>"Dude, it's a giant head."
>"Dude it's a talking tree and a raccoon."
>"Dude, it's a bunch of mutant turtles and a rat."
>"Dude, it's a talking blue hedgehog and his friends fighting an egg shaped man."
>"Dude it's about a plumber that goes through pipes and fights weird mushroom monsters."
>"Dude it's a pink ball with eyes that sucks things up."
>"Stop taking all that seriously."
Peoples inability to take seriously any fantastical or unorthodox premises and characters are what has been killing media for the past decade and a half. I swear to God people didn't have this problem just five years ago, but now peope use it to ironically detach themselves or deflect from any criticism.
Didn't this guy have a meltdown when this was thrown back in his face?
Yes.
Here.
Not a lot makes me smile these days but that always does.
What an unbelievable wienersucker. It's such a dumb argument too, so because something's fantastical or intended for kids, you can't think criticially about it?
>I swear to God people didn't have this problem just five years ago,
None of this existed before The Last Jedi, when Disney decided to go all in on blaming the poor response on Russian troll accounts and professional directors were calling fans manbabies. Even Rifftrax got in on it and claimed that only huge nerds hate TLJ.
If you're not gonna accept the premise at face value, why bother?
He is right
"This is a movie about space wizards intended for children" is what he said
Not
"You can't criticize Star Wars"
If you think those two statements are equal, the issue is with you.
>"This is a movie about space wizards intended for children" is what he said
But why would one say this? What context did he have for saying it if not in the context of said film being criticized?
The very next line after that post is
"I'm not saying you can't take it seriously, just don't get too angry about it."
Which is a fair point. There is a difference between media critique and treating a franchise like a front on a holy war.
When people move past "This film had writing , plot and story elements xyz I didn't like" and start treating a franchise like it's a personal attack on them and their identity, you are becoming unhealthily invested in fiction .
>okay you can have opinions, but don't make me think you're mad or anything!
Tone policing is homosexual shit.
You're not a hero for being an butthole with low impulse control.
youre not a level headed critic for being an butthole that downplays others' issues and insinuates theyre childish and then comes out with "how dare you" as if your ire is different to theirs.
youre not a hero for focusing on the tone of the presentation instead of what is said.
There's a world of difference between getting salty on Twitter and sending actors death threats, and you know it.
Everyone claims death threats yet cannot prove them, it's the perfect boogeyman
Yes anon, your side never does anything wrong, it's all just slander and conspiracy.
Who said anything about death threats, you hysterical homosexual?
People here have unironically suggested burning down Disney. If you think that is an appropriate response to not liking a movie , I would correctly say you are wrong.
Won't someone please think of the global corporation that can pay off governments and field a private army
>the global corporation that can pay off governments and field a private army
Hi, plz show proofs. :DDDDDD
Hasbro sent a paramilitia group to hunt down a guy who had early MTG cards.
ok
And you don't see that as a problem?
You do realize that Disney and these megacorps have had military ties right?
You realize you are offering up an accusation without any proofs right?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney's_World_War_II_propaganda_production
Well done, homosexual. You're not telling me anything I already knew.
So you already knew and tried arguing about it anyway?
Doing propaganda for the government doesn't mean Walt had the services of General MacArthur and the US Armed Forces. Grow up and get a clue.
>Military collusion isn't collusion!
Don't even bring up Marvel or how the military controls those movies too.
But collusion isn't illegal. 🙂
True. They have made military propaganda cartoons and patches featuring Mickey Mouse characters.
Overthrowing corpos in an act of class solidarity is cool.
Raging about how Disney is evil because it's promoting white genocide or some nonsense is unhinged
>"I'm not saying you can't take it seriously, just don't get too angry about it.
>"JJ Abrams how fricking dare you"
Lmao
patrick wasn't angry, that was "hah ha" how fricking dare you "hah" kinda statement. no seething in sight
Big stretch
Maybe if you ignore context or have poor language skills. It was absolutely used as a lampshade for criticism though. We are all adults here, no reason to play dumb. What was said was said.
Hi Patrick!
Hi Patrick!
Quick note Patrick. We don't reddit space here. 🙂
>"You can't criticize Star Wars"
Pat, you said that shit in relation to people having criticisms and complaints about a poorly written Star Wars movie. When faced with glaring problems with the movie, you insisted that it's just a stupid space wizard kiddy movie. As in "SHUT UP HAVING CRITICISMS ABOUT THIS THING IS WRONG!" and not whatever pathetic cope this is.
How is that not what he said?
>but now peope use it to ironically detach themselves or deflect from any criticism
Which is the key point here. They just want to deflect criticism. It's the same thing as saying "it's for kids it's supposed to be bad" like saying it's bad on purpose somehow excuses things.
Literally the same strategy Prequel fans use to defend Jar Jar.
Prequel fan here, I do no such thing, Jar Jar was made for kids yes but that doesn't make him good.
I have no strong opinions on Jar Jar whatsoever. Frankly, I have trouble believing any grown man cared enough to hate him.
I was there, they did anon, grow men did care enough
>Frankly, I have trouble believing any grown man cared enough to hate him.
Dude have you seen The People vs. George Lucas? Like I'm a fan of Star Wars but jesus some people got too emotionally attached to it.
I won't kill myself over Jar Jar, but he was a terrible addition to the movie.
Jar Jar stepping in poop is better than all scenes in the sequel trilogy
>
>https://desuarchive.org/co/search/image/YTlxWYfhQoZCzZsSCjiJxA/type/op/
>https://desuarchive.org/co/search/text/Turn%20your%20brain%20off%20and%20enjoy%20it./type/op/start/2022-04-16/
>https://desuarchive.org/co/search/text/%22As%20long%20as%20it%27s%20entertaining%2C%20it%27s%20good.%22/type/op/
How fricking hard is it for mods to just fricking rangeban these Black folk once and for all
Just filter it you fricking crybaby
It literally takes 5 seconds
>patrols the catalog so he can be the first rage post
I hate these people
>You WILL post about twitter
>You WILL argue over twitter screencaps
Frick off Black person
>everyone else
Having fun calmly discussing this Cinemaphile related matter
>(you)
Whining and raging about a perfectly good topic.
The spam is getting ridiculous. It's always the same threads about irony/cringe/edginess with minor variations at best. It's as if some hyper autist has no other way of communicating except through repetition.
OP is clearly insane by Einstein's definition of the word, and civilized society would be infinitely better off if "people" like him got their houses raided by a mental health gestapo.
There needs to be an addendum to global rule 4 where doxxing and raiding are allowed if, and only if the target is a well known public nuisance to a board's community.
Rangebans are weird. I just got out of somebody else's ban after about three months.
>Even Rifftrax got in on it and claimed that only huge nerds hate TLJ.
The same nerds who championed the "Han shot first" nonsense, I bet.
://desuarchive.org/co/search/text/%22As%20long%20as%20it%27s%20entertaining%2C%20it%27s%20good.%22/type/op/
jesus fricking christ imagine what kind of life this person lives that this doesnt feel like like an embarrassingly autistic waste of time
Why the frick should shit as stupid as Mario and Sonic be taken "seriously"? It can have stakes but you have to be autistic to not see that that shit was always meant to be lighthearted.
Is it too much to ask for movies of them that respect and be loyal to what is established in the games?
The games aren't that "serious" either you know.
Can you actually answer my question?
How was it not? Italian guy eats flower, shoots fireballs from his hands and he stomps on angry turtles sent by a guy that keeps kidnapping a princess of little mushroom people. Seems 100% accurate.
I actually don't remember if he uses the fireflower but it's still pretty much on point.
peach's characterization
If the characters don't take the setting and the story seriously and don't care? then why should i?
You're finally getting it, you shouldn't take the setting and story of Sonic or Mario seriously
Answer the question
If the characters don't take the setting and the story seriously and don't care? then why should I?
Sonic tries really really hard to be taken seriously, it's why it's such a laughing stock.
Mario is a Hungry Caterpillar tier story and that's fine. Nobody asks about Peach's tax policy or how Bowser feeds his army.
>enter forum that discusses a thing
>ask a question about the setting, something mundane like "man it's pretty wild how any twelve year old can time travel in Harry Potter just by asking a teacher for a time turner"
>get shit down instantly with thousands of angry comments telling you to stop caring so much about a children's franchise
Why is discussion bad? Why is caring about a world bad? Do most people just read a product, set it on their shelf and then never talk about it again?
They know they fricked up due to no talent/care on the part of the post OT writers and writing. They have to shut down discussion of their hackery if they want to keep their careers going. How hard would it have been to do more Jabba's Palace and epic space battles with characters that we get to know closely who care about what they are doing? I guess hiring good writers really is bad for your ESG score or something. So we get unbelievable woke garbage with no heart and a lot of anger toward straight, white, men.
>Why is discussion bad? Why is caring about a world bad? Do most people just read a product, set it on their shelf and then never talk about it again?
Now that you mention it, I think this is partly why a lot of the last decade's entertainment is unmemorable
Westerners in the 21st century have no identity. They have no religion, no strong ties to family or their nation, nothing. But people need those things, it's part of the human experience. So, they're replaced all that with entertainment, so when you imply anything is wrong with their entertainment, it's like you're trashing them as a person. It's the same reason people used to have fights over the slightest insult to their family, or why people these days will throw shit at one another over sports teams. It's all a replacement for actual culture.
Such a lame cope. Peter Pan is for children, but adults still accept "fairy dust" as an explanation for why they can fly.
this thread is a good example why context is important in this day and age.
>I swear to God people didn't have this problem just five years ago, but now peope use it to ironically detach themselves or deflect from any criticism.
Ok so let me give you a dose of reality here, this shit has been going on since the first star trek. And Star Wars? People been b***hing about the 3 prequels when you were probably born.
The problem is that you do take it too seriously, it's always going to be fiction, that's never going to change. The critism that you are deflecting is you are taking it too personal for something kids can simply shrug off.
Sure there is good and bad writing, production and what not. However you apart of the blame for taking it too far too.
You aren't the ones making it. And before you say
>if I go to a restaurant and it looks like shit, then it's shit
Proves that your taste buds and your perception of things needs to grow the frick up.
Just because a salad looks like shit to you doesn't mean it's not good for you.
>Just because a salad looks like shit to you doesn't mean it's not good for you.
>literally just don't ask questions just consume
No I don't think I will, if I don't like the look of something I'm not spending money on it. They aren't entitled to my money.
The problem is that the people who say "lol calm down is fiction" are the one who seethe the first when is their slop turn.
I swear that 70% of the one who said "is a space wizard for children" seethed at Raimi Spiderman , Man of Steel , Teen Titan Go or some Cartoon reboot
>Teen Titan Go or some Cartoon reboot
Nah, most people fine with these are the same ones who use the "it's for kids" defense
I'm a bad person because I want the entertainment I consume to have any standards?
No you are a bad person because you can't move on with your life when you don't get what you want.
You mean like you're doing right now?
it gets kind of shit when I never get what I want no matter how much I wait
Not even a star wars fan, but you are deluding yourself if this is the first time or you are the first to be experiencing dissatisfaction over media and entertainment.
Do these current writers suck ass? Yeah! Should it be better? Frick yah!
You think you gonna get it?
Yeah not gonna happen. Wake up gaybutt.
Sequel writers couldn't figure out the minimum expectations for what it should have been. How can someone fail so hard?
>Not even a star wars fan,
You're a corposhill, that's even worse
Star Wars and Marvel both fricking suck donkey dick. Frick anyone who likes any of that garbage
t. raging manchild
What's "giant head" and "talking tree and a raccoon" referencing?
MODOK, Groot and Rocket.
>dude it's a drawing it's not e-girlcon
show me a single soul that was hurt by the production and consumption of a e-girl pic
show me a single soul that was hurt by the production and consumption of girl jedi
millions of neckbeards
She wasn't even the first female Jedi.
One of the most popular characters in all of Star Wars is a female Jedi.
to be fair, ahsoka was hated at first
I already knew star wars fans had double standards.
People who relied on the billion dollar franchise before it started tanking? Toy stores come to mind.
meanwhile the act age guy ruined a little girl's life including his artist.
let's not forget how the Samurai X guy got away with possession of child pornography while the Galko dude got ruined for the same shit.
consequences are fictional like space wizards.
what are you talking about
nepotism
https://www.cbr.com/rurouni-kenshin-nobuhiro-watsuki-controversial/
The picrel is just coping because he got called out on his shitty media product and wants people to shut up. Star Wars had a surprisingly hard edge in the original trilogy. To see it dumbed down and tamed so completely was a real disappointment for decades long fans of the OT.
>Star Wars had a surprisingly hard edge in the original trilogy.
only 60% of it
The OT was a rare blend of nightmare space battles and wacky, silly kitsch. Then for whatever reason, everything post OT was utter dreck with sloppy plots, shallow characters, boring kitsch and disco tier battles. Stick a fork in it. This franchise is done.
RotS is better than RotJ despite it's flaws, and there is some good stuff in the TV shows.
How much profit as Disney made on their purchase of the IP? They seem perversely defensive of all their bad decisions, as if they are still underwater on the whole thing. It didn't flop that hard, did it?
probably a lot because of the merch
If you don't like the prequels, you don't even understand what actually made the OT good.
Stanislavsky once said: "You should write for children the same way you write for adults, except better". Saying something is "for children" is not even a valid excuse for a low quality.
>Dude, it's a bunch of mutant turtles and a rat."
>>"Dude, it's a talking blue hedgehog and his friends fighting an egg shaped man."
>>"Dude it's about a plumber that goes through pipes and fights weird mushroom monsters."
>>"Dude it's a pink ball with eyes that sucks things up."
>>"Stop taking all that seriously."
This is correct though.
How?
Tune out, don't consume, and avoid all discussion.
Never gonna make it.
The problem for Star Wars? It was always portrayed more seriously than those other products, except maybe pre fame Ninja Turtles which is ultra violent. Ninja Turtles even does quality character work for such a weird fantasy. Original Star Wars did all that too. The Prequels and Sequels did not do nearly as good character work, nor plot work, so there are some very angry show reps that try to excuse the inexcusable: a bad product one is expected to purchase. They get a lot of, "Nah, I can live without that." And it's the fault of their parent company not hiring good writers or directors.
>take seriously any fantastical or unorthodox premises
Do you understand how stupid this sounds?
No, can you explain it rather than just saying it?
You need to suspend your disbelief in order to "take seriously" anything relating to fantasy. Who gives a shit if you have a hard magic system or whatever the frick? It's still magic. It's still an implausible premise.
You're the guy who the "uhh this story has dragons so obviously it's ok that a random car from the 21st century can show up" post was made for.
>dude magic doesn't exist BUT it has to be realistic!
Are you moronic or just ESL?
Yeah dude we already know you are arguing in bad faith you didn't have to continue it. Anyone who says "uhh dude it's magic so internal consistency doesn't matter" is doing so and can be easily discarded.
>magic
>internal consistency
This is why everybody still laughs at nerds.
As you can see he can't actually refute things. He takes the false premise that magic isn't consistent in fantasy works(something that is not the case with most fantasy works such as LotR) and just says that this is the truth. Now watch as he says that LotR's doesn't count for some reason despite being fully consistent within the three books.
>LotR
>consistency
It's more a matter of consistency. If you establish that vampires can't be killed with bullets, you can't suddenly have them get killed by some dude with a gun (unless he has holy water on his bullets or whatever).
You also can't have modern technology in a medieval fantasy unless you specifically establish that X character is from the future and has future tech or some shit.
It's verisimilitude and consistency, more than realism.
At the same time, excessive nitpicking isn't good criticism. Certain things (advanced cultures like Paradise Island and Atlantis still having monarchies) are just conceits of the genre that you just have to accept.
>vampires can't be killed with bullets
>unless he has holy water on his bullets or whatever
You're not even adhering to your own
"hard" fantasy, you're just picking and choosing whatever elements you want.
Yeah, you're deliberately arguing in bad faith. There's no inconsistency to what was just said.
>There's no inconsistency to what was just said
Your "rules" don't even apply to what we know as classic vampires, you fricking zoomie.
What do you get out of trolling? Genuinely asking. What neurodivergence makes being a disingenous little shitstain weasel a pleasurable experience?
>point out how inconsistent his example is
>goes full seething mode
>Can't get killed by bullets
>Well if your bullets have holy water which can kill them
How is that inconsistent?
>WHAT IF I JUST *MAGIC* THESE BULLETS??
>What if you give the bullets somethings that's been established to kill them
How is that inconsistent, moron?
>>What if you give the bullets somethings that's been established to kill them
But that's my point, you big giant homosexual: plenty of classic vampires can't be killed just by bullets, regardless of the "somethings". Wouldn't they be more "canon" than whatever headcanon you've come up with watching Saturday morning depictions of vampires?
How are you more consistent than Bram Stoker, exactly?
We're not talking about other vampires from other stories, we're talking about vampires that are established in this story.
>from other stories
You mean THE book about vampires? The one that your whole argument is based around?
>The one that your whole argument is based around?
Well considering no one has brought up Bram Stoker until you did I'm gonna say that isn't what the argument is based around.
>i can disregard classical depictions of x vampires if the story demands it
>dude it's vampires who cares
I accept your concession.
You seem to be again just making up things that no one but you said anon. Maybe try reading the thread instead of just saying things. The original thing was about internal consistency in a story not about if stories could diverge from classical source material.
No, moron. You made a complete non sequitur by saying that all vampires portrayed in every work of fiction have to be the same. If a universe establishes vampires and how they work, then you have to follow those rules. Is that too difficult for you to comprehend?
It isn't.
But some people just don't want to accept that they've lost the argument.
>Magic bullets
How innovative.
From Dusk Till Dawn figured out carving little crosses into the lead of the bullets and they blow off parts of any vampire
Outlaw Star was pretty fricking good
Aisha Clanclan my dick
>autist seething about space wizard twitter man calling anyone else neurodivergent
Don't hate yourself like this
Okay, to use another example, you can't have Superman get horribly weakened by Kryptonite in one scene, and then have him shrug it off in another.
That has never happened, though. Why would you choose such a weak hypothetical?
What exactly do you want? He gave you an example of what an inconsistency is, and you shit on it by saying "it never happens in Superman books, so it's a weak comparison."
Anon it was established a bit ago he was arguing in bad faith I'm not sure why people continue to reply to him.
Because then he'll claim that he isn't, and that we are intolerant to his criticisms etc and the whole process repeats.
>Dude it's just an implausible premise therefore you can't take it seriously!
Hi anon.
If you by a family member a copy of the Brothers Grimm’s fairy tales, I will give you a reading list of 100 books on the following topics
>Pop culture infantilizing and dumbing people down and using nostalgia as a weapon against them.
>Disney's effects on culture along with their dumbing down of old folktales
>How empty and corporate, American culture is
>Ironic self distance and how it has effected broader culture
If you don’t do it, I’ll believe you are utterly insincere about your criticisms
is that kuckyweck
But the autistic fricks that make 40 minute long videos that screech about how the pipes in Mario are unrealistic and then get to work applying wikipedia based science and explain how it would tear Mario's skin off etc frustrate fricking everyone. No one gives a fricking frick how or why the pipes work, and a normal person would never make any attempt to analyze it's behavior, much less make a video explaining why it's not realistic enough for film.
All of these things are just punching back at the vast amount of autistic fricks that can't just shut the fricking frick up when their damaged brains force them to have to b***h and moan about how unrealistic shit like Baby Shark really is.
It's like that one autist who is so offended by the Grant Morrison quote about Batman's tires. Batman already has a massive supporting cast and a huge Rogues' Gallery; do we really care about whether Alfred or Robin or Lucius Fox pumps the tires if it's not relevant to the particular story?
Why the frick would Alfred, a trained butler, or Lucius Fox, a successful executive, would change Batman's tired?
But Batman does go to the mechanic in one Animated Series episode and though a nit pick detail, a scene where Batman or someone qualified was working on the Batmobile would be very world consistent. Certainly very unnecessary on a regular basis but not fish out of water odd if slipped in once in a while. Batman is frequently at his computer in the bat cave and these scenes are often used to introduce the episode or have the characters talk to each other and figure out a problem.
Personally I don't care what people have to say for the most part.
I completely understand that not everyone is going to see eye to eye with me so it's rather pointless to convince them otherwise.
Entertainment can serve it's purpose for you very thoroughly when you don't have to worry about argumentative online discourse.
You notice this is only brought up to excuse the "approved" things. Where was this sentiment when Man of Steel outraged everyone except the desperate DC and Snyder fans?
I think the main difference is if the movie is still fun to watch with cool action scenes or funny jokes despite the flaws. People can look past issues and still love what is basically a awful poorly made piece of shit as long as the film is still really fun to watch. Like Army of Darkness, it's cheap and stupid with dumb one-liners, a medieval cyborg hand, and even looney tunes sight gags in some parts. But who gives a frick, it's still a fun movie anyway.
But you get stuff like Man of Steel, which is a boring, dreary, broody slog to sit through. Nothing about it is fun or cool. So you can easily see the problems right there in front of you, because you are not caring to look past the flaws.
With stuff like Army of Darkness they're more like features not flaws but people expect things with Superman
The customer is always right so the burden lies upon the people making and selling a product to make it worth buying, not upon the customer to buy
You are not the customer anymore
Everyone with spending power is a customer, those dependent on them aren't
I disagree on the semantics. I could buy a box of tampons if I wanted to but I dont since I am not a women. Therefore, I am not a customer. The product isn't marketed to me.
Stuff like star wars used to be marketed to young men but they decided to chase a different dollar.
It's a society based on soulless irony. It's the beginning of the end. At least of what we like to call our modern American life.
>like comic books
>like movies
>like capeshit
>like not capeshit
>like funny capeshit
>like serious capeshit
must be something wrong with me
>by going DUDE WHO EVEN CARES ITS JUST SHITTY WORTHLESS PICTURE BOOKS IT DOESNT MATTER BRO
Which is odd because they god mad when Scorsese said the films were just that.
This disingenous tslting point is something tge so called "high prestige writers" at SFWA are notorious for.
When they get criticised for writing crap, they claim prople are getting mad at their "worthless funnybooks", but when people decide to treat their work EXACTLY LIKE WHAT THEY SAID THEY ARE, they get angry because they demand to be taken seriously.
Oh well I don't listen to writers after the 70s cause they don't actually write anything new
E-Celeb thread
It's because people are stupid and can't form rational defenses from criticism. They also have a really hard time accepting that something can be dumb and poorly written, and still enjoyable.
I love Godzilla vs the Sea Monster, but I would never refer to its plot and characterization as masterful.
>>WHAT IF I JUST *MAGIC* THESE BULLETS??
Also, I think this is tied to the general culture's inability to tell the difference between a "nitpick" and a genuine plot hole. A nitpick is a silly little detail or conceit that sticks out to you:
>If Hercules has the strength of ten men, why don't twenty guys get together and beat him up?
>How come the Jedi don't use telekinesis all the time?
>Why doesn't the Batmobile get stuck in traffic?
None of those have anything to do with the *actual* content of the story. A plot hole is when the story genuinely draws attention to something, then contradicts or ignores how it works or its direct implications. For example, TLJ's chase sequence is a complete mess, and it draws so much attention to its mechanics that it's impossible to ignore.
>If Hercules has the strength of ten men, why don't twenty guys get together and beat him up
Hercules has his own bros to help him, and magic items like impenetrable lionskin armor and super poison arrows
Plus Hercules is as strong as the plot needs him to be
Sure, but he also spends a lot of time solo, and doesn't always have his special equipment. But that's why it's a silly nitpick, not a genuine plothole.
Likewise, the Batmobile doesn't get stuck in traffic because Batman has a super computer that can change traffic lights and a super GPS that always finds the best routes, and Jedi telekinesis takes too much effort/concentration to be used constantly and precisely.
Again, these aren't *real* criticisms of a story, but a lot of people notice dumb details like that and thing it's a good, genuine critique.
>starts samegayging replies to lick his wounded ego
Star Wars is for children though
>I swear to God people didn't have this problem just five years ago
lmao
That's definitely not true
>Mfw Rocket Raccoon menationed