Fun story: George Lucas's ex-wife had a huge hand in writing a lot of the original blockbuster trilogy.
There were some odd choices in some of the early drafts; Han Solo was at one point a weird fishy creature, there was a malevolent energy called "The Bogan" that served as a counterpart to the force, Ben Kenobi was called "Owen," and the dialogue was straight-up odd.
Luke is attacked by Tusken raiders just before he meets Ben; they leave him handcuffed to a giant spinning wheel. Kenobi approaches with a “good morning!”
“What do you mean, ‘good morning’?” Luke responds. “Do you mean that it is a good morning for you, or do you wish me a good morning, although it is obvious I’m not having one, or do you find that mornings in general are good?”
“All of them at once,” replies Kenobi.
It’s a great laugh line. It is also lifted, word for word, from "The Hobbit." J. R. R. Tolkien’s work was so widely read by the 1970s that Lucas could never have gotten away with the theft; it vanishes in the fourth draft.
So, there was always this sort of hidden uncertainty about, how much of the undeniable quality of the final script came from George Lucas and how much came from his wife.
Until we got the prequels, and found out the answer.
George Lucas had a great vision and was strong on the technical side but the OT’s success is because it was a group effort.
This couldn’t be more obvious comparing them to the PT - Lucas had an almost completely free hand and it shows. There are countless things that needed someone to step in and go “George, perhaps we should do it this way”.
This is why it's actually a little unsafe to have two people flying an airplane where one is way more senior than the other. Because the guy with only 1,000 hours of experience or whatever will hesitate to say "Hey I think you're bein a moron, we need to do X Y Z instead," and there's not a person on earth who's exempt from being a moron sometimes.
I had real trouble focusing as it is a torrent of inanity and word salad - I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s learned from a brainwashing technique as hours of that would then your brain to mush.
Furiosa was great though. George Miller is actually making original scripts and doing a great job of it. You should support this if you don’t want more Marvel and Star Wars focus group fluff.
I’m not sure you can call Furiosa franchise milking.
Apart from sharing a name the 2015 film came out 30 years after the previous film and has little to actually connect them apart from the main characters name and the general theme. If it wasn’t the same director it would be just a love letter to those films instead of a reboot.
Furiosa is a prequel that came out 9 years later.
Making a film and then a follow up 9 years later is FAR from milking a franchise.
Additionally both stories are completely new and not remakes.
Lol I agree with you somewhat, but I think you’re too lost in the sauce here. There are plenty of egregious examples of Hollywood and movie studios doing what you dislike (Batman rings some bells…), but this ain’t it chief.
I don’t hate, but I honestly despise everyone of “The Walking Dead” team, regardless of whether they were actors or production team, who were complicit in the emotional violence against their viewers when Neegan brutally murdered protagonists that the audience had grown attached to for seasons.
And I do not object to the killing of the protagonists, if that’s what the writers wanted. I object to the way in which it was portrayed, breaking the rules of the genre and the unspoken agreement with an audience that there are different ways in which violence is portrayed depending on context:
The rule that was broken here is that the actual gore happens off-camera and is only implied, maybe the after-effects are shown. Gore on-camera in the zombie genre is only allowed between humans and zombies. Zombies are by definition subject to their instincts, whereas a human killing another human is cold-blooded murder in this scenario, and it is not needed for the story / suspense to show the actual gore - only the lead-up and an aftermath, or maybe an “artists depiction” - like “screen goes blurry” similar to the first murder (OTOH, I knew that one was coming and skipped a few seconds, so maybe I missed something similarly despicable).
The second murder in said scene caught me off-guard and made me (and a lot of other people) quit watching forever. Fuck AMC, fuck the producers, and fuck the cast for exposing me to that snuff shit.
I disagree. I despise everyone involved for not distancing themselves in public from that torture porn. If they didn’t know it before, they did afterwards & chose to roll with it.
Get over yourself dude. You can argue over whether it not a piece of media is bad or unwarranted or not, but to feel such hatred for an entire crew of people for just doing their job is a really out of touch response. I personally think Goblin Slayer is a fucked up piece of media that should never have been released as a normal piece of anime, but I’m not going to hold a vendetta against the animators for earning a paycheque
My biggest issue was the fake-out death just before the actual death. The show had been going downhill for a while, and it just felt like they were going for shock instead of storytelling at that point. Fake a characters death, then suddenly they’re alive, and then they’re murdered. It just feels like they ran out of good ways to make the show interesting.
There was no way in hell Glen should have survived his fakeout death, and then it didnt even matter because they fucking brutally killed him off at the end of the season anyways… and then waited until the very next season to confirm it… ALL WHILE THE SHOWRUNNER WAS SAYING THE SHOW WAS GOING TO TAKE A HARD LEFT FROM THE COMICS AS OF THIS SEASON, WHEN THE KILL WAS AS LITERAL SHOT FOR SHOT AS YOU CAN GET FROM TRANSITIONING FROM COMIC TO TV SHOW
yeah, as I argued, it wasn’t the gore per se, but about the emotional violence and disrespect towards the viewers that made me despise the team of that series. Gore is shown in splatter movies (Halloween, Scream, …), but in those you don’t have an emotional build-up to like a character. Protagonists are killed in thrillers / movies / series that build them up first, but then there’s no direct gore. The crossover is what makes the director and everyone complicit a piece of shit.
an example of a extremely well done surprise/twist.
By committing a non-punishable act of abuse against the audience? I don’t think so. What this was to the regular viewers was what it would be to expose kids to whatever PG-18 content in the middle of their favorite animated cartoon.
I think the connection to the cast that the viewers had at that point was exactly what made the scene so impactful. Many other deaths that seemed just as brutal didn’t hit as hard, and aren’t even mentioned whenever the topic comes up. The implied death before then with the “Never mind, he’s still alive!” was really where I felt insulted, and might’ve been another reason for his death to feel more real when it actually happened so vulgarly.
Taking it out on the whole team seems a bit much, though.
I think the connection to the cast that the viewers had at that point was exactly what made the scene so impactful.
It would have had the exact same type of storytelling impact (obviously not that of disgust) to show the bat swing, show the shocked looks, but cut away for the gore.
Taking it out on the whole team seems a bit much, though.
It’s not like I can do anything about it. They’re not likely to care that I consider them despicable human beings.
Not necessarily, since we’d already thought he died once before, so it might’ve even been confusing and some people would’ve been saying he might still be alive and might come back again. The gore of it drives it home in the most unmistakeable way, which is what really makes all the risks realistic from then on.
Remember, the whole point is the real monsters are the people, not the zombies.
Weird Al takes secular pop songs and makes them into wholesome parodies, for his movie he took his wholesome life and made it into a secular drama parody. Loved it and Daniel Radcliffe was perfectly cast.
yea and there’s something about the way the film does it … unless you know going in you could almost be fooled into thinking it’s a serious and accurate biopic (at least for much of the film) … which was really fun to watch … because then there’d be some line or event which is clearly too ridiculous and it all lands but still the mostly serious tone is almost the punch line.
I thought that made it kinda pointless. I wanted to see Al’s actual story, and instead I got some weird 2 hour long SNL skit. There were some pretty good parts, like Another One Rides the Bus at the Hollywood party, but the shit with Pablo Escobar was just a waste of screentime IMO.
This is literally a "random people too unnoteworthy to even name on social media are saying X" article.
This is tripe. It's not journalism. I don't care what the overall message is, the publisher and reporter should be embarrassed to release it.
US conservatives will ALWAYS find an angle to say something is related to how much they hate the imaginary and undefinable threat of "wokeness". PRC goons will ALWAYS find a way to say something western-produced is anti-China. Neither deserve platforming for their every nonsense claim.
It's a decent albeit brief write-up of the scene and the story if you take all this social media horseshit out of it. But instead they led with it.
Whenever you are dealing with large datasets like this it is really easy to have your rules generate false positives or false negatives. You would almost have to go through and verify each movie to get 100% accurate.
In the UK, there’s just been a case of two 15-year kids being convicted of a brutal murder, so it’s as relevant as ever (the actors in the film are much older, but the book is about young teenagers and that terrifying phase they go through of depleted empathy)
movies
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.