Art the clown belongs in dbd
Art belongs in dbd because he is a modern horror icon. And that's what dbd is about, bringing in horror movie icons. I would consider him more of a horror icon, for instance, than Vecna from Dungeons and Dragons.
As far as not liking Art being in dbd because "he's too violent in what he does to adults" than how would one explain the exact same people wanting Pennywise the clown who literally eats children. Not adults. Children. I can't even describe the stuff Pennywise does to kids in IT Welcome to Derry or I'd get banned. You can't complain about not liking one horror character because they're too violent while at the same time championing another character who's just as bad, if not a tad bit worse.
To be clear, I'm not an Art the clown fan. I'm a "keeping horror what it is" fan. Horror has always been about horrible people doing horrible things. Recently, there's been a movement of people, in a lot of fandoms, who want to come in and push to make things "not problematic and cleaner" and that includes telling other people what characters they are allowed to like and wanting villians to be more grey or redeeming. They want the bad guys to "not be that bad." Or if you do like a bad character, they think that makes YOU a bad person. I don't think that kind of puritanical grandstanding has any place in horror, which has historical roots in things like splatterpunk, body horror and grindhouse.
Fictional characters are FICTION at the end of the day. They also can't hurt anybody because they aren't real. Otherwise, all the CSI and Criminal Minds writer's would all be rotting in prison somewhere. And if you don't like a movie, show or book, just don't watch or read it. Literally nobody is making you.
Comments
-
You won't hear me complaining about his addition. I don't think he's a good fit, though, or a horror icon. I tried to watch the first movie after watching many people talk about him like he's some kind of avatar of the best horror in the world and all it seemed to me was a pervy, gory porn movie. And a bad one, at that. I think there are plenty other choices better fit for the theme and more interesting to create as a concept. But… People like it, so why not add him? It would be dumb.
But yeah, you're not changing my mind about him being a horror icon. What's next? Pretending reggaeton is music? Please…0 -
I don't really get how Art is anyway different than Jason, Freddy or Myers. So anyone who claims he should not be in the game are just lying to themselves.
1 -
My only reason against Art being in DBD is that he's mostly already in it, were practical VFX more of a point to be included. And that's just a technicality. Goreporn (VFX and their complexity) would be like a 45s Mori (and redundant computationally), that's not usually competitive at all (aside from promotions).
I'm not really against him being included, just hope the kit is interesting.
(sales are sales though, plastering Art's face onto a character with some gameplay may be/is likely beneficial to both parties)
-1 -
So far as I can tell the Terrifier series is best known for its practical effects. (love The Thing)
2 -
Based on the Slasher Radio interview, Art will have entirely new mechanics tied to him, will have a new height of gore depicted, and will have some form of his bag of tricks (the exact nature is TBA). All and all, this is completely spot-on with how I and many Terrifier fans wanted him to function in DBD. He's gonna be a dream.
2 -
While I'm not a fan of terrifier, the idea of a killer being "too violent" for dbd is laughable. Anyone who plays a game like this and balks at violence is very strange indeed. Tbh most of the gory moris are from original killers.
4 -
Anyone unhappy is just in denial about it not being Pennywise even though its pretty obvious that King won't make a deal.
1 -
i didnt watch terrifier movies because HONESTLY i dislike slashers, i think those movies are pointless+boring.
But i am much bigger fan of survival horror, thats why my favourite licenses are RE and SH. And i feel like Art is just Springtrap but for slashers, people don't want to accept it because its too recent, but truth is Terrifier is a modern icon of slasher movies, young generation will talk about him in 10-15 years like people talk about freddy, jason, myers right now. Same for springtrap, FNAF is modern survival horror icon, even if some deny it.2 -
I'm not mad about it per se, but hot take:
Terrifier is technically impressive gore porn with a generic clown mask thrown on it. I've seen the movies, and the practical effects are genuinely impressive and creative, but Art himself has all the personality of a mayonnaise sandwich. He's just a vehicle. That entire franchise is built on the kills, because there isn't anything else of note there.Not really liking Art and being disappointed that Pennywise isn't coming can be mutually exclusive.
If people are huge Art the Clown fans, I'm happy for them, but I'd just have preferred this licensing opportunity were used on a number of other IPs and I personally never expected Pennywise and will continue not to.0 -
David Howard Thornton is a genuine master of silent clownery, I will not tolerate DHT slander.
-1 -
i would just say that dbd is also at its core just a slasher game. theres some lore slapped on the back end that youll never interact with or know about unless you specifically choose to go out of your way to read it and all the game is really just a slasher game. therefore art is literally perfect for dbd as he is a slasher.
i dont think adding more "lore complex" franchises is a benefit to dbd on that front because freddies lore is completely irrelevant to dbd. his only relevance to dbd is that he is there to slash people.
0 -
While someone like Pixel Bush might disagree with your dismissal of the value of lore in DBD, I would actually agree with all that, which is why I'm not mad about it.
I just personally would have preferred another IP, and don't can't remotely get on board with calling Art a horror icon.
But if he plays well, all will be good. At the very least it should lead to a god-tier mori(s)0 -
i would say part of that is because horror icons are usually historical characters, or characters from early 2000s and before that have built up nostalgia and irreverance.
if you made the movie halloween today for the first time in the style of its original i really do not believe the movie would do well or that michael myers would ever be a horror icon.
But because of when it was made and the time that has passed he has become one of the faces of horror.
in modern horror, and in particular gore horror, i dont think art has any modern competition (that i am aware of) over time in another decade or 2, i believe art will more and more get cemented as a horror icon as he gains time that the other characters have as well.
0 -
Eh. I don't have any personal attachment to him, but I'm happy for those that wanted him.
We get a classic slasher tomorrow, and a fairly new one in November. Win-win, I'd say.
0 -
I don't really have a problem with the content in Terrifier, moreso that I just don't really enjoy watching the movies. They gross and bum me out, and not in the fun way other horror media like Saw does.
That said, Art is a pretty cool character in terms of power potential and I like his design (Needles from Fear & Hunger 2 gives me a strange attachment). In the context of DBD, I welcome his inclusion as a representative of Horrors more extreme side, even if his films aren't to my taste.
The roster feels complete to me now that all the classic slashers have joined among so many others. If the Entity wants Art, let him play.
Post edited by ArkInk on0 -
Certainly, the challenge that modern horror characters face is that they are all derivative. If Halloween were made today it wouldn't be as noteworthy because Myers would just blend into the sea of slashers, much as I feel Art does. And some other slasher would be the icon that Myers was.
But these old icons are iconic because they were pioneering. Pioneering as a horror character today is a massive task.
Maybe it's because I am old AF and have been jaded by voraciously consuming horror media for decades, but I don't think many people are going to remember Art the Clown in 30 years, at least on the pop cultural level the some of the 80's and 90's icons. To a subset of the horror community? Sure. On a broad level like Myers/Freddy/Jason are known today? No shot.
I think maybe we've seen the end the cultural phenomenon horror icon as a character; when I think of the best horror I've seen over the last 15-20 years, very few of them have a singular killer character as the most memorable aspect, and those that did weren't amazing.2 -
The constant manufactured controversy is why I don't really engage with the DbD community anymore. Not worth the mental energy. People need to put down their phones and go outside. Maybe experience life outside of Twitter and IG.
-2 -
The only backlash I've seen about Art coming to DBD is from Women saying the Art movie is a Misogynist power fantasy
0 -
I've actually never watched the movies (Pennywise was enough for me, clowns freak me out) but he's the antagonist of a bunch of horror films so I think he's just fine coming to DBD
0 -
I saw the first movie. Didnt hate it or anything, i can see the appeal for its fanbase. It does fit into dbd as a modern slasher icon. Just like myers and freddy and jason hes immortal and all that. His primary thing is how disgusting and gory the movies get which is different from the classic icons as its more of a shockfactor thing. That may have pushed some people away from liking the series and its something dbd would have to take a notch up for since more intense gore will be expected. Seems kote admitted during the post event slasher radio interview, that they will be taking it up a notch for the mori once he gets put in the game
0
