ishtar79 | Recs and a tech question

Entry tags:

recs,
recs:vids

Recs and a tech question

I’ve been having a problem for a while from videos fro YT, VM and the like-when I try to go full-screen, I get a wide screen, regardless of whether the video is embedded or at the main site, and with all my browsers. Does anybody have any idea why that may be?

Meta rec: Neoliberal Holmes, or, Everything I Know About Modern Life I Learned from Sherlock by

magnetic_pole I watch BBC’s Sherlock, but have been both unable to truly enjoy it and growing increasingly uncomfortable with fandom’s over-the-top reaction to it. This post shines an unforgiving light on every issue with the show I had, plus a few I hadn’t before reading it. Beyond its brilliant breakdown of Sherlock, there’s something to the core of the message that can be applied to fandom in general. At any rate, brilliant and thought-provoking.

Vividcon vid recs:
Things have changed by

trelkez Ats The compelling tragedy that is Wesley’s story.

Around the Bend by

danegen Multi Shiny fun of women behind the wheel.

Bad Romance by

sisabet Smallville Even before watching I was “yay!”, because

sisabet and Lady Gaga! What’s not to like? What I didn’t expect was going through a rollercoaster of emotions and left in a daze, unsure whether to cheer, cry or desperately read hunt down every single fic I ever loved when I was SV-obsessed.

Prowl by

sisabet and

sweetestdrain Multi There’s a reason this has been recced all over the place and generating all that discussion. Very clever look at fandom, in message and in delivery. ETA: The vidders chose not to warn, but that doesn't mean the video has no triggery content. Proceed with caution

Tandemonium by

jarrow BSG If you’re even a little disappointed by how BSG’s final seasons went, this is guaranteed to have you standing up and going ‘fuck, yes!’.

For Your Entertainment by

dualbunny BSG The song might seem like an odd fit for Tyrol, but it’s no more bizarre than the way his arc went. I still don’t know what the writers were going for, but this vid brilliantly highlights what they actually did.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Prowl by [personal profile] sisabet Multi There’s a reason this has been recced all over the place and generating all that discussion. Very clever look at fandom, in message and in delivery.
I haven't seen it recced, and talking about warnings, I really wished someone had warned me about this :o(

ETA: I missed the message, since I had to scramble to turn it off.

Edited 2010-08-12 16:04 (UTC)

Oh crap, I'm sorry! The vidders state that they don't warn, so I thought that would be enough to keep people away. I'll edit my post.

Not warning doesn't necessarily mean there is something to warn for - some people don't warn out of principle. And I get wanting people to see it without knowing - I just personally wish I'd known :o)

No, I get it! I was trying to respect the vidders' choices when it comes to warnings, but I see I should have erred on the side of cautions, especially since most of my flist are not specifically vid fans and might not guess at the possibility of strong content just by looking at the vidders and tongue-in-cheek note.

The thing is, first and foremost, I'm easily persuaded by recs, so I basically just followed your links and started dl'ing :o) ! Anyways, I think the whole warnings debate can go overboard (though I'm definitely a fan of warnings - not least because some people's squicks are other people's kinks, so they can work both as a way of staying away from things you don't like, as well as help you find things you do like), and I do feel my first comment was probably hasty - but I was very AAAARGH, ABORT, ABORT just then :o)

(In related news, I'm glad I now went and saw Jarrow's warning before watching the vid - argh, violence against women, I'm sick and tired of it.)

My tolerance for certain themes is a lot higher in vidding than in fic (which is odd, because I get squicked a lot easier by movies than books), so I tend to rec a lot more potentially triggery vids. Anyway, thank you for your comment, I'll think of a way next time to try to respect the vidder's warning philosophy and give people a heads-up.

I didn't really follow the warnings debate too closely (don't write/create and don't have triggers), but I wonder how the topic of warnings in recs was addressed.

Ahh, now I won't be able to watch Sherlock. Still, if I hadn't by now I probably wasn't going to. I am however, going to try and friend Magneticpole. She's cool. I wish I was articulate about my dislike of capitalism!

Well, like I said, I did enjoy it to an extent-but the spectre of the issues definitely looms large.

And that post is sheer articulate brilliance.

For me, though, these are exactly the points I like in Holmes - not because I agree with his sexism, classism etc, but because there are all traits that were in the original ACD stories and these, more than anything, make it a successful and faithful adaptation, in my opinion.

I don't know. It would be different to me if the text attempted to engage with these issues, but it feels like they're simply there for nostalgia, rather than something to be commented on. And go unfortunately unnoticed by a large part of the audience/fandom.

I like how Holmes is still Holmes and how he's basically a cold-hearted bastard that sees the world as his playground.

Oh, I was very impressed by how effective this Holmes was (more so than RDJ's, imo). Definitely compelling though not likeable in the slightest.

And yes, London was extremely whitewashed. To say nothing about the Orientalism of the second episode.

I don't know - nothing is addressed in the ACD stories, either.
(they're good fun but once you start thinking about the issues ignored, they're pretty creepy - and I think the new Holmes is doing the same thing)

(and I know how people think Moffat and Gattiss are geniuses, but I think that's only because RTD is such a crap director/writer etc.... I think they have better ideas and they're better at executing them, but their strong point is action not introspective character-based plots....)

Ah, I had forgotten about the Orientalism in the second ep - yes, that had been downright embarrassing to watch (I think I've done all I could to block it out of my mind)

Well, yes, Doyle didn't address those issues either, but as a society, we're supposed to have become *somewhat* more aware since. Those issues going unchallenged in 2010 is not equivalent to them going unchallenged in ACD's time.

(and I know how people think Moffat and Gattiss are geniuses, but I think that's only because RTD is such a crap director/writer etc.... I think they have better ideas and they're better at executing them, but their strong point is action not introspective character-based plots....)

Heh. Too true, both in terms of their writing flaws and RTD making them look good by comparison. I really should make a post about the latest DW season at some point.

Ah, I had forgotten about the Orientalism in the second ep - yes, that had been downright embarrassing to watch (I think I've done all I could to block it out of my mind)

I may have physically facepalmed a few times while watching, no lie.

but if they keep Holmes' ignoranve about the solar system, how do you expect them to address anything else?

I'll be looking forward to your DW review!!!

lol - i believe you about facepalming!!!!

My God, the solar system bit...how in the world would that even WORK, in modern times?

*nods*

Well I love 'Sherlock' because it is such a throw back to the original books by ACD... Doyle thought that Dr. Watson would be the hero, and instead all his readers loved and respected Holmes (who was supposed to be drug taking anti-social freak). Stephen Moffat is trying to get us to see that Sherlock is NOT an admirable character, except in that he has learned to value Watson. Watson is the admirable character, and Holmes is a misogynistic freak. I think that complaining about the Sherlock Holmes character means that the writer doesn't understand that. JMPO of course.

I think partly I like this so much because I've always disliked making Holmes the hero... I mean I love Robert Downey, Jr, but he is definitely from the tradition of making Holmes the hero (and I'll continue watching all movies RDJ makes, naturally).

I do agree that London could be more gritty, showing the under belly more (as it were)... I loved that about the RDJ movie: that really looked like dirty stinking Victorian London!

I don't think that post is saying Holmes should be heroic at all-it's more about how he's idolized/fetishized by the narrative. And that's without even getting into the fandom response (I've already glanced enough woobiefication to wonder what show these people were watching).

Yes, the RDJ movie was really fun, but it wasn't Holmes. My favourite RDJ movie is Iron Man though-he *is* Tony Stark, as far as I'm concerned.

OMG yes! I couldn't imagine anyone else doing so much as Ironman/Stark... in fact just thinking about it I had to stop and make an icon! Particularly now that Joss is going to get to write for and direct RDJ/Ironman/Stark! lol

(I'm very excited about Avengers)

Avengers is gonna be SO MUCH AWESOME! I especially appreciate it now that I've read up on more Marvel comics than the assorted X-titles!

I almost forgot: I got the package with the comics, thanks so much! It arrived in mid-July, but since I was on holiday at the time, I just got it yesterday (thank God the post-office held on to it0.

I'm so glad you got them! And I hope you enjoy them.... (or at least enjoy appreciating why so many people got pissed off at Joss! lol)

Meta rec: Neoliberal Holmes, or, Everything I Know About Modern Life I Learned from Sherlock by magnetic_pole I watch BBC’s Sherlock, but have been both unable to truly enjoy it and growing increasingly uncomfortable with fandom’s over-the-top reaction to it. This post shines an unforgiving light on every issue with the show I had, plus a few I hadn’t before reading it. Beyond its brilliant breakdown of Sherlock, there’s something to the core of the message that can be applied to fandom in general. At any rate, brilliant and thought-provoking.

From reading that, it looks like Sherlock has all the issues that Moffat has in general but amped up even more because Sherlock isn't a "kid's show". I was already at ease with my disinterest in his new show but it's always... I don't know... validating?... to have someone who appears to have had no feelings about his writing one way or the other prior to watching something of his to notice the same issues that I do.

Well, I *like* Moffat's writing, issues and all, but in Sherlock the issues are too huge to enjoy the narrative in spite of them. Not that it wasn't watchable per se, more like...impossible to actually love.

the issues are too huge to enjoy the narrative in spite of them. Not that it wasn't watchable per se, more like...impossible to actually love.

That's generally how I feel about Moffat's writing. He's not impossible to watch - he writes clever lines and such - but hard to love. Because of the looming issues.

We all have different things that ping us, though, for sure. I mean, I watched SPN for... four years? Maybe three, I can't recall at the moment, despite the build-up of issues that I had with it.

Edited 2010-08-12 12:47 (UTC)

growing increasingly uncomfortable with fandom’s over-the-top reaction to it.

Yes, this is a large chunk of my discomfort. That post could be applied to so many of the shows fandom eats up with a spoon and ultimately, it all makes me a bit queasy.

I have enjoyed and been fannish about plenty of problematic sources - even now I'm in Merlin fandom - but in order for me to compartmentalize (and I don't think there's anything wrong with compartmentalizing, our choices would be slim if we didn't), I need something in the source that is wholly unique, or that I can relate to even if it's underused or underwritten. With Sherlock, there's nothing unique. I can get subtextual teasing and pretty camera work anywhere. Hell, I can even get HOLMES elsewhere. And anything on the show I might be able to relate to is either dead or looked at with derision by everything from the narrative to the leads.

It's just not for me.

Edited 2010-08-12 13:09 (UTC)

Hey, if we had to stick to non-problematic sources to be fannish...there wouldn't be much of a fandom, is there? But I hear you, there has to be *something*. Unfortunately, for most of fandom, 'something'=two slashable attractive male leads+ (optional) EPIC MANPAIN. And I like my gratuitous slash as much as the next person, but it's not enough to sustain me.

Er that meta sounds like she's blaming Holmes for being Holmes which ... well that really does come under Do't like don't watch. If you want team work don't look to a series about a loner genius to provide it

That's not what I got out of it, but YMMV. I personally find it especially interesting as a commentary on the sort of thing fandom gets enthusiastic about.

Well the first half of the meta is nothing but a commentary on the fact that Holmes is a bright egotists, and then No problem is ever solved collaboratively. No assistance is helpful. No other types of intelligence are acknowledged. There is no such thing as society, only individual problems, and individual problem solvers.

Yanno, that's not what Holmes does. It just isn't.

To be honest, I didn't focus on that part, since I'm not familiar enough with UK politics for the full context. I did like the bits on class, gender and race-I feel that a lot of aspects of the original were transplanted as they were, only the result is a lot more jarring in a modern day context.

I pretty much flinch every time I see someone squeeing over OMG THE SLASHINESS of Holmes/Watson in that series and I've developed an almost Pavlovian response to just seeing the word Sherlock I don't care if this is me being too sensitive: after what Moffat & the actors said about how they're TOTES NOT GAY, it feels like being kicked in the fucking face.

Not that I expect fandom to give a shit about anything but the pretty white boys, of course.

+ extra punctuation as needed.

The funny thing is, I don't find it all *that* slashy. Yes, everyone mistakes them for a couple, har har, but we're told about the alleged homoeroticism more than we're shown it.

Not that I expect fandom to give a shit about anything but the pretty white boys, of course.

Perish the thought!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Recs and a tech question

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject