|
Peter Quill is like Superman except his home planet didn't explode, his mom is dead and his dad exploits other lifeforms rather than sacrificing himself for them.
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
sean10mm posted:Friendly reminder that Ego killed his beloved mother by giving her inoperable cancer, but yeah, it's about "my Walkman." I think that quote about the walkman was a joke my friend
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VulkN5OLEM Real good video essay on this real real good movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VulkN5OLEM The most hilarious part of this stupid video is that the author makes the same baffling point about Star-Lord kicking rodents.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
You need someone who loves you. This isn't a diss. You just seem so unpleasant, and all your posts reflect that. Hopefully things will turn around for you, dawg. Sincerely. CelticPredator fucked around with this message at 08:58 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 08:56
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:You need someone who loves you. This isn't a diss. You just seem so unpleasant, and all your posts reflect that.  "You're criticizing [blockbuster movie]?.... Wow.... you must lack love in your life..."
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Plenty of people have done such a thing. You just seem to reject the notion of emotion dawg, and that's just tragic. Even if you don't see it in this film, you don't seem to see it anywhere and I feel bad for you. That video was very good and a lot of work and thought was put into it. As well as emotion. And you reject it as just "stupid".
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:34
|
|
|
Do you have any films that have emotionally affected you? Something maybe, just for the sake of it, that isn't totally obscure? Serious legit question.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:57
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Plenty of people have done such a thing. You just seem to reject the notion of emotion dawg, and that's just tragic. Even if you don't see it in this film, you don't seem to see it anywhere and I feel bad for you. Yes, all criticism has work, thought, and "emotion" (I assume some specific emotions instead of the robotic abstraction you're talking about) put into it. Your defence of the video is that it was made. CelticPredator posted:Do you have any films that have emotionally affected you? Something maybe, just for the sake of it, that isn't totally obscure? Serious legit question.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
 CelticPredator that is some ultra cringe. Maybe I could say the same for you? You must be a soulless husk for not enjoying Destiny? Or some basic simpleton for loving the poo poo out of the MCU?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
I think the only thing I would change about GotG 2 is to have used the Hawkwind song Master of the Universe during build-up of Ego's ever more maniacal speech to Quill about his plans with the refrain hitting as they start fighting and maybe make some very very minor changes to his dialogue so that it lines up with the lyrics since they're already basically his speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9GSfB4-hOQ I'm just like kind of stunned that not a single Hawkwind track has appeared in the MCU given the cosmic content that has happened in them so far.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:
And I'm asking a legit question because half of Lamp's posts about this movie are going after the idea that it affected someone emotionally. Now, okay, I can see someone not quite getting it if you didn't feel it. I know people here who found Man of Steel moving where I did not. They've explained it...I get it. I don't feel it, but I get it. So here's this video that explains why the film made a person feel something emotionally, and Lamps dismisses it outright and calls it stupid. Films bring out emotions, people. In fact, to me, that is what films are for me. Whenever I write something, like reeaaallly write something, I'm coming from a place of pure emotion, trying to put that feeling on paper, and possibly on screen (if I ever get there!). So for someone to look at films, of any kind and call people stupid for feeling things is real weird to me. That's fine if that isn't the main thing you want to discuss, but outright dismissing that fact? I don't get that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:And I'm asking a legit question because half of Lamp's posts about this movie are going after the idea that it affected someone emotionally. Now, okay, I can see someone not quite getting it if you didn't feel it. I know people here who found Man of Steel moving where I did not. They've explained it...I get it. I don't feel it, but I get it. So here's this video that explains why the film made a person feel something emotionally, and Lamps dismisses it outright and calls it stupid. By this logic, if my criticism comes from a place of frustration (an emotion), by rejecting my criticism you are rejecting my emotional capacity as a person. Just lol at the hypocrisy. Here is my opinion on the sacralization of emotion. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VulkN5OLEM Nice video. I appreciate it and you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Wendell posted:Nice video. I appreciate it and you. And I you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Wendell posted:Nice video. I appreciate it and you. Yeah, this was the good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
It's an perfect example of what I mentioned: people talk constantly about how heart-warming and emotionally affecting the movies are and ignore that the Guardians don't do anything heroic. They simply kill things for the sake of public security. A character's relationship with their "toxic masculinity" (for some reason people are really proud of this clumsy synonym for machismo) is more important than that they casually kill people. There are four Guardians whose 'superpowers' are just that they're trained killers. In a wacky sci-fi universe where anything is possible, the heroes just default to killers. Towards the end of Sopranos, there's an episode where Dr. Melfi finds out that therapy can help sociopaths justify their anti-social actions, and she realizes that she may only have helped Tony Soprano into becoming a more effective sociopath. This is basically what all the teamwork and family-bonding in the Guardians movies accomplishes: the heroes become more effective killers for galactic security. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 08:35 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 08:28
|
|
|
Sometimes killing is the moral, practical thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 09:32
|
|
|
Just watched this today, thought it was great! Lots of fun humour, and I love Kurt Russell. I could just watch these characters interact all day. Really enjoyed it, even though I wish Ego could have been a cool dad. Went back to page 20 and read some pages and I can't believe how people were arguing about Ego's heel turn. He explicitly said that he didn't know what would happen if he stayed away from his base planet for so long living with Meredith, so even though he loved her he gave her a tumour so that she couldn't distract him/turn him mortal. He explicitly said this. How do people miss these details? It was also hilarious seeing BravestoftheLamps saying he wanted Luc Besson to write and direct this movie. He did, and it was Valerian, and it was full of the worst cliches and "jokes" you can possibly imagine, and bombed spectacularly. Wonderful
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Sometimes killing is the moral, practical thing to do. You're dodging the (implied) question. The actual issue is not that the Guardians kill, but how remorseless killing is paired with "fun" and sentimental family-bonding nonsense. In itself that's more disturbed than simply justifying killing. To paraphrase what SMG asked, when presented with an infinite fantasy universe of wonders and possibilities, why fantasize about killing threats to the status quo? Alan_Shore posted:and it was full of the worst cliches and "jokes" you can possibly imagine, and bombed spectacularly. The GotG movies, famously not full of the worst cliches and jokes you can imagine. Also, edorsing box office success as moral validation is really dumb. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 09:57
|
|
|
Why is any of what you said a bad thing. They're literally a government approved mercenary squad. The movie ends with a tearful funeral for a child trafficker. This is all intentional. None of the characters are supposed to be good people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 10:05
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Why is any of what you said a bad thing. They're literally a government approved mercenary squad. No one watches GotG as a satire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:No one watches GotG as a satire. A film doesn't have to be satire to have morally ambiguous or 'bad' protagonists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:
I only brought it up because Luc Besson was your personal choice to write and direct a GotG movie without cliché. And then he made Valerian. Oh. Dear. GotG, worst jokes? Haha alright. Box office doesn't equal moral validation, but it is good when bad movies bomb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:A film doesn't have to be satire to have morally ambiguous or 'bad' protagonists. Practically no one treats the protagonists as morally ambiguous or 'bad' - everyone recognizes that these movies are about them being sympathetic characters who overcome their nominal flaws and become closer as a family, and this is the appeal. Alan_Shore posted:I only brought it up because Luc Besson was your personal choice to write and direct a GotG movie without cliché. And then he made Valerian. Oh. Dear. Valerian is an average movie, and thus the best comic book adaptation of the year so far. There's little to "oh dear" about it. In the Valerian thread you just ranted about how Luc Besson didn't "care" about you, prompting your weird glee about the box office failure of a movie. That's actually bad and something to "oh dear" at. Alan_Shore posted:GotG, worst jokes? Haha alright. GotG's jokes generally terrible. Putting aside giant Pac-Man, the jokes amount to characters stating something lame sarcastically or wackily. The idea of humour is that a character is called Taserface, and another character has several lines where he talks about how stupid it is that a character is called Taserface. Star-Lord mumbles about how Gamora is using a gun instead of a sword. That kind of stuff. You'll notice that no one quotes the clever dialogue of GotG 1 or 2, because there is none. It's only about how nobody is 100% a dick or Mary Poppins. The best joke in the franchise is when Star-Lord equates the loss of his Sony Walkman with the loss of his mother. It's almost profound in what great characterization it is. But for some reason people hate to see it recognized as a joke. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The best joke in the franchise is when Star-Lord equates the loss of his Sony Walkman with the loss of his mother. It's almost profound in what great characterization it is. But for some reason people hate to see it recognized as a joke. Because it's not a joke, at least not entirely. It's the last connection Peter Quill has of his mother, it is his last physical memory of her. It's destruction means the last thing, and in fact the only thing, he owns that he got from her is gone. As his last physical connection to her it has some pretty heavy emotional weight to him, it's destruction is to him as if he is losing her again. Especially given not only was the Walkman destroyed but so was a mix-tape his mother specifically made for him, which whilst he may be able to recreate with his new music player it will not be the same mixtape his mother made him, it will only be an imitation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
You spend a lot of time and effort trying to convince people the movie is bad and dumb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:Because it's not a joke, at least not entirely. It's the last connection Peter Quill has of his mother, it is his last physical memory of her. It's destruction means the last thing, and in fact the only thing, he owns that he got from her is gone. As his last physical connection to her it has some pretty heavy emotional weight to him, it's destruction is to him as if he is losing her again. It's baffling to me how this could evade someone. Yes, the Walkman is occasionally the source of light-hearted music and played for laughs, but its purpose in the movie is 100% genuine. Anyone who's lost someone can surely sympathize. I still have one of my mum's ratty old hats hanging on my wall. It's frayed and stupid looking, but it's one of the few things of hers I still have. Ha ha, what a hilarious joke!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Lord_Magmar posted:Because it's not a joke, at least not entirely. It's the last connection Peter Quill has of his mother, it is his last physical memory of her. It's destruction means the last thing, and in fact the only thing, he owns that he got from her is gone. As his last physical connection to her it has some pretty heavy emotional weight to him, it's destruction is to him as if he is losing her again. Phylodox posted:It's baffling to me how this could evade someone. Yes, the Walkman is occasionally the source of light-hearted music and played for laughs, but its purpose in the movie is 100% genuine. Anyone who's lost someone can surely sympathize. I still have one of my mum's ratty old hats hanging on my wall. It's frayed and stupid looking, but it's one of the few things of hers I still have. Ha ha, what a hilarious joke! Star-Lord being a manchild obsessed with childhood gizmos and pop culture is funny. It provides probably about half of the humour in the films. That a Sony Walkman as a substitute for his mother is not tragic, it's tragicomic at most. The space adventurer swearing vengeance for his mother and his squished Walkman is funny. Lots of people can surely sympathize with being Han Solo and having your memento Walkman being crushed by an evil planet-dad who wants to cover the galaxy in blue goo. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Star-Lord being a manchild obsessed with childhood gizmos and pop culture is funny. It provides probably about half of the humour in the films. That a Sony Walkman as a substitute for his mother is not tragic, it's tragicomic at most. The space adventurer swearing vengeance for his mother and his squished Walkman is funny. You seem to think that when people talk about sympathizing with a character they can only do so by 100% matching up their lives to every aspect of that character or something. People aren't going to sympathize with being a space bounty hunter but they can likely feel some connection with the way people act when losing a close family member.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Star-Lord being a manchild obsessed with childhood gizmos and pop culture is funny. It provides probably about half of the humour in the films. That a Sony Walkman as a substitute for his mother is not tragic, it's tragicomic at most. The space adventurer swearing vengeance for his mother and his squished Walkman is funny. Yes attaching sentimentality to everyday items is inherently silly. It's also a thing human beings do constantly. It's also dumb that Arya Stark cares so much about a dime a dozen sword her brother gave her. Or that Rose kept a secret jewel as a memento from all the shenanigans on the Titanic. Laugh a minute scenes, those.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Yes attaching sentimentality to everyday items is inherently [...] human
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:
Sorry this is actually an incredible idea BravestoftheLamps hit paydirt with this. After all it's not like Luc Besson would ever make amateur mistake and definitive bad movie signifier of creating non-satirical films about hired killers that are portrayed sympathetically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Well yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Sorry this is actually an incredible idea BravestoftheLamps hit paydirt with this. After all it's not like Luc Besson would ever make amateur mistake and definitive bad movie signifier of creating non-satirical films about hired killers that are portrayed sympathetically. You've conflated different criticisms to the point of obscuring them, and even invented some. No one criticized James Gunn for the amateur mistake (?) of making a non-satirical movie about sympathetic hired killers. This is because the GotG movies aren't really about hired killers, since this aspect of the characters is sidelined if not ignored. No one watches the movies as films about hired killers, and thus no one cares about Star-Lord killing people for money. Steve2911 posted:Yes attaching sentimentality to everyday items is inherently silly. It's also a thing human beings do constantly. It's rather odd that there are fans of GotG who find the combination of comedy and tragedy to be a foreign concept. Isn't that part of the appeal of these movies? If you watch the scene, you'll notice that the line is funny, down to the choice of words: "You shouldn't have killed my mom and squished my Walkman." Chris Pratt's childishly indignant delivery is funny.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:A character's relationship with their "toxic masculinity" (for some reason people are really proud of this clumsy synonym for machismo) But people attack new terms that are descriptive of existing phenomena if use of those threaten comfortable but damaging norms, so now PTSD triggers are a punchline all over the internet. People also invent new terms for better, existing ones to make them sound selfish, so now civil rights are identity politics. The linguistic battle for our collective soul is real.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Because machismo isn't usually seen as negative, or having negative effects on men, and toxic masculinity speaks both to the damage it can do to others, as well as the damage it does to men. Real stupid, perhaps. Instead of speaking and thinking in terms of patriarchal ideology (terms that have been around for decades at the least), you've taken the language of pop psychology and cultivated a fantasy about infectious toxins. And now you're living in a zombie movie. You engage in 'linguistic battle' by dispensing with truth and accuracy in favour of expediency. Your goal is to 'win' the political argument as quickly and easily as possible, ends justifying the means, by depoliticizing it - by simply labelling the troublesome threat a biohazard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Man, SMG, it's sad that you're reduced to a hype-man for your inferior copy. What happened? You were the big dog!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Real stupid, perhaps. Are you projecting, or something? Edit: Also, a large percentage of the population thinking I should be dead for what I am is not a "political argument," and neither is talking about one of the causes of that viewpoint. LividLiquid fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Sep 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Edit: Also, a large percentage of the population thinking I should be dead for what I am is not a "political argument," and neither is talking about one of the causes of that viewpoint. Well right; exactly. You don't perceive what you are doing as political. That is why you are appropriating progressive language - 'I'm for civil rights, not identity politics' - and then straightforwardly indulging in identity politics. The 'toxin' is a form of masculine gender identity, is it not?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2017 23:19
|
|