MovieChat Forums > mxpowers43 > Replies
mxpowers43's Replies
"The film did not show us that someone like Rey in a place like Jakku can't know how to pilot any ships."
It gave us no reason to assume someone like Rey can. In this case the burden of proof is on the one presenting the story. Not the one observing it.
Deflection, unable to answer? worried you've been called out? Given what i have seen of you, especially since you were unable to even realize I was speaking of 3 possible people and not one person, you could not even come up with a reasonable response to talking to a brick wall.
Seriously, if you reveal your approximate age and IQ level or at least give some credibility in your intelligence I will offer mine.
What is your IQ and how old are you? Seriously I want to know if I am talking with someone that is mentally challenged, extreme old and suffering from Alzheimer's, or maybe someone extremely young and completely without experience?
"
Says you. "
ah that's the source of our disagreement. We obviously watched different movies.
"Those are just your specious preconceived notions."
I had NO preconceived notions which is why my brain did not turn off when watching the film. Apparently yours did.
Be honest did you emotional resonate with Luke in the first film? I sure didn't but I still cared about the story and even his story even though I thought he was annoying. You can care about people or characters without needing to be emotionally invested. Again you are demonstrating some seriously demented arrogance.
"If an author doesn't intend there to be an emotional catharsis then I'm not interested."
But maybe someone else would be interested. Jesus, this makes so much sense. Your a complete narcissist. TFA emotionally resonated with YOU, and nothing else matters.
"
No. Reactions like the ones that a few people have to TFA are learned behaviours which are a symptom of notions of ownership of the narrative, and therefore intelligence. So they are about protecting a presumed intellectual status. A good writer leaves it up to the audience's intelligence. They don't play up to an utterly specious set of intellectual standards. If people get used to their perception of their own intellect being pandered to then they react negatively to anything that neglects to satisfy that purpose. The irony is that their solutions actually dumb the story and the audience down."
Come on now, do you honestly believe this crap? Does the phrase cognitive dissonance mean anything to you? There is a difference between subtlety and things not making sense or being lazily contrived by plot needs. Here is an example,Luke's build up of being a pilot is built up for the entire film (one might make the case that it is just as inexplicable but that would be bullshit) before he flies. Rey's reveal of being a pilot is literally seconds before she is piloting the falcon in some of the most grandiose manners ever. How can you see there and pretend this was intellectually written? you are so full of crap I think I can see it dozing from the screen.
"First, show her doing more than being a loner and only scavenging. Instead have her doing things like show her socializing in jobs as a pilot in between camps with scavenged goods. She is both socially 'normal' and a great pilot so they should do things to show why she is like that. Maybe show her have a few friends while on piloting jobs for Unkaar and quick little social exchanges. Like she gets back from scavenging and Unkaar only gives her 1/4 portion and says 'if you want the rest fly the parts to "Y" camp and collect payment'. Then show her doing that instead of the wasted time with a 'pilots' helmet eating by herself and staring at an old lady 'dreading' her own future. Show that she is too busy to dread anything and that is why she doesn't leave on her own. Too busy to think about leaving would make more sense than what we got, of course it would make her less sympathetic to millennials.
Next, show her doing a fighting pit for money(food). Show that she willing participates and is competent in an fighting arena; maybe even with multiple weapons. This would suggest she has being it for some time and would make her later battle prowess not only acceptable but cool. Again this would likely make her less of a sympathetic character. What is the key part of the sympathetic - pathetic.
Third, show her having some exchanges with the Church of the force or suggest she knew them and was sad to hear they were all killed. Maybe Finn could tell her that is where he was escaping from and she is saddened by this and he gets a chance to consul her, which would humanize her and give their relationship and chance to develop naturally. Also it would help making Finn look less pathetic. Also it would explain her ability to pick up the force if she had heard more stories about it previously. "
Do you not understand what contradiction means? all of these fixes are based on the contradictions or at least seemingly contradiction of the characters ability vs background.
"Emotion IS story"
This is patently false. Emotion is the response one should have to story. They are one and the same.
"There's no point telling a story if the it is not intended primarily to provide emotional catharsis which the audience can appreciate at least vicariously"
That would be up to the author's intent. You cannot assume their intent for them.
"Emotional truth is always, way, way more important than obsessing over literal and explicit narrative transparency (which presumes the audience's intelligence in a negative way, almost without exception) ."
I like the way you admit it is an emotional story but those that did not resonant emotionally with it are somehow less intelligent then those that did respond emotionally. Emotional intelligence is only one kind of intelligence, and in my opinion should not even be considered intelligence because it is more the antithesis of intelligence.
"If my sarcasm wasn't effective with you it's because you couldn't understand it"
lol yes it couldn't be your sarcasm sucked, just assume you are clever and the world's reality is wrong. Man the type of arrogance that has to go into such a false assumption is astounding.
"That's often the objective with sarcasm. The target is unaware. "
That is not the objective of sarcasm, stupid. The objective is to make the target feel like an idiot. If they did not understand it they would not feel like an idiot. So since you don't even know what the goal of sarcasm is how can you use it effectively, dumb ass?
"And still can't provide a contradiction."
read my op and first response again, retard. It is full of the contradiction or at least seemingly contradictions I observed with the character and you refused to address my point. Pretending they weren't there doesn't mean they aren't. I may be using non-sequiturs now, but you started off with them. So who is the one that sucks at the art of arguing? It sure as hell ain't me
...Contrary to it. But I still don't want to focus on that, it is an argument for another board.
"Read some of the nitpicking overanalysis of the GoT board, it's really amazing how deep you can go with that show."
I have been over there and discussed it several times. Let me ask you something did you like the Sand Snake characters?
Edit: PS I really hate the character limit this site has for responses. It forces one to limit their content, which can sometimes make the point less effective.
Emotional response is important but it is not vital to cohesive story telling. I have not forgotten that most people need to respond emotionally but characters that only resonate on an emotional level are not good characters. Dom Torrito from fast and furious is designed only to resonate with younger male audience and for years was successful in that. He is still a bad character and Fast and Furious is a horridly written series.
personally I like characters that resonate emotionally naturally. When the film is trying to manipulate you into liking a character I find it almost impossible to like them. Like with the Avatar characters.
" in filmmaking the caring, the emotional component us far more important than the logic"
I am glad you agree up to this point for the most part, but this is just wrong. Emotions cloud judgement so if something is effective in clouding you judgement than you are not giving a fair and partial observation. Basically you are admitting Rey is a bad character that you like any way. and that is fine. I have no problem with that. In this case though can you see how my fixes above would really make the character better, even if less sympathetic?
"If you see a perfectly logical story and don't engage with the characters on an emotional level, you're bored and the film is a failure."
I think you are wrong. If the story is 'logical' in its characterization then one cannot help but resonate an emotional connection because the characters would feel more "real". Not realistic but they would be humanized. How can one resonate with Rey after her introduction? The rest of the film she is depicted as almost god like, so basically to 'enjoy' the character you can only access her based on the first ten minutes then make excuses for the remainder of the time.
"as you do refuse to understand what you've viewed a thousand times"
I understand all the "but Luke and Anakin" arguments and I think all the evidence of the first 6 films ...
Since it is my post you are replying to it is more accurate to point out it is you that is obsessed with me. Also did you just assume my gender? Do you have something against people that like to be pooped on? wow are you sexist?
Check your privilege.
Was that a solicitation? Also there are multiple meanings to word "impotent". Granted you don't seem too intelligent (or maybe just ignorant of the English language) but here is the definitions for impotent:
im·po·tent
ˈimpətnt/Submit
adjective
1.
unable to take effective action; helpless or powerless.
"he was seized with an impotent anger"
synonyms: powerless, ineffective, ineffectual, inadequate, weak, feeble, useless, worthless, futile; More
2.
(of a man) abnormally unable to achieve a sexual erection.
I meant the former not the latter.
You are so impotent.