The Big Picture: In Defense of Nostalgia

[CM156_v1legacy]

Honestly, I couldn't care less for gay marriage, but I've never heard an argument against it that was any stronger than "God said so!", and that's simply not a compelling reason. I'd like your take on it, since you clearly disagree.

Actually, I've heard a secular argument:

Money. If we allow more people to get married, that means more people will get devorced, which takes up the courts time and money. And that also means that if they file together, they pay less in taxes. So we are left with a net loss.

Which means we either cut spending, raise taxes, or both.

The former is not popular with those on the left, and the second is not popular to the right.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. It just is fully non-God based.

 

[mesoforte]

..... Yeah I don't think that's a good idea. Mostly because I don't want to die from famine.

If the Oregon Trail has taught me anything, it's that back then people died of dysentery, and only dysentery.

And if my history class taught me anything its that people died of starvation from the potato's failing. And then getting stuffed on boats to countries that didn't want them.

And then died of dysentry.

 

[sunburst]

Yay! MovieBob thinks I'm awesome! But seriously, Turner D. Century? You are charting whole new levels of obscurity.

Anyway, I agree that the idealization of entire time periods within certain political movements is a real problem while the Battleship movie is not. Still, you can be annoyed by constant remakes, reboots and adaptations without losing sight of the actual issues currently plaguing our society. And nerds who obsess over stagnation within media are more likely to react negatively to nostalgic politics than the average Joe (the plumber). I'm struggling to relate these seemingly separate issues in a way that makes sense to me.

Besides, sometimes you just gotta complain about the Transformers movies on the internet to blow off some steam.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Can't help but notice the two areas he calls a "problem" are both Republican ideas. Someone's showing their democrat side.

He's never hidden it.

Just like he's never hidden his Nintendo fanboyism.

 

[For.I.Am.Mad]

Bob's just a little ancy because Batgirl can walk again.

 

[Sylocat]

One of the best and most insightful Big Picture episodes ever, and a nice political perspective as well. I like how it ties in with geek culture and mainstream culture.

Also... look, I know ReCAPTCHA is a great force for good, but it needs to cut back on this...

 

[XDravond]

Oh my someone claiming that a 200 year old piece of paper might not gotten it right and need an update every now and then wow. Hehe I always found the US constitution a bit funny since Americans rely on it so extremely much defending themselves by claiming "the constitution gives me the right.."

(funny that only really US people call themselves "Americans" since there's a small piece of land called "South America" where they are not "Americans"... Never really thought of why but if you have an answer please tell me)

Another good epsiode Bob and yes "perspective people" is one of the best phrases that I would like to use quite often when someone screaming "worst thing EVER!!!.." but then I remember they are very likely going to get disturbingly defensive...

 

[Fewell]

Spot on Bob. I'd like to add that I had no idea a new He-Man movie was being made and I'm going to go absolutely apeshit if they don't cast Courtney Cox in it.

 

[Agent Larkin]

And if my history class taught me anything its that people died of starvation from the potato's failing. And then getting stuffed on boats to countries that didn't want them.

Are you calling the Oregon Trail a liar?!

Pistols at 20 paces, name the place!

I have no idea what this Oregon Trail is so I find it hard to call it a liar.

 

[Simalacrum]

Huh. MovieBob actually looked into the 'big picture' in his show 'The Big Picture' for once. What gives?

All in all, very good episode with some very good points. Wouldn't mind if you delved a bit more into the politics region actually, I find that stuff very interesting :3

 

[Dok Zombie]

I love that he touched on this extended childhood/arrested development issue that is becoming so prevalent for people in their 20s and 30s right now, and I don't know where he found the picture of the graduate, lying in bed in his parent's house, but it perfectly sums up the life so many people are living at the moment. (I can only speak for the UK, but there's much evidence to suggest it's commonplace in America too).

I think it's a bigger issue than people are giving it credit for, especially the baby boomers, who had everything handed to them and don't seem to understand that the frustration, ennui and lack of direction that their children are feeling is a side-product of a pretty serious problem. There's a whole generation of young people with useless degrees and masses of debt, unable to find work because going to university/college doesn't promise you the bright future it did for our parents.

It might seem like ungratefulness, an overt sense of entitlement or just plain laziness to the older generations, but what happens when it's our turn to be running our respective countries? I'd really like someone like @MovieBob, who is one of the VERY small minority of (almost) my generation lucky enough to be making a career out of having a personality defined by pop culture, to address this in further detail. We can't all have a platform to voice our concern and/or insight on and while I don't want to set him up as a "the voice of our generation" he certainly has more of an insider's viewpoint than most mainstream media commentators.

How about it Bob? You've made a career out of your quarter-life-crisis, how about throwing a bone to the rest of us?

 

[Ne1butme]

Honestly, I couldn't care less for gay marriage, but I've never heard an argument against it that was any stronger than "God said so!", and that's simply not a compelling reason. I'd like your take on it, since you clearly disagree.

Actually, I've heard a secular argument:

Money. If we allow more people to get married, that means more people will get devorced, which takes up the courts time and money. And that also means that if they file together, they pay less in taxes. So we are left with a net loss.

Which means we either cut spending, raise taxes, or both.

The former is not popular with those on the left, and the second is not popular to the right.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. It just is fully non-God based.

Can we ban all marriage then... you know, for the Benjamins?

 

[The Harkinator]

The thing about us humans is that we are constantly improving and progressing. The way things are today (ok, before the economic meltdown) are much better than they used to be.

I theorise that humans prefer the society that was in effect when they were in their childhood. Change can be seen as dangerous and unwanted and since these are the kind of people who control the media they can portray change how they want. As new generations with new ideas change the way we live previous generations resist this change.

Radio, Movies, TV, Comics, Video Games. All have been social pariahs (video games still are) that are not always totally understood by the previous generation, causing the resistance to change.

Last month I was one of the teachers in an internet class (ok I was student helper) for the elderly and I was so astonished at how difficult it was for them to use the computer. Three of them managed to accidentally turn the thing off within the first ten minutes.

Oops I'm getting off topic.

OK, harmless nostalgia is alright and often used by (mostly) harmless people. When harmful nostalgia is in effect it is usually associated with influential people (such as the mad Mr. Beck)

Sorry for the ramble.

 

[Varya]

Honestly, I couldn't care less for gay marriage, but I've never heard an argument against it that was any stronger than "God said so!", and that's simply not a compelling reason. I'd like your take on it, since you clearly disagree.

Actually, I've heard a secular argument:

Money. If we allow more people to get married, that means more people will get devorced, which takes up the courts time and money. And that also means that if they file together, they pay less in taxes. So we are left with a net loss.

Which means we either cut spending, raise taxes, or both.

The former is not popular with those on the left, and the second is not popular to the right.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. It just is fully non-God based.

Well, regardless if you agree or not, it's a bloody lousy argument. Yes, it'd cost money, but if you are gonna exclude people from marriage because of the cost of the divorce, you should A)work do de-legalize marriage as a whole, or B)make sure the people that are getting the divorce are paying for their costs, or C) base the discrimination on marriage rights on people more likely to divorce.
You can't say "Ok, we can have SOME marriages, but we can't afford more than X so these groups are not allowed to"
That is not an argument against gay marriage, that is an argument against marriage.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Honestly, I couldn't care less for gay marriage, but I've never heard an argument against it that was any stronger than "God said so!", and that's simply not a compelling reason. I'd like your take on it, since you clearly disagree.

Actually, I've heard a secular argument:

Money. If we allow more people to get married, that means more people will get devorced, which takes up the courts time and money. And that also means that if they file together, they pay less in taxes. So we are left with a net loss.

Which means we either cut spending, raise taxes, or both.

The former is not popular with those on the left, and the second is not popular to the right.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. It just is fully non-God based.

Can we ban all marriage then... you know, for the Benjamins?

I can't tell if your kidding or not, so I'll say this

You're welcome to try.

 

[Lord Krunk]

InB4 conservatives flaming the shit out of the comments section without stopping to think about what they're saying.

...oh, wait.

By the way, he's not talking about conservatives in general but more extremists (Fox News, the Tea Party etc.) being not only full of shit but also being influential. You know, the kind of people that see any kind of change as wrong.

Here in Oz, I'm really embarrassed about our political parties (and their only differences being how racist they are), but that's a story for another thread.

On-topic, I think there's certainly a balance that must be kept with these things; making exclusively new IPs is inherently ignoring the past, and thusly we can't improve on it. But too many sequels can make any form of media stale in no time flat.

It's certainly something Nintendo will have to address in the future, lest they go the way of Sonic.

 

[Lunar Templar]

"Some guy thinks the Thundercats redesign is the worst thing that has ever happen"

and then they saw the new Cheetara

then it was never heard of again

hehe, and how flirty they made her XD oh, and the cleavage shots, musent for got those XD

but its true, least far as entertainment goes, people ***** an whine how its 'not the same' till they get there hands on it, most the time anyway

far as the politics side of things >.> i'm just gonna say 'only politician that's NOT trying to fuck every one over cept whom ever bought them, is dead'

 

[bombadilillo]

For as much as Bob likes to Sperg about continuity and nerdy things its odd for him to step back and say its all not a big deal this time.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Honestly, I couldn't care less for gay marriage, but I've never heard an argument against it that was any stronger than "God said so!", and that's simply not a compelling reason. I'd like your take on it, since you clearly disagree.

Actually, I've heard a secular argument:

Money. If we allow more people to get married, that means more people will get devorced, which takes up the courts time and money. And that also means that if they file together, they pay less in taxes. So we are left with a net loss.

Which means we either cut spending, raise taxes, or both.

The former is not popular with those on the left, and the second is not popular to the right.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. It just is fully non-God based.

Well, regardless if you agree or not, it's a bloody lousy argument. Yes, it'd cost money, but if you are gonna exclude people from marriage because of the cost of the divorce, you should A)work do de-legalize marriage as a whole, or B)make sure the people that are getting the divorce are paying for their costs, or C) base the discrimination on marriage rights on people more likely to divorce.
You can't say "Ok, we can have SOME marriages, but we can't afford more than X so these groups are not allowed to"
That is not an argument against gay marriage, that is an argument against marriage.

You're missing the point of the argument, dear reader

You, I assume, favor gay marriage

Allrighty then, how do you pay for it?