YuyoDrift

How do you walk around in public with a lockscreen like this? X'D

we had glee debuting ten years ago, and we have literally no new major queer actors emerging recently, meaning that besides niche roles, low-paid TV gigs and local theatre, entertainment has nothing to offer to them.
 
nvm the general rise of social conformism and homophobia is also real, it's tangible and measurable, and this heffer with her transpropriation is just another symptom of a bigger process which, I suspect, is entirely ignored by the heterosexuals and the adjacent closeted crowd because it doesn't affect them/their job prospects.
 
ScarJo is a known imbecile, her google quotes page has been making rounds on twitter like literally yesterday again;
 
I don't see any reason to be happy about anything related to this person.

Hmm, you seem more invested in this than I am, which is very little.
My defense for the actors/actresses was to go beyond SJ and simply see their "just business" take, as you said. Considering that there are still many actors that have yet to "come out of the closet" after a successful life in hiding their true identity, you may be hard pressed to believe those college kids in drama or acting 101 never disappeared. We're only what, maybe entering the second decade of openly gay actors in hollywood? I'd give it more time.
 
You could be right that she's overflowing with confidence/cockiness in an industry that calls for it in order to "make it", but as I've mentioned in another thread, part of the balance is being proud of what/who you are no matter what. If she is taking advantage of a system that's been catered to "her types of people", and well enough to piss someone like yourself off, aren't you glad she's the wrong person to make statements like these to make your argument hold more weight?
 
It's really hard to provide an answer to this because we both understand that the mainstream audience cannot handle a level of exposure like say, a film about the struggles/lifestyle of a protagonist who is gay, played by an actor/actress who has openly admitted that they are gay, what with everything that has been surfacing online regarding LGBT and the associated controversies with it. Even Hollywood, that have been black-facing/eye slanting/etc actors since forever because they feel that (It's a stupid way of looking at it today, I am aware) their revenue gained at the box office would come in more steadily this way, aren't ready/accepting for it. I even question if the current actors are willing to look the other way for success/land these cut/dry roles they know their counterpart could more accurately play. Aaaaaaaand then you have people like SJ saying "what's your problem guys? this is Hollywood and I (we) can do whatever the fuck I (we) want in our films."
 
That said, an indie film will always be the best method to do all of this, what with people being more open to smaller budgeted studios these days. Combined with the internet at their disposal to promote/bring awareness to the intent of the film, I'd say this would be a better route to go in order to break that mold. Leave the fuckers in Hollywood in their palace and create your own, ya know? Getting past the conglomerate that is the movie industry that controls possibly every movie theater out there with their own films could be tough, but after seeing films (that you wouldn't think would do well) that bring a satirical/compassionate form of awareness on issues here in the USA by newer directors like Jordan Peele and Ryan Coogler, I'd say it's possible to give Hollywood a run for their money.
 
I love it.
 
Edit: I just read @secret_no_03 post and I agree haha.
 

I think it's safe to say for the foreseeable future the best hopes Trans actors have of breaking out is indie films that win praise as film festivals because Middle America or the Bible belt aren't going to show a movie that will have every church group in a fifty mile radius foaming at the mouth.

Hmm, you seem more invested in this than I am, which is very little.
My defense for the actors/actresses was to go beyond SJ and simply see their "just business" take, as you said. Considering that there are still many actors that have yet to "come out of the closet" after a successful life in hiding their true identity, you may be hard pressed to believe those college kids in drama or acting 101 never disappeared. We're only what, maybe entering the second decade of openly gay actors in hollywood? I'd give it more time.
 
You could be right that she's overflowing with confidence/cockiness in an industry that calls for it in order to "make it", but as I've mentioned in another thread, part of the balance is being proud of what/who you are no matter what. If she is taking advantage of a system that's been catered to "her types of people", and well enough to piss someone like yourself off, aren't you glad she's the wrong person to make statements like these to make your argument hold more weight?
 
It's really hard to provide an answer to this because we both understand that the mainstream audience cannot handle a level of exposure like say, a film about the struggles/lifestyle of a protagonist who is gay, played by an actor/actress who has openly admitted that they are gay, what with everything that has been surfacing online regarding LGBT and the associated controversies with it. Even Hollywood, that have been black-facing/eye slanting/etc actors since forever because they feel that (It's a stupid way of looking at it today, I am aware) their revenue gained at the box office would come in more steadily this way, aren't ready/accepting for it. I even question if the current actors are willing to look the other way for success/land these cut/dry roles they know their counterpart could more accurately play. Aaaaaaaand then you have people like SJ saying "what's your problem guys? this is Hollywood and I (we) can do whatever the fuck I (we) want in our films."
 
That said, an indie film will always be the best method to do all of this, what with people being more open to smaller budgeted studios these days. Combined with the internet at their disposal to promote/bring awareness to the intent of the film, I'd say this would be a better route to go in order to break that mold. Leave the fuckers in Hollywood in their palace and create your own, ya know? Getting past the conglomerate that is the movie industry that controls possibly every movie theater out there with their own films could be tough, but after seeing films (that you wouldn't think would do well) that bring a satirical/compassionate form of awareness on issues here in the USA by newer directors like Jordan Peele and Ryan Coogler, I'd say it's possible to give Hollywood a run for their money.
 
I love it.
 
Edit: I just read @secret_no_03 post and I agree haha.
 

@YuyoDrift I see your point. Plus, putting an unknown lgbt actor in a movie about lgbt subjects might scare the mainstream away, so placing someone like Scarlet as the star at least makes it more digestible to people who wouldn't even consider a bowl of rainbow flakes for breakfast. In a way, it could be beneficial in the long run. 
 
The thing is, sure the challenge of playing a character that is completely different to your being could be a great experience for the actor.  But there are people who have lived these struggles. They are out there and ready to show others their story, or the story of their queer idols, if only they had the chance. Even if a more unknown lgbt actor applied for these roles and did a fucking great performance, Scarjo is available and she brings in the money with her pretty, harmless straightness regardless of her performance. You could almost say no one else stands a chance and I'd argue that this type of "ally" does more harm than good. It's all well and good to have a sexy cis actress play a trans man, we can all pretend we're okay with "them" as long as they're appealing to our eyes and just pretend. Try placing an actual trans person who might not be as well manicured and Hollywood-fied in front of the same audience and see them grab their pitchforks and recoil in disgust. 

I'm sure many of you older VK fans have also noticed this, unless I'm imagining things, but I don't think I am.
 
 What I noticed is that the indie bands of the current VK era are playing at a level that they didn't about a decade ago, and I mean in terms of sheer skill. Bands of the present day are blowing bands from about 10 years ago completely out of the water by this metric. They are playing faster, heavier, and more complex riffs. Vocalists have become much more polished singers, and the ability to growl has become much more common in a vocalist's skillset, whereas 10 years ago there weren't many decent growlers in the indies scene, and most of those who were, still didn't perform at the level of guys from bands like Deviloof, Nocturnal Bloodlust, DIMLIM, DEXCORE, D.I.D, etc.
 
I'm wondering if anyone has noticed this, and what the reason may be? Has the VK scene just gotten much more competitive? Are all the average bands simply not being noticed? What's causing this massive skill increase? Another thing I've noticed is that band members don't have zillions of past bands in their resume anymore. It's as if they've reached a high level much more quickly than they used to. Back about a decade ago, the best musicians would usually work their way up to reach a high skill level, having played for years in previous bands before finally reaching a more major status, and continue to improve from there. Nowadays, it's very common for musicians with little to no known band history to play at the level of those with years of history behind them.
 
So I'm just curious to know what you all think, but I'm sorry if this has been brought up before. I have no doubt that this has been on people's minds, especially jaded fans who have been involved for a decade or longer, and have noticed several shifts in the scene within the current era. Lastly, I don't think the skill increase is a bad thing, although I did enjoy the slower, simpler sound that bands used to have. It wasn't as impressive, but the tunes were fun. I don't think bands with my favorite type of sound will ever emerge again, but it doesn't bother me. I still have those bands, and they still exist as a part of history, with music that can still be obtained. Everyone has different taste and I'm happy w/ the scene.
 
Here's a random song I just dug up to show off my taste, just for the fun of it. 
 

Convincing arguments.
 
I always question whether using actors that appropriately fit the roles would be a better solution. I understand the history of Hollywood, and how people of color who could perform roles that would be just as good as their white counterparts, are never even considered. I want to believe that the actors that existed during the 90's (mostly Caucasian) simply had better connections in the industry, for roles that anyone could play, and for the most part they did. Feel free to educated me about the dark side of the industry, I'm all ears because we're hearing about stories of unfair treatment all the time.
 
I suppose with the rise of new studios, producers, and directors that  cast roles for characters they've conjured up have now become more cut and dry, making it known that they need this type of actor and this type of background for their movie. I think another problem stems from films that are adaptations of books, comics/manga, anime, etc., that clearly identify everything about the character for us to become familiar with. If we knew none of that, then there wouldn't be a problem, as we have no attachment to it (sentimental or another form of personal identification).
 
I always look at it from the perspective of an actor trying to make it in Hollywood, and would use this as my defense for them (the irony).
 
Say for instance (I really feel bad for using my boi) Leonardo Dicaprio's role in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. Are we gonna really say that it would have been better if someone who was actually mentally handicapped would have been a better fit for the role? My take is no, and the reason being is that playing the role of playing someone like that is the challenge for an actor. To be able to place yourself in that mindset, and some actors go out of their way to study the workings of someone/something, in order to properly portray them in film. To be able to do that, allows them to better understand that type of person/ideal/lifestyle on a level that only someone in acting can use to grow. So playing a gay or trans (sorry I don't know the terminology well) person should be no different because the process should be the same, and no interference from the fanbase or whatever should be had. This is why we have critics that do their thing after the film is released.
 
I wanna mention this because I wonder if anyone feels the same way as I do, but a film about a certain type of subject/theme, only played by a cast that are applicable to that subject/theme, always feels like it was only intended for an audience that can apply to it.
 
So in a way I completely understand what SJ is trying to say, but I wonder if they even needed to say it. Sometimes I feel actors forget that they can show them they are up to par by walking the walk, and talking the talk. Making an effort to show fans their processes as an actor/actress playing new roles, and how they get a better understanding of these characters says a lot more than a statement from the heat of the moment that can be cut up and misinterpreted.
 
* I am going to mention now that voice acting for an animated film/show is on a whole different spectrum, as most of the time the audience would not even know who the voice behind the character is, let alone their ethnicity/race of color, since voice pitch and mannerisms are taken into account (i.e Seth Mcfarland, Phil Lamarr, etc.).

.

well she probably should stick to playing trees, with her signature wooden acting and botox all over.

the problem is, these roles typically don’t go to actual queer people, but rather cishet people.  i don’t, however, think the problem is so much in cishet actors playing these parts as much as it is that queer folk aren’t casted as often.  consequently, trans people (in cases where they are openly trans) should get roles as cis people.  so, no.  she’s not wrong.  this is what acting is.  alec baldwin voiced a literal baby.  😂

I never enjoy discussion on this topic as a whole, because as mentioned, the stigma/process/lifestyle that helped create the old breed of bandomen in 90's VK is gone. Music at it's root, is an extension of the artist(s) overall lifestyle or mindset, or at least always has been for me. With that in mind, VK no longer carries it's "genuineness" or originality, as the bandomen that exist today don't carry that gritty lifestyle or troubled upbringing that we can easily identify in the music.
 
I use this as a metric in order to mark the shift in VK music entering 99' to about 02'-03'.
The angst was still there, but that new generation introduced new themes and methods to bring that VK aesthetic into more "professional" standards.
 
Case in point:
 
I would agree that in terms of skill relating to professionalism or competence to write/perform music, its gotten better, and the resources available are utilized greatly by the new/young generation. However, the skill in terms of creativity/spontaneity/genuineness has/will always lessen, largely due to time/age. We all know that maturity tends to be the biggest killer when it comes to any form of expression that comes naturally, and VK can be considered it's own being that has begun to grow out of it's prime. It's a trade-off that occurs without our consent, but when utilized properly, gives birth to the next phase/trend/era of music. It's how we can identify sounds from certain periods from the same band over the course of 20+ years.
 
Reason why I don't like to discuss this is because we all say the same thing and are practically going in circles to reach the same point lol.

I never enjoy discussion on this topic as a whole, because as mentioned, the stigma/process/lifestyle that helped create the old breed of bandomen in 90's VK is gone. Music at it's root, is an extension of the artist(s) overall lifestyle or mindset, or at least always has been for me. With that in mind, VK no longer carries it's "genuineness" or originality, as the bandomen that exist today don't carry that gritty lifestyle or troubled upbringing that we can easily identify in the music.
 
I use this as a metric in order to mark the shift in VK music entering 99' to about 02'-03'.
The angst was still there, but that new generation introduced new themes and methods to bring that VK aesthetic into more "professional" standards.
 
Case in point:
 
I would agree that in terms of skill relating to professionalism or competence to write/perform music, its gotten better, and the resources available are utilized greatly by the new/young generation. However, the skill in terms of creativity/spontaneity/genuineness has/will always lessen, largely due to time/age. We all know that maturity tends to be the biggest killer when it comes to any form of expression that comes naturally, and VK can be considered it's own being that has begun to grow out of it's prime. It's a trade-off that occurs without our consent, but when utilized properly, gives birth to the next phase/trend/era of music. It's how we can identify sounds from certain periods from the same band over the course of 20+ years.
 
Reason why I don't like to discuss this is because we all say the same thing and are practically going in circles to reach the same point lol.

Well people abusing their kouhai's and women in general is something that is peculiar the Japanese society of that time overall, not really limited to visual kei. I'm not trying to say that being delinquent boys is the key to making inspired music, but probably their "spirit" somehow helped them to make something new and sincere. Someone "educated" and with enough music knowledge are keen to think inside the box and play along the rules, pretty much put a stop on their creativity.  They would be great writers and performers but not the innovators. For example I hardly imagine skilled musicians being able to write and perform the complete mess that bands like La'Mule or Kuroyume were doing in the 90's. Those bands could write those songs and end up being original because they probably had no idea of what they were doing in the first place. As soon as they got able to play a bunch of chords on guitar they were ready to write songs right out of a 30 minute jam session. Sure a lot of bands were just atrocious and eventually got forgotten, but I guess the ones with fresh ideas, charming persona and decent taste could emerge as popular acts in the end. Some other bands like BUCK-TICK eventually became skilled musicians and polished writers, but kind of kept their original spirit intact as well (looks like BUCK-TICK members still get themselves drunk till morning after all of their gigs, probably younger bands would die at 25 if they had the same lifestyle). Some other eventually learnt about the grammar through experience, and that's when they started being good musicians but suddenly unable to write memorable songs like at the beginning of their career. Probably this applies to other genres as well, when lots of people seem to like a band's indies works even though the musicians got so much more mature in their latest albums.

This image of older bandoman being delinquent boys, and how that 'spirit' was somehow in the core of the music they created, is lately coming a lot to my mind. I've noticed it after reading some translated tanuki therads on the old Fuckyeahtanuki tumblr, where several self-proclaimed old bangya described the terrible behaviour of some famous musicians with kouhai or even their bangya (like that bizarre story of Dir's Kyo and Kagerou's Daisuke abusing bangya on parties and so on), and how it changed during mid 2000s with bands who took conscious over the subject and decided to put and end to it (I've read that Nightmare brought it up on and old interview). Other way, once popped up here on MH the idea of the severe -and actually harassing- nature of the relationship between producers, bands and members in the origins of the scene being something that, although cruel, created some kind of 'quality filter' that assured a decent output of production, thus explaining that more accesible music media and technology, plus a more 'healthy' lifestyle, didn't contribute to anything but the rising of bland 'idolized' and plagiarizig acts. 
 
I'll appreciate if someone who believes in this idea could elaborate more over it. While I actually mourn over recent VK being in most cases uninspired, unskilled, etc.,  and wish they could someday bring us a new Malice Mizer or The Gazette, I find kind of problematic to consider that toxic relationships, power abuse, risky life-styles, social marginalization, internalized hate, cruelty, etc. is actually the key to deliver great and memorable art...
 
Btw, nice thread! This is for the things I'm here in MH: interesting discussion about VK's scene development!

i don’t like ice cream.  🤔

Oof, that's my favourite food 😕 on the subject of food/drink though, I don't like milk. Or cream, actually. I love ice cream but not cream. I also don't like cheesecake, tea or coffee.

Can we bring back more variety on popular radio stations?
I'm tired of hearing the same 5 songs every hour, and would like to hear a nice up and coming artist like it used to be. Maybe radio is a dying market and I'm just talking to the wind, or my tastes are getting too stale for the in-crowd.
 
Oh btw, Denver's radio stations suck compared to Chicago. Fight me.

Can we bring back more variety on popular radio stations?
I'm tired of hearing the same 5 songs every hour, and would like to hear a nice up and coming artist like it used to be. Maybe radio is a dying market and I'm just talking to the wind, or my tastes are getting too stale for the in-crowd.
 
Oh btw, Denver's radio stations suck compared to Chicago. Fight me.

Can we bring back more variety on popular radio stations?
I'm tired of hearing the same 5 songs every hour, and would like to hear a nice up and coming artist like it used to be. Maybe radio is a dying market and I'm just talking to the wind, or my tastes are getting too stale for the in-crowd.
 
Oh btw, Denver's radio stations suck compared to Chicago. Fight me.

George Clooney is the perfect example of a celebrity using his fame for good, he's been caring about Darfur before and after anyone even heard of it among other places.

All kids are stupid, most adults are stupid. 

Attacking people for the things they like is bad, disliking thing because they're popular just means you're not a conformist.

Also one more opinion from me:
 
Shitting on popular things makes you an asshole and shitting on things someone enjoys isn’t funny, it’s immature 

Oh some actors who are activists for anything outside of politics like world hunger, climate change, and the works are free to do so, but there has to be a large reputation and history of them doing this to back it up. Leonardo Dicaprio has been my childhood crush since forever, and if he would say something out of character (which I know he would not do) to wrongfully use his influence for some sort hidden motive/agenda, I'd be like "Leo nooooooo.....what got into you?". There's only so much they can do before someone asks for their opinion in politics, and thus far the wiser actors can state a neutral answer that will not leave room for ambiguity.
 
@Gesu I understand. I personally don't think anyone who could possess this much "power" by any means, should use it for anything other than awareness and helping others in the world, and I applaud those who have gone out of their way to help the world in their own way. You mention their popularity outside the USA, and that is another factor they need to consider, because the roles they play in tv and film are highly idolized and respected (look at all those outraged people online who don't like casting roles or storylines and witchhunt the actor personally) and can be crushed in an instant if one quote from their mouths conflicts with anyone out in the world. So really, for the sake of both themselves and the people that watch them, they need to learn that there are others in the world who can handle world issues.
 
I've gotten off topic, but if you want to agree to disagree more, you're welcome to PM me.