|
MisterBibs posted:No, I'm saying that in the absence of a scene in which he opens the marker, combined with Winston's comment that he'll need to use said marker, is concrete and indisputable evidence that it's a new marker. Not supported by the film.
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:Not supported by the film. MisterBibs has a very bad brain and is not going to understand that they are being mocked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:the absence of a scene . . . is concrete and indisputable evidence Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Not supported by the film. Quite the opposite. There's a scene in which the original marker is concretely finalized. It's a plot point where Winston has to track down what's-his-face and make him complete the marker, even if John would soon be dead. Serf posted:MisterBibs has a very bad brain and is not going to understand that they are being mocked. Oh, I know, but every time he says it, I get to cite specific scenes (or, just as important, the lack of a scene) to explain why I'm right. It's good exercise. MisterBibs has a new favorite as of 23:10 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Winston gives John a marker that he'll need. As such, it's an uncompleted marker. Your first sentence is in no way proof of your second sentence. You have zero evidence of your claim that ONLY an uncompleted marker has value.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
please stop responding to misterbibs as if he contributes anything to any discussion ever, is capable of learning, or understands human emotion
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Can't wait for the 3rd Wick movie where sombody somehow steals his cell phone and deletes that video of his wife. I mean that's literally the only other thing they have to destroy right? Unless they just kill the dog again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Phone got smashed, bro.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:Can't wait for the 3rd Wick movie where sombody somehow steals his cell phone and deletes that video of his wife. I mean that's literally the only other thing they have to destroy right? Unless they just kill the dog again. he has one last picture and an ashy burnt necklace. The phone is gone in the house explosion. John wick 3 is going to be him finally getting out of the assassin business to wallow in his misery John wick 4 is going to be him going after the cash for gold businesses until he gets that necklace back after some crack head steals and sells it. snergle has a new favorite as of 23:52 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
rydiafan posted:Phone got smashed, bro. I thought he was watching the video right before he got picked up to go to the park? Shows how much i was paying attention in the end then 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:Can't wait for the 3rd Wick movie where sombody somehow steals his cell phone and deletes that video of his wife. I mean that's literally the only other thing they have to destroy right? Unless they just kill the dog again. A kid running through the mall bumps into him and he drops his phone, breaking it to the point that it's unrepairable. The kid gets away but Wick tracks him to a house just north of Chicago...  John Wick: Home Alone e: aw man...I clearly haven't seen 2 yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Stop engaging with MisterBibs. He's either an autist who cannot grasp subtlety or he's the physical manifestation of the IMDB forums (RIP). No wait he's both. Mr. B: There are some cases where you've been right but you are not fun to talk to at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
rydiafan posted:Your first sentence is in no way proof of your second sentence. Where, in the movie, are we conclusively and concretely told that an completed marker has any weight in the movie's universe? Guesses, suppositions, justifications, and inventions don't count. Just because you think they might doesn't mean they do until the movie tells us they do. rydiafan posted:You have zero evidence of your claim that ONLY an uncompleted marker has value. Sure I do. Winston gives one to John at the end, saying he'll need it. Therefore, it's an uncompleted one. If it were a completed one, but still had value, the movie would've concretely and directly referred to it as it's the same marker, but that it still holds value. They didn't, because it's a marker for John to use on Winston. But he doesn't, because we have to wait another movie for him to do what he could do right now. MisterBibs has a new favorite as of 00:14 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
I look forward to the flashback in JW3 where we find out the impossible task he completed to get out of the game the first time is actually killing the disease that killed his wife.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Where, in the movie, are we conclusively and concretely told that a completed marker doesn't have any weight in the movie's universe? Guesses, suppositions, justifications, and inventions don't count. Just because you think they might not doesn't mean they don't until the movie tells us they don't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
My IMM is when in old movies and TV, the big and strong lead male grabs a woman that hates him and kisses her until she submits and loves him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
rydiafan posted:Where, in the movie, are we conclusively and concretely told that a completed marker doesn't have any weight in the movie's universe? The scene in which the bad guy is forced, by protocol, to complete and sign off (in blood) that the task is complete and that the debt has been paid. A scene with only one valid reading, aka the one that the movie and I are in agreement on. Did you see the movie?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
food court bailiff posted:The Magicians is a lot of fun for a gritty Harry Potter/Narnia pastiche but the dude who plays Quentin just stands around with his mouth hanging open like a dolt like 99% of the time he's on screen. The rest of the cast is incredible and vivacious and obviously having fun with their roles but the main character is just depressed and confused and awkward and it sucks. The worst part is that sometimes the actor himself doesn't seem awful, which means the directing must have been pretty bad. It's been years since I read the books, but I seem to remember Quentin being a dolt 99% of the time in that too. To give the performance the benefit of the doubt, I assume it's a case of the actor trying to channel Quentin's innate shittiness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:The scene in which the bad guy is forced, by protocol, to complete and sign off (in blood) that the task is complete and that the debt has been paid. A scene with only one valid reading, aka the one that the movie and I are in agreement on. That shows that the debt has been repaid. This shows that the marker no longer has value as a means to force John Wick to do things for Santino. It does not show that all value of the marker has been erased. It could, for example, have value as proof to the High Table that Santino ordered his sister's death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
rydiafan posted:It does not show that all value of the marker has been erased. So you're telling me your argument is that it's proof that a blood debt has been paid/redeemed, an innate and inherent act of negation, but still renders out as something with value or weight for one person or another? I'll give you that, if you have such a bizarre reading of the movie where this doesn't cause you to giggle, it totally makes sense. I'd advise you that the next time you hear the sounds of hooves, you think Horse, not Zebra. rydiafan posted:It could, for example, have value as proof to the High Table that Santino ordered his sister's death. Supposition, invention. It equally could have the ghost of John's wife sealed inside it, or the core of a jive-talking transforming robot named Markerus Prime.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:So you're telling me your argument is that it's proof that a blood debt has been paid/redeemed, an innate and inherent act of negation, but still renders out as something with value or weight for one person or another? What loving good is a marker if nobody can be bound to you by it? that's what excommunicado means, nobody associated with that world can help him, ever. What other kind of value than what was already discussed and keeping in mind that nobody who could be bound by the marker held by John as cemented by a loving line of dialogue that was pretty concrete in it's pronunciation despite Winston's accent. MrJacobs has a new favorite as of 01:40 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:What loving good is a marker if nobody can be bound to you by it? that's what excommunicado means, nobody associated with that world can help him, ever. Why, it's almost as if the movie is flat out telling you that John, in his current excommunicado state, that he can still use a marker to compel people in that world to do something they otherwise wouldn't. Like, say, removing a bounty from one's head, which he'll inevitably do in the third movie, but could totally do at the end of the second movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Why, it's almost as if the movie is flat out telling you that John, in his current excommunicado state, that he can still use a marker to compel people in that world to do something they otherwise wouldn't. Like, say, removing a bounty from one's head, which he'll inevitably do in the third movie, but could totally do at the end of the second movie. How? If nobody associated with world of the assassins can help him, how is he going to do that? Anyone who can help him with the bounty is associated with that world, so he cannot use them with the marker. It's loving useless unless it was Santino's marker.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Quite the opposite. There's a scene in which the original marker is concretely finalized. It's a plot point where Winston has to track down what's-his-face and make him complete the marker, even if John would soon be dead. Correct. The movie spends valuable screen time to show Winston forcing the dude to sign-off on the marker being complete. Given a basic understanding of the economies of storytelling, this heavily implies that the completed marker is, itself, an item of value. Presumably, it would be useful if John wanted to clear his name with the High Council, of whom he has just murdered two members. In your theory, Winston gives Wick an active marker of his own--but this is unsupported by the film, as we've been told that the markers symbolize a "contract" wherein one person is indebted to another due to some favor, but Winston doesn't owe John anything other than sympathy. If anything, John owes Winston a marker for not killing him on the spot as the rules of the first movie dictate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:How? If nobody associated with world of the assassins can help him, how is he going to do that? It's a shame this movie doesn't make it it clear early in its runtime that the concept of not being able to help someone who hands you a marker doesn't exist in this world. Wait, it does. They have to help him, he's got a marker. No ifs, ands, or buts. Patattack posted:Correct. The movie spends valuable screen time to show Winston forcing the dude to sign-off on the marker being complete. Given a basic understanding of the economies of storytelling, this heavily implies that the completed marker is, itself, an item of value. Presumably, it would be useful if John wanted to clear his name with the High Council, of whom he has just murdered two members. Implication. In other words, supposition and invention. As the movie makes clear, it's only an item of value when the marker is uncompleted. Once the completion occurs, it has no value, because value is inherently only about one person owing another a blood debt. A completed marker is a hunk of gold. Patattack posted:Winston doesn't owe John anything other than sympathy. This reading is invalidated by the act of Winston giving John a marker that he says he'll need to use down the line. If Winston didn't owe John anything, all he'd give him is the head start. We are expressly told that Winston owes John because he's given a marker that lets him call in that debt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and misheard but I assumed the marker was a "you have to kill whoever I want and you can't say no", whereas normally an assassin could refuse a contract based on ethics or that it might get them killed in the process, the marker is basically a free ticket for assassination.Android Apocalypse posted:Ruby Rose's character is mute, not deaf. I was trying to figure this out and I don't think anyone ever speaks to her without also signing so I think she's deaf.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:It's a shame this movie doesn't make it it clear early in its runtime that the concept of not being able to help someone who hands you a marker doesn't exist in this world. No, they don't. They have to accept the blood debt of the person bearing the marker. John was in a blood debt to santino willingly since Santino helped him in his impossible task. Thus John made a choice and had to accept the consequences because he willingly took the deal. If John just shows a marker to anyone invovled with that world and it's blank they don't have to do anything, and even if they wanted to they can't after he was excommunicado. It's only value is as evidence that he didn't order the hit on the council member, which John will need if he wants to live.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Inzombiac posted:Mr. B: There are some cases where you've been right This is not supported by the post history
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:No, they don't. They have to accept the blood debt of the person bearing the marker. You're right, I spoke in general when I should've been specific. I apologize. The giving of a marker is inherently a blood debt to John by Winston. We know this because Winston gives him it and says he'll need it. Any other alternative interpretation is invention. CaptainViolence posted:This is not supported by the post history Sure it is. I was right about a World of Warcraft game type being so dumb and stupid that the developers removed it. I was right about a removed World of Warcraft mechanic being so vital to the game that they had to do a 180 and return it as soon as possible. A cursory viewing of anything I've posted in CineD is generally being on the right side of cinematic / box office success. I was right about Bethesda doing Fallout better than Black Isle or Irrational. I mean, those are the ones most people bring up in resentment when they argue with me and invariably fail to come correct about it. There's also the hotdog one, but even they get it wrong by saying I choked on them. I don't fault 'em for that one too much, eosinophilic esophagitis, the immune disorder I have that causes food impaction ain't exactly commonplace.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
food court bailiff posted:please stop responding to misterbibs as if he contributes anything to any discussion ever, is capable of learning, or understands human emotion
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and misheard but I assumed the marker was a "you have to kill whoever I want and you can't say no", whereas normally an assassin could refuse a contract based on ethics or that it might get them killed in the process, the marker is basically a free ticket for assassination. It's a marker of debt. It is explicitly an owed favor. The first thumbprint is John's, showing he owes the bearer of the marker an unrefusable favor. The second is Santino's, showing the debt has been paid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Implication. In other words, supposition and invention. In what way is your theory not also supposition or invention? We don't see the interior of the marker that Winston gives John, and Winston doesn't clearly say "Here's a new marker. I owe you one." You're making assumptions based on what you interpret Winston's ambiguous "You'll need this" to mean, which is no more concrete than my interpretation. And to view it in storytelling terms again, it would make much more sense for him to give John the existing marker - which is the only marker that viewers have seen so far, and has been a major MacGuffin throughout the entire film - rather than to suddenly introduce a new one without explicitly differentiating it from the first one. MisterBibs posted:This reading is invalidated by the act of Winston giving John a marker that he says he'll need to use down the line. If Winston didn't owe John anything, all he'd give him is the head start. We are expressly told that Winston owes John because he's given a marker that lets him call in that debt. My interpretation is "invalidated" by the assumption that your interpretation is inarguably true? That is not how debate works. Also, we are not "expressly told" anything. You are drawing a conclusion based on your reading of Winston's non-explicit language (and the lack of clarification that would come from showing us the interior of the marker). I would consider that a supposition based on implication, my dude.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Hey if you guys aren't going to take my sage advice can someone PM me when you collectively stop arguing with this particularly idiotic wall? I used to like this thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
I know I've said this before but holy poo poo Ross is just the most spineless bitch in the first season of Friends. Have some goddamn self respect man. Also IJ and the Crystal Skull is not a bad movie. It's not even the worst IJ movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Why didn't Gandalf just call up those loving eagles from the start instead of dragging people around mountains and mines and losing hobbits all over?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
Alopex posted:Why didn't Gandalf just call up those loving eagles from the start instead of dragging people around mountains and mines and losing hobbits all over? Oglaf: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:Oglaf: That's why you strap ghost chiles all over your body as a defensive measure, like all proper fantasy adventurers do
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Patattack posted:My interpretation is "invalidated" by the assumption that your interpretation is inarguably true? You imply there's interpretation in the scene we're talking about. There's really not. In the end, John gets a fresh new proverbial P-Wing to get out of the situation he finds himself in. He doesn't use it because there's going to be a third movie he uses it again, because if he did it now, there'd be no sequel. Like I said, I'm fine with more John Wick. If they have to do a sequel bait ending to make sure we know there's one, I'm down with it. It's still (irrationally) annoying. Patattack posted:That is not how debate works. I didn't post an irrationally sequel bait ending because the ending was up for debate. I get it, some people like the movie to the point where they're trying desperately to invent unsupported alternative ways it might not just be a big neon THE STORY ISN'T OVER YET, BOYS!. I loved the movie as much as anyone, but I don't need to defend what's blatantly a sequel bait ending. What, are we going to have a discussion where something similar was actually good? Patattack posted:Also, we are not "expressly told" anything. You are drawing a conclusion based on your reading of Winston's non-explicit language (and the lack of clarification that would come from showing us the interior of the marker). I would consider that a supposition based on implication, my dude. Nope, it's just what the movie is literally telling you. I don't think I can make it much clearer. I mean, the movie made it clear as an empty sky, and people are still trying to argue that it's the same marker.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
food court bailiff posted:Hey if you guys aren't going to take my sage advice can someone PM me when you collectively stop arguing with this particularly idiotic wall? I used to like this thread. I get it now
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 05:17
|
|