What is the difference between "Smart" and "Ponderous"?

[Burnouts3s3]

I like watching the Big Picture and Escape to the movies.

But, lately, I've heard of a distinction that I don't quite understand. It was when Bob was talking about "Why Robocop still rules" and he said the phrase "Not Ponderous, but smart".

I heard the term again when he was talking about his worst of 2013 and mentioning Man of Steel. "Ponderous instead of Smart".

The two movies he's mentioned are Ang Lee's Hulk and Man of Steel. I know what pretentious means, but I'm not sure what ponderous means or why it's necessarily a bad thing.

 

[twistedmic]

Here are the definitions I found of Ponderous
1. moving heavily: lumbering and laborious in movement
2. dull: without liveliness or wit
3. heavy-looking: disproportionately thick and heavy

Definitions one and two seem like the best fit. The original Robocop (film) wasn't a slow or plodding/lumbering movie. It was well-paced and flowed pretty well. It was also lively and certainly had wit.

 

[PFCboom]

So, Merriam-Webster says that ponderous means:
1: of very great weight

2: unwieldy or clumsy because of weight and size

3: oppressively or unpleasantly dull : lifeless

As near as I can tell, when using the word "ponderous" in the aforementioned context, he's talking about how a movie might have some ideas, but goes nowhere with them. Man of Steel probably came up with more than a few interesting ideas (never seen it, won't see it until the Rifftrax comes out) but didn't follow through with them, at least not to any satisfactory degree.
On the other hand, I might be talking out of my ass. I do that sometimes, on the weekends.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Good example of a movie that's both smart and ponderous: Star Trek: The Motion Picture. "Smart" movies have a tendency to be ponderous, but it's not a given. For that matter a bad enough dumb movie could manage to pull off the ponderous without the smart. The Room might be an example, if the unintentional comedy didn't turn it into a laugh riot.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Well, I'd think 'smart' is quick thinking, and 'ponderous' is overthinking.

 

[kurupt87]

To ponder something is to carefully think about it.

Being ponderous however means you've taken being careful too far and have become too slow. So, ponderous loses the thinking and careful parts to its meaning and becomes just another synonym for slow (though one with undertones of being dimwitted).

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Well, I'd think 'smart' is quick thinking, and 'ponderous' is overthinking.

Well said. I'd say ponderous movies try to oversell their ideas without actually doing anything with them, going all "HERE, LOOK HOW DEEP WE ARE! WE ARE SMART!", while genuinely smart movies have their ideas in the background without addressing them or even the viewer noticing them the first time, while going somewhere with them.

 

[SoranMBane]

"Ponderous" is what a story becomes when it's trying to be smart, but just ends up being slow-paced, overly-long, and (worst of all) boring instead. Ponderous stories are usually not nearly as smart as they think they are, because any writer too incompetent to properly pace their story probably isn't smart enough to tackle that story's subject matter in any compelling way.

 

[Dr. Cakey]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say he used the word "ponderous" because the word "pretentious" has been abused beyond what modern medical science can heal.

I like it as word play, though. "Ponderous" as in 'dull', but evoking "ponder" as in 'think'. So "dull-thinking" as opposed to "boring movie".

I like. I like it.

 

[Ieyke]

Why did you need a thread for this? Any dictionary could tell you they're basically antonyms.
Something smart/witty/on-point is essentially the opposite of something dull/clumsy/slow-witted/ponderous.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Whether or not you like the delivery?

That's the first answer to come to mind since one man's smart is another man's ponderous, but I think in the experienced movie critic's eyes, ponderous means tons of exposition delivered for something that a mere handful of lines or visual hints could have shown. Could have shown, that is, to someone experienced enough to read between the lines and pick up on visual/other cues. Too often critics forget what the average Hollywood audience is like, who won't be able to pick up on any of the 'smart' stuff.

I guess the equivalent of ponderous in a book would reiterate the same plot point repeatedly in case you forgot, and a smart one would explain something once then expand on other things, assuming you can keep everything straight yourself. In Bob's review of the new Robocop he says that in one of first scenes, the main villain is in his office giving a lengthy monologue basically saying 'I'm the head of OCP and I'm pure evil'. A smart film would let his actions and the way he talks to other people out of public speak for themselves. Unless it's a Disney villain song, in which case I might excuse it, but even then they usually talk about more than just 'I'm evil'.

 

[elvor0]

He likely made a mistake using the word 'ponderous' due to the word 'ponder'. In this case he probably should've used insightful or contemplative instead.

At least that's how I understand it, though I might just be overthinking this and it has been a while since I saw that episode, so I might be remembering it wrong.
Until I saw someone post the definition of ponderous, I thought it was an adjective version of ponder.

He meant ponderous as a negative. The quote was "NOT ponderous; smart". It's still correct as a phrase. Something can be ponderous if it meanders about slowly without really doing much. An example: The Dark Knight Rises is ponderous, it has a message, but has no idea how to deliver it other than trying to slam you in the face with it till you get it, however it doesn't have anything of substance to say about it, and eventually drags it out, there's no pay off and then they forget about it, or it gets flipped on its head because the story and the message are at odds. They channel occupy wall street, then Batman ends up saving everyone anyway, despite being part of the 1%.

Robocop on the other hand, (no I'm not pretending it's Shakespeare but it is the OP topic and it's a reasonable comparison), is somewhat smarter, it has a message but it's not so blunt, it's there but is a little more subtle, it's in the background for you to think about or interpret yourself not just go: LOOK THE 1% ARE EVIL HATE THEM! HATE THEM! AND MILITARY STUFF IS BAD! HATE IT HATE IT! Like in DKR and the new Robocop. Omnicorp in the original arn't really that evil, they're not exactly good, but no less so than most oil corporations. Rather than in the new one where they're all mustache twirlingly evil.

The adjective version of ponder is to pontificate. Confusing yes, but that's English for ya. To ponder about something is correct too, but it means you're not really thinking about it that deeply, more sort of...day dreaming.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

The adjective version of ponder is to pontificate. Confusing yes, but that's English for ya. To ponder about something is correct too, but it means you're not really thinking about it that deeply, more sort of...day dreaming.

I never would have thought pontificate is a form of ponder, I thought it was more a form of pontiff, which in addition to being a name for the Pope, was a title for high priests in general in ancient Rome. I kind of figured "Pontificate" would be to do as the pontiffs do, if you catch my drift.

Edit: Yeah, not only is it not a form of "ponder" from what I can tell, but it's a verb, with the equivalent adjective being "pontifical," interestingly enough.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pontificate

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pontifical