Fandoms VS. Creators (over content, and creative directions)

[jmc]

No. But you don't seem to want to accept what the core problem is. I mean, the problem isn't new. The outlet, and the subsequent results, are due to social media. But fist fights about sports teams are about as old as sports teams.

You're mixing up two different problems. One is a problem of people who are trolls who get their kicks out of causing trouble, the other is a group of people who are overly passionate about a specific story or franchise. There is some overlap of course but there is still a difference between the two. What you don't seem to accept is that maybe the development of entirely original franchises will help mitigate the loud minority, because there's nothing to be invested in initially. At worst, you get the usual trolls and troublemakers, what you don't get is people yelling at creators that they ruined their childhood and chasing people off instagram. Something can't be ruined for you if you have no investment in it. Doing this is a win on two fronts, one - it helps drown out naysayers, and two - it means we get new ideas coming to the screen.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

No. But you don't seem to want to accept what the core problem is. I mean, the problem isn't new. The outlet, and the subsequent results, are due to social media. But fist fights about sports teams are about as old as sports teams.

In 532 a riot at a chariot race involving the Blues and the Greens resulted in half of Constantinople burning to the ground and the deaths of 30000 people.

 

[dark_b]

remember 2005 when Daniel Craig was cast as Bond? every newschannel was talking about the fans. and that was before social network.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

So, basically what I’m reading from some of you here is that there’s no point in trying anything. We can’t combat the existing toxic fan bases, and any attempt at creating original genre works is just going to attract those people anyway. If that’s the case then people need to stop complaining about toxic fandom, because you’re not offering any solutions.

I think that's a rather tone deaf and locked in a binary way of thought reaponse to people not agreeing with your idea, ironically in my view something that feeds into the current online "debate" climate.

Once more... There are more outlets for original material or adaptations of materials from other sources that aren't widely known with giant fanbases. I also have to point out that even if this criticism and "solution" (and how simple a solution... Just come up with a new Star Wars or Back To The Future that will be as popular and profitable... EASY.) of yours is solely about blockbusters/tent poles, which are hige parts of studios' bottom lines... Eh, that's kind of selling the art of making films and the experience of watching movies short. Point blank, blockbuster genre films aren't the end all be all of cinema.


As a general question to all... How much "original" (whatever that means) content do you support with your dollars if your complaint is that you don't get enough of that from big studios?

 

[blackdragon6]

Based on things like the Sad/Toxic Puppies and Gamergate, no, it isn't different.

Technically Gamergate was more so around a medium not a genre...justsayin lol

 

[jmc]

I think that's a rather tone deaf and locked in a binary way of thought reaponse to people not agreeing with your idea, ironically in my view something that feeds into the current online "debate" climate.

Once more... There are more outlets for original material or adaptations of materials from other sources that aren't widely known with giant fanbases. I also have to point out that even if this criticism and "solution" (and how simple a solution... Just come up with a new Star Wars or Back To The Future that will be as popular and profitable... EASY.) of yours is solely about blockbusters/tent poles, which are hige parts of studios' bottom lines... Eh, that's kind of selling the art of making films and the experience of watching movies short. Point blank, blockbuster genre films aren't the end all be all of cinema.


As a general question to all... How much "original" (whatever that means) content do you support with your dollars if your complaint is that you don't get enough of that from big studios?

Given that most of the original ideas are now on streaming services like Netflix I’m consistently paying for it. I’m not asking for people to agree with me, I’m asking for what solutions others are proposing, because this thread is basically pointless if there isn’t talk of what can be done about bad fandom. And just to be clear, I’m not limiting what I said to blockbuster type of movies.

 

[Herofan]

Is it at least possible for there to be toxic creators and for that to be part of a bad relationship, should that be considered along with increases in toxic fandoms?

 

[moviedoors]

Define “toxic creator.”

 

[Herofan]

Seeming to have gratuitous hostility to fans and/or flaming them, like (first comes to mind) Lucas suppressing the original OT.

 

[moviedoors]

Seeming to have gratuitous hostility to fans and/or flaming them, like (first comes to mind) Lucas suppressing the original OT.

I wouldn’t remotely qualify that as “toxic”. Toxic is harassment, death threats, doxxing, not “his preferred version isn’t my favorite!”

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

remember 2005 when Daniel Craig was cast as Bond? every newschannel was talking about the fans. and that was before social network.

Just as an aside, I remember an interview with Daniel Craig after Casino Royale had been released to huge acclaim. The interviewer said "It must be nice after all the hate and criticism beforehand to deliver a performance that met with almost universal acclaim" To which Craig gave a very professional (no doubt studio-prepared) response of "Well it's not about that, it's about delivering a quality product that people enjoy and that hopefully they'll want to see more of." The interviewer paused a moment, then repeated "But it must be nice..." To which Craig just smiled and said "Course it ****ing is!"

 

[blackdragon6]

To be fair, disgruntled fans aren't necessarily "toxic" fans.

 

[Frodo]

remember 2005 when Daniel Craig was cast as Bond? every newschannel was talking about the fans. and that was before social network.

Yeah, though the media was also pretty skeptical about his casting at the time as well.

Brosnan was a popular Bond, and Craig was consider a way outside the box choice to replace him. EON didn't get many praises for casting him from fans or the media. I'd say the vast majority of people were skeptical about his casting, despite what they may say now.

I was skeptical myself, but he's become one of my favorite Bond actors next to Connery. .

 

[Frodo]

To be fair, disgruntled fans aren't necessarily "toxic" fans.

Yeah. I think other fanboys at times use the term "toxic fans" to dismiss disgruntled or passionate fans who disagree with them.

For me "toxic fans" are the bigots, misogynists, creepy, bullies.

 

[Herofan]

I wouldn’t remotely qualify that as “toxic”. Toxic is harassment, death threats, doxxing, not “his preferred version isn’t my favorite!”

Well it was more than different preference, it was not releasing the older one. And while that's certainly not death threats or even harassment it fan toxicness is usually defined as a lot less than death threats. It's often defined as synonymous with fans thinking and acting like they're entitled to something and so ranting and being way too strong in their criticism, too vitriolic, especially if they do use profanity. By that, creators can and do act entitled to have the fans love their new stuff.

Another example of a toxic in the sense of acting-entitled creator was Simon Pegg. In 2013 he reacted to Trekkies voting Into Darkness the worst Trek film by saying that was ridiculous, asinine and "crass ****ing ire" against him so **** people who think that.

 

[moviedoors]

Well it was more than different preference

No, that's literally all it is. Lucas didn't do anything to anyone by not making the original films readily available. It's so narcissistic to take that personally on any level.

fan toxicness is usually defined as a lot less than death threats.

How about unrelenting harassment? I'm not talking about people that didn't like a movie and said so on social media, I'm talking about the true swamp dwellers, and I see no analogue on the creator side to those people.

Another example of a toxic in the sense of acting-entitled creator was Simon Pegg. In 2013 he reacted to Trekkies voting Into Darkness the worst Trek film by saying that was ridiculous, asinine and "crass ****ing ire" against him so **** people who think that.

Yeah, kinda harsh, but not at all comparable to what those losers have done to Kelly Marie Tran. Neither of your examples even remotely justifies the way the worst of fans have been acting.

 

[Herofan]

OK. I wish there would be more distinction between fans being abusive to people (which shouldn't be considered acceptable) and fans acting entitled (which IMO is a pretty odd accusation to make and if it in any sense means having high expectations doesn't seem to actually be an insult at all) or even being vitriolic about the product.

 

[Madam-Shogun]

OK. I wish there would be more distinction between fans being abusive to people (which shouldn't be considered acceptable) and fans acting entitled (which IMO is a pretty odd accusation to make and if it in any sense means having high expectations doesn't seem to actually be an insult at all) or even being vitriolic about the product.

I don't think the OP was even talking about Toxc fandoms, it's just where the debate went....for some reason. There's probably some overlap, which is why people keep putting the two groups in the same boat. But i'm assuming this thread was about disgruntled fandoms, not toxic fandoms. Which IMO is very distinct.

 

[Frodo]

I don't think the OP was even talking about Toxc fandoms, it's just where the debate went....for some reason. There's probably some overlap, which is why people keep putting the two groups in the same boat. But i'm assuming this thread was about disgruntled fandoms, not toxic fandoms. Which IMO is very distinct.

I think they're distinct as well, but as of late, the term "toxic" been used interchangeably by fanboys, geek pundits , and the media with disgruntled fandoms.

I've also seen people use the term "troll" against those who they disagree with as opposed to those who are genuinely attempting to be unpleasant and insulting.

 

[Mangle77]

"Creators" who respond to fan's criticism with insults deserve to go broke. I used quotation marks, because many of the people who are causing the problems on the creative side don't OWN, and didn't create, the Intellectual Properties (IP) they are using for their personal soapbox. Nerd culture has always been diverse and inclusive, but NOTHING can ever be diverse enough for some people. They will NEVER be satisfied, and trying to cater to them is a recipe for failure. Failure that they will blame on "toxic" fans, "trolls" and "Nazis". Get woke, go broke.

 

[blackdragon6]

I think they're distinct as well, but as of late, the term "toxic" been used interchangeably by fanboys, geek pundits , and the media with disgruntled fandoms.

I've also seen people use the term "troll" against those who they disagree with as opposed to those who are genuinely attempting to be unpleasant and insulting.

Indeed i was referring to disgruntled fans not toxic fans. But i have seen both terms bitterly used interchangeably

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

"Creators" who respond to fan's criticism with insults deserve to go broke. I used quotation marks, because many of the people who are causing the problems on the creative side don't OWN, and didn't create, the Intellectual Properties (IP) they are using for their personal soapbox. Nerd culture has always been diverse and inclusive, but NOTHING can ever be diverse enough for some people. They will NEVER be satisfied, and trying to cater to them is a recipe for failure. Failure that they will blame on "toxic" fans, "trolls" and "Nazis". Get woke, go broke.

I would say... this is a perfect example of "toxic" fans right here. Thank you for playing.

PS: I guess you guys have SO many pelts on your walls of things you've made "go broke"? Was Ghostbusters not a blockbuster because it had women or because it was mediocre regardless of the "diversity" of the cast? So please... What high profile franchise that is "pandering to diversity" have ya'll made go broke? In those precise terms. What have you and yours bankrupted recently, and more importantly, CONSISTENTLY?

 

[Madam-Shogun]

I think this essay actually does a great job if explaining this issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJhOpY7bh6s

 

[Mangle77]

I would say... this is a perfect example of "toxic" fans right here. Thank you for playing.

PS: I guess you guys have SO many pelts on your walls of things you've made "go broke"? Was Ghostbusters not a blockbuster because it had women or because it was mediocre regardless of the "diversity" of the cast? So please... What high profile franchise that is "pandering to diversity" have ya'll made go broke? In those precise terms. What have you and yours bankrupted recently, and more importantly, CONSISTENTLY?

None, actually. I don't participate in boycotting, or spreading negative comments about movies I haven't seen. I didn't see Ghostbusters opening weekend, but that was because I didn't have time or money. I DID see it in theaters eventually, and I enjoyed it. I DIDN'T enjoy hearing that members of the cast and crew went on social media and called fans racist and sexist for not thinking it looked very good. The only movie that was reported on by the Hype that I refused to see in theaters was Fant4stic, because it looked like crap. I saw it on DVD, and I was right, it was crap. Not because of Michael B. Jordan, (but his performance was... not as good as in Black Panther) but because of Miles Teller, Josh Trank, and the terrible CGI.

I really wasn't talking about movies, so much as what's been happening in comics; an industry that CANNOT survive without it's core customers. Have you heard of Magic Mirror Comics? They banned a customer for life, because he asked if they would be carrying an independent comic. Why? Because the comic is written by a conservative. Not a Alt-Right nut job, but someone who's been critical of Marvel Comics lately, because of the quality has been trending downward, in no small part due to hiring practices based on identity politics, rather than merit. A few months later, Magic Mirror Comics is going out of business. As much as it saddens me to see a comic book store go out of business, they brought it on themselves.

I don't care about your political views. I don't care about ANYONE'S political views. I care about good comics, good movies, and good video games. If someone ruins one of those things in an attempt to make some kind of statement, and then blames the fans for their own incompetence, I don't consider it "toxic" to say that person or company deserves to fail. Do your job first, and worry about your "message" as an after thought.

Sometimes a movie does poorly because it just isn't very good. But trying to defend your products by attacking and insulting your customers only serves to insure they'll be even LESS interested in your next project. Solo was actually a good movie, but the way Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson's response to criticism of Last Jedi put a bad smell on the Star Wars franchise, and that hurt Solo. On a side note, I would also have waited to release it in December, like the last 3 Star Wars films. I think the proximity to Last Jedi, and the general bloat of summer blockbusters, may have been part of Solo's problem.

I wonder if some of these creators are starting these "controversies" themselves, just to generate publicity...

 

[moviedoors]

Solo was actually a good movie, but the way Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson's response to criticism of Last Jedi put a bad smell on the Star Wars franchise

Do elaborate. I've been following Rian Johnson on twitter for awhile now and I've listened to quite a few podcasts and the way he's handled the naysayers has been nothing but graceful. Most certainly, nothing that could remotely be considered "toxic."