Psychotic Fans

Cutebutpsycho wrote:I happen to disagree with her, but I see where she's coming from -- I mean, it is a gimmick casting (but really, wasn't modernizing Sherlock Holmes the same thing?) -- and how protective she feels given the timing.

Maybe this is why I'm more fond of the Ritchie movies. They seem like they don't give a fuck as to what's going on. They're just out to have a good time. And it just leaves a sour taste in my mouth about people on the whole.

I can certainly understand why Elementary is a sore subject for almost everyone involved in Sherlock. The show was something of an unanticipated hit, and even though the show is broadcast in the US, it's being re-made (although I'm sure it's going to be very different) for US television. I really don't blame the people directly involved with the show being ticked off. I do think many Sherlock fans have gone overboard with the hatred for Elementary though. I'm going to check it out because it could turn out to be really good, and that's really all I care about when it comes to Sherlock Holmes. I'll take any good adaptation out there!

That said, someone needs to tell all the people involved with Sherlock that they ought to just take a page from Benedict Cumberbatch's book, and when they're asked about it, just say you wish the people involved all the best.

Oh I totally agree with you, but the reaction from the cast and main people seems to fan the flames on both sides and result in hate being rained down on everyone. I just wish everyone would shut up and kind of move a la Cumberbatch and just be diplomatic.

But then again, the fandom also seems to be quick to leap on him for some of his more stream of consciousness comments. Fandom is a fickle bitch.

I think because the Sherlock fandom is so...intense, people want to know everything about the actors and identify with them etc. I've read someone say that the cast and crew seem to be the worst when it comes to saying ignorant and problematic stuff. I'm pretty sure they aren't. But because of the way the media works now and because fandom hangs on their every word and wants to know everything about them, well, they won't like some of the things they say. Martin Freeman did say racist and homophobic things to the Daily Mail a few years ago. Cumberbatch and his ignorance on autism. Gatiss' condescension towards "fangirls". Steven Moffat and...everything. Both of them being dismissive when asked about the casual racism in some of the episodes. Now Brealey. Lara Pulver saying she doesn't want to label Adler's sexuality. Everything is a shitstorm.

Now, I understand criticizing them. I do it as well. But at a certain point it stops being about that and becomes outrage for outrage's sake and descends into "OMG horrible people" and "How dare you like the show/like them as actors" etc. Tumblr and twitter in particular seem made for these sort of self-perpetuating mechanics. They're film people doing their jobs, they're not heroes. Fans don't know them. They're all of them white and priviliged. The creators and main actors are white and wealthy men. Yes, they should know better, but many people in positions of privilege and power don't look beyond their own situations. That's sad but not all that surprising. They're not the fandom's friends, and the way parts of fandom act like they've been "betrayed", you get the distinct impression that that's not clear for everyone...

I personally find it amusing that the Sherlock fandom tosses a fit about Lucy Liu's casting being called gimmicky when they themselves have called it that and worse! But then, self-awareness has never been any fandom's strength.

Martin Freeman did say racist and homophobic things to the Daily Mail a few years ago. Cumberbatch and his ignorance on autism. Gatiss' condescension towards "fangirls". Steven Moffat and...everything. Both of them being dismissive when asked about the casual racism in some of the episodes. Now Brealey. Lara Pulver saying she doesn't want to label Adler's sexuality. Everything is a shitstorm.

Really? Sad. Maybe I'll just stay off the internet and enjoy the shows as shows.

I personally find it amusing that the Sherlock fandom tosses a fit about Lucy Liu's casting being called gimmicky when they themselves have called it that and worse!

I think the people getting outraged are preemptive Elementary fans/social justice warriors.

The problem is sometimes people don't bother to read the actual quotes/interviews or whatever and make their own minds up, they just get swept up in the hysteria from the over invested fans/antifans. I am not a huge Sherlock fan and I'm not familiar with all the 'controversies' but some of them, the reactions seemed disproportionate to the comments that started it. I mean, a lot of it is opinion, anyway, isn't it? Like Mark Gatiss being "condescending" towards fans, that's really a matter of perspective (personally I think he's one the nicest actors towards fans) or the wank over Benedict Cumberbatch accidentally attending the 'rival' party to the one his stalker threw and pretended was official on the last night of Frankenstein. I actually thought Martin Freeman made some very good points in his talk about racism and homophobia in the industry and in society (I'm actually surprised anyone could consider that comment homophobic) I don't agree with everything he said, and perhaps it's not an actors' place to talk about such issues, but they are important issues. It should be the starting point for debate, not wank.

There is so much entitlement in fandom/antifandom and it's easy for actors get a bad rep just for not living up to whatever mental picture fandom has created of them, or different parts of fandom war with each other because their perspectives and mental pictures are different.

The entitlement definitely bothers me -- I remember seeing the wank fly by on my dash with Engelbert Funkybatch defending Moff with the line "Not very misygonistic to his wife" at the BAFTAs. That was a hoot.

The way people react, you'd think they set fire to a box of kittens while bitchslapping some nuns.

I don't agree with some of what they say, but it's also such tidbits and tiny quotes, that it's hard to get a whole grasp on a thought, if that makes sense.

That sort of thing is called "Call Out Culture", isn't it? Where you can get a lot of approval and recognition by tearing down other people and pointing out how generally awful they are. I think it's different in quality from simple criticism, because the focus seems to be on outrage, on validating your own superiority and on finding many like-minded people. It becomes a very comfortable echo chamber after a while. The focus isn't on the content anymore, but on this feeling of "they are wrong, we are right".

It seems to overlap a lot with the Social Justice Warrior thing, which isn't so much about genuine social justice as it is using social justice language to corner and bully people. Who, in turn, can't defend themselves without looking like assholes. See also: "homophobic against my slashfic," as someone put it.

I feel like the Moffat anti-fans are the worst. I feel like they spend all their time scrutinizing everything he says for something horrible and then spending so much effort to explain why. I saw a 3000 word essay analyzing a tweet! Moffat can say a lot of dumb stuff but his anti-fans are just ridiculous. They stack up against the more dedicated Sherlock fans for insanity any day. And strangely some of them are the same people.

That's my thing with SJW. It feels like all they do is curse and insult each other. The worst part is that sometimes you might agree with their position, but you're like "Guys. This is not how to do things. Stop it."

I feel like the Moffat anti-fans are the worst. I feel like they spend all their time scrutinizing everything he says for something horrible and then spending so much effort to explain why.

I feel like a lot of it is very disengenous, since the majority of them are Russell T. Davies and/or Rose Tyler superfans who are trying to use social justice to justify their hatred of his work.

To be fair, it's not one-sided. There are plenty of hardcore Moffat fans who relentlessly attack RTD, the Tenth Doctor, Rose, and even the actors, and fans of any of the above. On some boards you can't voice even the slightest criticism of any element the show now without immediately receiving a barrage of, "Oh but he can't be compared to Ten who was the douchiest genocidal emo douchbag who ever douched because he was written by that evil misogynistic homophobe RTD and you're probably just some RTDStan/Batchipper/drooling Tennant fangurl."

Then of course there are the people who despise both showrunners and don't seem to even like the show but derive all their pleasure from grumbling about it, and the flamewars between those who wish to discuss race and gender issues (and, honestly, both showrunners had some issues on that front) versus those who wish all the "obnoxious elitist Women's Studies grads" would stfu and stop talking about "privilege" and all their other feminazi mumbo jumbo (who also seem to spend quite a bit of time talking about "Tennant fangirls" and how they aren't proper fans). I guess in a fandom as huge and long-standing as DW you will see pretty much every kind of person and opinion.

As much as I love Doctor Who, things like that are why I try to stay away from the fandom as much as possible. It's funny, because the DW fans I've met in real life are funny and lovely but many of the "fans" online are so bitter and full of spite.

PrincessCleo wrote: See also: "homophobic against my slashfic," as someone put it.

That seemed to be the main reaction against Lucy Liu being cast as Watson. Apparently arguing for the casting of a white dude over a non-white woman (who, iirc, isn't even straight!) is the height of social justice. Because vague subtext in fiction totally moves the cause forward, not giving an actress who's had a lot of of purely sexy roles a chance to play an interesting character.

I've seen a lot of DW fans (and, well, fans in general) who baffle me for the same reason a lot of TwoP posters do--if a TV show makes you that miserable, why are you still watching? I get with a long-standing fandom, you've invested enough time and energy that it can be pretty hard to walk away, but it's possible. It's still just a TV show. (It's actually really fulfilling and liberating to quit--"that boring thing is still on the air? Wow! Have they come up with an interesting character who's not a beagle?" That was how I felt after deciding Enterprise was a waste of my time, anyway.)

Also, does anyone have a link to Martin Freeman's comments about racism & homophobia? Now I'm curious.

Here you go. I remain a fan of his acting, but this interview was douchey.

Thanks for the link. Yeah, "if we were that racist, people wouldn't come" is quite willfully naive.

I'm still going to enjoy what he does with Watson, though. It's a good performance and I've heard much worse from people I've actually met. (At least I'm not going to have to block Martin Freeman on Facebook when he can't accept that I disagree with him.)

It's definitely side eye-worthy at the very least. I wouldn't call it out and out racist, though. And honestly I struggle to see how "it's a shame so many gay actors closet themselves for money, they should make a stand and come out" is actively homophobic. Those are very strong accusations and shouldn't be thrown around willy-nilly. Though I am biased because I loathe the Daily Mail so much, I don't believe anything they print.

I have stopped watching TV shows plenty of times, even ones I used to be obsessed with. Not in a This show sucks I am boycotting them now" way, I just get bored with them and start forgetting to watch, or not being bothered to watch the DVR.

I figured what could've set people off was the "poofs" bit, but overall his comments there didn't bother me. I do get annoyed when straight people decide they can cajole gay and bi folks to come out (especially since they've never faced any of the negative consequences firsthand) but I think there's a difference between that and saying that it's a shame box office pressures trump people being able to be who they are without having to hide it, which seems to be his actual point.

Then again I think most of the SJW online and in fandom need to address their own on telling LGTB people how to live before they go off on an actor saying people should be able to come out without worries about money.

(It's also from the Daily Fail, so I wouldn't be surprised if they went for the portions of his comments that were more in line with their views. Or just likely to stir shit in general. If you want an interview where an actor comes across as a sparkling paragon of progressive politics, that tabloid's probably not the right place to look.)

Something that never ceases to amaze me about fandom is its total inability to understand sarcasm. Sometimes writers or actors are *clearly joking,* and fandom misses it. I've seen it happen a lot with Joss Whedon and with Moffat, in particular. I remember one time Moffat referred to Rose as a "clingy girlfriend," and fandom had a fit. However, watching the video, he was clearly teasing Julie Gardner about her well-known Doctor-Rose shippiness, and it wasn't his genuine feelings about Rose. Granted, sarcasm isn't always obvious in text (I think Whedon once suggested the need for a sarcasm font), but fandom never considers that some of the people they claim they admire for their humor could be joking.

David Berkowitz still has groupies.

Okay, now I feel sick.

Bleurgh. Now that's a truly psychotic fan, and extremely disturbing. But I'm also concerned about the law enforcement agent pictured, as he seems to have lost time. At least, his facial hair is still in the 90's.