Lovers of cinematic catastrophe, rejoice!
Facing accusations of fraud, douchebaggery, and skull abandonment in the wake of a split with his estranged “filmmaking” partner Jordan Owen, the formerly bald film auteur Davis Aurini has released a 38-minute “Rough Draft Preview” of his version of The Sarkeesian effect.
I have not yet had a chance to watch the whole thing, but from the brief bits I have seen it more than lives up to the hype, if by “hype” you mean “the general consensus that Davis Aurini cannot possibly produce anything but poop.”
In the first 4 minutes alone, Aurini uses narration and music from Owen that he clearly doesn’t have permission to use; the rest of the footage is also “borrowed” from others, and the much ballyhooed “Animated Title Sequence” consists of the words “Animated Title Sequence” over a still image.
Watching this, it is important to remember that this film was not edited by a 5-year-old on a budget of one juice box, but by an actual adult human being who considers himself something of a filmmaking pro, with a budget in the tens of thousands of dollars.
So let’s watch this together. I will offer more extended notes once I’ve had a chance to stop giggling and digest the rest.
EDITED TO ADD: Ok, I finally made it all the way through and, wow, it’s even worse than I expected.
Where even to start? There’s no real narrative; none of this will make much sense to anyone who hasn’t been following the whole #Gamergate thing already.
The “argument,” when it’s not completely incoherent, is thoroughly dishonest and (when it comes to criticizing Sarkeesian’s actual videos) ridiculously petty. The film makes repeated assertions about Sarkeesian (that she’s a “bully,” that she wants to censor video games) without any evidence at all.
When we finally get around to the interviews — there is no original footage at all in the first 18 or so minutes of the “film” — the argument is simply laughable. Essentially, Davis says “SJWs claim to speak for women and minorities, so here’s a … WOMAN (dramatic pause) who disagrees!”
It’s not explained why they’re interviewing a sex worker, much less this particular woman. In fact, she made webcam videos parodying Sarkeesian, but this is never mentioned. (Also not mentioned: the fact that she’s the wife of the “mediator” involved in trying to get the film made.) Why is she talking about Gail Dines? Has Sarkeesian ever spoke in favor of censorship?
And then we get the “Honey Badgers” complaining about “damseling,” followed by Paul Elam … damseling. (What relevance he has to a discussion of Sarkeesian isn’t clear.) Then Alison Tieman damseling.
Oh, and then there’s Davis complaining that when Sarkeesian gets threats, she gets money from it! Never mind the $30,000 collected by AVFM last year ostensibly to pay for security. Or that the Owen and Aurini are basically living off of people’s hatred of Sarkeesian, as are a number of bloggers and youtubers .
Other, er, highlights:
- Terrible fonts (an Aurini trademark)
- That stupid grid of YouTube videos that Aurini uses when he’s got no actual filmed footage or stock photos or anything else to use for a visual
- The terrible sound, with volume changing radically from clip to clip
- Terrible lighting in many of the clips
- The lengthy segments with no visuals at all, just a black screen
- Various people shown without introductions or subtitles to explain who they are
- Even when people are identified, no real effort to explain why on earth they would be relevant
Probably not a good idea to include so much footage of Owen, given that he. you know, has publicly said that Aurini is a fraud who doesn’t have permission to use any of the film footage
It’s striking how much more professional the clips from Sarkeesian videos are when compared with everything Owen and Aurini filmed.
Now, obviously, this is a rough cut. Real filmmakers often make rough cuts missing elements from the final film — music, cgi special effects, etc.
But they generally don’t release these to the public in advance of the film’s release, because they generally look terrible. The footage they use to promote the films prior to release are designed to make the film in question look awesome, not to prove, yes we have some footage.
The only reason Aurini has to release this is to “prove” that he actually has been putting in some work on the “film.” But what it really shows is how little work he’s done. I mean, take a couple of hours and clean up the fucking audio a little. At least make sure the volume is consistent within shots and from clip to clip.
The “quality” here is less than the quality of many unprofessional youtube videos that are slapped together in a day.
Also, it’s kind of amazing that he had no original footage at all to use in the first 18 minutes. Did they film nothing but the interviews themselves? Not even some footage of, I dunno, someone watching YouTube or pretending to type something on their computer?
Damn you, Jordan, you don’t get to rant in a Megadeth t-shirt!!
I demand you take it o… shit NO! Keep it, it’s fine, really.
But do consider removing all audio from your response and add a Megadeth album instead.
I promise I’ll watch it, or at least I’ll listen to it while I do other stuff
I’m watching the video while I do other things. So far, the best bit is that Aurini’s vision for this film was… a buddy comedy. That’s why they are in the shots – because he wanted to make it a roadtrip buddy comedy.
It was worth listening to 44 minutes just to get to that.
I had to quit around the 50 minute mark to go pick my son up, but while listening I worked on a sketch of Owen cast as Ingrid Bergman’s character in the film ‘Gaslight’.
The thought of Aurini and Owen making this as a buddy movie is hilarious, I kind of wish he’d got his own way in that, only, don’t you sort of have to be friends to make a buddy film?
I couldn’t believe it when Owen revealed that it cost $1,600 each way for Aurini to take an unnecessary road trip.
I suppose they HAVE made it a buddy comedy, although not quite in the way they expected.
…Uh oh.
A commenter called Crazy Legs Murphy has just put up some very insightful comments on how terrible the draft is on both a technical and narrative level – check “Latest comments” on the Youtube page for an interesting read.
To those mocking me for pointing out that they misused the terms “sexism” and “racism” in general, and…
to those who have accused me of “mansplaining” and “whitesplaining” in particular.
First, I never mentioned my race – what makes you think that I’m white? Quite an assumption, isn’t it? Well, I am Caucasian…but to any white supremicist, I’m NOT white…that’s because I’m a Jew.
You speak as though I have no knowledge of what it’s like to be discriminated against. Here’s a sample of the family stories I grew up hearing: my grandfather lived in a time where there were signs in public parks saying “No dogs or Jews” – the dogs even got top billing; one of my uncles lost his thumb in a Nazi work camp for talking back to a guard, and a number of stories of family friends end with “and s/he was killed by the Nazis”; and at least one of my relatives is named after a family member killed in the pograms back in the old country, when Cossacks would sometimes hunt Jews for sport. Oh yes…and guess what one of the justifications for these atrocities was: the Jews secretly have all the power.
I am VERY aware of how lucky I am to live in a time where I am not discriminated against due to my religion. I am also very aware that my father, my grandfather, and all of my ancestors were not so lucky.
As far as sexism goes, have any of you ever been the victim of a false complaint of stalking a woman? I have. I know first-hand what it’s like to be told that you can’t even see the complaint, because the person who made it is afraid of you because you’re a man, and to be treated as guilty by default. In my case, it turns out that the complaint itself had never existed – it was part of a (successful) effort to drive me out of a convention circuit, and I only found out about this when I was finally given the opportunity to address the complaint by the convention staff, and it was discovered that there had never been one. The only reason the plan didn’t fall apart and get revealed immediately was because it played on sexist stereotypes of men being victimizers.
ALL racism is inexcusable, regardless of who it is directed against. To justify or excuse racism against anybody by saying that one cannot be racist against a group in power is as offensive to me as any other form of racism, particularly considering the number of my relatives and ancestors who have been maimed or killed based on paranoid justifications of them having more power than anybody else. Likewise, misogyny will NEVER justify misandry. BOTH are wrong.
I’ve now spoken my mind – make of it what you will. I will not be reading or commenting in this thread further, so please don’t address any posts at me. There’s no point, as I just won’t see them.
OK.
I’m not the only one boggling at the irony of Robert Marks’ comment on “people discriminated against Jewish people because they thought this oppressed and frequently victimized class of people secretly held all the power” and then him whipping around and taking about how women can TOTALLY accuse men falsely of stalking/rape/general creepiness and face no consequences and be totally believed and never questioned because for some inane reason men have been cast in an aggressor role towards women. What power these women wield, eh?
When it comes to these long-winded diatribes by Jordan Owen, I usually just wait for someone else to do a video, discussing the relevant highlights. Much more concise and worthwhile.
Whoops. I need to proofread better. I meant:
*I hope I’m not the only one boggling
He just used “Misandry” unironically.
I kinda feel bad about dismissing the rest of his post at this point, but that’s just too much of an “I’m not an MRA, but…” dog whistle.
re: Part 3, I am pretty sure Part 1 and Part 2 were the titles he used in his months-ago responses to the previous times Aurini has royally screwed him over, and thus not part 3 of his rant just about the rough draft. I could look at his YouTube channel and confirm that, but it would be so depressing if I’m remembering incorrectly.
@John
Ditto. I’m pretty sure that if I listened to more than a few minutes of these chuckleheads without a voiceover giving them the MST3K treatment, my brain would start bleeding. =P
I did enjoy the “I’m leaving now so don’t even bother responding to me” section of the content though. Such a nice example of a transparent and laughable attempt to get the last word.
I love when these anti-misandry guys come in with their pedantic manner and their nose in the air, and just pour fuel on my inner flames of misandry. Thanks bro.
I am utterly with you on the broccoli issue. Even a small amount (raw or cooked) in a dish will cause me to physically gag, as will the smell of it cooking. I’ve heard that it’s one of those foods like cilantro–if you have a specific gene (or set thereof, maybe?), it tastes horrible, otherwise it’s fine. Personally, I love cilantro, but I know a lot of folks who all claim the same thing–it tastes like soap.
I’ve noticed that this is a recurring motif with trolls. I think it needs a name.
I failed dismally with attempting to name “gertruding”, so someone else should probably name this one.
@freemage:
It’s a single gene, TAS2R38. It’s such a clear-cut and remarkable on/off thing (either you have it or you don’t, so either broccoli tastes very bitter or it doesn’t) that it’s used in teaching genetics.
(Disclaimer: I am not a geneticist. This may be wrong.)
I lack TAS2R38, having instead some other version of TAS2R, so I love broccoli. I’ll have yours.
Well, considering that Dave Mustaine is a right wing homophobe and conspiracy theorist (he thinks the mass murder at the Sikh temple in WI was a false flag carried out by Obama) it makes sense.
Jordan’s video is proving endlessly entertaining… His breakdown of Aurini’s utter incompetence in film-making is great, and it starts pretty early. Only problem is I might run out of popcorn… 🙁
Jordan would be someone I’d love to see rant on shit if he wasn’t such a shithead in so many ways.
@kirbywarp me too! He’s long-winded (looooooooong winded) but pretty good with the rantiness.
If you’re white, you’re white and you still have white privilege. You just don’t have Christian privilege. Religious oppression is a separate issue, although it can and does often intersect with racism, just not when the religious minority is white. Example: Middle Eastern and South Asian people who are assumed to be Muslims, therefore assumed to be terrorists/terrorist sympathizers.
You don’t get to hand wave away systems of oppression against people of color and women just because you belong to a different oppressed group. That’s not how social justice works.
Yeah, yeah. I know you claimed you aren’t going to read any responses, so don’t bother replying, but who are you kidding? Whether you post again or not, I know you aren’t going to be able to resist reading this.
I can deal with raw broccoli near me as long as it’s not mixed in my food, but the smell of it just curdles my blood. It also ruins any food it’s in for me. It’s hard to pick out because all those nasty little sprouts get everywhere. Ick.
I do love cilantro. I made salsa for a 4th of July party and my hands smelled like cilantro for hours. I kept smelling my fingers like a weirdo because I love the smell of it so much,
Yeah, you still have white privilege. Being white and Jewish clearly aren’t mutually exclusive, and I’m sure if I saw you on the street I wouldn’t be thinking to myself, “Hey he’s clearly Jewish!”, I’d say, “That guy is white.” Just like the taxi cab driver who would pick you up and avoid picking up a black person, or the person who interviews you for a job, or the person who gives you a bank loan. For all intents and purposes, Jewish folks are considered white — even if they weren’t considered to be decades ago, much like the Irish and Italians. To any white supremacist who knew you were Jewish, it’s true that they’d call you non-white, but they wouldn’t know by looking at you. Mainly because they probably think Jews look like those caricatures from a Der Stürmer cartoon. Thus, even if Jews “aren’t white”, they can “pass” as white. They’re conferred benefits on this basis and therefore have white privilege.
That’s the best explanation I can muster at the moment.