Remember that charming game where you have to shoot down gay men because they're supposedly going to rape you in the woods? I do! And I'm sure many others have the misfortune to remember that lovely game as well.
However, the Georgia based site originally hosting the game, Uzinagaz, just removed the game and issued this statement: "Our games are not politically correct. They're aimed at teenagers (12-18) and it's true that they're of a juvenile humour. I realise now that this one in particularly could be found shocking, but I believe that you should be able to make this kind of joke in the name of freedom of speech. Incidentally, not everyone in the gay community was supportive of banning the game."
Not much of an apology...I'm still all for free speech, but when it strips a group or person of their agency and incites violence against them, I don't think it should be protected. If you want to have a game called, "find the Bible passage admonishing homosexuals", that's great. And actually...
Biblical Tip of the Day: There are only 6 passages in the big, bad Bible that supposedly reprimand homosexuals but around 362 reprimanding heterosexuals. But rest easy, heterosexuals, God does not hate you (or homosexuals, for that matter). God apparently just has much more to say about how much you're likely to piss him off. Apparently, homosexuals can only piss him off 6 ways...instead of 362.
Anyway, a group called Gay Armenia is the one that pressured the site into removing the game. Not the UN, not GLAAD, or the HRC. Nope. It's cool though. The game has only been around since, what, 2002? So it's understandable. Besides, it only took Gay Armenia and I'm guessing countless strongly words emails 7 years to get it pulled. I mean, where would the dramatic tension be if any of the aforementioned groups had actually cared and stepped in?
So props to Gay Armenia for standing up and actually doing something to not only stop more affirmations of anti-gay violence, but for making the gaming world a little less sucky. That's one small step...oh wait...it's just one small step. But it is a step.
EDIT: It should, it seems, at this point be noted that this is a review of the movie. As such, I am reviewing the movie as a standalone and not with the background knowledge provided by the book. Were I reviewing the book, the statements would likely look completely different than they do now.
I went in with excitement and an open mind. I came out three hours of my life shorter, $30 plus parking fees worth of annoyance, and a disbelieving scowl richer.
When I went to see The Dark Knight in IMAX, I was blown away. The Watchmen preview that I saw blew my mind as well and I thought, 'I absolutely have to see it at IMAX.' At least the trailer was good.
This will be the third attempt I have made at a review of The Watchmen. My thoughts on the film are such that when I sit down to write, they all rush to the forefront of my mind simultaneously, vying for the immediate attention of my hands to type them out, with speechlessness as the paradoxical result. Also difficult, is giving a standard review before a feminist critique. So, here's to trying:
Condensed review of The Watchmen
The Plot:
Maybe.
It is quite possible that I missed something here, at least, I feel as though I have. The Watchmen starts with the promise of engaging adventure, intrigue, suspense, and prolonged excitement. It then delivers only the "prolonged" - a prolonged middle, an anti-climactic climax, a few random fight scenes connected with a thin semblance of meaning or purpose. What I remember:
Fight scene
Nixon
Random dead superheros
Sex
Violence
A fire
More violence
A prison
(Chorus)
Mars
Threat of world-destroying nuclear fallout
A blue pronged cat
If this makes no sense to you, there is a club you can join.
We have decided to no longer use a rating system for the feminist critique portion of our reviews. While the narrative of the FC will still be produced, we feel that the rating system itself is not as easily applied to the FC of games.
It is difficult to say what rating a game should get on this scale. Should it be relative to other games or only placed on its own? After all, many games leave much to be desired as far as race, gender,and GLBT presence is concerned - if this weren't the case we wouldn't have a reason for this site. Taken away from the relative, we feel that many of the ratings will be very low.
Mostly, though, are decision is based on the intersection of sexism, racism, heterosexism, and anti-queerism. By providing a number rating to this, it feels as though we aren't adequately addressing this. It kind of puts us in a position to decide which is worse. If a game has strong female characters but portrays other minorities in degrading ways then it both deserves a higher rating for the presence of strong women but a very low rating for its portrayal (or exclusion) of other minorities. By putting a number to this, it seems like we're rating the importance of each of these factors. In that, we would be ignoring the way that these intersect. Since these factors don't exist in separate bubbles, we can't really rate these so simply as on a scale. Our mission statement expansion discusses intersection in more depth.
XML Feeds