|
Agree the Wachowskis would make a gorgeous, singular movie out of these themes that would probably utterly fail wih both critics and general audiences. Sense8 is basically a 13-episode extended exercise in visually representing the exact types of mind-body divisions and distributed consciousness stuff GitS inhabits.
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Mithaldu posted:Lol stop engaging with them as if they're earnest, they're just using you guys as writing prompts, from which to bash out some hilarious insanity. ... Says the guy who five posts up admits to not really having the English language skills to follow the discussion? What? Not everything outside your comprehension has no purpose, my man. cosmically_cosmic posted:If they changed the location to Neo-New York or something I'd accept the white actors. But having the setting still be explicitly asian but still have a big famous white woman take the role seems a bit weird. The original film was pretty explicitly set in a colonial city; a Singapore or Hong Kong. Geographically in Asia, but founded and built by European empires in support of European trade, and still largely accomplishing that task though via globalism rather than colonialism by the time of the intermediate cyberfuture. I don't know if the live-action has explicitly labeled its setting yet but it cribs enough visual iconography that I think it ends up occupying that transitory space as well.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:Maybe it's because english is my second language, maybe it's because i'm simple-minded, but frankly, your literary style is too complex for me to even try and grok it in its entirety.  e: I'm not insulting you, I'm just saying that I don't understand dismissing things you explicitly don't care to read as bad-faith or ludicrous. Just move on. HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Mar 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Everyone knows that all good movies either spring fully-formed from a difficult savant auteur who obviously has no need to ever set ideas to paper, or are borne through serendipity from production constraints and mishaps (which is, incidentally, why CGI has ruined movies forever). Any evidence of effort, any detectable molecule of process, is a surefire indicator that it's gonna be poo poo, you guys 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Exactly. If the movie is good it'll be a pleasant surprise, but getting in such a rush to portray every Hollywood person as the insane hack producer from that Kevin Smith story who was sure that Superman needed to fight a giant spider as part of his hero's journey that you cast the totally mundane minutia of the writing process as pretentious failure is dumb. Like-- cosmically_cosmic posted:The note basically says 'insert story arc here' I really don't get how you can describe it as some sort of valuable tool crucial to creating this work of fiction. It's like someone wrote 'PLAN: Make movie with character arc'. That's what's so embarassing about it, it doesn't do anything wrong it's just so childish and dumb that it's funny. I mean that might be me just being pretentious, thinking that 'is lost, finds self beats villain' should be written down with lines connecting those points like you might accidentally start with her found and then losing herself while beating the villain in the first act. This entire quote is predicated on the idea that that little note is somehow 90% of the bulk of the story work going into the final product, and not a thumbnail sketch likely clipped to a huge sheaf of pre-pro work and script drafts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:normies Honestly I'm just mad curious at this point to see what a 'good' ten-word character journey diagram looks like. Must be really mindblowing if the dumbness of this one is so transparent! The caption to that image even specifies it's a single page from his notebook. Now why do you suspect that for an art book they might choose to excerpt a visual element rather than a random page of notes? Is it because those notes don't exist, as you suppose, or could there be some other reason? HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Analytic Engine posted:You're right, it's not a bad 10-word character diagram. But it's placement in that book is an explicit statement that the offhand scribblings of the rich and powerful Director deserve equal attention as stuff like this: That's... certainly a conclusion you've come to based on a scan of a single page of an artbook, yes. It does raise the question of what you think a director actually contributes to a movie, though. You're aware they also get to put their names first in the credits, yes? Does that cheat the vfx department too somehow? Also, artbooks are usually production showcases intended to give a behind-the-scenes view of the creative process of a movie at all levels, not some presentation portfolio of only the most polished camera-ready product; I don't think the inclusion of production notes is strange at all. It's just... incredibly fuckin' strange to read into it for slights is all  HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 04:52
|
|