to my first, but I think if the original lust was interesting enough to be here it's worth conversing about why. I don't dismiss the idea that some things are just poor form or are otherwise irredeemable but I am not sure that this is the case here. When we encounter things that challenge us, or at least challenge us to defend our positions, I think we do ourselves (and any one we wish to speak to) a disservice by calling back onto the ready to hand reaction. If I find something distasteful I hope that I will be able to eloquently have a discussion about why and not stop at the what. I personally think that if I can't than I probably missed something or let me heart (or adrenals) do my thinking for me.
In that vein if it weren't for the early comments I would have passed this by as being completely trivial and uninteresting. 'Passerby found graffiti mildly amusing, no film at 11'. What did I miss that was so important good or bad?
posted by mce at 1:56 PM on September 10, 2013
You can justify his tweets all you like. It's not going to make me think he's any less of a hypocrite. It was a joke made at the expense of readers who would think he was punching down, and that's exactly what he promised not to do.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 5:01 PM on September 10, 2013
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 5:01 PM on September 10, 2013
I simply don't see how it's any more likely that this stunt should be interpreted as 'hurrdurr made you look' instead of 'the fact that some saw this, thought I could be wrote saying something this terrible and it wasn't odd enough to wonder why, let alone _agree_with_this_crap_ is the problem'.
The essential problem with ironic racism, sexism, or whatever is that there isn't anything ironic about those comments. It may come as a great surprise to Patton and his followers/fans that anyone would believe that "women enjoy rape", but, you know, there are lots and lots of people who do say exactly that, sincerely. People do say things that terrible, all the fucking time. It's not even remotely remarkable. So instead of saying something that's so shocking, everyone takes a good hard look at how offensive such a statement would be, it's just him saying some shit that people say, except now he has a discrete and total message which says simply and only that, with his name on it.
I don't think Oswalt really thinks women enjoy rape, and neither do you, and neither do most people. But it's not enough that neither I nor you nor most anyone else thinks that, because that surprise is predicated on the idea of, "hey, you guys know me, you know I wouldn't ever think a thing like that, never mind say so sincerely." Except, you know what? I don't actually know that he doesn't think that. I'm guessing he doesn't, because I can parse what passes for contemporary irony, but people I've previously thought were cool have suddenly and inexplicably come up with nasty shit before.
The problem isn't that he was trying to make fun of people who think shitty things like this. The problem is that he's sufficiently disconnected from the actual issues that he thinks saying shitty things like this is so unusual as to call into question his seriousness. Of course the fact that some people agreed with that shitty thing is a problem. What point has he made, other than to give them one more shitty thing to agree with? Anyone who agrees with him knows that's a shitty thing to say. Anyone who agrees with what he said now thinks he agrees with them. Anybody who hasn't thought about any of this shit at all maybe now thinks women might like rape, because that awesome comic Patton Oswalt said so. The potential upside is not larger than the potential downside, because what's the upside, fuck everyone who retweeted the second half? We already know those guys should go to hell, except he never says that straight out, does he? So what's the thing he says implicitly, and what's the thing he says explicitly, and are we expecting people who don't get the implicit thing to understand anyway why the explicit thing is bad?
We both know what he was doing. What I'm saying is that doing what he was doing doesn't really help and has the potential to actually kind of hurt. It's bad engagement, predicated solely on cleverness and one-upsmanship. I don't, like, hate him for it or anything, but I don't think he accomplished very much and I'm not sure he'd be entirely proud of everything he did accomplish.
posted by Errant at 9:34 AM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
The essential problem with ironic racism, sexism, or whatever is that there isn't anything ironic about those comments. It may come as a great surprise to Patton and his followers/fans that anyone would believe that "women enjoy rape", but, you know, there are lots and lots of people who do say exactly that, sincerely. People do say things that terrible, all the fucking time. It's not even remotely remarkable. So instead of saying something that's so shocking, everyone takes a good hard look at how offensive such a statement would be, it's just him saying some shit that people say, except now he has a discrete and total message which says simply and only that, with his name on it.
I don't think Oswalt really thinks women enjoy rape, and neither do you, and neither do most people. But it's not enough that neither I nor you nor most anyone else thinks that, because that surprise is predicated on the idea of, "hey, you guys know me, you know I wouldn't ever think a thing like that, never mind say so sincerely." Except, you know what? I don't actually know that he doesn't think that. I'm guessing he doesn't, because I can parse what passes for contemporary irony, but people I've previously thought were cool have suddenly and inexplicably come up with nasty shit before.
The problem isn't that he was trying to make fun of people who think shitty things like this. The problem is that he's sufficiently disconnected from the actual issues that he thinks saying shitty things like this is so unusual as to call into question his seriousness. Of course the fact that some people agreed with that shitty thing is a problem. What point has he made, other than to give them one more shitty thing to agree with? Anyone who agrees with him knows that's a shitty thing to say. Anyone who agrees with what he said now thinks he agrees with them. Anybody who hasn't thought about any of this shit at all maybe now thinks women might like rape, because that awesome comic Patton Oswalt said so. The potential upside is not larger than the potential downside, because what's the upside, fuck everyone who retweeted the second half? We already know those guys should go to hell, except he never says that straight out, does he? So what's the thing he says implicitly, and what's the thing he says explicitly, and are we expecting people who don't get the implicit thing to understand anyway why the explicit thing is bad?
We both know what he was doing. What I'm saying is that doing what he was doing doesn't really help and has the potential to actually kind of hurt. It's bad engagement, predicated solely on cleverness and one-upsmanship. I don't, like, hate him for it or anything, but I don't think he accomplished very much and I'm not sure he'd be entirely proud of everything he did accomplish.
posted by Errant at 9:34 AM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
« Older Etymologically, the opposite of “suffering” is... | Unentschlossenheit Zweitausendunddreizehn Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Wait wasn't Laura Dern actually in this movie?
posted by The Whelk at 11:57 AM on September 8, 2013