|
Post by cyberstrike on Jan 1, 2011 8:20:31 GMT -5
I know MANY people who absolutely hate both Titanic and Avatar because they felt the stories were dull, predicable, and preachy (and for the record these same people they love Cameron's earlier work The Terminator, The Abyss, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Aliens, and True Lies). Titanic works because Cameron makes you care about the characters. IMHO the only reason Avatar was a box office hit was because of it's great 3D effects otherwise it would have never have been as a big of a hit at the box office as it became. Toy Story 3 is a smart, funny, emotionally rewarding and entertaining movie that deals with growing up, change, saying goodbye, and mortality and blows Avatar out of the water. And BTW The Comedian in Watchmen was never hero and never claimed to be one. I didn't see him has one when I first read Watchmen at the age of 13 and I still don't see him as a hero (or even as an anti-hero) now. He was a sociopath period. Tony Stark battling alcoholism is more heroic to me than Iron Man beating up any of his villain. Heroism to me is about overcoming life's problems with what you got to work with and in storytelling that means taking heroes down dark paths, some heroes fall others rise. The people who think Avatar & Titanic are preachy are the people who are anti-establishment anyway. A certain percentage of people will be like Moore who admired he was an anarchist. My problem with the Comedian is that he was accepted into the fold and tolerated. These aren't ant-establishment people and critics these are everyday people who hated Avatar because they felt it was long, boring, dull, preachy, and downright stupid. The only thing that they did like was the 3D effects. Which most likely why many people went back to see it because that is really the best way to expericne 3D is in a theater. No, he wasn't. In the attempted rape secene he is caught in the act by Hooded Justice who then beats the shit out of him. When people learn of his actions he is never accepted by them and he is just barely tolerated and only because of his skills. Titanic is about fictional characters dealing with a historic event, and The Terminator films are about time-traveling people and cyborgs trying to change the future. OK. There is no doubt in my mind that Avatar would have been a box office hit, even Cameron had shot it in 2D but IMHO it was the 3D effects that most people wanted to experince not the story. And most people wanted to experince it in 3D because it's something that is very hard, if not impossible to experince at home. While improvements have been made to bring 3D home is still hard to bring home because even the 3D ready HDTVs that are out on the market right (I know one guy on line who claims his 2007 HDTV is 3D compatible) people either don't know about it or they can't afford it, plus you still need Special Blu-Ray versions of movies and Blu-Ray players to pull off the effect and it will never be as good.
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on Jan 1, 2011 8:26:36 GMT -5
Sorry! Tony Stark battling Alcoholism is indeed overcoming difficulties. I never liked the way the story read, but the hero did persevere. We don't need to revisit that story and have Tony Stark die in a drunk flying accident after he got the monkey off his back. We don't need future storylines about him screwing up again while drunk. When they do stuff like that, it undermines every ounce of importance the original storyline had. They could have him be like someone I know and become too self-righteous and try to stop everyone from drinking simply because he had a problem. I know people who have done that. df1 I know people who cleaned and sobered up and never have a problem with it again but also some people who fall off the wagon and relapse sometimes decades after being clean (Robin Williams for example) due to stress, temptation, or weakness. Tony Stark will never be "cured" of alcoholism, because there is no cure to addiction and to say otherwise is not only stupid but irresponsible to people who are reading and battling addiction by saying there is a cure, when there isn't one, and disrespectful to the intelligence of the fans as well.
|
|
|
Post by bigw1966 on Jan 1, 2011 8:45:26 GMT -5
Regarding the soap opera aspect, As I said before, its nearly impossible to do that now. There have been so many stories told of these characters in their own titles and in crossovers that its virtually impossible to keep it straight. The other factor is that the teams change to quick and each team has their own idea that they are determined to do no matter what may have taken place in a title to render their idea moot. That itself is the biggest problem right there.
The Hellboy books have great continuity. Every title ties to each of the others in a natural way that is continually expanding. Each HB title, each BPRD title, even Witchfinder and The Plague ships, they all tie to the overall narrative.
Ultimate Spidey has a great continuity. Its gone though as far as other books are concerned.
AVATAR was a great flick. It had a solid story (even if the basic plot has been done in some variation in a number of other movies) with ramifications and character growth. It had everything required to draw the viewer in and never break the illusion. To me, that has always been Camerons greatest strength. He never half asses his characters. He goes all the way no matter how ridiculous the Idea is, like Arnold shooting a missle with a terrorist attached off the wing of his Harrier that is hovering outside of a skyscraper. Insane! But, it totally works.
Sad to hear you only read the first couple of chapters of WATCHMEN and gave up. It seems you only looked at the surface of the story and never saw the true meaning of the book or the characters.
Comedian (the rapist) was never accepted by the Minutemen after that event. Hell they barely accepted him before it. All of those characters had the Altruistic outlook that Heroes have except for Dr. Manhatten who was barely human anymore, and the Comedian who was the Realist. He was the one who had seen the true face of the world. He was our dark side. He also marked the first change from the old school hero to the Grim and Gritty type. But, even that was not the purpose of his character, or the others for that matter.
you see, Moore was interested in exploring what type of person would you have to be to put on a cape and cowl. What would your motivation be? Would you be a sociopath?(Comedian) Would you be a sexual deviant?(Sillouhette) A Gay man fighting oppression?(Hooded Justice) An alcoholic with dementia?(The Moth) A career Military Man who wanted to hold on to the glory while hiding his true self (Captain Victory. Someone who wants fame so badly that they will dress in scandelous ways to gain attention (Silk Spetre) Or a girl who after many years is still trying to not only escape the shadow of her mother but also trying to discover her own identity (Silk Spectre II) A man who comes from such a shattered beginning and instills in himself an absolute feeling of right and wrong that leaves no room for a grey area, only to have his Ideals destroyed leaving him with a shattered mind and total loss of self as he tries to rid the world of filth (Rorchach) (BTW, his personality was based off of Steve Ditko who created the Question which Rorchach was based off of who was supposed to be another Batman character) Or a man who decides to be a hero just because that is what everyone else was doing but then after voluntarily quitting he realized that the only time he truly felt like a man was when he was wearing the costume (Nightowl) There is more creative characterization just in the description of those characters than there are in 90% of all comics ever published.
The reason Moore did this is because once he decided that his characters would live in the real, real world, he decided it was important to explore what the motivations would be for these people. No other comic had truly done that outside of the vengeance idea or taking responsibility for ones actions. Notice I didn't mention Ozymandius, he is a whole nother type of personality.
The WATCHMEN film was great. The reason that people will as you correctly said, remember the big blue dick, is because they were sold an action film (Which is what the comic movie public had come to expect from Superhero films, and they were instead given a psycological thriller that was 50% character study. It did in film what it originally did in comics. It elevated what you could do with the material.
You should really make the effort to read it. You will be greatly rewarded if you actually give it its full worth.
I have read it every year since its release. I am always finding new things. Its so much more than a story. The use of repeating images or using others to make either an emotional connection to you or secretly give you clues to where you need to look. Or the ingenious level of design and thought that goes into it, such as the issue Fearful Symmetry which deals with the history of Rorchach. The entire issue every panel layout color choice and in some cases the image itself, from front of the book or back, is a mirror of itself just like his name implies. Fucking genius! the film was far to complex for the average film audience, and since it has been on video it has actually fared far better. I watched it with subtitles on because my friend who was over was mostly deaf. It was like watching the comic. Nothing missed.
Now, regarding what you have said about heroes, I actually do get it from your standpoint. The issue though is that the publishers know who their audiance is. ITs not little kids which seems to be what you are driving at. Publishers should focus on creating books around their characters that do appeal to those beliefs and market those to the kids and let them discover the other stories later.
For me, Spidey grew up with me. His character matured as I matured for me, and even you, it was a rather smooth transition from childish outlooks to adult awareness. Now you have companies trying to shoehorn the adult awareness into a childish background. It won't work though because the themes are to advanced for the young readers they are trying to capture.
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on Jan 1, 2011 9:12:52 GMT -5
Regarding the soap opera aspect, As I said before, its nearly impossible to do that now. There have been so many stories told of these characters in their own titles and in crossovers that its virtually impossible to keep it straight. The other factor is that the teams change to quick and each team has their own idea that they are determined to do no matter what may have taken place in a title to render their idea moot. That itself is the biggest problem right there. I agree 100%. I don't read Hellboy and it's spin-offs because I'm not a fan of Mingola. Peter David's run on X-Factor shows the soap opera aspect and he even makes the crossovers work for it. I recently had a chance to buy the special edition Blu-Ray of either Avatar or Toy Story 3, I chose Toy Story 3 a movie I had never seen over Avatar a movie I had seen and Toy Story 3 is far better than Avatar. I have all of Cameron's films on DVD and IMHO Avatar is weakest film, maybe when I'm not playing Mass Effect 2 or watching other movies, I watch it again on HBO and give it a second chance. The only thing have to point out is that Silhouette wasn't a sexual deviant, she was a lesbian.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Jan 1, 2011 11:17:59 GMT -5
Sorry! Tony Stark battling Alcoholism is indeed overcoming difficulties. I never liked the way the story read, but the hero did persevere. We don't need to revisit that story and have Tony Stark die in a drunk flying accident after he got the monkey off his back. We don't need future storylines about him screwing up again while drunk. When they do stuff like that, it undermines every ounce of importance the original storyline had. They could have him be like someone I know and become too self-righteous and try to stop everyone from drinking simply because he had a problem. I know people who have done that. df1 I know people who cleaned and sobered up and never have a problem with it again but also some people who fall off the wagon and relapse sometimes decades after being clean (Robin Williams for example) due to stress, temptation, or weakness. Tony Stark will never be "cured" of alcoholism, because there is no cure to addiction and to say otherwise is not only stupid but irresponsible to people who are reading and battling addiction by saying there is a cure, when there isn't one, and disrespectful to the intelligence of the fans as well. Addiction is merely wired synapses in the brain. Consciously changing ones behavior over time rewires synapses. Scientists have discovered it takes about 7 months of altered behavior to rewire the synapses (the electrical reward/communication system for an action) in the brain. If you can successfully change your behavior for more than 7 months and replace it with an activity that gains a healthy spot in your thoughts... you can overcome addiction. In all honesty, everyone is "addicted". People are addicted to anger. People are even addicted to depression. The other thing (in my opinion) that compounds people's problems are that they don't have a healthy balance of Amino Acids. L-Tryptophan is the Amino Acid your body uses to make serotonin. You cannot feel pleasure with out serotonin. Drugs, Alchohol, and antidepressant medication merely alter the behavior of serotonin. If your body doesn't have adequate levels serotonin, you are fighting and endless circle of self-destruction. L-Tryptophan cannot be manufactured in the body and it must be in the foods you eat or bought as supplements (but it's tough to find). Sugar addiction is partially tied to L-Tryptophan. When you eat sugar, it's been found that your body drops all Amino Acid concentrates in the blood down to zero, but L-Tryptophan stays the same. Sugar turns us into a serotonin factory. There are Amino acids that it works with, but L-Tryptophan is one your body can't make. df1
|
|
|
Post by bigw1966 on Jan 1, 2011 11:45:59 GMT -5
Cyberstrike. The thing with Sillouhette in my assessment was that the time period in which she existed (30's - 40's) branded her a sexual deviant.
Toy Story 3 which I watched the other night was an incredible film. Animated or not, it was very powerful and deserving of all accolades.
Peter David could make it work for a couple of reasons. First, he created the version that is most current., and he is in complete control with how it functions. the original series had less than 100 issues at the time he worked on it, and again in a shorter run of that type it is much easier to handle the soap opera aspects. When you have a title that is up to issue 500+ and it is only one series out of say 7 in the case of spidey that add up to over 1000 stories, It begins to get a bit convoluted.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Jan 1, 2011 11:50:29 GMT -5
Soap Opera storytelling requires orchestration and management and it requires cooperation. It has always been work. Jim Shooter used to have sessions and stories were plotted about 8 issues or more in advance. Key crossover events were planned and writing the individual comics was just 'color' to fill the requirements of the plot. If the template is laid out in advance, anyone can fill in the dialogue and details of an issues and make that story their own.
I understand everything that Watchman is. I don't know how much more suffering it would take for someone to believe I don't like the comic series. Moore shows his contempt at superheroes by mocking them in everything he writes. You call it a character study. I call it Moore's personal boredom with heroics and altruistic beliefs. The only interesting things about Watchmen to me is the detail added in the background. Example: "The Gordian Knot Lock Company". Unfortunately, all the psychology injected into Watchmen only displays his contempt for altruism and the background details show that he is well read and has specialized knowledge on obscure subjects. It does not translate as an intelligent or entertaining plot to me. I could ramble on about Tesla and people would think I was intelligent, but it's information readily available online. People should not confuse intelligence and parroting information. Intelligence is the collection of knowledge. Wisdom is the application. In that sense, I see Moore as foolishly intelligent. I'd rather read the words of someone wise. Last but not least... Hellboy. For me it's unreadable. I can't stand Mignola's art. The movies are okay, but I give credit to Guillermo Del Toro. I'm more a fan of his work.
df1
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Jan 1, 2011 13:21:13 GMT -5
Cyberstrike. The thing with Sillouhette in my assessment was that the time period in which she existed (30's - 40's) branded her a sexual deviant. Toy Story 3 which I watched the other night was an incredible film. Animated or not, it was very powerful and deserving of all accolades. Peter David could make it work for a couple of reasons. First, he created the version that is most current., and he is in complete control with how it functions. the original series had less than 100 issues at the time he worked on it, and again in a shorter run of that type it is much easier to handle the soap opera aspects. When you have a title that is up to issue 500+ and it is only one series out of say 7 in the case of spidey that add up to over 1000 stories, It begins to get a bit convoluted. 100 issues is over 8 years! You consider that to be a short run? The simple fact is that no hero needs 7 titles to tell his stories. If if waters down quality... then stop it. I think it's safe to say that Marvel flooding the market with I believe 9 Thor related titles solicited in November did nothing buy hurt the sales on all Thor related books for the month. The way Marvel markets their heroes does nothing but hurt their potential to succeed. I am sick of the Toy Story type of animation and I think that in 20 years all of the Pixar stuff will be looked back upon in the same way we see 1960's musicals. df1
|
|
|
Post by G on Jan 1, 2011 13:28:18 GMT -5
Soap Opera storytelling requires orchestration and management and it requires cooperation. It has always been work. Jim Shooter used to have sessions and stories were plotted about 8 issues or more in advance. Key crossover events were planned and writing the individual comics was just 'color' to fill the requirements of the plot. If the template is laid out in advance, anyone can fill in the dialogue and details of an issues and make that story their own. That to me is the beauty of the potential of comics. If they can be orchestrated beforehand, they can lay out like a simultaneous universe. No, I'm not talking no mega-crossover event which basically only barks up one tree. I'm talking a cohesion where one book may indirectly affect another and vice versa. They don't need to be interwoven, but a fact in one will make it a fact in another. I think there is more of a jumbled mess now than their ever was. I've spent the last year trying to catch up with new comics and I'm still almost as fuzzy as when I began. I keep having to find out what is REALLY going on by people who have been reading faithfully all the parts. All the books seem totally separated and with their own dizzying timelines. I really think it is more a jumbled mess now than it ever has been. If I can't catch up in a year, how can Johnny Newbie hope to catch on? Comics seem to be selling to existing comic readers. If the lure is there to grab them for a mini-series, I think they can manage that. But if the lure is there to make them a fan for years or life, I don't think this is doing it.
|
|
|
Post by bigw1966 on Jan 2, 2011 10:10:39 GMT -5
@defiant 1; 8 years, 100 issues. Hell yeah that is managable. Its much more managable than trying to sift thrugh 40-70 years of history to decide what direction to take a character. Especially if a couple of those 8 years were created by the same writer. In reality, we lose ties to events from 5-10 years ago, but in comics, bot hthe creators, and many fans seem to think that every moment of a characters existance needs to be catalogued and put in a position of being able to come back. Its not like that in reality and it shouldn't be like that in comics.
now granted they do try to cycle a characters life every ten years, but then they allow people to go all the way back for some things and its just not realistic. I would prefer to see only a single solo book per character and maybe have them as a team member in a second. but, Marvel and DC are trying to maintain a bottom line so they flood the hell out of the market to sell to the same people. This is why I feel they need to come up with new characters and Ideas.
In 20 years, there is no telling what animation will be like. I am rather excited at the possibilities myself. But Toy Story, especially the 3rd one will still be considered one of the best films ever made. I do not throw plattitudes for films around lightly. I have a huge understanding for film and story structure. I have always been good about breaking down films based on strength or weakness.
This film which starts off with the basic theme that most of them have which revolves around their -kid-, but ends up becoming one of the deepest looks at abandonment, loss and the true meaning of friendship. among so many other things. Its a remarkable work from a film studio that has yet to make a bad film.
|
|