The Big Picture: Plothole Surfers

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Plothole Surfers

The Internet is arguing about the right way to criticize movies - and the problem is more complicated than you think.

Watch Video
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,954
6
13
Am in agreement with the annoyance of people who expect perfect logic and conformist, expected ways of thinking from characters in entertainment as if they're supposed to be all infallible identical robots instead of, you know, human. People don't act logically at the best of times, let alone during times of stress or panic or any other state of emotional concern. Hell, I can't even act logically when out doing shopping for fuck's sake, and mess up all kinds of ridiculously stupid things. People can be messy and unpredictable in all kinds of unforseen situations, it's the beauty of the variety upon which enriches any character whether real or fictional.
 

Jacked Assassin

Nothing On TV
Jun 4, 2010
732
0
0
They don't go to the police because its boring reminded me of a post I have in a different forum. Though that rant has more to do with the word Practical.

The whole problem with black though is its an over used color scheme. Even worse when it replaces the original color schemes that would've stood out more.
We can't have a Blue, Gray, &/or Yellow outfit Batman.... Nope we can only get black outfit Batman.
We couldn't (originally) have the X-Men in Blue & Yellow or any of their original color schemed outfits. Just a bunch of Black Leather Suits.
And forbid that no one in The Matrix not remind us of The Trench Coat Mafia.
So having Robocop follow along with this doesn't sit well with me at all. Even if someone were to label this as practical the whole point of any of these (Super) Heroes isn't to really be practical in the first place.
If they were practical
Superman would wear all black as black absorbs heat from sunlight more easily.
Spider-Man fighting at night would have an all black outfit with a hard to see Spider Logo if there was a Spider Logo at all.
Tony Stark would have remotely controlled his new Iron-Man suits in every situation.
Thor would have never been cast out of Asgard because this time around he was too practical to get into trouble.
Any Super Hero (or Villain) wearing the colors of their country as their color scheme would be replaced by camouflage.
Kick Ass, Big Daddy, & Hit Girl would have easily been replace by SWAT Teams.
Even being "Practical" by using Military Forces in movies has caused movies to probably be less exciting then they could have been.
Godzilla 1998 (even though my favorite looking Godzilla) suffered from the use of Military Forces. They should've gone with a Mecha Godzilla 1998. That could have been a much better movie.
Cloverfield suffered from similar problems but with the added annoyance of a bunch of pricks from a party.
Michael Bay's Transformers.... Yeesh.... The Military Forces Had / Has the ability to destroy Decepticons without the need for Autobots to be there.
Maybe that's why we can't get a Gundam movie on the big screen. Someone is going to want it to be practical. RX-78-2 (If that's the Gundam they use) wouldn't be able to have its color scheme or its roll out color scheme. It would have to have either a camouflage color on earth or be black since that's basically the camouflage color of space. Then they would probably change it to a Mobile Armor since a Mobile Suit isn't as practical. By the time it was done making practical changes it would be like the Battleship movie.
No wonder I had the urge to defend Pacific Rim. Pacific Rim being impractical is what made it fun.
So once this Practical Robocop comes out I honestly & hopefully expect it to bomb. Because practicality is what ruins these (super hero like) movies.
 

Samtemdo8_v1legacy

New member
Aug 2, 2015
7,924
0
0
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
I do despise folks like Cinemasins and Red Letter Media for their insane obsession with the most minute details in films. Plot Holes I don't tend to notice in films unless i'm already not enjoying a film. I don't give a shit about the plot holes in the DCEU films and the live-action Transformers series, I still find them fun dammit, and i'm sad Cavil won't be Superman anymore, I genuinely thought he did a damn good job playing him.
 

LaughingAtlas

New member
Nov 18, 2009
873
0
0
While I think things should generally make sense, a story about sapient lifeforms that never make any mistakes or miscalculations while being allegedly human kind of sounds like it wouldn't make sense by itself. Unless this was some hypothetical future where human thought is governed entirely by nanomachines or chips in our brains or something, a cybernetic mockery of what once was mankind now just going through the motions without any real understanding, a system enacted in the first place by people hoping to escape their feelings and failings altogether by outsourcing it all to programming and becoming 'perfect,' even though making such a decision to throw away their own being out of fear of being imperfect is itself a very human error to make, but I'll bet that's already been explored somewhere.

As for Q&A, did you ever find time to enjoy Mario: Odyssey? And if so, did you finish the Darker Side of The Moon? :)
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Jacked Assassin said:
They don't go to the police because its boring reminded me of a post I have in a different forum. Though that rant has more to do with the word Practical.

The whole problem with black though is its an over used color scheme. Even worse when it replaces the original color schemes that would've stood out more.
We can't have a Blue, Gray, &/or Yellow outfit Batman.... Nope we can only get black outfit Batman.
We couldn't (originally) have the X-Men in Blue & Yellow or any of their original color schemed outfits. Just a bunch of Black Leather Suits.
And forbid that no one in The Matrix not remind us of The Trench Coat Mafia.
So having Robocop follow along with this doesn't sit well with me at all. Even if someone were to label this as practical the whole point of any of these (Super) Heroes isn't to really be practical in the first place.
If they were practical
Superman would wear all black as black absorbs heat from sunlight more easily.
Spider-Man fighting at night would have an all black outfit with a hard to see Spider Logo if there was a Spider Logo at all.
Tony Stark would have remotely controlled his new Iron-Man suits in every situation.
Thor would have never been cast out of Asgard because this time around he was too practical to get into trouble.
Any Super Hero (or Villain) wearing the colors of their country as their color scheme would be replaced by camouflage.
Kick Ass, Big Daddy, & Hit Girl would have easily been replace by SWAT Teams.
Even being "Practical" by using Military Forces in movies has caused movies to probably be less exciting then they could have been.
Godzilla 1998 (even though my favorite looking Godzilla) suffered from the use of Military Forces. They should've gone with a Mecha Godzilla 1998. That could have been a much better movie.
Cloverfield suffered from similar problems but with the added annoyance of a bunch of pricks from a party.
Michael Bay's Transformers.... Yeesh.... The Military Forces Had / Has the ability to destroy Decepticons without the need for Autobots to be there.
Maybe that's why we can't get a Gundam movie on the big screen. Someone is going to want it to be practical. RX-78-2 (If that's the Gundam they use) wouldn't be able to have its color scheme or its roll out color scheme. It would have to have either a camouflage color on earth or be black since that's basically the camouflage color of space. Then they would probably change it to a Mobile Armor since a Mobile Suit isn't as practical. By the time it was done making practical changes it would be like the Battleship movie.
No wonder I had the urge to defend Pacific Rim. Pacific Rim being impractical is what made it fun.
So once this Practical Robocop comes out I honestly & hopefully expect it to bomb. Because practicality is what ruins these (super hero like) movies.
As someone who never read X-Men or watched the animated series, I couldn't have cared less what the color of their suits were, I just cared that the films were compelling.

I was glad that the military were actually portrayed as competent in the Transformers films, as I get so tired of seeing humans portrayed as completely inept in those types of movies, so it was downright refreshing to see one where the humans aren't completely helpless in defending themselves. I think Godzilla 1998 was way better then most people said, it was first Godzilla film I ever saw, so I didn't have any preconceived notions of what I wanted the film to be like.
 

Samtemdo8_v1legacy

New member
Aug 2, 2015
7,924
0
0
You prefer Kirk over Picard?

To me that's like choosing between my children.

And I have yet to see Deep Space 9 to see if Sisko can even compete.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
You prefer Kirk over Picard?

To me that's like choosing between my children.

And I have yet to see Deep Space 9 to see if Sisko can even compete.
Kirk is too much of a dick for me to like him over Picard.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Suspension of disbelief is a funny thing. It doesn't just apply to "that's not the way physics works" or "that person couldn't do that action-movie stunt after experiencing the kind of injuries they would sustain from the last three action-movie stunts and being shot five times". If you're on board with the story, themes, and characters, you're more forgiving of inconsistencies and logical flaws (and/or you come up with your own reasons that they aren't flaws at all, regardless of whether or not the movie actually provides those reasons). If the movie handles that story with disregard for what has come before, a haphazard and ham-handed overemphasis of those themes in some instances and a complete abandonment of them when it's convenient, and makes the characters shallow, incompetent, and pushes them in new directions of motivation and action without warning, rhyme, or reason, a distracted mind might wander to why we're spending all this time on the world's slowest chase in a series that has never been particularly concerned about "fuel" before Why a commanding officer would deprive her subordinates of vital information as she appears to be leading their allies into a drawn-out death march, effectively sabotaging her own plan Why we should feel releasing a few animals through a casino is a meaningful act of "fighting the power" in a world with actual human slaves "plot holes", of various sizes, that a more engaged mind might overlook. (Or "theme holes" or "character holes", for that matter, though by nature such things are harder to pin down.)

I fully admit that I have my own sliding scale. If I'm less engaged with a movie, or actively dislike it, I'm more likely to enjoy a "Cinema Sins" video, for example, whereas if I enjoyed the movie, I'm more likely to find such lists nit-picky and mean-spirited. (Really? You looked up which notch on the record contained what the soundtrack is playing, and it's not the one the needle is on in the movie? Aren't you a clever boy.)

But it shouldn't be overlooked that what Bob presents is just another side of the same damn coin he's deriding. Yes, if you're in the moment, you can come up with reasons that Rose didn't find room on the door for Jack- but it doesn't mean the movie itself is providing them. I enjoyed Titanic, but I recently ran into a joke about Rose not moving over for Jack in some other show, and I found it pretty funny, in part because some people do still hold a grudge about it. I'm not so invested that I can't recognize why some people might find that element distracting. And yes, some people might lump a racist or sexist point amid plot holes in the hope that it will be overlooked- but that's a terrible reason to dismiss all the other points out of hand, or all criticism of a work as inherently sexist and racist, which does far more harm to criticism and discussion than any list of plot holes could ever hope to IMO.

Arguably it's better for a critic to be nit-picky or adopt an unwarranted pedanticism than for them to be so caught up in a work (and/or whatever attendant buzz/controversy/real-world-parallels follow it) that they cannot produce criticism of value to someone who doesn't see the world in absolute parallel.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Titanic really is a fucking terrible movie though, the plot holes are the least of that movies problems. It might as well be called "First World Problems the movie", hated the acting in it(and Kate Winslet apparently was not a fan of it)thought Jack and Rose were bland characters with zero chemistry, the film dragged for way too fucking long and engaged in too much bullshit emotional manipulation("instead of selling this valuable necklace to help out some other unfortunate folks, i'm just going to throw it away!") it's the prime example of style over substance. No way in hell it should've beat out L.A. Confidential for Best Picture, Titanic is the worst kind of Oscar Bait imaginable.

Sorry Bob, but Jack basically committing suicide was fucking dumb both narratively and in a technical sense.
 

Samtemdo8_v1legacy

New member
Aug 2, 2015
7,924
0
0
darkrage6 said:
Titanic really is a fucking terrible movie though, the plot holes are the least of that movies problems. It might as well be called "First World Problems the movie", hated the acting in it(and Kate Winslet apparently was not a fan of it)thought Jack and Rose were bland characters with zero chemistry, the film dragged for way too fucking long and engaged in too much bullshit emotional manipulation("instead of selling this valuable necklace to help out some other unfortunate folks, i'm just going to throw it away!") it's the prime example of style over substance. No way in hell it should've beat out L.A. Confidential for Best Picture, Titanic is the worst kind of Oscar Bait imaginable.
Would you go as far as to say that Cameron's Avatar was a better movie then Titanic?
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
darkrage6 said:
Titanic really is a fucking terrible movie though, the plot holes are the least of that movies problems. It might as well be called "First World Problems the movie", hated the acting in it(and Kate Winslet apparently was not a fan of it)thought Jack and Rose were bland characters with zero chemistry, the film dragged for way too fucking long and engaged in too much bullshit emotional manipulation("instead of selling this valuable necklace to help out some other unfortunate folks, i'm just going to throw it away!") it's the prime example of style over substance. No way in hell it should've beat out L.A. Confidential for Best Picture, Titanic is the worst kind of Oscar Bait imaginable.
Would you go as far as to say that Cameron's Avatar was a better movie then Titanic?
Yes, though i've got my issues with that film too-it's basically a live-action version of Ferngully and it's environmental message is so heavy-handed it makes Captain Planet look downright subtle in comparison(and i'm saying that as someone who generally leans left). Most of the reviews praising that film were in regards to the 3-D, which was revolutionary at the time yes, but once you watch the film on home video, you realize it's just another blockbuster and there's nothing too special about it(give me the DCEU and Transformers films over it any day of the week). Honestly I don't think the sequels are going too do that well at the box-office, because Avatar's cultural relevance is long gone by this point, and honestly I don't see where else there is for the sequels to go.
 

JakubK666

New member
Jan 1, 2008
781
0
0
Eh, I feel like it varies on a case by case basis and swinging too much into either direction is equally bad. It's not unreasonable to want a story to have some kind of a structure that holds itself together, but that's far different from the stereotypical tripe nitpicky crap. Unless you're someone like David Lynch, which most people aren't, I don't want every film to be a barely coherent mess just because it's got THEMES.

Hack bloggers and Youtube essayists absolutely deserve to be called out on their bullshit, but picking on CinemaSins-tier stuff as an example of all "plothole-driven criticism" being wrong almost becomes its own strawman counter-argument. No one with any serious interest in film thinks CinemaSins is good or takes them seriously.


There's absolutely some stories out there where a couple of plotholes or cases of people uncharacteristically acting like idiots can make or break one's suspension of disbelief. "The Cold Equations" is a famous 70 year old example of a controversial story that bends over backwards to justify its themes, to the point where it hugely undermines itself due to just how contrived its set up is. Likewise see: anything Ayn Rand ever wrote.
 

CrazyGirl17

I am a banana!
Sep 11, 2009
5,145
0
0
I admit to liking Cinema Sins but I don't take it seriously. I do kinda prefer its counterpart Cinema Wins, which is more positive and also goes into detail of why the movie is so good.

Also as a wannabe writer, the fear of plotholes in said writing makes it tricky to even do it since people nowadays are critical about that sort of thing.

(Also I can't be the only one who got the reference in the title, right?)
 

Falseprophet

New member
Jan 13, 2009
1,381
0
0
Callate said:
But it shouldn't be overlooked that what Bob presents is just another side of the same damn coin he's deriding. Yes, if you're in the moment, you can come up with reasons that Rose didn't find room on the door for Jack- but it doesn't mean the movie itself is providing them. I enjoyed Titanic, but I recently ran into a joke about Rose not moving over for Jack in some other show, and I found it pretty funny, in part because some people do still hold a grudge about it.
No, if you're in the moment, you don't care about the reasons for X and Y. Rather, the film has successfully pulled off its magic trick of making you care about these fictional people (or heavily dramatized real people) in this fictional (or heavily dramatized) situation without stopping to think "why?" or "how?" Any reasons you then come up with later are just rationalizations after the fact, but that doesn't change how you felt in the moment. And the door jokes didn't originate with a bunch of haters who never gave the film a chance--it was an in-joke among the superfans who saw it half-a-dozen in theatre and bought the DVD and knew every detail by heart.

Callate said:
Arguably it's better for a critic to be nit-picky or adopt an unwarranted pedanticism than for them to be so caught up in a work (and/or whatever attendant buzz/controversy/real-world-parallels follow it) that they cannot produce criticism of value to someone who doesn't see the world in absolute parallel.
To what end? Neither the cineaste nor the average film-goer spares a second thought for the tiny bunch of pendantic never-satisfied nerds whinging about expanded universe/fanon/retconned continuity nitpicks. Which by the way--pot to kettle--is also being "so caught up in a work" but in a tedious, priggish way far fewer people can relate to. And I resemble that remark, I've just become more self-conscious of it over the years. So why should a critic bend over backwards to accommodate them? To alienate the majority of their audience in the attempt to please a minority who's never satisfied anyway? That doesn't make sense for the critic, and frankly nerds shouldn't seek validation for their opinions if they can't be mature enough to take the criticism with the praise.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
You know what the worst part about Titanic is though? The despicable way it turned real life heroic figures into outright villains, if Titanic had come out today, there would've tons of Twitter threads about how unbelievably disrespectful that Cameron was to real life figures. Murdoch got screwed over big time by the film:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8933109/The-30-seconds-that-sank-the-Titanic-fatal-delay-in-order-to-change-course-doomed-liner.html

The filmmakers were actually forced to apologize to Scotland for how badly they fucked up:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/78839.stm
 

Falseprophet

New member
Jan 13, 2009
1,381
0
0
For the Q&A:

-Did you get ownership of The Big Picture's back catalogue when you rejoined the Escapist?
-Whether yes or no, do you still feel compelled to go back and update older entries?
-Are you planning any more "If I pitched it" videos? Would you do those here or on your own channel?
 
Mar 9, 2012
250
0
0
The Last Jedi is a rather bad film for other reasons though, and it is not about "plot holes". It has more to do with Rian Johnson's approach to "subverting expectations". I have seen quite a few outlets praise the film for "subverting expectations", but this is not a good thing in and off itself, and to claim so is really just an empty appeal to novelty.

"Subverting expectations" essentially means nothing if you don't try to doing something emotionally meaningful with the act of "subversion" itself. Rian Johnson's approach to "subverting expectations" seems for all intents and purposes to be "You expected me to bring you a bottle of beer, but I gave you a beer bottle filled with phosphor! Sure fooled you!"
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
Soon? Do you not remember the days of youtube where the response video's use to be listed directly below the video being responded to? Youtube use to promote that exact thing to fuel debate.

Mauler, Rags, and Wolf do a great job here though. Mauler in particular absolutely destroys The Last Jedi in his review really breaks these things down. His deconstruction of the whole "Theme" argument really puts Bob's shallow defense of it to shame.
 

Dragon Zero

No one of note
Apr 16, 2009
710
0
0
For the Q&A:
-What is your favorite Wrestling match of all time? Of 2018, so far?
-What are your thoughts on Shin Godzilla/Godzilla Resurgence?
-How would you rank the Star Trek movies in order from worst to best?
 

thejboy88

New member
Aug 29, 2010
1,515
0
0
Looking back over all the past Big Picture episodes you made (or at least the ones you can recall), which would you say are the ones you're most or least happy with?
 

PsychedelicDiamond

Wild at Heart and weird on top
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,536
175
68
It's one of those things where I realize that I just don't really watch movies the way most people do because very rarely is the plot or its internal consistency the most important thing to me. I mean, I'm not gonna simply dismiss it either because that'd be a disservice to the effort that goes into writing a screenplay but my personal rule of thumb is: If I don't notice a plothole without having it pointed out to me, it doesn't matter. I'm sure someone could spin this into a "Psyche only watches movies for pretty visuals and feels, that fucking sissy" but to me film is an aesthetic medium first, an emotional medium second and a narrative medium only third. It's not that the narrative doesn't matter but a movie doesn't need a particularly well constructed one or, as a matter of fact, a narrative at all, to be good. But even in an explicitly narrative move: creativity, emotional resonance and thought provoking themes are more important to me than internal logic. There are hardly any movies I like for how much sense they make. Sure, I can appreciate I clever screenplay but if anyone pointed out to me just how consistent a story is and how it never contradicts itself my reaction to it would be hardly more than "Oh, neat.", it wouldn't make me appreciate the movie all that much more.

My favourite novel and what may or may not be the most significant literary work of of the 20th century (yes, that's a hill I'm willing to die on) is Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow, Pynchon representing the artistic movement referred to as "postmodernism" that gets anally retentive old men so angry. It's a fantastic book and one of the most intelligent, most creative, most emotionally resonant and most socially aware stories ever told, a masterpiece of prose, storytelling and sholarship and... look, it's a great novel, you dig? Anyway, if you actually reading it and expecting to follow how it got from one situation to the other, being able to make out why specific characters were at specific places at a specific time or expecting a clear beginning, middle and end in the conventional sense it wont make you very happy, I imagine. Now, clearly, your typical Star Wars movie or comic book adaptation is no Gravity's Rainbow and I'm not claiming they are but if you go over them with a fine tooth comb trying to find inconsistencies instead of actually paying attention to the craftsmanship, the emotions they invoke, the visuals they present and the actual stories they tell, honestly, you're watching movies wrong.
 

Falseprophet

New member
Jan 13, 2009
1,381
0
0
Blachman201 said:
The Last Jedi is a rather bad film for other reasons though, and it is not about "plot holes". It has more to do with Rian Johnson's approach to "subverting expectations". I have seen quite a few outlets praise the film for "subverting expectations", but this is not a good thing in and off itself, and to claim so is really just an empty appeal to novelty.
The Last Jedi is a rather good film because it "subverts expectations" the same way the franchise as a whole has done from the beginning. The damsel in distress is actually a take-charge military leader? The way to take out the massive technological terror isn't with technology but commitment to a higher spiritual purpose? The annoying green gnome is actually a legendary spiritual master? The hated villain is actually your long-lost father? Boba Fett is actually lame? Savage teddy-bears can have the courage and ferocity of Wookies? Victory over evil isn't through superior strength or mastery, but by showing mercy and compassion for those who least deserve it? The princess was your sister all along? The Old Republic wasn't actually that great? The Jedi weren't actually that great? Sure, a lot of this stuff feels old hat now, but that's because Star Wars invented it/introduced it to a mainstream audience.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
And now my questions to Moviebob for the Big Picture Q&A-What in your opinion is the single WORST movie you have ever seen in your entire life?

What do you think is the most overrated movie of all time?

What do you think is the most underrated film ever?
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
thejboy88 said:
Looking back over all the past Big Picture episodes you made (or at least the ones you can recall), which would you say are the ones you're most or least happy with?
I'd imagine he's probably not fond of the Magneto was Right episode.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Ukomba said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
Soon? Do you not remember the days of youtube where the response video's use to be listed directly below the video being responded to? Youtube use to promote that exact thing to fuel debate.

Mauler, Rags, and Wolf do a great job here though. Mauler in particular absolutely destroys The Last Jedi in his review really breaks these things down. His deconstruction of the whole "Theme" argument really puts Bob's shallow defense of it to shame.
Nah, Mauler sucks major ass. Rags and Wolf are both bigoted pieces of shit not worth listening to.
 

Orekoya

New member
Sep 24, 2008
485
0
0
A lot of truth in this video. And for some reason Cinema Sins has rampant misogyny when it comes to writing their sins, with an almost active hatred of Scarlett Johansson in particular. Edit: Also remembered watching a video last year specifically about why Cinema Sins is bad in many different ways so gonna include this link for those that might wonder why people that series is trash.

 

franksands

New member
Dec 6, 2010
115
0
0
I have to wholeheartedly agree with "plot holes" obcession. I started watching Cinema Sins because it had some fun things about Back To The Future and complaining about Man of Steel and I was sucked in. But after some time, they started doing "problems" with cartoons, which felt wrong to me. Do cartoons need to be realistic? and I started watching Cinema Wins and thought, you know what? It's much better focusing on what a movie did right than the "problems" with the movie. So I unsubscribed from Sins and my movie going experience only improved. Also, Cinema Wins is a great channel and deserve your attention.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Blachman201 said:
The Last Jedi is a rather bad film for other reasons though, and it is not about "plot holes". It has more to do with Rian Johnson's approach to "subverting expectations". I have seen quite a few outlets praise the film for "subverting expectations", but this is not a good thing in and off itself, and to claim so is really just an empty appeal to novelty.

"Subverting expectations" essentially means nothing if you don't try to doing something emotionally meaningful with the act of "subversion" itself. Rian Johnson's approach to "subverting expectations" seems for all intents and purposes to be "You expected me to bring you a bottle of beer, but I gave you a beer bottle filled with phosphor! Sure fooled you!"
I enjoyed the movie, but yeah people like Angry Joe do have a point with at least some criticisms of the film. I remember back when people were praising Feast for "subverting expectations", I guessed every single twist that would happen in that film and was unimpressed to say the least.
 

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
When you get down to it, storytelling is not a logic puzzle (though there are stories that . There is A KIND of logic to storytelling and it mostly has to do with consistency, themes, characterization, etc. There are some stories where certain mechanisms are done (like the films of Christopher Nolan or Agatha Christie's novels) but for the most part they're not a Rube Goldberg machine.

Another problem with this nitpicking about "plot holes" is that it also damages actual criticism. It's one of the reasons hacks like David Cage keep getting away with melodramatic, histrionic bullshit because they can pull the "You're so heartless and cruel!" card when they're called out on terrible storytelling and nonsensical plots.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Aiddon said:
When you get down to it, storytelling is not a logic puzzle (though there are stories that . There is A KIND of logic to storytelling and it mostly has to do with consistency, themes, characterization, etc. There are some stories where certain mechanisms are done (like the films of Christopher Nolan or Agatha Christie's novels) but for the most part they're not a Rube Goldberg machine.

Another problem with this nitpicking about "plot holes" is that it also damages actual criticism. It's one of the reasons hacks like David Cage keep getting away with melodramatic, histrionic bullshit because they can pull the "You're so heartless and cruel!" card when they're called out on terrible storytelling and nonsensical plots.
Personally I don't think Cage is a "hack" at all, I think he's a damn good writer, Laura Kate Dale did an excellent review on Detroit:http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/24/detroit-become-human-succeeds-by-focusing-on-small-timely-stories

I actually think most of what Bob said can apply to the people whining about Cage's writing having "plot holes", for me I was too absorbed into the storyline of his games to give two shits about plot holes.

Speaking of Nolan, I didn't like how the Dark Knight started the trend of "villain gets captured on purpose as part of an incredibly convoluted scheme that makes no sense". I rolled my eyes when Skyfall pulled that crap too.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
There's also the REALLY wrong way to criticize a movie: tell the actors and director to kill themselves and threaten death upon their families. There's Twitter harassment of actors who just so happen to be women and not-white, under the guise of criticizing their movies. In comment sections of review articles and YouTube comments (no surprise there), I've read calls for Zack Snyder's head just for what he did with Batman v. Superman. Maybe that's what drove his daughter to commit suicide. That should be the signal that this kind of behavior should not be tolerated anymore.

As for the Q&A:
Are you going to do a guest spot on The Nostalgia Critic's show?
What episode of the Simpsons do you think truly is the WORST one EVER?
 

Bedinsis

Elite Member
Legacy
Escapist +
May 27, 2020
511
61
33
Country
Sverige
I agree with the overall point of this video. I will say though that if someone did not connect with the movie in question emotionally then their thoughts started to wander off which makes them more likely to notice holes in the logic of the story. In other words, people noticing plot holes can be the symptom of the greater problem that the movie failed in connecting emotionally.
 

Cherukuri Praharsha

New member
Jan 27, 2017
2
0
0
question:1)the next trend in going to be india-:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rgqc-9MPIY&t=2s
so why not cover more indian content in your because we make 2000 movies a year and can you do review of ''2.0'' when it comes out because it is the most expansive film in india
2) do a review of ammoru it has english subtitles-:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXae6jK3Bfo
because it is unique horror genre excucive to india
 
Mar 9, 2012
250
0
0
Falseprophet said:
But, yeah as I said:

"Subverting expectations" essentially means nothing if you don't try to doing something emotionally meaningful with the act of "subversion" itself.
And this is important because these:

The damsel in distress is actually a take-charge military leader? The way to take out the massive technological terror isn't with technology but commitment to a higher spiritual purpose? The annoying green gnome is actually a legendary spiritual master? The hated villain is actually your long-lost father? Boba Fett is actually lame? [...] Victory over evil isn't through superior strength or mastery, but by showing mercy and compassion for those who least deserve it? The princess was your sister all along?
...are actually pretty good examples of what I'm talking about (I somewhat disagree on other examples (they are good concepts in and off themselves, but I think they were executed poorly) but that is a whole other discussion). They are emotionally meaningful "subversions". I think our main disagreement here might actually be on whether or not TLJ has anything resembling them.

EDIT: And for the record, I think that Knights of the Old Republic II had already done all the most interesting things TLJ tried to do, and it also did it so much better that it isn't even funny.
 

daibakuha

New member
Aug 27, 2012
272
0
0
darkrage6 said:
I enjoyed the movie, but yeah people like Angry Joe do have a point with at least some criticisms of the film. I remember back when people were praising Feast for "subverting expectations", I guessed every single twist that would happen in that film and was unimpressed to say the least.
People like AngryJoe would like the movie a lot more if they paid any attention when actually watching it. One of the points in the Patrick (h) Willems video is that people often don't pay close enough attention to things and then complain when they don't make any sense. That's about 90% of the problems people have with The Last Jedi.

I think AngryJoe is an excellent person, but his criticism is super shallow and bad, like he has no background in film crit and it shows.
 

Devieus

New member
Jul 30, 2014
173
0
0
Cinema sins doesn't really deserve the hatred just because you think it's serious. The more lighthearted one looks at it, the more lighthearted it becomes and it only becomes valid criticism if one accepts it as such.

Just because a movie has holes doesn't make it any less enjoyable, but then that's the point here. However it's also a thing to keep in mind when watching entertainers riff on a movie because it gets the views.
 

daibakuha

New member
Aug 27, 2012
272
0
0
Devieus said:
Cinema sins doesn't really deserve the hatred just because you think it's serious. The more lighthearted one looks at it, the more lighthearted it becomes and it only becomes valid criticism if one accepts it as such.

Just because a movie has holes doesn't make it any less enjoyable, but then that's the point here. However it's also a thing to keep in mind when watching entertainers riff on a movie because it gets the views.
The problem is that the guy who makes CinemaSins views it as legit criticism and he is serious. There are multiple videos on this.
 

Exley97_v1legacy

New member
Jul 9, 2014
217
0
0
YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS.

I love everything about this (including the title, which made me laugh) and can't wait to watch the others videos on the subject.

I'll just throw in a quick rant about so-called "plot holes": The Hunt for Red October isn't "ruined" for me because I don't understand why the cook's assistant shot up the cabin *before* going to the missile bay to blow up the sub, when it would have been much easier to just go there quietly and connect the damn wires. I didn't notice it the first few times I watched it, and I don't really care about it now either. It's an insignificant flaw in an otherwise superbly-executed action thriller. And every single one of the movies we love has flaws and blemishes and errors and the vast majority of them don't need to be blown up into "OMG PLOT HOLES!" rants on YouTube or -- worse -- goddamn listicles and slideshows.

Signed, a dedicated Star Trek fan who loves the reboots and no I don't care what you say about Nero's "patience" or the Enterprise being under water or any other "holes" you can think of.
 

CyanCat47_v1legacy

New member
Nov 26, 2014
498
0
0
I don't get the hate for Cinemasins honestly, i never took them seriously as film critics and i never expected nayone else to because they have sins like "scene does not include a lapdance" and "doctor Kurt Cockings". It's kind of like being mad that Monthy Python's The Holy Grail isn't a faithful retelling of the legend of King Arthur. I mean, does it look like they are even trying to be? It's poking fun at cliches and oversights, it's not like all the hacks reviewing TLJ claiming to know everything about cinematography
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
I am sorry, but when your film has logical inconsistencies the narrative and themes go from "moving" to "contrived" very quickly.

I mean Jesus Tapdancing Christ, how long was Leia in space for? A minute? Twenty seconds? That ship is constantly accelerating, otherwise why bother with thrusters-- never mind. I realize it's all about space magic but at the same time there comes a point and Last Jedi went way past it.

Rose's "This is how we win" is supposed to be emotional? She did the exact same thing Finn was trying to do but she sacrificed just as much for a far smaller result. If the message is that the rebels win by making mistake after mistake and just getting lucky, or being willing to sacrifice thousands of themselves so only 12-17 of them can get away? Uh, you really sold that.
 

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
darkrage6 said:
Personally I don't think Cage is a "hack" at all, I think he's a damn good writer, Laura Kate Dale did an excellent review on Detroit:http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/24/detroit-become-human-succeeds-by-focusing-on-small-timely-stories

I actually think most of what Bob said can apply to the people whining about Cage's writing having "plot holes", for me I was too absorbed into the storyline of his games to give two shits about plot holes.
No, Cage is a genuine hack both in game design and writing. I wasn't even getting into plot holes with Cage, more about his themes are dumb and he can't actually tell a story worth a damn. Like our own Yahtzee said in his review of Detroit, one of the twists he brings up is how the child the nanny bot runs away with also turns out to be a robot. That completely undermines and actual, interesting question of "can a robot mother truly love a human child." Why would you do that? It makes no sense.

And that's before you get into his uncomfortable writing, his treatment of women and minorities in his narratives, and his reliance on lazy cliches. And if we're going to do the "well, look at what this critic says!", I raise you Heather Alexandra, Kirk Hamilton, and Evan Narcisse:

https://kotaku.com/1826578490

https://kotaku.com/detroit-become-human-the-kotaku-review-1826277408

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-casual-inhumanity-of-how-detroit-become-human-uses-1826776147

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-opening-of-detroit-become-human-is-some-dumb-butt-1826270803

Yeah, I can play that game too, it's not hard. And the funny thing about Detroit's main theme: most of its fandom doesn't care, even admitting its political commentary is awful and just wants to ship characters:

https://kotaku.com/the-super-fans-of-detroit-become-human-hate-most-of-th-1828260985

Cage is not very good at his job.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
daibakuha said:
darkrage6 said:
I enjoyed the movie, but yeah people like Angry Joe do have a point with at least some criticisms of the film. I remember back when people were praising Feast for "subverting expectations", I guessed every single twist that would happen in that film and was unimpressed to say the least.
People like AngryJoe would like the movie a lot more if they paid any attention when actually watching it. One of the points in the Patrick (h) Willems video is that people often don't pay close enough attention to things and then complain when they don't make any sense. That's about 90% of the problems people have with The Last Jedi.

I think AngryJoe is an excellent person, but his criticism is super shallow and bad, like he has no background in film crit and it shows.
That is why I prefer his game reviews over all his film stuff, his review of Ghostbusters was pretty weak.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Aiddon said:
darkrage6 said:
Personally I don't think Cage is a "hack" at all, I think he's a damn good writer, Laura Kate Dale did an excellent review on Detroit:http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/24/detroit-become-human-succeeds-by-focusing-on-small-timely-stories

I actually think most of what Bob said can apply to the people whining about Cage's writing having "plot holes", for me I was too absorbed into the storyline of his games to give two shits about plot holes.
No, Cage is a genuine hack both in game design and writing. I wasn't even getting into plot holes with Cage, more about his themes are dumb and he can't actually tell a story worth a damn. Like our own Yahtzee said in his review of Detroit, one of the twists he brings up is how the child the nanny bot runs away with also turns out to be a robot. That completely undermines and actual, interesting question of "can a robot mother truly love a human child." Why would you do that? It makes no sense.

And that's before you get into his uncomfortable writing, his treatment of women and minorities in his narratives, and his reliance on lazy cliches. And if we're going to do the "well, look at what this critic says!", I raise you Heather Alexandra, Kirk Hamilton, and Evan Narcisse:

https://kotaku.com/1826578490

https://kotaku.com/detroit-become-human-the-kotaku-review-1826277408

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-casual-inhumanity-of-how-detroit-become-human-uses-1826776147

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-opening-of-detroit-become-human-is-some-dumb-butt-1826270803

Yeah, I can play that game too, it's not hard. And the funny thing about Detroit's main theme: most of its fandom doesn't care, even admitting its political commentary is awful and just wants to ship characters:

https://kotaku.com/the-super-fans-of-detroit-become-human-hate-most-of-th-1828260985

Cage is not very good at his job.
No he is not a "hack" at all just cause YOU personally claim he is, that right there is total bullshit. His writing did not come off as "uncomfortable" to me at all, I don't feel like he did too much lazy cliches. Personally I feel like all those articles you came up with are very piss poor examples of "yellow journalism". Gizmodo in particular is a website I fucking despise, TotalBiscuit did a great Soundcloud where he ripped them apart(God I wish TB was still around) so anything they post I personally cannot take remotely seriously(their article on the Punisher TV show was particularly awful)

I think Cage does game design quite well, maybe it's because i'm sick to death of "live services" crap, but it's refreshing to see a person like Cage is still committed to making single-player focused experiences and not succumbing to the bullshit the infects most AAA games these days(I.E. multiple special editions, day one DLC, pre-order bonuses, season passes, microtransactions and lootboxes, etc).

He can too tell a story "worth a damn" I found Heavy Rain in particular to be highly compelling(as TotalBiscuit said about that story, it's more impactful if you have kids yourself)

I like Yahtzee but I strongly disagree with him on Cage's games, and I feel like too many people fail to realize that Yahtzee often exaggerates things in his reviews for the sake of comedy, as too many people take it at face value(the PC Master thing is a perfect example, far too many people didn't realize he was mocking arrogant assholes who wouldn't stop bragging about their PCs and insulting console users when he coined that term, people took it literally and Yahtzee eventually mentioned that he regretted coming up with the term in the first place in his Kingdom Come Deliverance video because of how many assholes took it literally).

Cage is very damn good at his job considering how well his games sell.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Exley97 said:
YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS.

I love everything about this (including the title, which made me laugh) and can't wait to watch the others videos on the subject.

I'll just throw in a quick rant about so-called "plot holes": The Hunt for Red October isn't "ruined" for me because I don't understand why the cook's assistant shot up the cabin *before* going to the missile bay to blow up the sub, when it would have been much easier to just go there quietly and connect the damn wires. I didn't notice it the first few times I watched it, and I don't really care about it now either. It's an insignificant flaw in an otherwise superbly-executed action thriller. And every single one of the movies we love has flaws and blemishes and errors and the vast majority of them don't need to be blown up into "OMG PLOT HOLES!" rants on YouTube or -- worse -- goddamn listicles and slideshows.

Signed, a dedicated Star Trek fan who loves the reboots and no I don't care what you say about Nero's "patience" or the Enterprise being under water or any other "holes" you can think of.
My mom grew up watching the original series when it first aired and she's also a big fan of the reboot series and she was utterly baffled when I told her about all the hatred some people have towards those films.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
webkilla said:
I will have to disagree with Bob on some of his points - but I'll agree to some of them too.

He complains that people want flowchart box-checking... but I don't think he quite realizes what kind of people want that. I'm thinking the people who want diversity checklists and whatnot. Equally, his point that theme and emotional investment in a movie is better - yes - but again, who exactly is it who's pushing for the other thing? I don't think its the people that Bob thinks it is.

He even uses the Beauty and Beast movie as example here... and I'm not quite certain what tropes and whatnot he's refering to, but the only drama I recall about the movie was the addition of a gay mini sub-plot in the movie. If this was done to satisfy anyone, then I would again question exactly who.

Also bob's redefinitions of what a plothole is - hasn't it always been a somewhat subjective issue, based on how much a consumer of a given media product has been paying attention to the plot, how genre savvy they are, and so on?

Equally, I think bob just straight up wrong when he puts forth the idea that people detailing plotholes are doing it as a cheap way of doing movie critique - I think you can do a youtube vid about plotholes without having to do movie critique, and conflating the two seems disingenuous.

And then Bob goes on to effectively claim - showing clips of star wars - that what you think is a plothole might not even be a plothole, because you might be "one of those people" who didn't like The Last Jedi. Come on Bob, that's low even for you. ...and you then go on complain about people who try to make their subjective opinion off to be actual fact? Dude, come on.


but then around the 3min mark Bob gets into something a little more interesting: he claims that "back in the days" of early geek culture, people were nicer and knew better than to debate each other into the ground. I think he's wearing some really rose tinted goggles there.

when he brings up the Titanic movie as example - again, he admits to as much that it was a really popular movie at the time (it was...) but I think his argument falls apart a bit here too. He's making it sound as if pointing out plotholes isn't allowed for the purposes of movie critique, or that it cheapens movie critique.


...and then he finally gets to Star Wars the last jedi. I get it bob, you liked it - and you're angry that other people don't like it - but for fuck's sake don't try to claim that it was some secret work of a genius.

Oh and "Zarbon of akkad" - Real subtle there Bob, its almost as if you're not coming off as a petty passive-aggressive child when you try to smear people like that. Hell, I'd probably be a lot more open to accepting your ideas if you didn't also use your platform here to smear to smear people.
You're coming off as the manchild here, anyone that honestly takes Sargon seriously needs to have their head examined, he has as much credibility as Alex Jones, he's a bigoted piece of shit who no sane person takes seriously.

Clearly you didn't watch Lindsay's video on Beauty and the Beast.

Anyone who complains about people wanting more "diversity" is someone who cannot be taken remotely seriously and is usually a closeted bigot.

Last Jedi isn't a secret work of genius, because most critics really liked it.

Sargon IS racist and stupid, anyone with half a brain can see that.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Abomination said:
I am sorry, but when your film has logical inconsistencies the narrative and themes go from "moving" to "contrived" very quickly.

I mean Jesus Tapdancing Christ, how long was Leia in space for? A minute? Twenty seconds? That ship is constantly accelerating, otherwise why bother with thrusters-- never mind. I realize it's all about space magic but at the same time there comes a point and Last Jedi went way past it.

Rose's "This is how we win" is supposed to be emotional? She did the exact same thing Finn was trying to do but she sacrificed just as much for a far smaller result. If the message is that the rebels win by making mistake after mistake and just getting lucky, or being willing to sacrifice thousands of themselves so only 12-17 of them can get away? Uh, you really sold that.
Eh it worked fine for me.
 

RC1138

New member
Dec 9, 2009
80
0
0
I was thinking of the Hitchcock quote the whole time I saw this and Lindsey Ellis' videos; you don't need to watch movies for a 100% 'logical', no plot holes, no 'inconsistencies' in the most literal sense. They have that thing already, it's called watching/reading the news. Everything has to 'fit' in reality cause it actually happened, even if the story you're told is wrong, but there are no plot holes. Movies are supposed to be fun (and all that entails; sad-fun, scary-fun, ect)

Q/A Question:

You know more about the science of filmaking (theory) than say, the vast vast majority of people. So when you see a film about film-making (Scream comes to mind, which you've said way-back-when you hated more than any other movie) I assume you find yourself rolling your eyes at people who know a 1/10th of your background trying to claim knowledge of the film making process based on said film when it typically amounts to chapter/class titles rather than the actual premise and theory. So extending that logic to other fields, do you find that film critics can often be blinded by feigns towards fields of study that are not their own due to lack of depth of knowledge in said field.

Or, put simply, do you find that film critics can often be, 'blinded by the bullshit' of stuff they don't know? I ask because of more recent film and especially television fair that often makes motions towards scientific and mathematics literacy, and praised for that aspect, often times using it as a, "Well the rest of the show is mediocre but the science-y stuff is fascinating." As someone with a PhD in Chemical Engineering, I cannot tell you how shows are made worse by false claims to science, not because a 'plot hole' aspect, but because said claims are used to prop up what are typically shallow and pedantic plots, themes, and even worse characters.

Put another way: the Math jokes in (classic) Simpsons are infinity more indicative of scientifically literate writing staff adding actual nuance and layers to their already great characters/plots/themes than other recent fare that just happen to show examples of things that can be found in the table of contents of a Physical Chemistry text book.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
webkilla said:
He even uses the Beauty and Beast movie as example here... and I'm not quite certain what tropes and whatnot he's refering to, but the only drama I recall about the movie was the addition of a gay mini sub-plot in the movie. If this was done to satisfy anyone, then I would again question exactly who.
I guess you didn't watch the movie or any of the critiques of it, or at least not the ones I've seen. You could definitely benefit from seeing the specific video Bob referenced, the one by Lindsay Ellis. But to sum it up, the writers of the movie seem to have laser-focused their efforts on "fixing" the "plot holes" and "historical inaccuracies" of the original (e.g. "Why did no one in the village know about the prince who used to live in the nearby castle?" "How is Chip still a child if the curse happened a decade ago?" "Why are people in old-timey times OK with a girl learning how to read?" etc.) even though no one of consequence was demanding it. Personally I suspect they did it because you're expected to change something when you remake a movie, and Beauty and the Beast is such a beloved, universally-lauded classic that this was the only excuse they could think of. It's not like Bob Iger personally said "Bad news, everyone! People are complaining about plot holes in one of our most famous movies! We gotta spend millions of dollars making a new version so they'll shut up!"
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
darkrage6 said:
You're coming off as the manchild here, anyone that honestly takes Sargon seriously needs to have their head examined, he has as much credibility as Alex Jones, he's a bigoted piece of shit who no sane person takes seriously.

Clearly you didn't watch Lindsay's video on Beauty and the Beast.

Anyone who complains about people wanting more "diversity" is someone who cannot be taken remotely seriously and is usually a closeted bigot.

Last Jedi isn't a secret work of genius, because most critics really liked it.

Sargon IS racist and stupid, anyone with half a brain can see that.
Didn't bob just say that trying to pass off your own subjective opinion as fact is a bad thing?

Anywho, I see that you have certain opinions about Sargon. Good for you. That doesn't mean you should call me names though - that's not very mature, is it? I'm not claiming to be a saint myself, but you're equating Sargon to Alex Jones? Really?

And I did watch Lindsays video - but I was commenting on Bob's remarks about the movie.

Critics might have liked TLJ - but it still only has a 46% audience score on rotten tomatoes, and I think that the paying costumers who fork over money to see the movie - as opposed to professional reviewers - should have a say in this.

But clearly, I am but a poor lost soul with half a brain by your logic - though my three university degrees does make that a little weird. Anywho, no I don't think Sargon is racist and you're completely off topic in bringing that up, but whatever you do you.
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
For the Q&A:

Vaguely related to Lindsay Ellis's video about YouTube selling the authenticity of content creators, what factors into your decisions about how your curate your online persona? For example, you've at least implied in some episodes of Really That Good that you want to affect the general tone of movie criticism and consumption online in a more positive, thoughtful way; I assume you intend to do this by example?

EDIT: Also, did you bother counting how many people in the comments to your "people should stop trying to present subjective opinions as objective facts" argument responded by trying to present their subjective opinions as objective facts in order to "prove" you wrong?
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
11,708
1,057
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
From actions I would say Picard is the better captain but William Shatner was in MLP so I suppose I have to give it to Kirk.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
webkilla said:
darkrage6 said:
You're coming off as the manchild here, anyone that honestly takes Sargon seriously needs to have their head examined, he has as much credibility as Alex Jones, he's a bigoted piece of shit who no sane person takes seriously.

Clearly you didn't watch Lindsay's video on Beauty and the Beast.

Anyone who complains about people wanting more "diversity" is someone who cannot be taken remotely seriously and is usually a closeted bigot.

Last Jedi isn't a secret work of genius, because most critics really liked it.

Sargon IS racist and stupid, anyone with half a brain can see that.
Didn't bob just say that trying to pass off your own subjective opinion as fact is a bad thing?

Anywho, I see that you have certain opinions about Sargon. Good for you. That doesn't mean you should call me names though - that's not very mature, is it? I'm not claiming to be a saint myself, but you're equating Sargon to Alex Jones? Really?

And I did watch Lindsays video - but I was commenting on Bob's remarks about the movie.

Critics might have liked TLJ - but it still only has a 46% audience score on rotten tomatoes, and I think that the paying costumers who fork over money to see the movie - as opposed to professional reviewers - should have a say in this.

But clearly, I am but a poor lost soul with half a brain by your logic - though my three university degrees does make that a little weird. Anywho, no I don't think Sargon is racist and you're completely off topic in bringing that up, but whatever you do you.
You're clearly trying to pass your opinion off as fact, hypocrisy thy name is webkilla(oh boy is that an edgelord username if I ever saw one).

How do you know that the people who downvoted TLJ actually saw the damn thing? You don't, user scores are highly susceptible to downvoting campaigns, that's how come the Ghostbuster trailer got so many dislikes. So that userscore means fucking nothing.

Yes I am, Sargon engages in the same kind of bullshit conspiracy theory nonsense that Jones does, I don't think comparing the two is farfetched at all and i'm far from the only person to have done it(let me guess, you're one of those people who sends death and rape threats to people like Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian all the time right?)

Three degrees my ass, and even if that is true that still does not inherently make you smarter then someone who has not gone to college or who has less degrees, that's not how things work.

Trump has a degree too, but no sane person would argue that automatically means he's not a complete moron.

I'm not off topic at all saying that Sargon is racist, considering that was part of this video.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
RC1138 said:
I was thinking of the Hitchcock quote the whole time I saw this and Lindsey Ellis' videos; you don't need to watch movies for a 100% 'logical', no plot holes, no 'inconsistencies' in the most literal sense. They have that thing already, it's called watching/reading the news. Everything has to 'fit' in reality cause it actually happened, even if the story you're told is wrong, but there are no plot holes. Movies are supposed to be fun (and all that entails; sad-fun, scary-fun, ect)

Q/A Question:

You know more about the science of filmaking (theory) than say, the vast vast majority of people. So when you see a film about film-making (Scream comes to mind, which you've said way-back-when you hated more than any other movie) I assume you find yourself rolling your eyes at people who know a 1/10th of your background trying to claim knowledge of the film making process based on said film when it typically amounts to chapter/class titles rather than the actual premise and theory. So extending that logic to other fields, do you find that film critics can often be blinded by feigns towards fields of study that are not their own due to lack of depth of knowledge in said field.

Or, put simply, do you find that film critics can often be, 'blinded by the bullshit' of stuff they don't know? I ask because of more recent film and especially television fair that often makes motions towards scientific and mathematics literacy, and praised for that aspect, often times using it as a, "Well the rest of the show is mediocre but the science-y stuff is fascinating." As someone with a PhD in Chemical Engineering, I cannot tell you how shows are made worse by false claims to science, not because a 'plot hole' aspect, but because said claims are used to prop up what are typically shallow and pedantic plots, themes, and even worse characters.

Put another way: the Math jokes in (classic) Simpsons are infinity more indicative of scientifically literate writing staff adding actual nuance and layers to their already great characters/plots/themes than other recent fare that just happen to show examples of things that can be found in the table of contents of a Physical Chemistry text book.
I sure hope Bob has changed his mind on Scream, cause boy were his reasons for hating it unbelievably shallow and weaksauce.
 

Horadrius

New member
May 14, 2009
8
0
0
Q&A questions:

1) Was it hard to get back into ?Big Picture? mode after such a lengthy hiatus?

2) Where are the various faces from? Were they drawn from photos? Do you have a favorite?

3) Do you have a favorite Kaiju video game, and if so, is it Rampage?

Mine is Shadow of the Colossus

4) Do you remember your 2012 election video from the ?American Bob? series where you shouted out to the viewer about the importance of the SUPREME COURT? Because I do.

I?d also like to say your video explaining the Collector scene at the end of Thor 2 came in handy for Guardians 2 and Thor 3!
 

Exley97_v1legacy

New member
Jul 9, 2014
217
0
0
For the Q&A, here's a question:

Are there any reviews you've done where your opinion of the film has drastically changed (positively or negatively) as time has passed since your initial review?
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Apr 14, 2020
5,165
155
68
Well, now I know why the other Escapist forums have been so quiet.

I never know what to ask in Q&A (and someone already ninja'd me the Big Picture's faces question). The only thing I can come up is:

"What's the weirdest question you ever answered in a Q&A?"

"What's the weirdest question you ever got answered in someone else's Q&A?"
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Apr 14, 2020
5,165
155
68
darkrage6 said:
I was glad that the military were actually portrayed as competent in the Transformers films
I'm not surprised. The US military financed those movies.
 

JakubK666

New member
Jan 1, 2008
781
0
0
daibakuha said:
One of the points in the Patrick (h) Willems video is that people often don't pay close enough attention to things and then complain when they don't make any sense. That's about 90% of the problems people have with The Last Jedi.
But my chief problem with The Last Jedi is that literally everything involving Finn/Rose/Poe/Holdo/Leia is nothing short of a pure idiot plot. The more attention I pay to it, the worse it actually gets.

I don't give a shit about pedantic nitpicks regarding the feasability of FTL ramming or Rey being too powerful too quickly. I do care when the entire two-thirds of the plot is facilitated by one character refusing to divulge even the slightest amount of crucial information with no estabilished reason for them not do so - other than the fact divulging said information would collapse the entire story.

Holdo doesn't owe the recently-demoted Poe a detailed explanation, but the fact Poe isn't just throwing a fit by himself but instead successfully inspires a mass mutiny amongst a sizeable portion of the officers in charge who were also willing to go against Holdo speaks volumes about her failure as a leader. Yet instead of the theme being something about two flawed people trying to do their best and accidentally going against each other due to poor communication, the film is still seemingly trying to sell it as "Poe do a bad, Holdo right and good all along" which straight up doesn't work.

It seems to me they initially came up with two key themes, a fairly comprehensive idea of where they want those characters to end up, and zero clue how to get them there:

1) Subvert the classic archetype of authority-defying bad boy rebel character who says "screw the rules" and saves the day. Instead have Poe be in the wrong and inadvertently put in motion the events that screw everything up.

2) Don't be obvious about Poe doing something genuinely wrong or shady-looking. Don't even hint at it, either. Instead bait-and-switch the audience into fully sympathising with Poe's point of view and purposely paint Holdo as a *****, before pulling a fast one on them.

Plenty of stories have done this kind of stuff before, but in order to do it succesfully you absolutely have to lay out a fair bit of narrative groundwork for the audience to buy into.

I understand what they were trying to do, the themes themselves are pretty excellent, and TLJ gets brownie points for actually trying something like that in the first place, yet at the end of the day they still completely failed narratively. Poe and his fellow mutineers are left looking like a bunch of people making the best choices based on bad information, while Holdo looks hopelessly incompetent.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
I think this presupposes that people actually did like The Last Jedi due to its themes or whatever but convinced themselves not to like it because of plot holes, real or imagined. To me, The Force Awakens frustrated and angered me more than the prequels, but it wasn't because of plotholes or secret bigotry, I hadn't examined the movie enough to care about plot holes. But bitching about TFA is soooo pre-Trump-as-President, so I'll keep with the nontroversy du jour (spoilers ahoy for TLJ).

I came out of The Last Jedi mixed. I loved the Rey/Luke/Kylo plot thread, weird monster-milking and all, it was great. I enjoyed the Finn/Rose storyline quite a bit and thought it was necessary to change up the setting and tone, and remind us there's a world outside of these two ships.

But then there's the Leia/Poe/Holdo storyline, which felt strange and bad from the beginning to me. Is it because I hate the idea of women in positions of power? Well, no, I wouldn't have minded if Leia castrated Poe on-screen if she was doing it for a good reason. But that's why the whole thing felt wrong, the only thing Poe did that was so terribly wrong was disobey orders, which is something only the Empire would hold as extremely important. Luke couldn't have blown up the Death Star without disobeying his superiors. I was actually excited to see what special plan Holdo was holding from Poe that was going to put him in his place, but it ended up just being a suicide attack that she could have told to the entire crew at any time. Leia/Holdo was asking Poe to blindly follow orders and trust his superiors over his own sense of judgement and morality- something antithetical to the idea of being in a Rebellion, most of us our taught that blindly following orders no matter how cruel/nonsensical is a bad thing.

So am I just nitpicking plotholes? Well, no, this a serious thematic problem in the movie that is to the detriment of the central themes of the film. Rogue One, for its various flaws, was interesting because it portrayed a Rebellion that had to do unsavory things to stay alive, and portrayed some of the very difficult decisions that are posed in war.

At the same time, if someone felt really compelled by that storyline, I'm not going to try to tell them their objectively wrong, just as people want to tell me I'm wrong for liking the space casino.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
JakubK666 said:
daibakuha said:
One of the points in the Patrick (h) Willems video is that people often don't pay close enough attention to things and then complain when they don't make any sense. That's about 90% of the problems people have with The Last Jedi.
But my chief problem with The Last Jedi is that literally everything involving Finn/Rose/Poe/Holdo/Leia is nothing short of a pure idiot plot. The more attention I pay to it, the worse it actually gets.

I don't give a shit about pedantic nitpicks regarding the feasability of FTL ramming or Rey being too powerful too quickly. I do care when the entire two-thirds of the plot is facilitated by one character refusing to divulge even the slightest amount of crucial information with no estabilished reason for them not do so - other than the fact divulging said information would collapse the entire story.

Holdo doesn't owe the recently-demoted Poe a detailed explanation, but the fact Poe isn't just throwing a fit by himself but instead successfully inspires a mass mutiny amongst a sizeable portion of the officers in charge who were also willing to go against Holdo speaks volumes about her failure as a leader. Yet instead of the theme being something about two flawed people trying to do their best and accidentally going against each other due to poor communication, the film is still seemingly trying to sell it as "Poe do a bad, Holdo right and good all along" which straight up doesn't work.

It seems to me they initially came up with two key themes, a fairly comprehensive idea of where they want those characters to end up, and zero clue how to get them there:

1) Subvert the classic archetype of authority-defying bad boy rebel character who says "screw the rules" and saves the day. Instead have Poe be in the wrong and inadvertently put in motion the events that screw everything up.

2) Don't be obvious about Poe doing something genuinely wrong or shady-looking. Don't even hint at it, either. Instead bait-and-switch the audience into fully sympathising with Poe's point of view and purposely paint Holdo as a *****, before pulling a fast one on them.

Plenty of stories have done this kind of stuff before, but in order to do it succesfully you absolutely have to lay out a fair bit of narrative groundwork for the audience to buy into.

I understand what they were trying to do, the themes themselves are pretty excellent, and TLJ gets brownie points for actually trying something like that in the first place, yet at the end of the day they still completely failed narratively. Poe and his fellow mutineers are left looking like a bunch of people making the best choices based on bad information, while Holdo looks hopelessly incompetent.
Holdo looked plenty competent to me.
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
JakubK666 said:
I understand what they were trying to do, the themes themselves are pretty excellent, and TLJ gets brownie points for actually trying something like that in the first place, yet at the end of the day they still completely failed narratively. Poe and his fellow mutineers are left looking like a bunch of people making the best choices based on bad information, while Holdo looks hopelessly incompetent.
If Holdo had even once mentioned that she fucked up I think the whole thing would have been far better. Some realization that she TOO was flawed would grant the theme or message they were going for a lot more weight.

Thinking about why he was demoted in the first place... the bombers were already in place. If they had attempted to turn around and run they would have been cut down just the same. At least this way they did some damage on the way out.

Is the theme or message that you should follow orders or understand that the chain of command exits for a reason? Because that was a piss poor way of delivering it.
 

JakubK666

New member
Jan 1, 2008
781
0
0
darkrage6 said:
Holdo looked plenty competent to me.
So competent that she got overthrown by a chunk of her desperate direct subordinates who felt they had reasonable grounds to believe she was incompetent/insane/treasonous, her plan went completely sideways, hundreds of people died, and she was forced to launch a suicide attack.

All of which could have been avoided with almost literally six words - "Poe, I have a plan. Chill.".
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
I tend to ignore plot holes in films because I go to a movie to be entertained, not to expend my energy picking apart someone's hard work.
 

Alex V.Sharp

New member
Jan 20, 2011
19
0
0
TLJ is not only bad, but it's entirely broken and borderline insulting.

People who actually think this is the best the Star Wars universe has to offer are either a) Uninformed, don't know of KOTOR, Jedi Knight series, or any of the books; b) Give zero shits about the Star Wars universe in general - for them it's just another action film; or c) Have either no standards or no thoughts of their own and just follow the crowd. Watch the pretty light: Boom! 10/10 best film ever! Reviews said so, must be true!

TLJ can burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. I'm hoping the downward spiral continues and the property get ruined so much that they regret ever putting their greedy paws on it. China banned it, toy sales are failing, fans left.

The only good thing to come out of this dumpsterfire is that I found out about Mauler and the crew.

I didn't even know 'The Big Picture' returned to Escapist till now. I was actually hoping for something odd and interesting to hear about, something like all the 'comics are weird' or similar. Instead all I got was this piece of... again talking how maybe, just MAYBE TLJ plot and themes aren't so bad? Being disappointed does not even begin to explain how I feel atm...
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Falseprophet said:
No, if you're in the moment, you don't care about the reasons for X and Y. Rather, the film has successfully pulled off its magic trick of making you care about these fictional people (or heavily dramatized real people) in this fictional (or heavily dramatized) situation without stopping to think "why?" or "how?" Any reasons you then come up with later are just rationalizations after the fact, but that doesn't change how you felt in the moment. And the door jokes didn't originate with a bunch of haters who never gave the film a chance--it was an in-joke among the superfans who saw it half-a-dozen in theatre and bought the DVD and knew every detail by heart.
TV Tropes uses the term "Fridge Logic" to describe moments that don't jangle your sense of logic, reason, or continuity until later (e.g., when you're away from the show/movie getting a snack from the refrigerator). The thing of it is, sometimes such contemplation does become like a hanging end that makes the whole sweater unwind, diminishing your memory of the experience- and other times, sometimes on the strength of your pleasure "in the moment", you put the matter aside as inconsequential.

Or you split the difference and come up with a reason why it might not be the problem your querying mind things it is- as in Bob's "shaken up by trauma, half frozen, not thinking clearly" excuse.

I've done this, too. One example is Tim Burton's Batman. I've convinced myself that Vicki Vale realized who Batman was when they exchanged glances in the Batmobile while he was driving her from the museum to the Batcave. But I'm pretty sure that Burton himself has admitted that he simply never made the linking scene where Vale finds out that Wayne is Batman before Alfred just escorts the curiously unsurprised reporter into the Batcave while un-masked Bruce Wayne is working amidst all his gear. Oops.

As far as Titanic goes, it's hard to pin down the origin of a joke, let alone twenty years or so after the release of the movie that inspired it. But I would certainly say that the joke does persist is a testament to the movie's impact and longevity, whatever the original intention.

Callate said:
Arguably it's better for a critic to be nit-picky or adopt an unwarranted pedanticism than for them to be so caught up in a work (and/or whatever attendant buzz/controversy/real-world-parallels follow it) that they cannot produce criticism of value to someone who doesn't see the world in absolute parallel.
To what end? Neither the cineaste nor the average film-goer spares a second thought for the tiny bunch of pendantic never-satisfied nerds whinging about expanded universe/fanon/retconned continuity nitpicks. Which by the way--pot to kettle--is also being "so caught up in a work" but in a tedious, priggish way far fewer people can relate to. And I resemble that remark, I've just become more self-conscious of it over the years. So why should a critic bend over backwards to accommodate them? To alienate the majority of their audience in the attempt to please a minority who's never satisfied anyway? That doesn't make sense for the critic, and frankly nerds shouldn't seek validation for their opinions if they can't be mature enough to take the criticism with the praise.
I should clarify that I didn't mean that net-picky pedanticism is a good thing- "better" in this case is a value judgement not unlike whether it is "better" to be afflicted with bed bugs or lice.

I don't really find harm in things like "Cinema Sins" or "HISHE" or "Honest Trailers" or "Pitch Meeting". Often they're funny; sometimes they bring up interesting points.

But I also don't really think of them as "criticism" in the same way I think of what Siskel and Ebert used to do as criticism. They're their own form. I'd be far more distracted (and irritated) if in the middle of a paragraph about the protagonist's character arc a conventional film critic went off about how a scene used a POV shot when there was no one who could plausibly served as that camera's POV in the scene. The list-makers, I go in girded knowing what to expect. It's a bit like not going into Zero Punctuation not expecting to hear about a game's glorious scenery and stellar voice-over cast.
 

RTR

New member
Mar 22, 2008
1,351
0
0
Aw, man. I can't think of what to ask when I'm on the spot.

OK, here go a couple ones off the top of my head:

1. Are you gonna do a video on THE VENTURE BROS? (I know you're a big fan).

2. Can we expect a return for INTERMISSION (Your weekly column)?

3. How do you think CAPTAIN MARVEL will tie into AVENGERS 4?

4. That new SPIDER-MAN game seems pretty awesome. Have you played it?

5. What is your favorite pre-comeback memory of working on THE ESCAPIST? Favorite video, column, etc.?
 

tumblingmice

New member
Nov 18, 2015
1
0
0
I'm a big fan of Lindsay Ellis but her rejection of film criticism that focuses on plot structure rather than academics or politics is very obnoxious to me. Of course it's just her opinion but it's really dismissive and harmful to film writers who care about such things specifically. I don't think anyome can say YouMovieSucks is a bad film critic because he cares a lot about films making sense, but that's what the video was implying.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
tumblingmice said:
I'm a big fan of Lindsay Ellis but her rejection of film criticism that focuses on plot structure rather than academics or politics is very obnoxious to me. Of course it's just her opinion but it's really dismissive and harmful to film writers who care about such things specifically. I don't think anyome can say YouMovieSucks is a bad film critic because he cares a lot about films making sense, but that's what the video was implying.
She didn't say you could NEVER criticize plot holes, her main point was that that should not be the ONLY reason you criticize a film, you have to balance it out with other criticisms, otherwise it just comes off as being pedantic for the sake of it.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
JakubK666 said:
darkrage6 said:
Holdo looked plenty competent to me.
So competent that she got overthrown by a chunk of her desperate direct subordinates who felt they had reasonable grounds to believe she was incompetent/insane/treasonous, her plan went completely sideways, hundreds of people died, and she was forced to launch a suicide attack.

All of which could have been avoided with almost literally six words - "Poe, I have a plan. Chill.".
You are exactly the kind of person Bob was criticizing in the video, the fact that you fail to realize the irony is hilarious to me.
 

Gennadios

New member
Aug 19, 2009
1,157
0
0
Any movie out there will have critics and analysis videos, but at the end of the fiscal year the only thing that matters is how the majority of viewers feel about the movie. The majority of viewers won't care about the water tension of the door in Titanic because they recognize it as a primarily emotional piece and it was well made. Nobody cares about the historical accuracy of viability of the LOTR castles because the movies genuinely felt like they were set in a different world, accuracy didn't matter.

Nu Star Wars isn't viewed positively. People care about the plot holes because because the movie didn't give the majority of fans anything that they wanted. Akbar's heroic moment was stolen by a character that didn't resonate, and a Mystery Box pushing hack robbed fans of their Han/Luke/Leia reunion to set up a mystery turned disappointment.

Damn straight people are going to look for plot holes in highly anticipated movies that failed to deliver, when something gets broken you look for what went wrong.
 

Batbro9240

New member
Mar 16, 2016
3
0
0
For Q&A: Are you glad that the New 52 wasn't immediately reversed like you'd said when it all started, or would you have rathered it be reversed quickly?
 

Gizen

New member
Nov 17, 2009
279
0
0
Gennadios said:
Nu Star Wars isn't viewed positively.
This is something the internet has to get over itself about. TLJ is viewed extremely positively by the movie going public at large. Just because an extremely vocal minority doesn't like something, doesn't mean the silent majority who can't be bothered to argue over internet forums agrees.
 

kwerboom

New member
May 27, 2013
5
0
0
For Q&A: Being as you have done updates of "The Big Picture" episodes like 2013's "Ninetiestalgia Stinks" as 2017's "In Bob We Trust - SHERMAN'S MARCH: THE CRITIC IN 2017", could you do an update of 2011's "In Defense of Nostalgia"? I know it's a weird request but that's one of my favorite "The Big Picture" episodes and you could even slot in a "ThunderCats Go" reference where the "ThunderCats 2011" reference was in the original.
 

WindKnight

Quiet, Odd Sort.
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
1,823
6
13
Cephiro
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,954
6
13
Windknight said:
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
If it is the case, it would be a very unintentional meta statement about that type of compulsive YouTube nitpicky over-analysis it intends to defend, even on top of the fact it is supposed to be criticising the criticism of criticism.
*Sigh* Whatever makes them the money and attention I spose.
 

Pat Hulse

New member
Oct 17, 2011
67
0
0
tumblingmice said:
I'm a big fan of Lindsay Ellis but her rejection of film criticism that focuses on plot structure rather than academics or politics is very obnoxious to me. Of course it's just her opinion but it's really dismissive and harmful to film writers who care about such things specifically. I don't think anyome can say YouMovieSucks is a bad film critic because he cares a lot about films making sense, but that's what the video was implying.
I think the point she was making was less that plot structure (and worrying about plot structure) isn't important, and more that it's not the only thing that matters, and if you make other parts of the movie weaker in service of patching up perceived problems in the plot structure, you'd probably be better off just leaving those problems alone. The "Beauty and the Beast" remake was a great example of this because in almost every case, their pedantic attempts to patch over perceived plot holes only created more problems and hurt the tone and pacing of the film. Hence the recurring phrase, "Thanks, I hate it." Plot holes only matter when they take you out of a movie. If you're only noticing the plot holes because you're already out of the movie, odds are good that something else disengaged you (maybe you were already bored or annoyed or otherwise antipathetic), not the plot hole itself, but as the plot hole is often more tangible and easier to articulate, it's what your brain wants to naturally latch on to as it searches for a reason why you aren't enjoying yourself.

To put it another way, you don't hate "The Phantom Menace" because of Jar-Jar Binks, you hate it for a whole host of other reasons. It's just that Jar-Jar Binks is such an obvious problem that it pretty much speaks for itself. Removing him wouldn't make the movie much better, and if the rest of the movie were actually fantastic, audiences probably would have just ignored Jar-Jar's presence.

Virtually all movies have logic gaps if you're in the mood to look for them. The key is whether or not a movie bores or irritates you enough for you to notice or care.

Every "Star Wars" movie is bad. Every single one. Each movie's enjoyability depends entirely on the viewer's willingness to overlook their inherent silliness and campiness for the sake of whatever that particular movie has to offer them, and if it doesn't have enough to offer, they will just become fixated on the silly parts.

Considering that, it's a mistake to try and make your movie better solely by ironing out logical gaps. That will only give people fewer tangible things to complain about if they disengage. The more worthy focus, therefore, would be to just try and keep the audience engaged by finding more to offer them. None of the "improvements" made to "Beauty and the Beast" offered the audiences more. The movie didn't add any new depth to the characters or the story. They just painted over a few nitpicks.

Sometimes it's important for a story to make sense. If the meaning of a story hinges on a character's behavior seeming logical, then it's very important. Like, "Breaking Bad" is a great example. The entire idea of that show is to demonstrate how an ordinary person can become a monster in a believable way, because we are meant to relate to the character and see how we ourselves could also become monsters under similar circumstances. If Walter acts illogically, therefore, the audience struggles to relate to him, and the entire show's premise is compromised. But not all shows are meant to evoke direct empathy with a flawed protagonist. Sometimes it's just about wallowing in melodrama, as is often the case with soap operas and comic books. In these cases, characters don't necessarily have to behave *logically*, they just have to behave *consistently*. Like, let's even take one of the most cold, logic-driven characters from one of the grittiest comics of all time, Rorschach from "Watchmen" (I'll be vague to avoid spoilers). In the end, the most logical, sensible thing for him to do would have been to keep the truth a secret. He knew what Dr. Manhattan would do if he tried to leave, and he knew he couldn't do anything to hide his intentions from Dr. Manhattan. Even if he disagreed, the best thing to do would have been nothing, because at least then he could still have continued fighting the fight in other ways. But that wouldn't have been consistent with his character. He believed what he believed strongly enough to lay down his life for it, and that's more important than whether or not it makes sense as a thing to do in a vacuum.

And really, that's the biggest problem with nitpicky criticism in general. By its very nature, it's criticism divorced from context. It takes a movie intended to be consumed whole and breaks it up into tiny chunks to be examined on their own terms, when they were never really meant to in the first place. It can be helpful if you are trying to identify symptoms of larger problems present throughout the entire film, but when the entire piece of criticism is just cataloging "problems", then it's utterly useless as a piece of constructive criticism. It can still be entertaining, though.
 

The Great JT

New member
Oct 6, 2008
3,721
0
0
A plot hole is what happens when a movie breaks its own rules. It is not when the rules lawyer starts complaining to get his way.

For the Q&A:
-Do you have any comic book recommendations?
-Who is your favorite Robot Master in the Mega Man series?
-If you could bring back any extinct species of animal, what would you bring back?
-What fighting game move would you use to finish off your worst enemy?
-Who are your top five favorite wrestlers?
 

Alarien

New member
Feb 9, 2010
441
0
0
I'm a bit tired of the whole "Admiral Holdo" thing.

Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.

You don't walk up to a superior officer and demand all the details of campaign strategy as if you are entitled to it. That's just not a thing you do. Holdo's behavior follows exactly as a general/flag officer would react to that from a far junior officer. It's one thing for a private to walk up to their sergeant and say "hey, sergeant, what's the deal?" It's something else for an O-3 level officer to walk up to a general officer and petulantly demand attention and explanation, as if they are entitled to it. Poe was behaving like a child and was treated like one. He got off better than he really should have, but that entire plot line, the way it was depicted, was entirely for that point in his character growth.
 

blackdwarf

New member
Jun 7, 2010
606
0
0
I find it hilarious that you reference the Patrick H Willems video, but at the same time say that media critics are using 'sleight of hand' rhetoric, with plot holes/logic criticism, while he is pretty much doing the same with theme and characters criticism. He is not actively interacting with the arguments and points made by these media critics, but pretty much waving this criticism aside, because the aspects they criticize don't matter according to him, unlike the aspects he thinks are most important, like characters arcs, themes and what it made him feel. He is using neat editing and talking like he knows it all, but his arguments are poor or non-existent. Saying that People are illogical, so that why characters can act stupid is justified is such a shoddy argument, because when character is acting illogical only to further the plot, and not acting illogical based on the knowledge we have of that character or the situation they are in, that undermines the character and the plot. Especially since this seems to happen more often because of lazy plot based writing, where a scene must happen, so we must write to the scene instead of writing characters that act believable based upon their character. A parent choosing the life of its child over that of ten strangers is maybe a illogical choice in terms of objective math, but logical in sense of character and interpersonal relations. the plot hole criticism has always been present, but the reason we talk more about them, seems more a result of a decline of quality of writing in popular movies than a wish of the audience to speak about it.

His defense of holdo withholding information, because of course we are talking about the Last Jedi here, for the sake conflict and drama is a prime example of this lazy writing. She must be written as illogical so that the film can drum up conflict for Poe and a reason for Finn to go to the casino planet. Her decision of withholding doesn't seem to be based upon her character or her own logic. She pretty much does nothing as the commander, resulting in Poe and the rest of the crew thinking that they are going to die by her inaction. So as a viewer I am asking myself why would she do that? does she have ulterior motives? Maybe she wants to hide the facts that she is going to sacrifice herself so that nobody is going to stop her? These would be 'logical' reasons for her to act the way she does, but no, she just written this way to facilitate conflict so the movies could have a story. A lot of the resulting story lines are pretty jarring, meaningless and extremely hamfisted in their presentation themes: "slavery is bad okay, fuck the 1% am I right guys? save the animals." The presence of themes should not be considered a plus by default, the form how these themes are presented should be considered and in TLJ this is hilariously bad. When seeing these scenes and asking yourself in frustration why are we watching this/why is this happening, just to realize it is because of Holdo being written as a idiot just so we can get these poor C-stories, I find it really hard to care or get infested, because the writer didn't seem to care either.

Sure, Poe was a demoted and a idiot at the start of the movie, so Holdo has a reason to find him unreliable, but he is voicing the concern of the crew when he is asking what her plan is. So her not saying anything to anyone just seems as a poor way of creating conflict that seems to be just there for plot reasons instead of actions resulting of her character. This is underlined when Poe is unconscious and Holdo and Leila are talking about him and Holdo says he likes him. like what, first you don't trust him, then he pretty much tries to steal the ship of you, but he is a still a great guy. Patrick defends this by saying that humans are illogical, so characters can act like that, but this behavior has no base in reality or common sense. It just happens because otherwise there would be not reason to tell the story for some characters. And if the only way of telling stories of characters is by having characters acting illogical, then that is bad writing.

But according to Patrick I am watching movies wrong then and not focusing on the things that 'actually' matter like the presence of themes and characters with arc's. While in reality I think all these things matter in the context of one movie/book/video game/etc, because they empower and enhance each other. Having one of these aspect be bad in such a way that it is hard to ignore, makes a movie unstable and affects the presentation of the other aspects. in the case of TLJ, the poor plot and writing made me feel that this is poorly written film, which just made me question why it was written this way instead of hooking me and taking me on a space adventure.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Gennadios said:
Any movie out there will have critics and analysis videos, but at the end of the fiscal year the only thing that matters is how the majority of viewers feel about the movie. The majority of viewers won't care about the water tension of the door in Titanic because they recognize it as a primarily emotional piece and it was well made. Nobody cares about the historical accuracy of viability of the castles because the movies genuinely felt like they were set in a different world, accuracy didn't matter.

Nu Star Wars isn't viewed positively. People care about the plot holes because because the movie didn't give the majority of fans anything that they wanted. Akbar's heroic moment was stolen by a character that didn't resonate, and a Mystery Box pushing hack robbed fans of their Han/Luke/Leia reunion to set up a mystery turned disappointment.

Damn straight people are going to look for plot holes in highly anticipated movies that failed to deliver, when something gets broken you look for what went wrong.
Wrong, it is viewed positively by the vast majority of people.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
blackdwarf said:
I find it hilarious that you reference the Patrick H Willems video, but at the same time say that media critics are using 'sleight of hand' rhetoric, with plot holes/logic criticism, while he is pretty much doing the same with theme and characters criticism. He is not actively interacting with the arguments and points made by these media critics, but pretty much waving this criticism aside, because the aspects they criticize don't matter according to him, unlike the aspects he thinks are most important, like characters arcs, themes and what it made him feel. He is using neat editing and talking like he knows it all, but his arguments are poor or non-existent. Saying that People are illogical, so that why characters can act stupid is justified is such a shoddy argument, because when character is acting illogical only to further the plot, and not acting illogical based on the knowledge we have of that character or the situation they are in, that undermines the character and the plot. Especially since this seems to happen more often because of lazy plot based writing, where a scene must happen, so we must write to the scene instead of writing characters that act believable based upon their character. A parent choosing the life of its child over that of ten strangers is maybe a illogical choice in terms of objective math, but logical in sense of character and interpersonal relations. the plot hole criticism has always been present, but the reason we talk more about them, seems more a result of a decline of quality of writing in popular movies than a wish of the audience to speak about it.

His defense of holdo withholding information, because of course we are talking about the Last Jedi here, for the sake conflict and drama is a prime example of this lazy writing. She must be written as illogical so that the film can drum up conflict for Poe and a reason for Finn to go to the casino planet. Her decision of withholding doesn't seem to be based upon her character or her own logic. She pretty much does nothing as the commander, resulting in Poe and the rest of the crew thinking that they are going to die by her inaction. So as a viewer I am asking myself why would she do that? does she have ulterior motives? Maybe she wants to hide the facts that she is going to sacrifice herself so that nobody is going to stop her? These would be 'logical' reasons for her to act the way she does, but no, she just written this way to facilitate conflict so the movies could have a story. A lot of the resulting story lines are pretty jarring, meaningless and extremely hamfisted in their presentation themes: "slavery is bad okay, fuck the 1% am I right guys? save the animals." The presence of themes should not be considered a plus by default, the form how these themes are presented should be considered and in TLJ this is hilariously bad. When seeing these scenes and asking yourself in frustration why are we watching this/why is this happening, just to realize it is because of Holdo being written as a idiot just so we can get these poor C-stories, I find it really hard to care or get infested, because the writer didn't seem to care either.

Sure, Poe was a demoted and a idiot at the start of the movie, so Holdo has a reason to find him unreliable, but he is voicing the concern of the crew when he is asking what her plan is. So her not saying anything to anyone just seems as a poor way of creating conflict that seems to be just there for plot reasons instead of actions resulting of her character. This is underlined when Poe is unconscious and Holdo and Leila are talking about him and Holdo says he likes him. like what, first you don't trust him, then he pretty much tries to steal the ship of you, but he is a still a great guy. Patrick defends this by saying that humans are illogical, so characters can act like that, but this behavior has no base in reality or common sense. It just happens because otherwise there would be not reason to tell the story for some characters. And if the only way of telling stories of characters is by having characters acting illogical, then that is bad writing.

But according to Patrick I am watching movies wrong then and not focusing on the things that 'actually' matter like the presence of themes and characters with arc's. While in reality I think all these things matter in the context of one movie/book/video game/etc, because they empower and enhance each other. Having one of these aspect be bad in such a way that it is hard to ignore, makes a movie unstable and affects the presentation of the other aspects. in the case of TLJ, the poor plot and writing made me feel that this is poorly written film, which just made me question why it was written this way instead of hooking me and taking me on a space adventure.
Your post is poorly written.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
Alarien said:
Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.
And the problem is, that's the thing people don't typically like about the military. The idea of blindly following orders regardless of how dumb they are (or worse, how cruel they are) all because the military has some pseudo-religious devotion to the idea of chain of command is not one that resonates with people.

For any progressive who feels compelled to defend Holdo because THOSE OTHER PEOPLE don't like her purple hair, just take a step back and think about what message that whole interaction is sending, that Holdo is supremely wise by virtue of her title, that everyone should have just listened to her and followed her orders blindly no matter how nonsensical they seemed, because people in authority all know better than you. For people keeping score, this message is a fascist one, or at least totalitarian.

Not to mention, that's not even the way a good military works. Superiors don't just issue orders and expect everyone to robotically follow them without question. The command is a two-way street, the rank-and-file are expected to follow orders, but it's also the command's RESPONSIBILITY to communicate to them effectively what the purpose and goals of the mission are, which is crucial in cases where mission parameters change. The soldiers may be expected to act without orders if it means completing the goals of the mission. If every military superior acted like Holdo, armies would disintegrate quickly. We can actually see this in places like Vietnam, as the tactics and strategy to the average soldier seemed increasingly pointless and ineffective, people just felt like they were going to die for no reason, and morale dropped.
 

Alarien

New member
Feb 9, 2010
441
0
0
hentropy said:
Alarien said:
Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.
And the problem is, that's the thing people don't typically like about the military. The idea of blindly following orders regardless of how dumb they are (or worse, how cruel they are) all because the military has some pseudo-religious devotion to the idea of chain of command is not one that resonates with people.
I don't disagree with a good portion of what you are saying, particularly in regards to the "blindly following orders" portion and why people dislike the military system. However, you are skipping right past my point, which was not about what we think of Holdo's orders, but Poe's behavior. His behavior was, in any military estimation, poor, and, regardless of why people do or do not like the military, that's how it functions. I have my own problems with my time in and how the system works, but questioning the command decisions is not something that military operations can afford outside of special circumstances.

Beyond that, discussing chain of command is missing there apparently should BE a chain of command. In this case, Poe just ignored it completely and went straight to a flag officer because he's buddies with Leia and gets to do it there. Again, bad behavior.

As to the issue you do bring up, it goes to the question of whether Holdo's orders were unreasonably wrong or, worse, actively incompetent. They were neither of those two things. Certainly not to the level of "quick! mutiny!" They were communicated as being part of a plan, the goal of which was reasonably obvious, and the particulars for individuals were communicated. Further, the plan was completely sound and the only reason it started to go haywire is because Poe, Rose, and Finn introduced a code slicer who gave up the fact that resistance shuttles were being sent off-ship.

There is another point you are ignoring: the military is not a democracy. I'm not sure why you feel the need to point out the militaries are totalitarian. They are authoritarian by nature, that's just what a chain of command is and I fail to see a reasonable alternative presented. Also, fascism is an unrelated comparison when discussing militaries. That's not a thing.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
hentropy said:
Alarien said:
Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.
And the problem is, that's the thing people don't typically like about the military. The idea of blindly following orders regardless of how dumb they are (or worse, how cruel they are) all because the military has some pseudo-religious devotion to the idea of chain of command is not one that resonates with people.

For any progressive who feels compelled to defend Holdo because THOSE OTHER PEOPLE don't like her purple hair, just take a step back and think about what message that whole interaction is sending, that Holdo is supremely wise by virtue of her title, that everyone should have just listened to her and followed her orders blindly no matter how nonsensical they seemed, because people in authority all know better than you. For people keeping score, this message is a fascist one, or at least totalitarian.

Not to mention, that's not even the way a good military works. Superiors don't just issue orders and expect everyone to robotically follow them without question. The command is a two-way street, the rank-and-file are expected to follow orders, but it's also the command's RESPONSIBILITY to communicate to them effectively what the purpose and goals of the mission are, which is crucial in cases where mission parameters change. The soldiers may be expected to act without orders if it means completing the goals of the mission. If every military superior acted like Holdo, armies would disintegrate quickly. We can actually see this in places like Vietnam, as the tactics and strategy to the average soldier seemed increasingly pointless and ineffective, people just felt like they were going to die for no reason, and morale dropped.
I would add that additionally- the Rebel Alliance/Resistance really hasn't been shown to behave like a conventional military before. I guess one could make the argument that it's become more like a military in the interim between the original trilogy and The Force Awakens- Leia going from "Princess" to "General", for example. But in the past, it's been the kind of operation where some smuggler in a Corellian freighter showing up on a major battlefield at the last minute could prove to be the turning point of a mission... Where a princess could use her diplomatic credentials to operate as a spy and claim diplomatic immunity when the Empire shows up to challenge her (which becomes frankly ludicrous when her capture occurs as soon after a pitched battle as Rogue One portrays it as being)... Where some jerk whose only credentials are governing a Cloud City and who previously betrayed the cause can end up piloting the flag ship of a make-or-break mission... Where most of the most important members of the Rebellion might drop everything to free a friend trapped in carbonite, regardless of the risks or the dangers of antagonizing a crime syndicate that is the de facto ruler of at least one planet...

It's still a pretty inconsistent organization, to all evidence. Rey is permitted to come and go as she pleases, despite having possession of data that could lead the enemy right into the midst of the surviving Resistance fleet. (And I was genuinely surprised that never came up in the movie.) Finn, a former stormtrooper, is folded into the ranks with nary a thought. The battle that started the movie begins with the premise that the First Order will be sufficiently distracted by a combination of "can't quite hear you" and "yo momma" jokes that a single ship will be able to take out all the anti-fighter guns (and to all evidence, this was not Poe playing hot-shot; this was the plan the Resistance went in with. That the planet-destroying First Order would be too polite not to wait and hear them out.)

It is well established that both Poe and Finn are respected and admired by the rank-and-file of the Resistance. Regardless of the military chain of command, keeping them in the dark shows a utter failure to understand how morale works, in an organization that is dependent on volunteers, constantly out-gunned and out-manned, and cannot remotely afford to fail on that front.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
darkrage6 said:
Ukomba said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
Soon? Do you not remember the days of youtube where the response video's use to be listed directly below the video being responded to? Youtube use to promote that exact thing to fuel debate.

Mauler, Rags, and Wolf do a great job here though. Mauler in particular absolutely destroys The Last Jedi in his review really breaks these things down. His deconstruction of the whole "Theme" argument really puts Bob's shallow defense of it to shame.
Nah, Mauler sucks major ass. Rags and Wolf are both bigoted pieces of shit not worth listening to.
Name calling isn't an argument. I could not only say the same thing about Bob and show tweets to back it up, but ad hominems aren't terribly convincing.
 

PsychedelicDiamond

Wild at Heart and weird on top
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,536
175
68
Ukomba said:
darkrage6 said:
Ukomba said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
Soon? Do you not remember the days of youtube where the response video's use to be listed directly below the video being responded to? Youtube use to promote that exact thing to fuel debate.

Mauler, Rags, and Wolf do a great job here though. Mauler in particular absolutely destroys The Last Jedi in his review really breaks these things down. His deconstruction of the whole "Theme" argument really puts Bob's shallow defense of it to shame.
Nah, Mauler sucks major ass. Rags and Wolf are both bigoted pieces of shit not worth listening to.
Name calling isn't an argument. I could not only say the same thing about Bob and show tweets to back it up, but ad hominems aren't terribly convincing.
I'm sorry, I don't think that someone who takes hours to nitpick Last Jedi and then turns around to praise Infinity War to high heavens has anything worthwhile to say.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
Alarien said:
hentropy said:
Alarien said:
Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.
And the problem is, that's the thing people don't typically like about the military. The idea of blindly following orders regardless of how dumb they are (or worse, how cruel they are) all because the military has some pseudo-religious devotion to the idea of chain of command is not one that resonates with people.
However, you are skipping right past my point, which was not about what we think of Holdo's orders, but Poe's behavior.
I might agree with you, but I didn't want to spend time going over pacing and plot structure. At least to me, a lot of the reason the Poe/Holdo stuff is weird is because of the way to conflict is structured. The conflict is one that has been used many times, ego-driven hotshot gets taken down by reality and finds out there's more to things than just being talented. Poe is never really established as a foolhardy hotshot though. We cheer when the space-killing ship gets blown up, as it makes the sacrifices worth it. Leia being upset because he didn't follow orders just seems weird considering how much of an objective success the mission was. They could have easily cleaned this up by having Poe do something obviously stupid and unnecessary, even if he still comes out a hero.

Then with the scenes wit Holdo, it never really seems like we have enough time to make up our minds about whether Holdo or Poe is right or wrong, because it becomes all about the conflict rather than the events around it. The reason why so many reacted to this badly is because Poe was the one who seemed more in the right, as we're given no logical reason why he's wrong. And he's not protesting because he's just a big baby hotshot pilot, but out of a seemingly genuine and understandable concern for his comrades. We're left to wonder, like Poe, whether Holdo really does have a secret plan, or whether she's just improvising and projecting her authority as a way to mask the fact she had no real plan (something that happens all the time in real life), or even worse, whether she secretly working for the Empire. The subplot would have worked much better had the characters fit more traditional archetypes for the traditional conflict. He could have subverted the conflict more, had Holdo admit that maybe she didn't fully know what to do and having a pilot gripe at her every step of the way wasn't helping. Show some shred of humanity, I dunno. Of course the conclusion only raises more "nitpicky" questions as to why they couldn't get a droid to push the lightspeed button or just do it automatically, but I don't mind bending logic for heroic self-sacrifice if it was earned. It wasn't earned.

But bringing it back to theme, I do agree with Bob that theme is the most important thing here. Which leaves us to wonder what Johnson was trying to say or accomplish with this storyline. That's why I bring up fascism and totalitarianism, because that's the only clear message of this subplot: trust authority and follow orders against your own sense of morality and instinct. I don't think that's what Johnson intended, but that begs the question as to what DID intend. The only thing I can think of is he wanted to make a shallow feminist appeal, but turning "Daddy Knows Best" into "Mommy Knows Best" isn't feminist or progressive in my opinion.
 

Gennadios

New member
Aug 19, 2009
1,157
0
0
Gizen said:
Gennadios said:
Nu Star Wars isn't viewed positively.
This is something the internet has to get over itself about. TLJ is viewed extremely positively by the movie going public at large. Just because an extremely vocal minority doesn't like something, doesn't mean the silent majority who can't be bothered to argue over internet forums agrees.
I realize that I'm probably in the minority on here, but I see aggregate user reviews as a better indicator than critic reviews, and the user scores on Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic paint a different story.

Either way, I'm not shopping for an argument, which one of us is right won't be apparent until Ep. 9 comes out.
 

Tsun Tzu

Feuer! Sperrfeuer! Los!
Legacy
May 3, 2020
1,620
80
33
Country
Free-Dom
I'm not really surprised to see this video, considering the guy in question specifically called out Bob as "one of the good ones" in terms of producing content like this.

But yeah, suffice it to say, agree to disagree.
Windknight said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
They do a few of his videos.

There's a lot of banter and back and forth too. But, yeah, 5 hours.

Was an enjoyable listen while I was driving up to Michigan the other week.
 

vallorn

Tunnel Open, Communication Open.
Nov 18, 2009
2,307
0
0
Blachman201 said:
EDIT: And for the record, I think that Knights of the Old Republic II had already done all the most interesting things TLJ tried to do, and it also did it so much better that it isn't even funny.
Apathy is death.

P.S. Kreia is the best character in all of Star Wars.
Aiddon said:
darkrage6 said:
Personally I don't think Cage is a "hack" at all, I think he's a damn good writer, Laura Kate Dale did an excellent review on Detroit:http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/24/detroit-become-human-succeeds-by-focusing-on-small-timely-stories

I actually think most of what Bob said can apply to the people whining about Cage's writing having "plot holes", for me I was too absorbed into the storyline of his games to give two shits about plot holes.
No, Cage is a genuine hack both in game design and writing. I wasn't even getting into plot holes with Cage, more about his themes are dumb and he can't actually tell a story worth a damn. Like our own Yahtzee said in his review of Detroit, one of the twists he brings up is how the child the nanny bot runs away with also turns out to be a robot. That completely undermines and actual, interesting question of "can a robot mother truly love a human child." Why would you do that? It makes no sense.

And that's before you get into his uncomfortable writing, his treatment of women and minorities in his narratives, and his reliance on lazy cliches. And if we're going to do the "well, look at what this critic says!", I raise you Heather Alexandra, Kirk Hamilton, and Evan Narcisse:

https://kotaku.com/1826578490

https://kotaku.com/detroit-become-human-the-kotaku-review-1826277408

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-casual-inhumanity-of-how-detroit-become-human-uses-1826776147

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-opening-of-detroit-become-human-is-some-dumb-butt-1826270803

Yeah, I can play that game too, it's not hard. And the funny thing about Detroit's main theme: most of its fandom doesn't care, even admitting its political commentary is awful and just wants to ship characters:

https://kotaku.com/the-super-fans-of-detroit-become-human-hate-most-of-th-1828260985

Cage is not very good at his job.
I think "Cage is a hack" is a nigh universal opinion round here. He manages to both go overboard in his themes and also sell them short, he may as well be screaming his themes at you from an android cabin at the back of the bus most of the time.
 

Dalisclock

Making lemons combustible again
Legacy
Apr 18, 2020
6,637
1,283
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
hentropy said:
Alarien said:
hentropy said:
Alarien said:
Look guys, if you're complaining that Holdo could have fixed everything by explaining all of her plans to Dameron, then you really don't understand the military. Oh, and yes, the Resistance, in all depictions, attempts to behave like a military, just as the Alliance did.
And the problem is, that's the thing people don't typically like about the military. The idea of blindly following orders regardless of how dumb they are (or worse, how cruel they are) all because the military has some pseudo-religious devotion to the idea of chain of command is not one that resonates with people.
However, you are skipping right past my point, which was not about what we think of Holdo's orders, but Poe's behavior.
I might agree with you, but I didn't want to spend time going over pacing and plot structure. At least to me, a lot of the reason the Poe/Holdo stuff is weird is because of the way to conflict is structured. The conflict is one that has been used many times, ego-driven hotshot gets taken down by reality and finds out there's more to things than just being talented. Poe is never really established as a foolhardy hotshot though. We cheer when the space-killing ship gets blown up, as it makes the sacrifices worth it. Leia being upset because he didn't follow orders just seems weird considering how much of an objective success the mission was. They could have easily cleaned this up by having Poe do something obviously stupid and unnecessary, even if he still comes out a hero.
It really doesn't help either that it appears Poe did exactly what he was expected to do. He went out there, Trolled the First Order(that might have been his own idea) and then did a maneuver to take out the AAA guns on the huge ass warship, clearing the way for the bombers to blow it up. The fact all the bombers were lost taking it out is then blamed on Poe, which begs the question 1.) Why use such a shitty design to begin with? and 2.) Why have them ready to go if they weren't meant to be used?

It comes across like high command was setting Poe up to fail if they told him to go execute this plan to blow up the super-cap ship and then immediately punish him when he succeeds(albeit with heavy losses). Granted, Poe then goes and immediately starts mouthing off to the nearest flag officer in full view of everyone on the bridge, which was a mistake on his part and he really should know better. But it's easy to see why he felt frustrated.

It's a small example of some of my frustrations with this film, which Ironically, I still enjoyed, but I honestly can't say I consider it a good movie because of how many flaws it has.
 

NerfedFalcon

Level i Flare!
Apr 3, 2020
6,527
161
68
Gender
Male
Question:
If you had a choice between a game that's fun to play but has a story that you actively dislike and can't skip, or a game that's boring or not fun to play but has a story you enjoy, which one would you play?
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
Dalisclock said:
It really doesn't help either that it appears Poe did exactly what he was expected to do. He went out there, Trolled the First Order(that might have been his own idea) and then did a maneuver to take out the AAA guns on the huge ass warship, clearing the way for the bombers to blow it up. The fact all the bombers were lost taking it out is then blamed on Poe, which begs the question 1.) Why use such a shitty design to begin with? and 2.) Why have them ready to go if they weren't meant to be used?
There are so many issues with that sequence. Poe cuts his... microphone/receiver and ALL the attack run follows him in despite the direct orders of the admiralty? Was his ship the only one capable of receiving communications from the flagship?

Second, next to no time passes. The bombers are clearly visible and the ties are scrambling, THEN the order is given to retreat... all bombers were lost on the attack run, did they somehow think the bombers would survive the trip back to the fleet?

Third, the bombers themselves "dropping" their payload... in space... where there is no gravity... who the fuck designed those things?
 

Dalisclock

Making lemons combustible again
Legacy
Apr 18, 2020
6,637
1,283
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Abomination said:
Dalisclock said:
It really doesn't help either that it appears Poe did exactly what he was expected to do. He went out there, Trolled the First Order(that might have been his own idea) and then did a maneuver to take out the AAA guns on the huge ass warship, clearing the way for the bombers to blow it up. The fact all the bombers were lost taking it out is then blamed on Poe, which begs the question 1.) Why use such a shitty design to begin with? and 2.) Why have them ready to go if they weren't meant to be used?
There are so many issues with that sequence. Poe cuts his... microphone/receiver and ALL the attack run follows him in despite the direct orders of the admiralty? Was his ship the only one capable of receiving communications from the flagship?

Second, next to no time passes. The bombers are clearly visible and the ties are scrambling, THEN the order is given to retreat... all bombers were lost on the attack run, did they somehow think the bombers would survive the trip back to the fleet?

Third, the bombers themselves "dropping" their payload... in space... where there is no gravity... who the fuck designed those things?
Yeah, those are all other issues with that sequence alone. Especially #3, which makes no sense at all in universe and seems to exist because someone thought it would be cool to do WW2 Heavy Bomber Formations IN SPACE. You know, the same reason guided missles are pretty much never used in the movies despite the fact it would make a lot more sense then the AAA cannons on Capital ships that can't seem to hit anything.
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
34,595
1,213
118
leet_x1337 said:
Question:
If you had a choice between a game that's fun to play but has a story that you actively dislike and can't skip, or a game that's boring or not fun to play but has a story you enjoy, which one would you play?
I've already made that choice before. The latter option.
 

Dalisclock

Making lemons combustible again
Legacy
Apr 18, 2020
6,637
1,283
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
leet_x1337 said:
Question:
If you had a choice between a game that's fun to play but has a story that you actively dislike and can't skip, or a game that's boring or not fun to play but has a story you enjoy, which one would you play?
What a choice. Not being able to skip a wretched story would drag down the game despite good gameplay, while a game with a good story but isn't particularly enjoyable to play might as well be just be watched on youtube.

Ideally I'd say they can both go to hell though it's rare I've played a game where the story was so terrible to overpower the fun gameplay(though MGSV came really close, but at least the cutcenes were skippable) or the gameplay so awful to make it not worth it to enjoy the story(The first Witcher is really close to fulfilling this).
 

Kolby Jack

Come at me scrublord, I'm ripped
Apr 29, 2011
2,519
0
0
CrazyGirl17 said:
I admit to liking Cinema Sins but I don't take it seriously. I do kinda prefer its counterpart Cinema Wins, which is more positive and also goes into detail of why the movie is so good.

Also as a wannabe writer, the fear of plotholes in said writing makes it tricky to even do it since people nowadays are critical about that sort of thing.

(Also I can't be the only one who got the reference in the title, right?)
I also like Cinema Wins (fell out of love hard with cinema sins though), but disagree with your wording a bit. I like it not because it shows how a movie is good, but instead how someone could end up liking the movie. Cinema wins covers a lot of poorly received films. There are several movies I like that I wouldn't call good, but them being bad is also not why I like them. I just like them, unironically. Justice League would be one example; I saw it in theaters and honestly loved just about everything in it, yet also I fully understood why so many others would hate it.
 

Dak_N_Jaxter

New member
Oct 23, 2009
215
0
0
1. While you've made your feelings on the 90s quite clear, were you at all into the 90s animated Marvel shows on FOX? If so, how do you feel they hold up against / compare to newer iterations?
 

Gizen

New member
Nov 17, 2009
279
0
0
Gennadios said:
Gizen said:
Gennadios said:
Nu Star Wars isn't viewed positively.
This is something the internet has to get over itself about. TLJ is viewed extremely positively by the movie going public at large. Just because an extremely vocal minority doesn't like something, doesn't mean the silent majority who can't be bothered to argue over internet forums agrees.
I realize that I'm probably in the minority on here, but I see aggregate user reviews as a better indicator than critic reviews, and the user scores on Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic paint a different story.
Review aggregate sites, by their very nature of letting anybody leave their opinion, are highly vulnerable to things like review bombing. A small group of persistent and pissed off people can wage a campaign to tank any movie or game's score (or vice versa).

Wanna know what's even better than user reviews for judging how much people like something? Sales numbers. Despite the supposedly bad word of mouth, The Last Jedi did absurd box office numbers. Even if you want to make the argument that negative word of mouth spread too slowly to prevent box office success, if TLJ was truly as unpopular as you want to believe, then surely nobody would be buying home video copies of the film. Afterall, why would people buy a movie that they supposedly think is trash? And yet it's the best selling blu-ray of the year. The majority of the movie going public either does not have a problem with the film, or does not view its problems as a big deal, otherwise they wouldn't still be buying it long after all those 'problems' have been made apparent and bitched about on the internet since the movie came out.
 

CrazyGirl17

I am a banana!
Sep 11, 2009
5,145
0
0
Kolby Jack said:
CrazyGirl17 said:
I admit to liking Cinema Sins but I don't take it seriously. I do kinda prefer its counterpart Cinema Wins, which is more positive and also goes into detail of why the movie is so good.

Also as a wannabe writer, the fear of plotholes in said writing makes it tricky to even do it since people nowadays are critical about that sort of thing.

(Also I can't be the only one who got the reference in the title, right?)
I also like Cinema Wins (fell out of love hard with cinema sins though), but disagree with your wording a bit. I like it not because it shows how a movie is good, but instead how someone could end up liking the movie. Cinema wins covers a lot of poorly received films. There are several movies I like that I wouldn't call good, but them being bad is also not why I like them. I just like them, unironically. Justice League would be one example; I saw it in theaters and honestly loved just about everything in it, yet also I fully understood why so many others would hate it.
That's probably a better way to look at it, I never though of it like that... so thanks.

(Also for the Q and A)
So Bob,
*What made you want to get into the reviewing business to begin with?
*What have you been doing in your time away from the Escapist?
*What do you think of the current state of comic books? (Maybe keep it short please?)
*Are there any modern cartoons you like? (ie the Ducktales reboot)

Feel free to answer any one of these, you don't have to answer them all.
 

Exley97_v1legacy

New member
Jul 9, 2014
217
0
0
I'll just throw some fuel on the fire here and say I *LOVE* The Last Jedi and after repeated viewings I think it my be my favorite, surpassing Empire.

And yes, I understand all of the structural issues and questions people have pointed out here, and I really don't care. Just as I don't care about the issues with Empire (Wait, there's an Emperor? Who is this guy? He was never mentioned in a New Hope! Hold on, when did Vader realize Luke was his long lost son? Why didn't he just use the force to prevent Luke from jumping? How does Luke just....escape from Hoth casually while the whole Empire is surrounding the planet/looking for him? Why the hell did the Empire just disable the Falcon's hyperdrive? Why not just DESTROY it if you're worried about Luke and company trying to escape? And don't even get me started on the Battle of Hoth...)
 

PsychedelicDiamond

Wild at Heart and weird on top
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,536
175
68
Exley97 said:
(Wait, there's an Emperor? Who is this guy? He was never mentioned in a New Hope!
He was, actually. There was a throwaway line by... either Tarkin or some other imperial officer about the Emperor having dissolved the senate.
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
leet_x1337 said:
Question:
If you had a choice between a game that's fun to play but has a story that you actively dislike and can't skip, or a game that's boring or not fun to play but has a story you enjoy, which one would you play?
Both

Fallout 4 has a really bad story - and its built into the gameplay in a painfully unskipable fashion - but the rest of the gameplay is really fun

Games like Spec Ops: The Line has intentionally meh gameplay, but a riveting story, to the point that the shitty cookie-cutter gameplay is actually an intentional part of the experience


My point is: you can get away flaws like that - if the other qualities of your product is good enough, and you're lucky enough that the bad qualities don't overshadow it
 

Frankfurter4444

New member
Aug 11, 2009
168
0
0
Good stuff, now on to the questions!

What video game system/video games do you currently have/are currently playing?
 

Bedinsis

Elite Member
Legacy
Escapist +
May 27, 2020
511
61
33
Country
Sverige
Through your videos Bob I've learned of the history of Hollywood, and in particular how the 70's was the era were movie studios tried risky ventures on movies deemed higher risks due to there not being any safe bets left in the movie business. This lead to one of the most creatively vibrant eras were auteur driven projects were the rule of the land, and films that would never have seen the light of day earlier were given the go-ahead. This due to Hollywood at large being slow at adapting to changing tastes.

I'm bringing this up because when I look over the Zero Punctuation reviews of this year I see an awful lot of indie games, i.e. games made by teams small enough that they can afford to take more risks and tackle less conventional material. Meanwhile as far as AAA-games go I am more reminded of loot box controversies and Ubisoft's "standard yearly releases" of good, but safe games. My question is thus:

Do you think we're we're about to see a major shift in what games get major push-back in awareness and marketing, similar to the movie business in the 70's?

Alternatively, if you think that question is to difficult to fit into your show format/too specific to be meaningfully answered:

How do you think indie games will affect/is affecting the video game business?

Edit: Thinking about it, feel free to reformulate the question whichever way you choose. The key component is that I'm curious if the 70's film scene can be reasonably compared to the present day indie game scene.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
While I mostly agree, it does nag me when I can't disceren any level of sense. Indiana Jones didn't know he needed to sit out Raisers, but it seems like Poe Dameron doesn't just do some stupid things, but undergoes a radical personality change because someone needed to be the idiot who started a mutiny. And it also seems like the reason this was done was to largely bring him back to who he was before. It'd be like Indiana Jones starring in a movie where he had to re-learn Nazis were bad or something.

Samtemdo8 said:
You prefer Kirk over Picard?

To me that's like choosing between my children.

And I have yet to see Deep Space 9 to see if Sisko can even compete.
If my children were Kirk and Picard, it'd be an easy one. Kirk is objectively better, based on the only logical criteria: I prefer him.
 

Scott-Spain

New member
Sep 23, 2012
3
0
0
Question
What IP/media is surprisingly under-represented in Movies?

Sidenote: It is so weird to have logged in after not even visiting this site in such a long time. Welcome back, guys!
 

pineappledan

New member
May 7, 2012
1
0
0
I know this is just personal opinion, and I fully agree that most nitpicking film criticism is pointless, pedantic over-intellectualizing, but I cannot get behind this being used as a defense of Star Wars VIII. I only watched the movie once, and I was just so constantly distracted by the bizarre physics, logic, plot progression, design choices, characterization and dialogue in the film.

- Why did the director decide that the opening dialogue of the movie should be a "Yo' mama" joke?
- Why did the director decide that the first action scene of the film should be a tech demo of a character's impregnable plot armor? He single-handedly destroys every point-defense turret on a massive capital ship using a single fighter? Why does the director spend the first 5 minutes driving home the fact that this character is invulnerable?
- Why did the director have the droid smash its face into a circuit board to keep the ship flying? Was that supposed to be funny? What did that slapstick routine add to the film?
- Why do bombs drop in space? Why do bombers in space send a payload DOWN?
- Why do 2 capital ships that are of completely different make and model have cruising speeds that are exactly the same? The entire 2nd and 3rd acts of the film takes place over 18 hours of in-universe time, where neither ship has eith erpulled away or gained on the other. Do they put governors on spaceships?
- How did the director decide that having characters zip in and out on 3 separate occasions would keep tension on this whole chase thing? How can I believe there is any risk to any character when they can all come and go freely?
- Why didn't they just park the space ship legally on the casino planet? Their entire breakout/chase scene was to get out of the galactic equivalent of jaywalking.
- why do the laser blasts arc in space like cannon balls? Why does the director seem utterly convinced that gravity works like that in space?
- Why does everyone seem so damn pleased with themselves at the end, when >300 of their friends are dead, and there are ~15 people left on a rinky-dink, 50+ year old shuttle? That was the story equivalent of watching a car crash kill 5 people, but then telling the audience to be happy because the paramedic gave the lone survivor a lollipop.
- Why is there still only a single recurring alien with a speaking role in 2 films? Why do these star wars movies not have any alien characters in them?
- Why is Holdo's main motive "follow orders unquestionably", when the bad guys are space-nazis? Wasn't that, like, the one lesson real-life nazis taught us, to question authority and not just blindly follow orders? Her entire character undermines any possible attempt at an anti-fascist message.
- Why did the director tease a better movie inside his movie? "The Sith, The Jedi, let it all die." Yes. You teased an actual narrative, thematic, and philosophical progression in Star Wars, and then threw it away to reenact the Battle of Hoth instead.
- "...........salt." -wut? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGILNrrruPk)

That's just the stuff I could think of off the top of my head. It was really a death by a thousand cuts for RotJ; I could hardly watch the movie because I just kept getting taken out by these bizarre decisions.
 

Kenji_03

New member
May 12, 2007
134
0
0
Q&A - What does Bob think the odds of "Mexican Superman" becoming a thing in the DC-CU?

It worked really well in "Justice League: Gods and Monsters", and Mexican-immigrant Superman speaks to the "American way" in 2018 about as much as being "just a poor corn farmer" in the 1930s. But I don't know how Hollywood's "old guard" execs would feel about that vs the potential profits and new blood it could bring in.

I would love to hear your take on that (largely in response to your recent big picture discussion of Black superman instead of Mexican superman).
 

RealRT

New member
Feb 28, 2014
1,058
0
0
If constant search for plotholes results in less movies as abhorrent as The Last Jedi (and make no mistake, the movie is a complete and utter pile of garbage), what are the drawbacks, again?
 

HazardousCube

New member
Apr 20, 2017
44
0
0
Q&A
You might be asked this A lot but I'm genuinely curious. Why did you come back to The Escapist? I assumed your YouTube career would've allowed what you do here and on your own terms.

Also what is your favorite videogame movie if you have one?
 

HazardousCube

New member
Apr 20, 2017
44
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
Not gonna lie. I hate those people. Mauler's 5 hour critique of The Last Jedi was the point of the video taken to its logical conclusion. Dishonored Wolf decided to not give his channel anything that makes him stand out other than making gay jokes about himself and Rags is just awful. I'm okay with people being unwavering in their views, but Rags is just condescending about it.
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,578
0
0
Windknight said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
Yeah I?m curious about that too; how do you need 300 minutes to break down 13 minutes? That?s fucking insane.
 

HazardousCube

New member
Apr 20, 2017
44
0
0
Gordon_4 said:
Windknight said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
Yeah I?m curious about that too; how do you need 300 minutes to break down 13 minutes? That?s fucking insane.
This is their usual MO. I have not seen the video, but one thing these channels are infamous for is talking non-stop. Mauler is extremely nitpicky, Dishonored Wolf has a lot to say (to put it nicely). and Rags cuts people off halfway through each sentence. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case
 

Tsun Tzu

Feuer! Sperrfeuer! Los!
Legacy
May 3, 2020
1,620
80
33
Country
Free-Dom
Gordon_4 said:
Windknight said:
Samtemdo8 said:
Patrick's video became viral because of Mauler's 5 hour long stream criticising it:


Honestly to me this is gonna soon create precendent where everyone are gonna now criticize youtube critic's videos when it comes to movies and tv. Making video responses to other videos.
on the one hand I've never heard of this takedown till now, but I absolutely saw the 'shut up about plot holes' video. On the other hand

... 5 HOURS criticising a 13 minute video?

Five. Full. Hours. That's over TWENTY times as long as the thing their critiquing.

(disclaimer - not actually watched the video (again FIVE HOURS) so if they don't actually spend all that FIVE HOURS on on 13 minute video, feel free to mock me for jumping to conclusions)
Yeah I?m curious about that too; how do you need 300 minutes to break down 13 minutes? That?s fucking insane.
Well, it was two videos. One about 13:30 and another about 11:30. So, 25 minutes. Along with going over and breaking down a couple long comments from YourMovieSucks that were refuting the original video.

And, yes, 300 minutes. It was that shit of a pair of videos.

When you have to pause after almost every sentence because they're that ridiculous, it can prolong the process quite a bit.

But...yeah, long as all fuck. Had folks in the chat pointing that out constantly and they did too.
HazardousCube said:
This is their usual MO. I have not seen the video, but one thing these channels are infamous for is talking non-stop. Mauler is extremely nitpicky, Dishonored Wolf has a lot to say (to put it nicely). and Rags cuts people off halfway through each sentence. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case
Mauler actually did most of the interrupting, though I'm sure not intentionally. They all like to talk, so it just happens. Rags was pretty quiet/polite. Wolf sperged out a bit at the end when YMS was in the chat.
 

Naqel

New member
Nov 21, 2009
345
0
0
RealRT said:
If constant search for plotholes results in less movies as abhorrent as The Last Jedi (and make no mistake, the movie is a complete and utter pile of garbage), what are the drawbacks, again?
Well, you see, movies that "push an agenda" will inherently have some "plotholes" and other gaps in logic, that would be doubleplusungood if those were to be pointed out by someone.
 

ineptelephant

New member
Sep 22, 2017
3
0
0
Something Amyss said:
While I mostly agree, it does nag me when I can't disceren any level of sense. Indiana Jones didn't know he needed to sit out Raisers, but it seems like Poe Dameron doesn't just do some stupid things, but undergoes a radical personality change because someone needed to be the idiot who started a mutiny. And it also seems like the reason this was done was to largely bring him back to who he was before.
Its like watching Archer all over again.

It seems to me that the new trilogy fittingly has nothing new to offer. Frankly, the original films weren't the kind of in-depth intellectual powerhouses that warranted a trilogy of introspection, which is a polite way of putting it considering the blatent copy-paste. Battle of Hoth pt.2, new deathstar with a dumb weakness, leading jedi master sacrifices himself to distract the sith villain whom he formally taught and etc. The high camp archetypical moralising space western was never a particularly sophisticated story to begin with and the subversion card has already been played for Rogue One.

Fair enough to everyone that enjoyed it, I found both movies incredibly dull and somewhat insulting to my memory (the Luke fakeout especially, jesus. Should've gone all the way and had Kylo say "But now, I am the master!") but that's the infinite multiplicity of subjective opinion for you.
 

Henkie36

New member
Aug 25, 2010
678
0
0
Well, I actually think that Beauty and the Beast remake is an interesting example here, because while yes, it does in fact try to fix some of the perceived 'plot holes' of the original, it's very hard to deny that it ended up in far worse shape because of it. In the words of Yahtzee: "Talk about side-stepping a pothole only to fall off a bridge." And yes, I would also like to point out that Disney didn't fix the one thematic issue that animated movie had: "I want adventure in the great wide somewhere," which is a throughline that doesn't really go anywhere. But there is the simple fact that the remake ended up being so messy is an interesting discussion about the current marketing strategy of Disney is playing it safe and angling for nostalgia dollars while also wanting to acknowledge the fanboys, but in order to properly do so, first you have to acknowledge what is wrong with said movie, which inevitably entails a discussion of the plotholes dug in order to collect the dirt to fill up the previous ones.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
ineptelephant said:
Its like watching Archer all over again.
"Do you want Sith? Because this is how you get Sith!"

It seems to me that the new trilogy fittingly has nothing new to offer. Frankly, the original films weren't the kind of in-depth intellectual powerhouses that warranted a trilogy of introspection, which is a polite way of putting it considering the blatent copy-paste. Battle of Hoth pt.2, new deathstar with a dumb weakness, leading jedi master sacrifices himself to distract the sith villain whom he formally taught and etc. The high camp archetypical moralising space western was never a particularly sophisticated story to begin with and the subversion card has already been played for Rogue One.

Fair enough to everyone that enjoyed it, I found both movies incredibly dull and somewhat insulting to my memory (the Luke fakeout especially, jesus. Should've gone all the way and had Kylo say "But now, I am the master!") but that's the infinite multiplicity of subjective opinion for you.
For the most part I'm fine with the shared beats. Lucas made it clear before the prequels even came out that the saga doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme. And by the time we get the crossed sabers before Senator Palpatine's face in a totally-not-foreshadowing moment, he'd really beaten that point to death.

It largely comes down to perspective, but I at least found the sequel trilogy to be fun so far. I could live without the dumb phone jokes, could really live without a casino planet side excursion, and think much of of the conflict in TLJ was driven by sheer stupidity, but at least I wasn't bored like I was during the prequels. Well, I mean, TLJ was too long for the content and desperately needed an edit and I checked my phone several times to see what time it was, and that still managed to be better than my response to AOC.

I don't know. I think part of it is just that I never had the same reverence for Star Wars a lot of fans seem to have. I grew up on them, but they were dumb fun space cowboys and samurai movies. I remember when I was five or six and saw the movies in revival and was blown away by the visual spectacle, the silly fun, and the visual spectacle.

But that's also kind of the thing: if I'm entertained, I'm far less likely to care about the dumb moments or the plot holes or just the cludgier moments of a movie. So when I'm paying attention to the cracks, it probably means I'm not entertained. And while I've watched TFA more times than I've watched the prequels combined, one viewing of TLJ gave me enough down time to really go "this is dumb," "this doesn't make sense," and "I want a porg." Okay, that lat one isn't really a bad thing.

And while none of that automatically equals plot holes, I do think it enters into the territory of "why people had problems with the movie."
 

ewhac

Digital Spellweaver
Legacy
Escapist +
May 12, 2020
575
0
1
San Francisco Peninsula
Country
USA
So. Bob...

[ul][li]Approximately what percentage of your time these days is consumed creating Web content? I only ask because sometimes there were long gaps between movie reviews and episodes of In Bob We Trust, and I've mused to myself, "Well, dude probably has a day job..."[/li]
[li]Does your current arrangement with The Escapist impose any time limits on your videos? Back in the day, your videos were all five minutes or less, presumably to control bandwidth/storage costs.[/li]
[li]Gratuitous Tech-philia: What kind of A/V equipment do you use to make your videos?[/li]
[li]I recently fired up the Really That Bad trilogy again (all four hours). Are you still glad you did it? Has the demon finally been purged from your psyche?[/li]
[li]Have you thought about a series covering vintage TV shows? I'm thinking in particular of things like Space: 1999, UFO, The Prisoner, Voyage to The Bottom of The Sea, The Six Million Dollar Man, etc. Or is this more The Nostalgia Critic's territory?[/li]
[li]Any chance of new episodes of The Game Overthinker? And on that note...[/li]
[li]Flagrantly Gratuitous Self-Promotion: Have you by any chance seen this: https://youtu.be/lwniiqhux4g It's a "response video" to your Game Overthinker "Top Ten Consoles of All Time" video, addressing what I deemed a conspicuous omission...[/li]
[/ul]
 

K12

New member
Dec 28, 2012
943
0
0
Orekoya said:
A lot of truth in this video. And for some reason Cinema Sins has rampant misogyny when it comes to writing their sins, with an almost active hatred of Scarlett Johansson in particular. Edit: Also remembered watching a video last year specifically about why Cinema Sins is bad in many different ways so gonna include this link for those that might wonder why people that series is trash.

I checked out of CinemaSins really early after their Avatar video contained the sentence "If Michelle Rodriguez were a women then I would fuck her"... and then gave the film a "Sin" for that... somehow.

If you like CinemaSin bashing I'd also suggest the following videos nitpicking the hell out of their videos with a kind of tired amusement that is way funnier than any of their videos have ever been.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qxgkOIsHUs
 

300lb. Samoan

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,765
0
0
HI BOB!!!!! Long time listener, first time caller.... well not actually, but I'm happy to reactivate my account after 5 years to ask you this VERY important and timely question:

IF 'Buckaroo Bonzai' was rebooted, how would you fix it? Obviously, no one wants this to happen, because it would be destined for ruination by the Hollywood machinery BUT... how cool would it be if MOVIEBOB could be the architect behind a BUCKAROO BONZAI CINEMATIC UNIVERSE! What do you think Hollywood would get wrong, and how would you do it differently? I'd love to know who you'd cast, what direction the story might take, what tone the movies would have, who might get a spin-off movie... how many films could it sustain? How many 'phases' could the BBCU potentially go through? What sort of Twitter controversies might the cast and crew run up against?

Anyway, I spent the last three days trying to think of a great question and I'm hoping this will catch your attention. You're a voice of reason in these trying times, I'm glad Esc had the decency to reconsider publishing your work. It was some long awaited and much needed good news, not just for me I'm sure!

Your fan,
-BigNickOnTheDrum (youtube handle)