People's inability to take any slightly unorthodox premise seriously is what has been killing media for the past 15 years. Its not so much as a fault of the media they consume rather than a problem with themselves.
There are a lot of people who will say something "Takes itself too seriously" when they really just mean "This actually cares about storytelling when I don't respect it enough to engage with that."
Moreover, there's people who's entire personality is being embarrassed of being into self serious somewhat edgy/dramatic shit when they were teens and their inability to suspend disbelief is them capitulating to ghosts.
We had this thread before and I get what you're saying but I think it's bullshit. There's tons of media that takes itself super seriously despite its absurd premises. Especially when it's some auteur that has perfect control of the output.
Name one that's a western IP.
Abatap, Dune, um Jackie Chan
And... that's it?
I'm sure there's a lot more but I'm not cataloging them.
>Can't take ineffectual mockery from children
How cowardly of them, they must've had nothing of import to say
You asked him to name one, if you wanted him to name 100 you should have specified that, homosexual.
The only thing I've seen doing it nowadays is anime. Westerners just can't take anything seriously.
I have to agree with this. There isn't a single serious story that makes it big with the zoomer generation that isn't memed to the point were it ends up becoming a joke. Even stuff that starts small and explodes, like all the analog horror bs that grew big over the past couple years, just ends up being mocked by everyone from so many angles you can't take it seriously anymore.
I cannot tell you how many series I've had ruined for me because of this.
It's more complex than that, it's not that we can't, but that we normally won't. We're terrified of showing even that slight measure of vulnerability and gullibility implied in caring for and engaging with stories (i.e. lies!) unless we can explicitly assert control over that very forfeiture of control. The story must be itself openly self-aware and snarky about its own silliness so we can respond to the cues for emotionality in the safety of a context that makes our complicity with it crystal clear.
Tldr: we are really, really REALLY fricking insecure and we'd rather share a collective lie than risk a genuine emotional connection.
The reasons for it are up for debate, but the fact that american culture is extremely insecure and everything has to be cloaked in cynical irony rather than anyone admitting they enjoy anything is pretty obvious. I want to say that the internet is to blame, any opinion you put online is basically a pinata waiting for the worst actors to come along and take their swing, but maybe this was already festering and the internet just revealed the sickness in all its pustulent glory.
I would say it's something that fuels one another. 2000s and 2010's internet was mostly guided by people who grew up on media that already had a dose of parody, irony and sarcasm, so you basically had a population composed of folks whose idea of funny is behaving like a Sitcom Snarky Straight Man character type and these people are being put in social media that pushes them towards wanting to be the first to take the swing.
But it definitely predates the internet's big community boo,. Like you can grab a late 90s/early 00s and you'll already see a lot of this particular form of cynicism and humor.
Sorry I'm moronic and forgot to write 'late 90s/early 00s MOVIE' and I meant to write Boom not Boo'
This isn't incorrect, but this isn't something that will change any time soon.
This isn't about American culture. American culture can actually openly promote positive humanistic values without people rolling their eyes because "real life is cruel and not like that at all", like, say, in Eastern Europe. And it does not have strict social norms permeating every facet of existence, even art, like in Japan.
The fact of the matter is, yes, the majority of people feel pressured by social norms in some way to put up their best front, so they don't want to seem weak and tend to dismiss everything. This isn't exclusive to America, it's a part of every single country's society.
But the thing is, this isn't just a "society" problem. This is a deeply ingrained problem with our own psyche. We are conditioned to not just lie to others, but lie to ourselves. Because we like to have a certain image of ourselves. "I am strong", "I am smart", "I am rational", "my decisions are justified even if I know made them on a whim and made up some rationalization LATER, but this isn't important". We will go to almost any length to lie to ourselves to remain in our comfort zone, and the worst part is, most of the time, we do it subconsciously, without even noticing. A lot of the things you believe about yourself and others are probably a result of being unwilling to recognize the complexity of a certain issue and work your perception of it into your worldview, and instead resorting to easy labels.
People used to say Cinemaphile makes you more honest, but this is not completely true. Cinemaphile makes you more impulsive. The lack of consequences makes you more likely to voice the little passing thoughts in your head you don't mean and might regret later. But it doesn't make you reflect on yourself and what you are as a person, how you engage with the world and what you want to achieve. It just fosters yet another culture where you put up a front.
>And it does not have strict social norms permeating every facet of existence, even art, like in Japan.
But you do. Just look at adult cartoons "violence is ok, sex is the worst thing ever". America has a lot of social norms and you can feel it in all american media.
>Just look at adult cartoons "violence is ok, sex is the worst thing ever".
Which adult cartoons promote this? Which scenes? Be specific. Because there is plenty of sex in adult cartoons.
Most of them. Every old sitcom like fg, american guy, futurama and even new stuff like HQ censors everything sex related and leaves violence and blood unharmed because americans are afraid of sex. It's still a taboo subject in that country.
I always thought that was because extreme displays of violence is something that most American people won't experience so they can get away with it while sex is something that most people will have at some point in their lives so sexual content is censored. Same reason why children shows will show someone getting disintegrated by a laser beam but avoid showing guns because they don't want want kids to mimic it
>Which adult cartoons promote this? Which scenes? Be specific. Because there is plenty of sex in adult cartoons.
anon, on this very baord, today, people have posted pictures of Brain the dog being beaten until one of his arms fell off and you can see the bones in his feet. This aired on normal american tv.
On the other hand harley quinn show, despite being specifically for adults, still doesnt show full breasts, veganas or dicks.
If you're wondering what the frick does this still have to do with thread's topic, well, people not being genuine is a far bigger issue than just some pop culture movies being overly quippy, and that's not nearly the worst expression of it. For example, every person you've ever met who was a massive butthole, that's exactly why it is. They're compensating for their own deep insecurities they deny by being overly antagonistic, being they were conditioned to believe being seen as weak is WORSE than being seen as an butthole. This isn't about Joss Whedon or whoever, it's about our psyche and how it has been shaped by the history of human society.
This realization has made me uneasy and somewhat frustrated with life ever since I've had it a few years ago. The knowledge that the people around me are all just slaves to their own biases. That they maybe make about 40% of their decisions consciously at best, but there's a ton that goes on inside their heads they don't even realize. And yet every single person still considers themselves the infallible center of the universe who is objectively correct about everything all the time for no other reason but just because this idea makes them feel good, but they will never admit it, even to themselves. They are like children, you have to walk on eggshells around their egos or they will throw a tantrum and try putting you down. Of course, I'm probably not exempt from this too.
Basically, I wish more people reflected on why they hold certain beliefs, and were ready to change their worldview, but this is not how our psyche is usually conditioned to be. I'm pretty much demanding people to do therapy with themselves to be less miserable and be better people like I try to, but in order to do that a person needs to admit there's something wrong with them to begin with, so of course my demands are unreasonable. I'm hopeful that as we grow more civilized, people get more open and honest, but this is pretty idealistic.
If everyone was genuine this world would be so damn boring. If we all shared the same worldview every discussion would be so damn boring. If we all gave up passion and tried to view everything using rationality everything would be so damn boring.
>Basically, I wish more people reflected on why they hold certain beliefs, and were ready to change their worldview, but this is not how our psyche is usually conditioned to be. I'm pretty much demanding people to do therapy with themselves to be less miserable and be better people like I try to, but in order to do that a person needs to admit there's something wrong with them to begin with, so of course my demands are unreasonable. I'm hopeful that as we grow more civilized, people get more open and honest, but this is pretty idealistic.
Look at you. You, yourself think that your way is the correct one and people should think and act the way that you envision. You are basically contradicting what you have written in the previous 2 paragraphs.
>would be so damn boring.
plot twist, real life is currently boring.
You don't need to give up passion to be genuine with yourself. You don't even need to give up passion to be rational. It's rational to want things that make you happy and don't harm you, which might be indulging in your passion.
And yes, I realize that "everyone is a victim of their bias" also extends to me and this very belief. It's probably a natural inclination of my personality to be so people-oriented and sometimes care about trying to change them. Someone else's personality will lead them to simply dismiss the people they disagree with to keep their comfort zone, which is necessary for us all to an extent. But my beliefs aren't about doing harm to anyone unless you count psychological damage from re-examining your worldview, which I guess might be too much for some people to bear and I'm usually trying to see the other people's circumstances unless they're being an butthole, rather than forcing my stances on them. So in my bias, I do believe they are right and just and people would benefit from adopting them.
>Cinemaphile makes you more honest
Cinemaphile is just ahead of the curve. How everyone acts here is how the majority of people act on the internet in 3-5 years time. You just have to go look at posts from like, 2012 and see how those memes or mannerisms translated to places like twitter and instagram a few years later. Cinemaphile doesn't make you more honest, its just more honest of a medium.
Also, its a fantastic place for data mining, as you can make many interesting deductive leaps based on nothing more than the number and types of threads, regardless of individual thread content.
Anime does take itself TOO seriously tho, like, a character could say he ate a burger and everyone in the room will gasp and then some dude will start dramatically yelling that he hates burgers
>Anime does take itself TOO seriously tho, like, a character could say he ate a burger and everyone in the room will gasp and then some dude will start dramatically yelling that he hates burgers
thats the story though. Why does everyone rush to be the guy to point out some random shit isnt real?
That's the definition of melodrama.
>Anime is great because it's sincere
A little self awareness goes a long way. You can still have your super serious drama while stopping once in a while and think “Yeah, this is actually about talking animals”
I think it defintiely depends on how you're portraying it. Like Watership Down doesn't need to go all "wink wink nudge nudge Wabbits amirite?" honestly thinking about it, what talking animal cartoons really decide to take you out of the movie to be "self-aware". Self-awareness should pertain to the movie you're making, Shrek is self-aware to its success because that's literally the artistic goal. To take a step back from the perception of Disney and make something that directly plays with all those ideas and cliches and is ultimately not a movie that's afraid of sincerity. It's just the sincerity it finds is within its own characters.
>It's just the sincerity it finds is within its own characters.
There have been good examples of this even within Western media - Arcane jumps to mind right away. It was an animated show about a video game and was ripe for lots of 4th wall breaking snark, but instead it went with a sincere story about the characters and it pretty much worked.
I blame the entertainment system as a whole for putting out shite products filled with forced melodrama. The audience isn't wrong with "it's just an x about x" because that's literally true about any form of fiction. And it's a hell of a lot easier to write something that leans into that perception than it is to make a narrative that doesn't need to. It's cheap and easy, and you can make the audience feel like they're in on the joke.
>I blame the entertainment system as a whole for putting out shite products filled with forced melodrama. The audience isn't wrong with "it's just an x about x" because that's literally true about any form of fiction. And it's a hell of a lot easier to write something that leans into that perception than it is to make a narrative that doesn't need to. It's cheap and easy, and you can make the audience feel like they're in on the joke.
I think some of that is inherent anytime art becomes a product. Or more specifically, a corporate product.
It would be like one of us critiquing an ikea furniture copy sold at walmart like it was a bookshelf made by a fine cabinet maker from the 1700s. Some dipshit surely would say "reee, its just cheap walmart furniture" and they would be correct. They very well could be trying to cover for their own poverty and lack of taste. Covering their inability to afford better. But we might also be buttholes for asking for the cheap furniture to be better while not looking at the bigger picture that both the cheap piece of shit furniture and the poor person deflecting are products of the same economic system that incentives producing cheap shit and not raising wages.
Self awareness or a bit of humor is fine so long as it's not undermining the work itself. Western cape comics, cartoons, and superhero movies have this problem in spades. Look at the recent Doc Ock arc in ASM where the entire thing is trying to tell you the situation is serious while everyone is quipping left and right and the whole thing feels like a goofy cartoon. There's a point where I have to wonder why I should be taking this seriously when the writers clearly aren't.
'self awareness' isn't good and is just something hack internet reviewers bang on about.
Yeah? What makes you think so?
The entire irreverent attitude people have towards media that's plain as day easy to see.
>"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."
And pic related.
Rendering the barest possible description of a movie's premise to back the argument "the concept is ridiculous so it only works if it's funny or has meta ironic humour" is the bane of modern media and needs to die horribly.
This is the idiot who made his edgy "shut up about plotholes" video because I guess his sponsors told him that aggressively shutting down people calling them manchildren was were the likes were at rather than actual critical thinking. He's just self-serving and reductive by trade
>"Dude, it's a giant head"
Oh, no, no. This is a misunderstanding. Let me clear it for you. It's not the giant head that we have problem with. It's that it was done poorly when we have examples of giant head done well.
People's inability to take anything seriously has always felt to me like the result of some kind of damage or something. Do people act like that when reading or watching, I don't know War and Peace or Moby Dick? Those are fiction too you know.
I'd read War and Peace if it had snarky MCU quips throughout
The people who act like that don't read anything that isn't a post on social media.
It gets exhausting to put up a front. I used to be so irony poisoned but only now am I starting to break out of it.
Yeah, at this point genuine optimism or even just media being earnest about what it is/wants to be is extremely fricking refreshing.
Its only of the reasons I enjoy shows like Symphogear so much: even among anime examples, its a show that know exactly how stupid it is and says "and everyone here is okay with that, right? Okay, cool, so now lets suplex a space shuttle over a church."
Blame Whedon. He was immensely popular with the crowd that would go into writing entertainment and his quip heavy style basically made them think that everything needed jokes to undermine all sense of tension or seriousness.
>Do people act like that when reading or watching, I don't know War and Peace or Moby Dick?
Early novels like Clarissa or The Sorrows of Young Werther didn't really have this. They had what could best be described as protofandoms who were very vocal about the works and took them seriously. Diderot, I believe, wrote about how he'd shout at the characters and events like a kid watching a play when he read Clarissa as it was coming out.
>Early novels like Clarissa or The Sorrows of Young Werther didn't really have this. They had what could best be described as protofandoms who were very vocal about the works and took them seriously. Diderot, I believe, wrote about how he'd shout at the characters and events like a kid watching a play when he read Clarissa as it was coming out.
what was that book that came out where the dude killed himself because his crush married another guy? fans took that book so seriously the officials of the time were worried about copycat suicides. The Sorrows of Young Werther maybe
Yeah it was Werther. Young men would also dress in the way he described himself and there were things like fixfics and the like.
Usually these arguments are used to justify putting race swaps and other diversity/lgbt nonsense into a piece of fiction nowadays.
trump lost
Who Fking cares?
Yeah, but he was never supposed to win in the first place
"People may buy that our character has radioactive powers, or is from another planet, but a colorful spandex costume?! Are you crazy?! No audience will accept that!" - Strong Bad
Well, I guess times have changed because audiences will accept it AS LONG AS you point out how ridiculous and crazy the character's outfit is. As long as you're at it, maybe also point out how ridiculous the character's name, powers, city, state, and zip code are.
Irony was a mistake
Something's always bothered me about this beyond the usual "Durrr you can't take genre fiction seriously because it's not real." Since when was Star Wars a children's movie, anyway?
I mean it's really not the own people think it is. saying "this movie is ridculous dogshit for babies so stop criticizing it" is far more scathing than pointing out plotholes.
They've never honest when they say that, though, it's just a whine to refuse to address criticism. The guy with the sign was famously mocked for it when he was salty about how bad the final nuStar Wars film was.
Wow
They will want to defend themselves and their lack of inability to suspend belief so much so that they'll outright say "If it's not real then I don't care."
>Since when was Star Wars a children's movie, anyway?
Since it was rated PG, and anything that allows you to bring your kids automatically makes it a kids movie.
>people set on fire
>hands lopped off literally, LITERALLY left and right
>not-Nazis slipping into power to create a not-Nazi space regime hellbent on doing space not-Nazi shit
>casual unwitting on-screen incest for the sole purpose of a gotcha joke
>powerful galactic senator reduced to a sex object for a giant greed slug
>hulking death cyborgs slaughtering hapless soldiers like goddam Jason X with a laser sword
>all but last second cut from actual on screen child murder
FOR
C
H
I
L
D
R
E
N
Yes it is.
nothing you listed is really that profound
>WOWZA SPEZZ NAZZEEES!
>WOAH HIS HECKIN HAND GOT CHOPPED OFF!
>OMG THEY IMPLIED THE KIDERINOS GOT WACKED!
if this considered too much for kids then no wonder this generation gets triggered by slurs on the internet and breaks down
I guess it depends on what you think is adult and what is for kids?
It seems that you think death and violence is ok for kids. So is your issue with sex? Only things with sex are for adults? Or maybe its unfunny funny complicated life situations with no easy answer like a sitcom on the bbc or some soap opera? Things have to be boring and like a normal daily life to be for adults? Or maybe its some story where everything is vague and poorly put together so no clear narrative can be observed? Maybe something like youd find in some shitty 60s art film?
How old were you when you first watched a Star Wars movie?
I saw Alien when I was 10. What's your point?
>star wars is on the same level as alien
It's ok to like kid stuff anon.
I'm responding to your question about when I watched a kid's movie by telling you how old I was when I watched something nobody could consider a "kid's movie"
Because the age of the view is irrelephant
>irrelephant
This is just a really funny sounding word
"It's for children!" is such a fricking handwave when your movie is flopping. I've been going to the movies a lot with a friend ever since we discovered this great restaurant/movie theater combo nearby. I've seen Mario Bros, Elemental, Dial of Destiny, Barbie, Guardians 3, and Asteroid City. Every single one of those movies except Asteroid City had minimum a few kids in the audience-- obviously movies like Mario had more kids than others.
All of these movies (except Mario) had fidgety kids who couldn't sit still throughout the whole movie and got up multiple times to use the bathroom or something. Even Elemental had bored kids. Dial of Destiny was REALLY bad with the couple of kids sitting next to me. By the time we got to the boat scene, they were slouching in their chairs and kicking the air in boredom. Except for Mario and Elemental, these movies do not feel like they are made FOR children; if kids end up liking it, they will absolutely cater towards them and take their money. But the movie itself does not do things that hook kids. They feature lots of grim scenes about depression, tons of adult humor and situations, many monologues, and long running times.
Maybe my perspective is warped. I'm going to a very expensive movie theater, after all. But adults had no problem at crying over the potential death of a CG raccoon or being moved by a giant plastic doll coming to life and interacting with an old woman. So again, the only time the, "It's just a cartoon/movie/for kids!" thing comes up is when your script sucks and you're defensive about it.
The Flash just fricking sucks. Even if the special effects were good, it would suck.
I dunno, I think someone could make an argument for "this work really was made aimed strictly at kids and thus focuses on an experience that aims for simpler dialogue, clear but simple character depth and brisk pacing with lots of humor" and what not. Obviously alot of time it's just people trying to handwave criticism of shit they like, but I think it's also clear to see that there is such a thing as "this is made for kids thru and thru".
This. Also anyone going in with a "it's just a _____" attitude on their creation tells me they don't really give a shit and that what they made is very likely to be low quality. Frick them for trying to waste my time.
Oh my sweet potato pie I just want to make a Supergirl movie exactly like Symphogear, same tone and attitude and everything. Just straight up no irony allowed superheroics.
>it's just a cartoon up until I can no longer make a living drawing them
You would think Barbie was a movie for children, except it's actually a crackhead movie made for forty year old women who played with Barbies when they were ten in the Nineties. I'm sure all the little girls in the theater had no idea what the hell was going on when Barbie got her ass slapped by some guy
>I'm sure all the little girls in the theater had no idea what the hell was going on when Barbie got her ass slapped by some guy
you're probably a pedo poster that secretly wishes he could educate them on said ass slap
that's some nice projection you got there, anon. got anything else you'd like to tell us?
The movie is bright and colorful enough with lots of slapstick and enough people were laughing that a child would latch onto the vibes still enjoy the movie. Especially when Ken is acting silly and doing dance numbers.
I loved Seinfeld as a kid because George and Kramer acted so loud and crazy all the time even if I didn't understand all the adult situations they were referencing. It helped that my parents loved it, too. Kids feed off of happy energy very easily, they'll laugh just because you're laughing.
holy shit, someone else who also saw asteroid city!
What's your thoughts on it?
In my opinion its one of Andersons best, but it will also not be as well liked as his more well known movies. I still think Moonrise Kingdom is his best movie, but this might be second now. The speech scene with the military guy where he explains the chapters of his life was my favourite scene, though other scenes are much more important. I disagree that the meta nature of the movie removes narrative heft for each meta layer. The movie wouldn't work if the innermost layer didn't have a solid framework upon which to lay the rest of the structure of the film.
I agree but Star Wars is for children
What age are these children we are talking about?
12-14 year old boys.
>oh no a skeleton!
Cope
Not Cinemaphile but this fricking dog from Skyrim. I hate him
>from Skyrim
moronic secondary. Barbus was a dog from the very beginning.
Is that Godard? Frick off. Wait. That's Patrick H. Willems. My bad.
>People's inability to take any slightly unorthodox premise seriously is what has been killing media for the past 15 years.
The audience's inability or the creator's?
Audiences don't create media, so I don't think you can blame them for what gets created.
Post-modernism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
>Post-modernism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
most of the media we enjoy is made possible by post modernism. If we still believed in a concrete morality given to us by various christian faiths, we wouldn't have much if any of the fiction provided to us in the past 100 years.
And now we have garbage fiction built with no faith or mortality of any type.
Hiding behind "It's a dumb movie for kids" the nanosecond you get criticism is the absolute peak of cowardice.
The problem is that nerds care about the wrong things. Brainless plotgays obsessed with lore and wiki minutiae. Stories are about themes, character, tone, ideas, not about explanations and exposition dumps. You accept the premise at face value, and any explanation given should be in service of the story, not the story itself,
They're also obsessed with behind the scenes trivia and endlessly make fanfics about the author's that they post here
That's just Cinemaphile in general.
It's much worse among capeshit fans. I presume it's all the rebooting so people can't view the stories and stories
>The problem is that nerds care about the wrong things. Brainless plotgays obsessed with lore and wiki minutiae.
I think it is fine to obsess over those things. The problem is that the people that get upset over them cant really articulate what they are upset about. When you really get down to it, they are upset about american corporate capitalism and how it manufactures fiction and entertainment. Thats the heart of it. The lore not making sense is usually caused by that. In one episode of whatever the aliens are green, in the next they are blue. In one episode it is said they can only have babies with dragons. Then in season 2 you see them having babies with unicorns. Stuff like that happens because nothing is made by a small team of people that have vision and give a shit. Its just a job. The show is just a cheap product to make money. The episodes and seasons rarely all have the same writing staff. Their is no unified idea behind the story when it starts. Random people are just throwing shit at a wall until the show is canceled and the process starts over.
They get upset at the writers or the show but it is really just baked into the system we have in the US.
Japan is a little better because they adapt manga that is made by 1 to 5 people usually. But manga and japan has its own problems, usually with readers or the companies that print manga only wanting derivative stories. It takes a long time to ever get anything truly original. Fight manga has been copying journey to the east since probably inception.
>But manga and japan has its own problems, usually with readers or the companies that print manga only wanting derivative stories
Anon... 95% of western cartoons are still comedies and that what they have been doing for 60 years now. I wouldn't throw the stone if I were you.
>Anon... 95% of western cartoons are still comedies and that what they have been doing for 60 years now.
not really. Most of them have heros that are light hearted but that does not make them comedies. You're showing your ignorance because that didnt really start until nicktoons. That would have been 91. So that would have been 32 years ago. And even then, it was a slow transformation of copying nicks success.
Kids were not watching GI Joe busting a gut at all the slick cool jokes.
>not really. Most of them have heros that are light hearted but that does not make them comedies
Action cartoons are way fewer and in between and even those are pretty egenric copies of each other.
>. You're showing your ignorance because that didnt really start until nicktoons. That would have been 91.
Lol comedic cartoons have been a thing since 60s with Hanna-Barbera and warner bros stuff
>And even then, it was a slow transformation of copying nicks success.
That doesn't change that for 60s years 95% of western cartoons have been slice of life comedies with a gimmick or two.
>but they evolved and some incorporated other genres and styles
Then battle manga are different as well since there quite a lot that tried different things and combined genres and styles.
>GI Joe busting a gut at all the slick cool jokes.
GI Joe is 1 in 10.000. Not to mention that at that time it was one of the very few toy commercial cartoons that was entertaining. Anyway useless ass discussion. Just follow what the Bible teaches you and don't throw the stone.
>Lol comedic cartoons have been a thing since 60s with Hanna-Barbera and warner bros stuff
Im not arguing that comedy cartoons didnt exist, but your wild assertion that 95% of them are comedies
>that didnt really start until nicktoons
Black person, television cartoon comedies started with shows like The Flintstones and The Jetsons ripping off The Honeymooners, and that was in the fricking 60s.
Even before then, The Looney Tunes and Disney theatrical shorts were also comedic, and that was in the 40s.
>There are a lot of people who will say something "Takes itself too seriously" when they really just mean "This actually cares about storytelling when I don't respect it enough to engage with that."
No, it actually means that something has storytelling so shit that it ends up being cringe (common in anime and 3deep5me artsy crap.) Only (man)children want to engage with cringe-worthy, shitty pieces of media and get mad when someone criticizes them.
I also hate intellectual dishonesty. look at Ninja Turtles threads trying to pass black april as an argument against the movie when adlib zoomer dialogue is right there ripe foe the nitpicking
The Shakespear we all ready in high school was about as absurd as you can get without bringing in fantasy elements. That should shut down the pseduointellectuals.
>That should shut down the pseduointellectuals.
lol, do you even remember high school? Every class had some dumb shit that thought he was a little genius saying "why do we have to read this? This isnt important. When will I use this? No one talks like this."
Im sure the first spoken word was met with someone grunting about how stupid and pointless it was.
If they pull that you can just accuse them of being a child that lacks the ability to take anything seriously. Not only are you refuting idea a second time (since they didn't evne challenge the first accusation) but you also attack their character so much that if they don't reverse this nothing they say will be respected or listened to.
Although if your audience is people that would agree "Why take literature seriously? Why take high school seriously? Why take entertainment seriously? Why take anything seriously?" You shouldn't be debating them. You should be laughing at them. Every time they try to act like anything they say has anything value use it as a change to bury them more into the ground. Just start calling them subhuman. They probably won't even deny it since it's just another thing they "don't take seriously".
>Although if your audience is people that would agree "Why take literature seriously? Why take high school seriously? Why take entertainment seriously? Why take anything seriously?" You shouldn't be debating them.
people like that probably dont take much serious. If it isnt eating, sleeping, sleeping and fricking, its probably not very important to them.
The Tempest?
I always like to quote Stanislavsky: "You should write for children the same way you write for adults, except better".
And while we're at it, let's consider the following quote. According to it, worldbuilding and internal consistency is bad. BTAS actually answered the question of "Who pumps the Batmobile's tires" and made a story from it, but apparently they should've instead made Batman fly and shoot eye beams because who the frick cares, it's a made up story about guy in a bat suit.
Morrison gave an example. Do you know what an example is moron?
>According to it, worldbuilding and internal consistency is bad. BTAS actually answered the question of "Who pumps the Batmobile's tires" and made a story from it, but apparently they should've instead made Batman fly and shoot eye beams because who the frick cares, it's a made up story about guy in a bat suit.
I dont think the quote is against world building if the writer is so inclined to do it. But against people who write off fiction for doing anything that is unusual to the reader.
Autists usually focus on the scenarios rather than the characters. It's why they tend to be shit writers. Decent fiction always emerges from the characters and the audience will forgive the sloppiest of world building if they give a frick about the protagonist. Witness Harry Fricking Potter.
>wingardium leviosa
>Witness Harry Fricking P
That is pretty bad example considering the characters were ok with very few good ones.
I dare to say that Harry Potter was made popular by its setting and escapist premise, not the characters. Hell, the fans usually tended to change personalities of their favorite characters to suit their liking even more.
Well, as you can see, his example is shit.
The point of an example is to convey a concept. You didn't attack the concept and you didn't explain how the example fundamentally doesn't work with the concept. You basically proved his point that comic books are spergs who's thinking is worse than children," Actuaklly it's not the underpants man that changes the tires it's his butler!"
His point is people like you need to get a fricking life.
You're not saying anything more substantial despite your posturing.
Iteration and re-evaluation of past concepts is essential to producing anything of value when you use old stories as your basis. It's how we come up with new permutations of ideas instead of trotting out the same old ones on repeat. You point to Superman when our very idea of what Superman has been shifted by people doing EXACTLY the kinds of stories you decry as betraying the material. He was not a compassionate figure UNTIL people like Binder put him in situations his powers couldn't solve and created further restrictions in order to explore Clark's morality and character. Shit, Kryptonite as a weakness wasn't even a Siegel and Schuster invention! It was added to the radio show for drama! They inherently changed the entire conceit of Superman because the norms established in the comics weren't engaging. Challenging convention is not inherently good or bad.
Harry Potter's writing is absolute garbage with paper thin characters.
>Autists usually focus on the scenarios rather than the characters.
there is some truth to this. I think they studied where autistic people look when watching media and they tend to look everywhere and average people usually look at the eyes and mouth of the speaker.
not that one is better than the other. Like autistics show some natural resistance to being manipulated by people with antisocial personality disorder. Probably because they listen to different parts of a conversation than an average person.
anyway, harry potter is a bad example. The strength of HP is that harry potter is a good self insert for the reader. he enters the magical world just as ignorant as the reader. Then the series depends on its setting which is appealing to autistics. If anything, the characters are pretty week and written so shallowly, readers can write whatever kind of head cannon they want with them
I aint reading that shit
Comics, cartoons and video games all exist for one reason: to keep kids happy and distracted, so their parents don't have to do any actual parenting. That's the American way: you have kids you don't really want out of societal obligation, you put as little effort into raising them as you can get away with, and if they grow up to be crack prostitutes, you blame the media you used as a substitute for parenting, society, and everyone except yourself. Then you look in the mirror, pop a Valium, and tell yourself that you're a good parent, erasing all evidence to the contrary from your perception. God bless America!
>Comics, cartoons and video games all exist for one reason: to keep kids happy and distracted, so their parents don't have to do any actual parenting.
I think you give everyone too much credit.
This stuff exists to make money and they dont give a shit who buys it so long as line goes up on that chart they look at every friday before they all go for golf.
Like, they even know most games are purchased by adults. They know 25% of toys are purchased by adults. Transformers and Marvel Legends are probably over 50% adults and that is conservative. Kids were probably not shelling out 50 bucks for the hydra stomper figure. Probably didnt shell out 180 for the last tf combiner either.
No. All forms of entertainment were invented to keep kids distracted. Adults are supposed to be working, not having fun. The second you turn eighteen, you put down the toys and pick up the job applications. This is just how things are. This is how the system works, and will always work.
>This is how the system works, and will always work.
>will always work.
In order for the average person to be functioning, they basically have to remove the urge to think about anything profound or beyond their lives and immediate friends and family. Things have to serve a utility that matches their demographic including fiction. Stories must be escapism for thrills, sexual urges, or as a starting conversation piece for social engagement that doesn’t go beyond ‘its good’ or shallow observations for social affirmations only. They can’t have their time wasted by something that doesn’t have a message or provides empowerment as an emotional bandaid. They tend to shut down anything that brings them out of their comfort zone. I just think that the modern societal structure strips most people of a desire to want to engage because they’ve been worn down into drones that are hyper focused on surviving and can’t devote any time to things that may damage their social networks or standing.