MovieChat Forums > mxpowers43 > Replies
mxpowers43's Replies
Damn it, I know this is going to bite me in the ass and I know that objectively Jaws is a better film but Jurassic Park takes it for me. Mostly because of the music combined with the cinematography and effects just make it such a special movie for me. Combined that with nearly every actor is JP gives a great performance I can overlook some of the more simplistic parts of the overall story. This one of the only examples in a film which I rate the spectacle higher than the story. But they are really close.
For example my favorite scene from each film is Jaws: Quint's USS Indianapolis speech. Jurassic Park: Hilltop (First Brachiosaur scene) There is no way I could decide which is better. Shaw's performance is just something of legend and the setting and mode is just incredibly effective. For jurassic park the music use and performance reaction of each actor involved is equally effective but in a different way. Both give me goosebumps and there is not much on this planet that does that.
Honestly for me JP takes it but not by much. They are both among my favorite movies but JP is on my top test list where as Jaws is like top 20 list.
This might be because I was not around to see Jaws in theater but did get to see JP in theater and it might just have had more of an impact because of that.
I have read the entire original Mary Sue story. this "93% of all Mary Sue stories start with some kid being told that their real parents are much more important and glamorous than the clods who raised them," Doesn't appear in it. I understand the Mary Sue was a satire version of the multiple Fan fics that plagued the Star Trek fandom for years; but Mary Sue is about wish fulfillment and manner in which the character is presented.
"that they born to some sort of glorious destiny and great power and the fate of the good guys/world/galaxy/universe is in their hands! Sound familiar?"
Consider this does not fit Luke Skywalker in at least ANH in the slightest, no it doesn't sound familiar in regards to him.
-Obi-wan does not tell him he has a great destiny, it is only "you must learn the ways of the force, if you are come with me to Alderaan". That is is. He offers to train him because he was friends with Luke's father and realized he had potential. That is vastly different from the universe revolving around him and it being in his hands. You are projecting you narrative to fit your argument. This is not how the story was actually presented though.
-Luke has very little power in ANH and ESB. It is not until the third film does he have any greatness and he had 2 films of failure to earn that. Rey did not earn it.
So yeah your arguments are crap and you are full of it.
Bye, enjoy living in ignorance.
"and YES, elements of the standard Mary-Sue narrative, "
WTF are you talking about? do you even know what the Mary-Sue narrative is? based on this it seems not. How in the f*** can Luke be a Mary Sue, he has no power and gets belittled, ridiculed and his ass kicked the first 95 minutes of the film and only has one lucky shot that propelled him into greatness. It is a archtype of the standard heroes journey. Not a Mary-Sue narrative.
"And if the anti-haters* are the only ones who are able to discuss anything rationally, then yes, they act like they're the only ones who should be talking. That's how rational people always treat the irrational. I have to tell you, you're being a bit of an exception here."
IN what way is labeling all critics as sexist a rational discussion or counter-argument. Maybe since you don't know what a Mary Sue is perhaps you do not understand what rational means either.
"* Please take a moment to consider the difference between "defenders", which implies more fondness for this film than I think exists, and "anti-haters"."
if that is the case, the pro-TFA crowd is misrepresenting themselves to a hysterical level.
The OP was not provocative, as far as I can see. The title was because I was trying to attract attention to open discussion. If one was careless and did not bother to read the OP then why would calling that lazy be such a problem. And again I was focused on criticizing those that are disrespectful AND lazy when looking at other people's beliefs. The word lazy keeps coming up because many of the posters are perfectly exemplifying the type of laziness I was critiquing in the first place.
"It's absolutely true that training not being important is canon. We see Luke train for an hour or two with Ben and spend a couple of days max with Yoda, and boom suddenly he's a full-blown jedi. "
You must have watched a different movie, the one I watched was after training with Obi-Wan he had not one force ability and 3 years later was barely able to force pull the lightsaber before training with Yoda. AFter training with Yoda we see him get toyed with and easily bested by Vader. remind me again how much training Rey got. It is nice to just make up absolutes whenever we feel like it. No need to argue when you can just assume your take on a particular thing is "absolutely true".
I don't go to IMDB anymore, but TFA does not deserve to be on any top anything list unless it is a negative list. like Top 10 worst written sequels or something, TFA can go there.
Yeah it was pretty infuriating. But I think the endless line of pleabs coming out to defend what is basically indefensible with some of the worst conceivable logic and reasoning combined with petty untrue insults it what is truly remarkable.
"By you going well it is not going to satisfactorily explain the problems away created by TFA shows you are going in closed minded."
Not what I said, I said I can't imagine a scenario in which they explain the problems of TFA away. How, even if the explanation is good, will it not now feel tacky? Can you imagine a scenario or do you just not care?
"Admit it you secretly want the film to fail because you are salty about the success TFA got which you did not like. Since by your own claims you said you hate that if it is good people will overlook TFA. "
I don't want star wars to fail, I want the weak elements of the highly financially successful TFA to be scrutinized so that the film producers and directors realize they have to put out quality star wars films or loss their audience. All this excuse making and overlooking the many flaws of TFA is just reason for disney to keep giving more of the same, if people by it why not?
I do find it annoying that if TLJ is really good most people will just give a pass to TFA. You may not believe me but I found TFA a more painfully bad experience than even Batman and Robin because even though the execution of the story of Batman and Robin was awful, TFA had a horribly weak story and even worse characters. Finn is basically Robin, Kylo is basically Mr Freeze, Poison Ivy is Snoke, I would say Rey is Batman but that would be selling Rey way to short. She is more like Superman.
I am not going to try to defend Batman and Robin though to try to 'prove' it is a better film. Why would I do that, Batman and Robin is properly hated. In my view TFA is equally bad and yet it is getting praises and defended like no other film in history.
Yeah I bet people don't like being called lazy in their thinking. Conviction is a hell of a thing.
"I hate the fact that your mind is made up before you even see the film. That is why I told you to stop seeing the films. "
My mind was not made up prior to TFA. I went in hopeful. My mind is not made up either about TLJ but I can't imagine a scenario in which they will satisfactorily explain away the problems in TFA and it is going to hang over the series head in a very negative way.
Batman and Robin was a goofy comic book movie that was horribly done. As bad as it is; I still view TFA as a worse movie overall. Now not all movies are rated with the same scrutiny. A movie with Arnold I would never expect to be a Godfather like masterpiece. But an Arnold movie can be Good as a Arnold movie. Batman and Robin was a bad movie for what it was. As I see it though based on the merits I see films being judged; TFA is worse for what it was that Batman and Robin for what it was. I am not sure if that makes sense.
"1) if Luke can become a full-blown Jedi with three days of apparent training, and become the best pilot in the rebel fleet because he flew an old crop-duster back home, then it's canon that training isn't important!"
In what way did look become a jedi in 3 days? he does not become one until the very end of ROTJ and that is I think 7 years after the story began. It is safe to assume he was doing at least some self teachings between the films. And yet even with Obi-Wan short lessons he does not ever use a full force ability. It never goes beyond reflexes and intuition. This is directly contrast to Rey whom uses basically every force power and ability that is available and known. It is likely they will come up with an explanation that she was taught but lost her memory, but even it the explanation works it is going to feel so tacky.
" and become the best pilot in the rebel fleet because he flew an old crop-duster back home, then it's canon that training isn't important!"
When did anyone say he was the best pilot in the rebel fleet? In ANH hope he almost crashes once, is nearly shot down twice and relied heavily on R2 to make up for he lack of knowledge. He knew enough to do alright and got lucky to be the one to make the last shot, because other better pilots sacrificed themselves for him and saved his life. It was not a crop-duster back home; the T-16 was an sports like space craft used for recreation and probably tournaments. the film suggest that the controls are similar enough to the x-wing for Luke to get away with doing alright, and he does barely do alright. Luke is just not as impressive as you all make him out to be in ANH in order to deflect the criticism from Rey and the fact they basically make her God.
your real life example is terrible. The person had training in music, that is usually enough for more gifted individuals to be able to apply the music to other instruments even ones they have not used before.
The OT may have used a lot of cliche and archetypal story elements but it did so in a completely new way with a new setting and combined archetypes in a way no other film had done in the past. So a discussion on originality would require us to be specific about what we view as "originality". ANH borrowed heavily from multiple stories told over hundreds of years and did so in a completely unique setting. I would call this originality but with inspiration from other sources. TFA does not have a unique setting as nearly all are direct (or very similar) copies of planets shown in previous films. All the aesthetics are basically the same to the point were one is wondering if this is actually taking place 30 years removed from the last entry. And the story and plot arch is almost a complete rehash of the plot of ANH, I mean even some parts being nearly frame for frame identical. This goes beyond inspiration and looks more like a lazy reboot marketed as a sequel. Had they made this a reboot instead of episode 7 I likely would not have had as much an issue with the lack of originality because the focus would have been on what they did that was new (as a reboot it would be expected to be similar in story to the original and would not be offensive). It was not a reboot though, it was a sequel and a continuation of a story requires a little more effort on 'what's next' in the story and not moving the story to almost the same position before the original began.
Why is it that defenders think they are the only one's allowed to discuss TFA; seemingly you just want anyone that saw the films negatively will just go away. I don't want you to go away. I want to make compelling arguments and make you realize TFA was not a good film and will be very difficult to follow up.
Yup, it is a pretty self contradictory "true agenda" I am trying to get people to be less lazy in their thinking but at the same time I am trying to conquer the world. Wouldn't it be easier for me if everyone was dumb, thoughtless and easily manipulated?
I was not offended. I was responding sarcastically to your lazy comment; which if you had read my entire OP you would know was one of the primary things I was criticizing. I do not mind what you believe, because it is probably similar to what I believe, primarily secular scientific explanation. I just admit that every thought and belief has holes and is inconclusive so to state conclusively is not a objective approach and in my opinion lazy.
"Notice I said the majority of critics praised it."
Yes, go back and read some of the actual reviews; even those praising admitted the weaker elements but they overlooked them and still praised the film.
" A Star Wars film pushing a female lead would not do wonders for their career. "
Going up against a Star Wars film pushing the first female lead would not do wonders for their careers in a industry that has a very powerful vocal feminist support. People that do say something are pounced on and nearly always suffer negative consequences. And there is a difference between making a new series with a female lead and putting a female lead into an already popular franchise. Not that it is bad to do so, but if it was done poorly; like I say it was for TFA, it still makes it unlikely spineless critics will 'rock the boat'.
"If it is that bad do not go see the Last Jedi."
Considering I did not see TFA or Rogue one in Theater I will likely not do so for Last Jedi. and may not watch the series at all.
"You will though that is what I love about all you whining people. No one is forcing you to watch it so stop seeing them"
I hate this condescending tone. So according to you only people that like a film can discuss it; those that want to look at the weaker elements and discuss criticism are just "whining people" that should stop watching ergo no longer be able to discuss.
Not all critics praised it, most recognized the weaker elements but overlooked, likely for the sake of their careers; bashing a star wars film pushing a female lead would not do wonders for a journalistic career in modern american; and if you don't think that played a role you are incredibly naive.
I think it is the worst film I have ever seen but I try to keep in mind there may have been smaller budget obscurities I am neglecting. TFA as far as I could see had not a single redeeming quality. Only a few aspects of it were mediocre and the value I put on story and character means since this film was lacking in those departments means the other qualities couldn't make up.
I think the baseless accusations of sexism at any and all critics of the character Rey and the film in general is equally disturbing.
Also at this point I think my star wars ship is about sailed. I was clinging on but I can see more and more I am the type of fan that is getting left behind, those that actually care about story seem to be a minority now. So Disney will continue to pop out soulless popcorn flicks that pander to nothing but modern cultural pandering mixed with nostalgia and you all will just eat it up until you are fat blotted and as soulless as the marketing garbage you defended for years.
Tragic, but I guess I can still always enjoy the OT and pretend nothing exist outside of that.
I have not seen Catwoman or 2015 Fantastic Four; but I would honestly watch only of those others you mentioned over TFA even though I hated nearly all of them as well. TFA was actually painful to get through. I really am sincere in saying I think it is the worst big budget movie I have ever seen.
I disagree I think you can say, and should say, Godfather is an objectively better film but you enjoy Commando more. There is nothing wrong with that. It is when you try to apply your subjective standards as being worthy of overriding objective merit we run into problem.
" The people who criticize her are very vocal. Mary Sue thing is just as tired as a new hope remake. "
this is getting boring and akin to talking to a wall. These 2 criticisms are the most pointed to because they are the most obviously and glaring. And if the defenders won't budge or concede even the slightest admittal to the weaknesses of these aspects how can we ever move on to anything more specific. use logic here.
I already said no one owes me an explanation but if they respond to my criticism with weak point, logic or even insults I am going come down on them like the hammer of the gods. That is my prerogative and if they are too weak to defend themselves and resort to shrinking away to pathetic cope outs, like "I just think it is dumb" to discuss, then that is a reflection of the weakness of their argument to begin with and a suggestion they do not have a actual defense so the whole thing became a trivial exercise to a loop around someone pathological ideology and not even a discussion of film.
" people called me a feminist douche bag who is sexist"
funny that you bring this up because I have neither said nor hardly seen any discussion towards the anywhere towards Rey. I admit I am not on Mad Max discussions as much but all the criticisms I have seen of Rey have been about character and writing and nothing about gender (or at least very seldom). The fact is one of the only defenses I have seen of such criticism of the writing is it was based in sexism (of course without any proof to substantiate the claim). This is seemingly what you are trying to do here yet again, but being a little more guarded about actually casting the label.