MovieChat Forums > avortac4 > Replies
avortac4's Replies
"..he's an overgrown man child who hates cats"
Attraction is not something you choose. It also doesn't have to make sense, and often doesn't. A vegan girl can be attracted to a butcher, even if she hates him mentally.
Angela is certainly not 'a very attractive', and what makes you consider her a 'lady'? She has no 'ladylike' qualities whatsoever, she's like an angry snake, ready to hiss at anyone and anything.
Angela is not socially adept, she probably doesn't have friends - her social network is most likely relatively small, and she lives with cats, which already indicates that she has given up on trying to attract mates.
So she lives in a 'socially unsuccessful', maybe even a bit 'awkward' circle, where she can't really shine or be the 'life of the party'. She can't easily attract mates, although being a female, of course men are drawn to her somewhat.
Now, expecting realism from a TV show is silly, but I think her attraction to dwight is at least a little bit realistic, and could actually happen in real life.
Dwight is not an 'alpha male' by any means, but he can play one convincingly enough for angela to have 'stirred feelings' inside of her about him. Dwight is not an apologetic simp that acts as a doormate, but he tries to dominate every situation he is in. Even though Dwight is not actually very successful in this regard (it's not always realized in concrete way), the constant aura of dominance has an effect on angela.
Dwight has AMBITION - an aphrodisiac to women.
He also goes for what he wants, and takes it (whenever he can), has strong opinions and a big ego.
Dwight is a faulty individual in many ways, and a little bit crazy - but as an attractive MAN, he certainly succeeds in angela's eyes.
Dwight DARES, and sometimes that's all it takes. Meek men usually don't 'dare', and this is something that, in a big way, separates the 'wheat from chaff' in women's eyes.
'Overgrown man-child' (what a weird term!) doesn't enter into it.
If you think and experience these jokes fully and understand all the layers, and where it all comes from and why, and you get the character motivations and experience the relationship dynamics properly, there's a lot of really fun stuff in there to enjoy.
But these things are _so_ easy to not notice, or dismiss, or just see from a superficial perspective, that if you just see this as 'non-funny dialogue' without realizing all the perspectives that work in tandem, you won't get it, and understandably probably continue to hate it.
So a lot of responsibility for enjoyment of this show falls to the observant diligence of the viewer - if you focus wrong, you'll miss it. If you don't understand what's going on and why, you'll miss it.
It's like hearing a joke, but focusing only on the words used, without listening to the content of it, and then dismissing the joke as unfunny.
This is the kind of superficial TV viewing that can EASILY happen with this show, because there's a surprising amount of intricate subtlety woven into many of the scenes that you can't appreciate with a surface-level viewing.
This is exactly why it took me so many viewings to start appreciating the show - I simply didn't understand or realize what was going on, I didn't give the show enough credit, and I wasn't immersed in the relationship dynamic that makes the dialogue so funny - in a very subtle way. So all I heard and saw was 'words that make unfunny sentences, spoken by some people I don't know'.
Once you know change that into 'Michael does his typical misunderstanding thing while undermining the egotistical Ryan in a brilliant way', you can see how there's way more substance than what I originally experienced.
Once you start seeing everything in this show in its proper context and the underlying intricacies open up to you, THAT is when you can properly and truly start enjoying the show.
It's not for everyone, maybe you'll still hate it - but it needs more than surface viewing.
This is a weird show, and it's actually easy to not like it.
It took me a really long time, and multiple viewings - almost out of sheer curiosity - for this show to start finally growing on me enough for me to starting to eventually like it.
It's the kind of experience that you have to be 'in tune' to, understand the characters, observe all the sometimes really subtle humor, find something that speaks to you, to start liking it. It's not immediately genius, it's more like 'after not understanding' for the longest time, you expect it to be crappy, and you watch it anyway, and then something might click a little bit.
Then something else makes you somewhat laugh or smile, and after repeat viewings sort of start 'making sense' in its own, perhaps silly way. When you can start to expect a certain 'tone' or 'style' from the show, you can start appreciating the humor and the misunderstandings and Michael's innocent charm more and more.
It's possible you might never like it and always hate it, but for me, a change happened after I just watched it enough. I didn't expect it, but the things Michael says, and how he delivers them, just started really getting me to like the show more each time.
One very small example;
Michael asks Ryan, who used to be a temp, and is now .. a salesman or something, to fetch him coffee. Ryan says, "I don't do that stuff anymore", obviously referring to 'fetching coffee' and other temp duties that a salesman doesn't have to do.
Michael insults Ryan by saying "No, it's for me, bimbo!"
It's subtle, but there are layers in that joke. It undermines Ryan's importance, it plays on Michael's view of Ryan as a temp he remembers him as (not letting him have the dignity of 'not being a temp'), him not even taking into account Ryan's elevated status as a salesman (or whatnot), and making Ryan seem so stupid, he thinks Michael orders Ryan to get coffee for himself, and fully expects Ryan to fetch him coffee, now that he cleared it up.
I hate T2 - it doesn't offer anything new plotwise, and what new it offers, is just gimmicky, boring, superficial glitter at best, and childish, cringeworthy, predictable crap most of the time.
Some skinny guy with big ears slightly tilting his head towards camera is _NOT_ scary. Arnold at his prime walking towards you shamelessly naked, asking for your clothes and saying 'nice night for a walk' without emotion _IS_ scary. A massive bodybuilder frame slowly getting up after being shot at with a shotgun multiple times (after it brutally murdered a bunch of people) _IS_ scary.
T2 is just a 'watered-down', 'child-friendly', 'family-oriented', sentimental and boring rehash of the only GOOD Terminator movie, 'The Terminator (1984)'.
However, even _I_ think Terminator 2:Judgment Day is better than this faulty movie based on a really idiotic premise (you can't 'revive the dead' no matter how much you freeze them or inject stuff into them, and even if you somehow could re-animate those dead corpses, they wouldn't have any 'memories' or 'habits' or functionality of any kind that you don't specifically give them. The reason is, body and soul are separate things, and once soul leaves body, the corpse starts rotting immediately - the soul is the only thing keeping it alive, and memories are stored in the soul, not in the body. The body is never -truly- alive, the soul only makes it seem that way. And humans never really die, because it's only the body that dies (or stops seeming to be alive)).
This movie is as predictable, straight-forward, and boring as it gets, and even the action is not as good as you should be able to expect from this particular duo.
There are good Damme movies (No Retreat, No Surrender) and good Dolph movies (Rocky IV), but this is not it.
I would rather suffer through the 'Edward Furlong acting' rehash crap than this movie. The only saving grace is how well Dolph plays a totally crazy guy (very believably, in fact!), but that's not enough.
I think his function is to show that Daniel doesn't understand parenting.
It shows us that even though Daniel has wealth, riches, big house, wife and family - he still doesn't have balance in his own life, he doesn't understand discipline in parenting, and is therefore a bad parent. It shows the results of Daniel's faults that all his wealth and car dealership can't fix.
Rich people, one could assume, have more ability to spoil their brat kids, so they do, because it's easier than learning how to actually discipline your kids properly and thus create a happy family.
Just throw money at it-type problem solution doesn't always work, but rich people can't fathom this much.
At least, this is my explanation of 'prodigies', so even Twosetviolin is wrong, when they say 'Geniuses are not born, they are made'. Nikola Tesla was clearly a genius that was 'born', not 'made' - but you have to practice to CULTIVATE your genius to a properly expressible (is this a word?) level.
If Bruce Lee incarnates to a rich violin family, it's possible that his martial arts prowess will never be expressed in that particular incarnation - and whoever good or bad he (or she) might become with violin, the martial arts skills won't be there even if he/she needs them, because of lack of practice that would bring it out and cultivate it, and make it accessible.
So you can be a genius in something, but if you don't practice it, you won't be able to bring it out into anything detectable. It's still inside of you, and maybe gets cultivated in next incarnation, but you can't express it.
If Mozart never saw pianos or any musical instruments until he was 20, he couldn't suddenly play like an angel - he would need at least some practice to 'rekindle' that atrophied genius.
So your 17 years of Tae Kwon Do prove absolutely nothing.
" I have studied taekwondo for over 17 years and I can assure everyone that no one can be a five week wonder boy, like Daniel-san."
I have learned Tae Kwon Do a bit, and Karate also a few separate occasions each, and I can assure you - you CAN learn the basic moves, especially if you train at home between lessons, etc.
Once you know how to do a few basic moves, all you need is experience, which comes from sparring and practicing.
'Studying' isn't enough, you know, it's like saying you have studied swimming for 17 years and can assure no one can learn to swim quickly, when all you have done is read about swimming from books and the internet.
Bruce Lee was otherplanetary in his skill and ability long before he had 'studied' Kung Fu (or should it be spelled 'Gong Fu'?) for 17 years. So maybe you are just a slow learner.. (:
(Just kidding!)
I know that to truly master 'martial art' of any kind, especially something that goes beyond Jeet Kune Do and eventually is just 'human movement that adapts to anything automatically when you want it to', takes a lot of dedication, and usually a long time.
However, this is a TV show, AND here's a possible explanation to ponder:
- Incarnational learning throughout ages
Mozart was able to play superbly as a 4-year old, and was able to also compose very good music at a very young age. He didn't learn how to play all those 4 years and thus became a master. He already KNEW how to play, from years and years of practice from previous incarnations.
Think about all the violin prodigies - think how skilled Bruce Lee will be when he incarnates again (if he hasn't already) - that 'kid' will be really good at martial arts at a very young age, just like Mozart was about pianoplaying and music. Any teacher that taps into that and utilizes his already existing, deep understanding of martial arts, would be able to very quickly make him into a 'martial arts superstar', because that's what he already inwardly is.
When Johnny explains that he DIDN'T call her a bítch, he only described her behaviour as 'bítching', it leads to a really funny humor immediately after what happens after this explanation.
This scene is one of the surprisingly funniest things I saw in the show. I have to admit, I love the humor, how the heck can a modern TV show be this brilliant?
Oh, and watch the intro title with the FRENCH music first, so you understand it's actually a beautiful, not a cheesy song originally. The translation kind of butchers it beyond recognition, and the singing is corny in the english version.
Here's a screenshot from the first episode:
https://i.postimg.cc/Vv4JRkjq/O-UaTS.png
I'd like to add the old cartoon from the early 1980s, "Il était une fois… l'Espace".
Its english translation was "Once Upon a Time...Space".
It is a bit boring, it has a lot of 'filler' and many irrelevant episodes, and many of the plot points don't lead anywhere, the villains are very two-dimensional (pun not intended), but there are also many good points about it, for example:
- Gorgeous spaceship designs (in my opinion)
- Wonderful, melodic, energetic, immersive and atmospheric musics
- Likable main characters
- Interesting 'main story arc' that proceeds every few episodes a bit
- Philosophical points (about all kinds of things, from 'can robots be considered slaves' to 'hierarchy of technological and spiritual evolution', 'different take on history', 'are PSI powers real', 'should people destroy nature', 'what gives a people the right to conquer/colonize a planet', 'does might make right' and so on and so forth - all in all, a LOT to think about!)
- StarTrekTNG-like 'optimistic future' with high aspirations with solving problems by discussing them in 'councils' and such
- Actually relatively believably scary villains (as 'cartoony' as they are, they actually do manage to create a lot of destruction, and their militaristic power greed-mania seems very realistic, or at least believable indeed)
It is in some ways a 'somewhat realistic take' on how Earth's 'civilization' might have evolved into a space-faring people, based on what was going on this planet at the time (of course real space faring is nothing like it).
In addition, the show is inspirational and has some nice, colorful visuals and even some interesting animations.
It did succumb to the 'boring planet of the week' syndrome from time to time. Still, the first episode, the last episode, and a few episodes here and there are absolutely brilliant, and worth watching, and may even teach the viewer some small lessons and give something a bit more cosmic to think about.
"..though principle shooting had all but been completed,"
What kind of principles did they shoot?
Unless you mean principal shooting.
These things are SO easy to check, especially nowadays! Why do people do this instead..? I can't understand.