Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dark_Convoy, Apr 3, 2012.
6 Common Movie Arguments That Are Always Wrong | Cracked.com
Space Unicrons with rocket feet, away!
Some very good points here...
That coupled with this: Internet Argument Techniques | Cracked.com
...Is the movie forum in a nutshell.
A good article, though I kind of sort of disagree with two of them. The "RIPOFF OF BATTLE ROYALE" section talks about how there's a limited number of plots people can use, the monomyth, and how unoriginality is nescessarily so bad. I completely agree there's a ton of great films that borrow from other films, and classic stories based in archetype, and even remakes that manage to be relevant and worth watching. I disagree, however, that there are only a few "frames" to build a film on by adding characters and subplots and such. Original ideas DO exist, and in amazing supply, and there IS some level of shame in cribbing an idea someone else has used earlier, especially if it's well known. However, this doesn't say that it can't be done, far from it, but it does mean that by starting from a point of unoriginality, you then have to MAKE that project original, by treading some new territory in it or turning that idea towards some new angle that makes the project novel and relevant. Throne of Blood by Akira Kurasawa channeled many of the themes in Macbeth as a statement on the Japanese feudal period, and even the Hunger Games, to use an example from the section title, uses the idea of youth gladiatorial combat (which itself does not originate with Battle Royale) to arguably make a statement on the nature of power and society.
Which brings me to another section I disagreed with, substantially more, that there's a problem with people saying "This movie is about my pet cause!". There's absolutely nothing wrong with analyzing film, it's an artistic and subjective medium, and people will draw different things from it. There's no way to know what a director or actor was going for unless they explicitly state it, and even then, it can be interesting to look at other implications of how something comes across. That being said, however, you better be able to back up the case if you make one, and your support should be clear, concrete, and proportional to how "off" your interpretation is going to seem. The writer doesn't really explain WHY people shouldn't muse over the messages in film, or discuss why they are always wrong. Maybe he should have stuck with 5 common arguments?
Yeah, that pet one sort of seemed like filler to me, but at least the "it happened in the comics" gave me a good laugh, especially since I hear that like every week about Walking Dead, and then there's the stuff about Comic Book men where I was apparently supposed to have memorized some random podcast from 5 years ago to know that a bunch of guys acting like assholes actually aren't.
There's nothing more ironic (or is it moronic) than someone on the internet 'debunking' movie arguments with opinions shrouded under the guise of fact.
Cracked is hit and miss.
Pretty good article, I know a couple of that think that "transformers is a big, dumb action movie with robots and explosions!
After the five odd years of reflection I've had, I'd say that the big and dumb label can only really be applied to Revenge of the Fallen. That one was undeniably stupid, almost offensively so at times. The hows and whys are important but the fact remains it was not up to par with what came before it.
People dug it, obviously, but TF07, man I saw that 8 times in theatres and watched it countless times on DVD/BluRay and on my iPhone. It wasn't out to rewrite the bible of action movies in terms of structure but aside from a few minor issues I personally had, it was a solid action movie.
Dark of the Moon was actually a good improvement on the first one with a villain who was compelling and threatening. DotM didn't deserve its drumming but Revenge of the Fallen did.
As I see it anyway.
I agree with the Transformer argument. You can obviously have a good plot in action movies, which Batman has more then proved.
I am guilty of the remake comments. The problem I have is that these movies arent inspired by, a lot of the time they are almost straight copies scene for scene. You can save the world, but it is the different ways you get to saving the world that counts. I personally enjoyed both Dark City and the Matrix, regardless that they shared the same theme. But there was enough difference and originality in the Matrix that I could appreciate it as it's own movie. Benjamin Button was a wanna be Forest Gump in almost all respects.
As for the hidden meaning in movies, it depends on the movie. The Matrix definately was full of messages, which the film makers even admitted to. However, when I see people trying to explain the deeper meaning in TFers bay films I permanently face palm.
They forgot about actors who shouldn't act any longer and directors who just need to stop directing or doing rereleases of their movies and ruining them.
Nope. Just reasonable.
Separate names with a comma.