Jump to content

Controversial Opinions


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Dunkum said:

well he definitely didn't kill the main antagonist.  Snoke was nowhere near interesting enough to be the main antagonist, he was a shallow failed attmept to make a copy of palpatine.  more to the point, Kylo took his place, which meant that even if you cared enough about Snoke to consider him the primary antagonist somehow, its not like there was no antagonist after his demise, just a different and infinitely better/more interesting one

He wasn't interesting because RIAN KILLED HIM. He could have made him interesting, Kylo even in that movie was morally confusing on whether or not he was a good guy/bad guy. he constantly flip-flopped. he 'interesting' because you can never know what Kylo will do because what he does depends on the plot, not his character. Snoke could have been interesting, he wasn't that similar to Palpatine yet, and he was far more menacing than Kylo, who got his butt kicked in the first movie. He should have been the main antagonist, and he could've been more fleshed out, but instead he was killed for the 'subversion', showing that Rian likes to have shock value rather than substance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Aspiring Writer said:

He wasn't interesting because RIAN KILLED HIM. He could have made him interesting, Kylo even in that movie was morally confusing on whether or not he was a good guy/bad guy. he constantly flip-flopped. he 'interesting' because you can never know what Kylo will do because what he does depends on the plot, not his character. Snoke could have been interesting, he wasn't that similar to Palpatine yet, and he was far more menacing than Kylo, who got his butt kicked in the first movie. He should have been the main antagonist, and he could've been more fleshed out, but instead he was killed for the 'subversion', showing that Rian likes to have shock value rather than substance.

i basically disagree with just about everything you said here.  I'll leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2020 at 2:34 PM, Dunkum said:

i basically disagree with just about everything you said here.  I'll leave it at that.

*Eye twitches* Watch this video. Time code 1:19:00. It explains the point of Subversive content and why Snoke does not work as a good subversion. 

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by Aspiring Writer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today's controversial take: posting loooong videos on a medium that favors short form posts and expecting anyone to watch them is... let's say naively optimistic. 

Also, if someone makes a video that reviews films or TV shows and that video is as long as what they are reviewing? Learn to trim that junk down! Give that chicken fat back to the chicken and don't be chicken again! 

Sheesh, could you imagine if some self-absorbed  jerkwad wrote a review about all the things wrong with Stormlight Archive that was even a tenth the length of one of the books?! No one has time for that! I HAVE HOBBIES, DAGNAMMIT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Orlion the Platypus said:

Today's controversial take: posting loooong videos on a medium that favors short form posts and expecting anyone to watch them is... let's say naively optimistic. 

Also, if someone makes a video that reviews films or TV shows and that video is as long as what they are reviewing? Learn to trim that junk down! Give that chicken fat back to the chicken and don't be chicken again! 

Sheesh, could you imagine if some self-absorbed  jerkwad wrote a review about all the things wrong with Stormlight Archive that was even a tenth the length of one of the books?! No one has time for that! I HAVE HOBBIES, DAGNAMMIT!

If you think that putting more work and passion into a review of a piece of media is worth complaining about, then I suggest you watch it before saying he needs to 'trim that junk down' as you so put it, because I can assure you he doesn't waste time in his videos. I would know, I watched all of them. Yes, you have hobbies, but you don't have to watch it in one go, and it's better to take time explaining your point than making something short with that doesn't explain your point well. This is like saying you took longer to make the movie than the movie itself, so it's bad. And if some 'self-absorbed jerkwad' made a SA review that was one-tenth of the books and explained their points well, I would have respect for whoever did so and would gladly read it as it may be useful and you could learn a lot. You cannot judge a work simply from the fact is long and you feel you don't have time to see it. And, if nobody has time for it, explain why he has over two million views on several of his videos that range up to two hours. And in case you forgot, Brandon Sanderson writes pretty long books when compared to most writers, and yet his books are considered some of the best by millions of people. Now imagine in an alternate reality, people said his books were poor because they were too long. That is what is happening here. 

Also, the fact that the medium favors short videos makes his accomplishment to how he still got as far as he has with everything working against him even more impressive. Naively optimistic doesn't seem that naive anymore, does it? And if that is referring to me, yes, I have a naive hope that some people will take some time out of their day to watch a video that explains why a piece of media is garbage. What exactly do I have to lose here? Either they don't watch it, where then nothing changes, or they do and start to realize their errors in judgment and may perhaps start holding media to a higher standard and more discerning eye, where then my optimistic hope has brought us one more person to uphold modern creators' to a higher standard than the sludge that we receive today, at least when it comes to the film industry.

The fact you have made this claim is an example of someone who does not appreciate true passion being put into someone's work from simply one quality which they disagree with and have decided because of this quality, their work is meaningless, naive, and simply not with the effort of checking out. People have received such short content for so long that any long-form content befuddles them, as evidenced by you. Most posts here are simply a few sentences, but there are posts that are quite long compared to the average and take some time to read. Is the work they put in that post meaningless? No. There are quite a few people, including me, that are willing to take the time to read it through despite the abnormal length, and you clearly aren't one of them. Is it difficult to get through something abnormally long? Yes, but that does not take away from the quality of the work and definitely does not mean that you should pass judgment from that quality alone. 

I do see the irony in how long this post is, but this is a place for controversial opinions, and yours are unfortunately seeming to be convincing people, judging by the three Rep points you have while I am currently typing this, and I feel that I must make clear that your opinions have been extrapolated from one detail that does not at all represent the quality of what you are judging and that you should give it a try (Remember, you don't have to watch it in one go, you can take breaks like you would when reading a book) and I would kindly ask you to not spread opinions that are not properly informed and try to find more about what it is your judging before making a conclusion that you wish to make public. 

I hope this has shed some light on the issue. Good day to you, ladies and sirs.

Edited by Aspiring Writer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Orlion the Platypus said:

Star Wars is all about crap stories. 

Not a single Star Wars film is not a crap story. It's fundamentally designed to be flashy genre garbage.

Now, many Ashoka Tano episodes of Clone Wars and Rebels on the other hand...:P

The key to a "good Star Wars" story is whether or not it's fun. Like Marvel movies. It's not high art. 

That does not change the writing quality of the movie, first off, especially since a movie being 'fun' is fairly subjective as what is fun differs drastically between people. What I am trying to do is say whether or not the writing in those movies is of good quality, which they're not. And I would leave it at that if you hadn't implied that being fun and being good are two separate things. 

The recent Star Wars movies have had some of the worst writing I have ever seen, to the point that things in-world are no longer consistent and anything is just added in by the director's whim, with bland characters and the embodiment of a Mary Sue, with technology and power changing rapidly between films and even scenes to create tension, the force being used as a deus-ex-machina to an unseen degree that breaks all logic, tension and investment in the movie, to the point that even death is no longer something we can depend on to get rid of a character.

Now you say that all the film needs is to be 'fun' to be good, but what you are neglecting is that logic and one's enjoyment in the film are often linked, especially in a sci-fi movie. When the events of a movie progress logically, people are more invested in the story, and therefore enjoy it better. Quality of writing and the enjoyment of those experiencing this writing are linked; that's why so many people enjoy BS books, because they progress logically and intelligently. So when things are written poorly, it takes away from the enjoyment of the film.

So it not being 'High art' does not excuse the poor writing quality, and you should not be making that excuse. Just because it isn't 'high art' doesn't mean it can't be and still be enjoyable. You should be trying to push for better content, as that is the duty of people consuming media is to make creators give their best and then some, making them constantly improve. Otherwise, why would someone, let's say, be bothered by the poor representation of disabled people in BS books? because it affects their enjoyment, and even if it didn't, it can be improved, which will be getting us better content. 

Yours and others' apathy toward this is part of why recent media has given us content sludge like the Star Wars sequels, GoT season 8, Captain Marvel, the most recent Predator and Alien, and pretty much all of the Disney remakes, Mulan being the one I want to mention in particular. Creators won't strive t be better if we decide to be content with whatever they give us; that's why we must keep them to a standard.

The MCU is popular because lots of their movies have nice progression and character development, Infinity War being some of the best content we have had in recent years, being able to work characters of each other, introducing a menacing yet deep villain, smooth plot progression, and logically sound for the most part. There are small flaws, which are bound to happen, unfortunately, though we should still point them out and try to avoid them as much as possible. However, there is no film that is completely flawless, so what is a "good film" must be judged by the number and severity of the flaws they have, and the sequels have that in spades. By writing quality, it is garbage, and for entertainment, it also fails horrendously. Nothing makes sense, and when the audience is confused about how this is suddenly happening or laughing at the absurdity of events, it takes away all investment. Fun and logic are connected, and we should make sure to separate our feelings when judging a piece of media, as whether or not we enjoy it does not represent the film's quality. What does is the events, characters, and progression in that media. And it's not necessarily bad to enjoy a bad film; you just need to realize that the film you liked may have not had the best writing. Obviously, that's not easy, as that is basically saying the film you liked sucks, and if that does bother you, maybe you should reevaluate why you enjoyed the film, but if it doesn't, then congrats, you enjoyed a film that was poorly written yet still appealing.

And lastly, the original trilogy was not 'crap' or as you more nicely put it 'flashy garbage'. It told a hero's journey with great character drama between a father and son in an interesting setting that was unique. There were some flaws, but if that is enough to make it 'flashy garbage' please tell me what you think not garbage is.

 

Edited by Aspiring Writer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Aspiring Writer Ok, there's something fundamentally wrong with this discussion. The thread is for controversial opinions. People share them and there are bound to be discussions as obviously there are going to be disagreements, but for the most part, people understand that if something made it to this thread, it must be a pretty strong opinion, not likely to change, so most discussions end up as exchanges to demonstrate that both opinions exist and end with an "agree to disagree".

This is what was going to happen here since some people engaged you in a friendly way telling you why they didn't share your opinion but without necessarily trying to convince you to change your mind. You obviously feel strongly about the topic, it's obvious that any attempt to make you change your point of view would be futile. However you have tried to change their opinions and outright told them that they are wrong, which is why the thread is so derailed now. 

Now, regarding your take on passion. It's not that people cannot feel so strongly about a topic that they shouldn't make huge two-hour reviews, it's that not everyone is willing to spend that kind of time watching them and you should not judge them on that. Not only that but you posted it repeatedly as an argument but let's be real. Most people will come here, catch up on the discussion expecting to post an answer and continue with their lives. Some may get curious but don't expect most people to be happy when you tell them they need to do homework before going on with the discussion.

Also, I think you put too much weight on objectivity here. You implied that if people watch the video they will change their mind on this topic, which is just not true. Believe me, no amount of arguments will convince me that the sequel trilogy is not worth watching, I enjoy it greatly and likely will continue to do so for a long while. Not because it's the pinnacle of narrative, but because it's simply fun. 

Which brings me to the last point. You said we should demand higher quality because we "content" ourselves with mediocrity. I'm sorry but I'm not simply content with what Star Wars is, I'm entirely happy with it. When I watch a Star Wars movie I don't want to see a masterpiece of narrative with an intricately designed plot and carefully chosen themes, I just want fun characters, good visuals, and some space fighting, and so far, it has greatly delivered. 

I was obsessed with objectivity in stories for a while and said everywhere how this story is objectively good and this one is objectively bad. It even messed with my love for another "sci-fi" story, Doctor Who. I loved it, but it bothered me that it had no consistency, or overarching plot, past plot points didn't have any weight on present events. I just didn't enjoy it as much as I could because I kept waiting for some "Now it all makes sense" moment which never came. 

Then, I ditched objectivity and decided that the only thing I care about is if I enjoy the story or not. From that moment onwards I enjoy literally everything infinitely more than before. It's my way of enjoying stories and I intend to continue that way for as long as it makes me happy. If you feel passion about trying to find more sense in every story, if you're always striving to find consistency, in judging how a piece of writing is objectively good and that is what makes you happy, you shouldn't change that for anything, but you also shouldn't try and tell others they're enjoying things the wrong way because there's a whole spectrum here. You are on one end, I'm on the other, and there's everything in between. Let's just share our views so we can understand each other without trying to take the fun away from the other, shall we? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A controversial opinion that's loosely linked to some things that were written earlier: Breaking logic in a story can be used to great effect when committing to it. It's probably not really controversial. After all, artists like Franz Kafka, David Lynch and Haruki Murakami are all among the most acclaimed of their respective art forms. But I'd reckon that it might be on this site to some degree, since high fantasy books are better off having a working internal logic in most cases.

I guess what I'm wanting to say is: Magical realism ftw!

(That said, this is not a defense of illogical plot points when plot matters. If you commit to creating a conflict that calls for an understandable solution, you need to deliver on those.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Eluvianii said:

@Aspiring Writer Ok, there's something fundamentally wrong with this discussion. The thread is for controversial opinions. People share them and there are bound to be discussions as obviously there are going to be disagreements, but for the most part, people understand that if something made it to this thread, it must be a pretty strong opinion, not likely to change, so most discussions end up as exchanges to demonstrate that both opinions exist and end with an "agree to disagree".

This is what was going to happen here since some people engaged you in a friendly way telling you why they didn't share your opinion but without necessarily trying to convince you to change your mind. You obviously feel strongly about the topic, it's obvious that any attempt to make you change your point of view would be futile. However you have tried to change their opinions and outright told them that they are wrong, which is why the thread is so derailed now. 

Now, regarding your take on passion. It's not that people cannot feel so strongly about a topic that they shouldn't make huge two-hour reviews, it's that not everyone is willing to spend that kind of time watching them and you should not judge them on that. Not only that but you posted it repeatedly as an argument but let's be real. Most people will come here, catch up on the discussion expecting to post an answer and continue with their lives. Some may get curious but don't expect most people to be happy when you tell them they need to do homework before going on with the discussion.

Also, I think you put too much weight on objectivity here. You implied that if people watch the video they will change their mind on this topic, which is just not true. Believe me, no amount of arguments will convince me that the sequel trilogy is not worth watching, I enjoy it greatly and likely will continue to do so for a long while. Not because it's the pinnacle of narrative, but because it's simply fun. 

Which brings me to the last point. You said we should demand higher quality because we "content" ourselves with mediocrity. I'm sorry but I'm not simply content with what Star Wars is, I'm entirely happy with it. When I watch a Star Wars movie I don't want to see a masterpiece of narrative with an intricately designed plot and carefully chosen themes, I just want fun characters, good visuals, and some space fighting, and so far, it has greatly delivered. 

I was obsessed with objectivity in stories for a while and said everywhere how this story is objectively good and this one is objectively bad. It even messed with my love for another "sci-fi" story, Doctor Who. I loved it, but it bothered me that it had no consistency, or overarching plot, past plot points didn't have any weight on present events. I just didn't enjoy it as much as I could because I kept waiting for some "Now it all makes sense" moment which never came. 

Then, I ditched objectivity and decided that the only thing I care about is if I enjoy the story or not. From that moment onwards I enjoy literally everything infinitely more than before. It's my way of enjoying stories and I intend to continue that way for as long as it makes me happy. If you feel passion about trying to find more sense in every story, if you're always striving to find consistency, in judging how a piece of writing is objectively good and that is what makes you happy, you shouldn't change that for anything, but you also shouldn't try and tell others they're enjoying things the wrong way because there's a whole spectrum here. You are on one end, I'm on the other, and there's everything in between. Let's just share our views so we can understand each other without trying to take the fun away from the other, shall we? 

I must say, seeing this response was certainly amusing. You say it's okay to have discussion and disagreements, yet you chastise me for saying what I believe is wrong with her comment. They engaged me in a friendly way, yes, but I viewed that way as harmful, as anyone who saw that could potentially be swayed by those who see her comment, as I did specify in that response. "This is a place for controversial opinions, and yours are unfortunately seeming to be convincing people, judging by the three Rep points you have while I am currently typing this, and I feel that I must make clear that your opinions have been extrapolated from one detail that does not at all represent the quality of what you are judging." I am aware I will not be changing his opinion; that was not my goal, though it would be a nice side benefit if it did happen. My goal was for anyone who might be swayed by her comment to see my counter-argument and hopefully not judge something by its length. 

And judging by how you refer to "changing their opinions", what is the point of discussion if not to try and convince the other side of a certain point? You say I am wrong for attempting to do so and engaging them. Part of the point of opinions is to have a discussion and to change others' minds, and if you think I should not, I question why anyone makes their opinions public.

As for the passion part, remember I'm not judging him for not watching it, I am judging him on the fact that he did not watch it and then proceed to declare judgment based on one detail. He is not the kind of person to watch it, and that's fine, but he implied that the video was of poor quality, referencing "chicken fat" I believe, saying that the video is overblown and has lots of filler. Yet, it's clear he hasn't watched it, as he outright said, so his point is made from an assumption that portrays the video in a negative light despite him not seeing said video, which I feel warrants a response.

As for my posting of the videos, I do that when I either do not have the time or energy to continue and just post it. As I said, "What exactly do I have to lose here? Either they don't watch it, where then nothing changes, or they do and start to realize their errors in judgment and may perhaps start holding media to a higher standard and more discerning eye." Notice the may I put in. I'm aware it may not convince everyone. But if even one person is convinced, it will be a victory, and if not, I did not lose anything. It harms nobody that I post them here, and I never said they had to watch it to say anything about the movie. I DID say that he should have watched the video before putting a judgment on its quality. He could have said it's dumb that you think people will watch a long video and end it there. He did not. So yes, I feel before making an opinion on something, you should have the courtesy to know what it is your judging before making it public.

And as for your enjoyment of the film, I thought I made it clear that I'm judging the movie quality, where your enjoyment does not storming matter. Your subjective opinion of the movie and the objective writing quality of the movie are two different things, and I think it's why this argument is even happening. I don't care if you enjoy the film; I care if you say it's good writing because there are objective things to can see that make it clear that's not true. Whether or not I convince you if the movie is worth watching is not even what I'm arguing for; I am saying the movie's quality is bad, and I outright say it is okay to like a badly written film. 

As for your opinion of what star wars is right now, even if you are happy with it does not mean you should not fight for better. The person I referenced who wrote a letter about his displeasure of how disabled people were portrayed clearly enjoyed BS books, but he still wanted better. It does not matter if you are happy with it, you should be wanting better, forcing your writers to try and improve. So yes, you are having fun with the movies, that does not mean you cannot fight for better.

And as for your 'fun', if I can take that away, that's not my fault. That means I convinced you of something and you reevaluated, and for some people, having quality content is 'fun' and discerning that is also 'fun'. You see how easy it is for me to use that word? Fun is not my argument. You can have fun with it; it will never change whether or not the movies are bad. So please, have fun with your bad movies, I mean that sincerely. Just don't start saying they are of good quality, because it is portable that it isn't, and that is the difference between the subjective and objective. I argue for the objective, which also happens to affect my subjective opinion. You are arguing for your subjective opinion, which is not what I am arguing about. You and I are arguing two different things. I am arguing about quality, you are arguing for experience and enjoyment, despite my attempts of making that clear. So yes, let's share our views, but if you are unable to handle someone arguing against your views, maybe you should not make it public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Orlion the Platypus said:

@Aspiring Writer

Knock it off. 

No. if you're bothered by my responses, then don't put your opinions on a public thread. I have said nothing outright insulting, and I will respond to anything I feel deserves a response, and they will likely be long because I can never do anything small. If you're bothered by my responses, I suggest you ask yourself why. Have a good day.

Edited by Aspiring Writer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Eluvianii said:

Then, I ditched objectivity and decided that the only thing I care about is if I enjoy the story or not. From that moment onwards I enjoy literally everything infinitely more than before. It's my way of enjoying stories and I intend to continue that way for as long as it makes me happy. If you feel passion about trying to find more sense in every story, if you're always striving to find consistency, in judging how a piece of writing is objectively good and that is what makes you happy, you shouldn't change that for anything, but you also shouldn't try and tell others they're enjoying things the wrong way because there's a whole spectrum here. You are on one end, I'm on the other, and there's everything in between. Let's just share our views so we can understand each other without trying to take the fun away from the other, shall we? 

This is (in my humble opinion) a pretty great way of viewing entertainment. I have discovered that I am much more likely to enjoy something, even if it has huge faults, if I try to look at it from the perspective of "what about this is well-written? What is fun, what did I enjoy?" Which is why I have enjoyed and liked heavily critiziced pieces of media like the Hobbit-movies, the final seasons of Game of Thrones, and the Star Wars sequels. They are what we have, and they do have entertaining/good things (the action in The Hobbit, Theons arc and every Beric-scene in GoT, Kylo and the visuals in Star Wars, among else). Not judging people who view things differently though.

1 hour ago, Aspiring Writer said:

Your subjective opinion of the movie and the objective writing quality of the movie are two different things

I dont think this is entirely true. Writing can work very well for one person and not at all for someone else. I, for example, am of the opinion that Blade Runner (the first one), is, at least partially, badly written. The majority of the sci/fi-fandom disagrees with that, as far as I know. I think writing Deckard as an unsymphatetic douche who has to be saved from every replicant he runs into, while hyping him up to be a great Blade Runner is pretty bad. Several people I know, who love that movie, has no problems with it at all. If I were to go out and say "Blade Runner is objectively written badly" and argue using my own take on the movie, people would get mad, since that writing worked for them. 

What I think happens (and what I think is a general problem in the Star Wars debate) is that the term "objectively bad writing" gets thrown around a lot, to describe, what is, ultimately, a subjective experience. People in general do not like to be wrong, and they defenitely do not like when someone claims that they are wrong. It easily gets interpreted to mean "I know better than you do" (and I am not saying taht you or anyone think that, but simply pointing out how it can be interpreted on internet forums). 

Personally, in regards to Star Wars, I'd say that some things are really well-written (Kylo as a villain motivated by a search self-value and someone who loves him, showcasing the grey morality of war, making some really Stormlight-y points about failure and how it can make us better), and some things are really not that well-written (the Holdo plotline could have been handled much better and Palpatines return, to mention two things, even though the latter has become a pretty good meme). In my eyes, these things are good and bad writing, respectively, just like (I presume) all of it is bad writing in your eyes. That is fine, and that is why discussing media is interesting in the first place. But involving objectivity is something that I personally think bound to fail in discussions regarding entertainment.

1 hour ago, Orlion the Platypus said:

Knock it off. 

I don't think this adds much to the discussion. Either you politely discuss, or you dont engage him at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Toaster Retribution said:

I don't think this adds much to the discussion. Either you politely discuss, or you dont engage him at all. 

Edited to remove original response, I've wasted enough time on this all ready. 

Have instead a picture of a cat. 

122572274_3792626654089354_7599036705635289585_n.jpg

Edited by Orlion the Platypus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Toaster Retribution said:

I dont think this is entirely true. Writing can work very well for one person and not at all for someone else. I, for example, am of the opinion that Blade Runner (the first one), is, at least partially, badly written. The majority of the sci/fi-fandom disagrees with that, as far as I know. I think writing Deckard as an unsymphatetic douche who has to be saved from every replicant he runs into, while hyping him up to be a great Blade Runner is pretty bad. Several people I know, who love that movie, has no problems with it at all. If I were to go out and say "Blade Runner is objectively written badly" and argue using my own take on the movie, people would get mad, since that writing worked for them. 

What I think happens (and what I think is a general problem in the Star Wars debate) is that the term "objectively bad writing" gets thrown around a lot, to describe, what is, ultimately, a subjective experience. People in general do not like to be wrong, and they defenitely do not like when someone claims that they are wrong. It easily gets interpreted to mean "I know better than you do" (and I am not saying taht you or anyone think that, but simply pointing out how it can be interpreted on internet forums). 

Personally, in regards to Star Wars, I'd say that some things are really well-written (Kylo as a villain motivated by a search self-value and someone who loves him, showcasing the grey morality of war, making some really Stormlight-y points about failure and how it can make us better), and some things are really not that well-written (the Holdo plotline could have been handled much better and Palpatines return, to mention two things, even though the latter has become a pretty good meme). In my eyes, these things are good and bad writing, respectively, just like (I presume) all of it is bad writing in your eyes. That is fine, and that is why discussing media is interesting in the first place. But involving objectivity is something that I personally think bound to fail in discussions regarding entertainment.

Except they are. They are linked in many ways, but simply because you liked a movie does not mean it's objectively good (And you can find that out by analyzing the scene), and just because a movie is good doesn't mean you'll like it. And more often than not, the two are considered the same in discussions, and it's what will often spark debates, hearing a movie you liked being considered bad will make you angry, either because it was bad and you just can't except you liked something bad or it was good and you don't like how this person said it was bad because they disliked it. And you yourself said there are elements in a movie that are handled poorly, so talking about the objective things in a movie and trying to see why they didn't work is needed to improve entertainment. A lot of people put stuff out there and talking about what worked and what didn't can help others avoid the mistakes they made and while following the things they did right. The subjective part of the discussion surrounding entertainment is valid and should be considered as well, but the objective part is just as important, just for different reasons. It isn't bound to fail; it just isn't what you find interesting in the discussion. 

 

9 hours ago, Orlion the Platypus said:

Edited to remove original response, I've wasted enough time on this all ready. 

Have instead a picture of a cat. 

122572274_3792626654089354_7599036705635289585_n.jpg

There happens to be a hide function you can use if you press edit, and seeing as this does not contribute to the discussion or the thread in any way, you might want to use that rather than editing it and putting cute cat pic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aspiring Writer said:

Except they are. They are linked in many ways, but simply because you liked a movie does not mean it's objectively good (And you can find that out by analyzing the scene), and just because a movie is good doesn't mean you'll like it. And more often than not, the two are considered the same in discussions, and it's what will often spark debates, hearing a movie you liked being considered bad will make you angry, either because it was bad and you just can't except you liked something bad or it was good and you don't like how this person said it was bad because they disliked it. 

Nope. Movies (or other kinds of entertainment) is not empirically objective science. Put five different people on analyzing a scene, and you will get five different analyses. Put five different people on measuring the height of a table, and you will get the same result. What makes people angry is the implication that someones opinion on a piece of entertainment is worth more than theirs simply because they are "better" at analyzing. Writing will always be subjective, since something can work for one person, and not work for someone else. That doesn't have to do with analyzing: it has to do with who we are, what we relate to, and what we are looking for in entertainment.

2 hours ago, Aspiring Writer said:

And you yourself said there are elements in a movie that are handled poorly, so talking about the objective things in a movie and trying to see why they didn't work is needed to improve entertainment.

I said there were things that I thought was handled poorly. I never said that those opinions were objective. 

2 hours ago, Aspiring Writer said:

It isn't bound to fail; it just isn't what you find interesting in the discussion. 

What I meant with "bound to fail" is that it will make people mad, and derail discussions. Not that I dont find it interesting. I find this discussion quite interesting, in fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Aspiring Writer said:

There happens to be a hide function you can use if you press edit, and seeing as this does not contribute to the discussion or the thread in any way, you might want to use that rather than editing it and putting cute cat pic.

I was personally quite amused by said cute cat pic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say that the sequel trilogy was not well written, and not feel guilty, but the visuals are enjoyable, and to the little girl in a movie theater for the first time, The Force Awakens was inspiring, because there was a girl Jedi.  (At this point I had not seen the prequel trilogy.)  Rey was a girl, and she was a Jedi, and that is something I'm very glad I got to see as a young girl.  As I said, it was inspiring, and it sparked my love of sci-fi. 

So yes, there are flaws, but there's also some nostalgia in it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Toaster Retribution said:

Nope. Movies (or other kinds of entertainment) is not empirically objective science. Put five different people on analyzing a scene, and you will get five different analyses. Put five different people on measuring the height of a table, and you will get the same result. What makes people angry is the implication that someones opinion on a piece of entertainment is worth more than theirs simply because they are "better" at analyzing. Writing will always be subjective, since something can work for one person, and not work for someone else. That doesn't have to do with analyzing: it has to do with who we are, what we relate to, and what we are looking for in entertainment.

I said there were things that I thought was handled poorly. I never said that those opinions were objective. 

What I meant with "bound to fail" is that it will make people mad, and derail discussions. Not that I dont find it interesting. I find this discussion quite interesting, in fact.

...Yes, they are. Here is an objective fact in Empire Strikes Back; Luke got his hand cut off by Vader. That is objective, it clearly happened. if you were to say Luke's hand was cut off by Palpatine, you would be objectively wrong. There are scenes that can be interpreted differently, but there are objective things you can analyze in a scene, the event taking place, character progression, death, and more. Are there objective rules a story must follow to be good? No. Writing is one of those things where there can be an exception to any rule. 

What 'works' is more about the experience the person had with the movie, which is handling the subjective aspect of movie-making. The flashy lights, the visuals, the amazing CGI, are often a subjective experience. But what actually happens in the movie is objective. An example for the Last Jedi, is that the supremacy fight scene is claimed as bad and a main point for everyone is that a knife disappears in the middle of the fight, saving Rey's life. That is an objective thing; there was a knife in his hand, and then it was gone. That is not a subjective experience and is something you may not notice until you analyze a scene, as you are likely to miss it on first viewing. 

And again, I think we're arguing two different points. You are arguing people's enjoyment of a film, I'm arguing the what actually in the film, what exactly happened in the writing, what events are taking place, and whether or not they make sense under a more discerning eye. Because let's be clear, if you are just watching the movie to enjoy it, you are likely to miss stuff compared to you viewing it scene by scene and taking time to contemplate it.

You said things were handled poorly, but I'm sure if you actually tried to find out why you think that, you would find many objective errors that they made. And as for discussion, it only derails if you let it. If both parties put away how they feel about a film and just try to look at it objectively, considering events and the logic behind them, you can have good discussions. That's difficult to do, however, as ripping apart a film you like is painful. Trust me, I know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aspiring Writer said:

An example for the Last Jedi, is that the supremacy fight scene is claimed as bad and a main point for everyone is that a knife disappears in the middle of the fight, saving Rey's life. That is an objective thing; there was a knife in his hand, and then it was gone. That is not a subjective experience and is something you may not notice until you analyze a scene, as you are likely to miss it on first viewing. 

Well, with this example at least, there are two ways of looking at it. There's the technical standpoint, where yes, errors were made because a choreographed fight on that scale is a little difficult to do well, let alone perfectly. Then there's the storytelling aspect -- arguably the more important one -- where they succeeded admirably, in my opinion. Since we've started sharing videos, here's one that explains that more in depth:

Spoiler

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Aspiring Writer said:

No. if you're bothered by my responses, then don't put your opinions on a public thread. I have said nothing outright insulting, and I will respond to anything I feel deserves a response, and they will likely be long because I can never do anything small. If you're bothered by my responses, I suggest you ask yourself why. Have a good day.

Aspire. It doesn’t take a ton of effort to say sorry and and attempt to see why someone was offended. I’ve had multiple people inform me that you’re being a bit rude on this thread; clearly there is a problem somewhere, regardless of whether or not it was intended. Here’s a bit of a fantastic post by @FeatherWriter; relevant parts: 

Quote

What we intend is less important than what was understood. What determines whether or not your words or views are hurtful is not whether you were trying to hurt someone, but whether or not someone was hurt by them. When you have hurt someone there is one correct response: apologize, attempt to convey that the hurt was entirely unintentional, and what you can do to not hurt people in the future. The person who is offended is the one who decides what's offensive, not the one who said it. 

And this thread, which has a lot of great, relevant advice: 

I suggest that you read and consider them. 

In addition, please try to remember that stories, fundamentally, attempt to do different things, and which thing it accomplishes will differ for every reader. For you, certain qualities in writing, those generally considered to make a story “good”, are important. I respect that; I value it very highly myself. However, that is not what everyone is looking to get out of a story. Happily, you seem to have realized that already. 

What you have not noted in your posts is that all art is subjective, full stop. Good writing, bad writing, fun writing, boring writing. There is no such thing as objectively good writing because ‘good’ is an opinion. It cannot be a fact. What makes writing good is different for everyone, including published writers - or aspiring ones. All criticism of any form of writing MUST keep that in mind; there is no objectivity, and looking at your opinion and calling it absolute, indisputable fact is where one of your problems lies. 

It’s not that you like certain things in writing. It’s that you insist they are the correct way for something to be written, when there is no correct way to tell a story. 

On 10/31/2020 at 2:14 PM, Aspiring Writer said:

I must say, seeing this response was certainly amusing. You say it's okay to have discussion and disagreements, yet you chastise me for saying what I believe is wrong with her comment. [...] So yes, let's share our views, but if you are unable to handle someone arguing against your views, maybe you should not make it public. 

And judging by how you refer to "changing their opinions", what is the point of discussion if not to try and convince the other side of a certain point? Part of the point of opinions is to have a discussion and to change others' minds, and if you think I should not, I question why anyone makes their opinions public.

Either they don't watch it, where then nothing changes, or they do and start to realize their errors in judgment and may perhaps start holding media to a higher standard and more discerning eye. 

It does not matter if you are happy with it, you should be wanting better, forcing your writers to try and improve. 

People are allowed to think that someone is being rude, and are allowed to bring that up in a conversation. 

Every discussion in humanity is not merely an attempt to win someone over. There are many other reasons to discuss something; other people will have and use those reasons; and looking at your way as the only way to go about a thing is not going to go well for you in life. 

There is something you may wish to take note of in this quote. You say that if that video is watched, people will - definitively - change their ideas. Even worse is your choice of words with “errors in judgement” and “higher standard”. There are your standards and there are theirs. Neither is higher. Art is, again, subjective. Likewise, their judgements are not errors, and it is astonishingly impolite for you to call them that. A person can be mistaken about facts; they cannot be mistaken about an opinion. 

Don’t tell other people what they should want. I personally want writers to improve and to strive for improvement in many areas. I see that you do as well. We can express that desire, and our hope that other people will feel the same, but it is up to them how they feel, not us. 

 

Let’s all be nice to each other and accept each other’s opinions, guys, I don’t want to have to put my mod hat on in here again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Spren of Kindness said:

Pumpkin ravioli is a thing?

An "ok" thing! 

Apparently, according to Wikipedia, it comes from Romagna region of Italy and is way older than I thought.

If you're ever at a restaurant and it comes as a side, it's worth a try. I would hate to eat a meal of it, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...