Why is their so little appreciation for Anglo excellence these days?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Why is their so little appreciation for Anglo excellence these days?
Why is their so little appreciation for Anglo excellence these days?
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
*there
I'm glad no one is bumping this, I let all my Anglo bros down with the messed up OP. I'm sorry.
Hehe.
>all poorly made cartoons rendered in blender and on green screen that shit on their respective source material
Do people like you actually feel good about spewing reductive nonsense like that? Is there no conscience alerting you what you're doing might be wrong?
>shitposting about shit movies on Cinemaphile is wRoNg
There's nothing witty about what you're doing, so yeah.
Here, I'll show you an example of a good shitpost.
no this is a shitpost
>pictured: these films
No. That's just a shit post.
are you sure? it looks a lot like synder’s cinematography to me
You're trash.
well that wasn’t very witty
Yeah. Snydergays and Prequelgays deserve each other. That is, they deserve themselves.
>Nute Gunray: Sideous promised us a handsome reward!
>Darth Vader: I am your reward, am I not handsome? *kills Gunray*
How'd you feel if this book line was in the movie?
Would’ve killed the tone
Those are bad movies.
People never managed to sufficiently express why. It's always some nonsense like "I don't like the computer graphics" or "it doesn't respect the source material" (which is hilarious, especially in the case of Star Wars). At best you'll get discussion revealing how the haters misunderstood specific scenes like the "Martha" scene or the "I don't like Sand scene".
Go to bed, Zack.
You too, James.
fine I’ll take the bait. there are many approaches to deconstruct Synder’s work and this one’s my favourite. synder is supposedly a student of joseph campbell. so much so, he took quotes from his book A Hero With A Thousand Faces, translated them into his version of kryptonian language, then took this scribe and embossed it into his superman’s suit. this is what the raised lettering covering Henry cavil is: the words of Joseph Campbell. what’s hilarious, and deeply ironic, is man of steel specifically, but of course dawn of Justice naturally, DO NOT maintain the Monomythic story structure as prescribed by professor Joseph Campbell. mos, specifically, is non-linear, with superman’s characterization moving between childhood and adulthood. the issue therein, is the ritual of story laid by campbell, status quo, call to adventure, crossing the threshold, are then out of order. perhaps the most egregious of this example, is zod’s snapped neck. which is likely synder’s atonement with the father, which takes place after the boon: receiving the superman suit. furthermore Clark already had a literal atonement with meeting his actual father in the fortress of solitude. modern acolytes of Campbell, like Harmon, purport you can move the rituals around, which is entirely reasonable. however Synder’s non-linearity and apparent misunderstanding of these rituals, make them a mishmash of comparative mythology which most find unpalatable. the difficulty then, in finding legitimate conversation of these rituals, is finding actually intelligent individuals who do this thing called “reading books”. those who would actually read the work of Campbell, and speak from a position of genuine understanding. instead you Syndergays just post generic and ambivalent quotes from the professor for thinking this is somehow profound
there, now continue pretending no one can articulate why these films are the celluloid equivalent of green baby shit
Okay. First of all, Campbell's a good source but his monomyth is a more flawed version of what say Pageau calls Universal History. Being a fan of Campbell doesn't mean you must subscribe to his every idea. Ritual isn't something unique to Campbell, Campbell just summarized it based on his understanding. You've admitted yourself that non-chronological storytelling isn't a disqualifier at all. The atonement of the father in Man of Steel is complicated by the fact that Clark has two fathers. One's harshness consists in sending Clark to a foreign world and the other's in raising him as a human. Clark reconciles with both of them, choosing mankind over Kryptonian revival but also stepping up as a unique defender of mankind. Zod is strongly related to number of the beast symbolism, which his artificial birth emphasizes. The main problems with your critique are setting an unrealistic standard when comparing Snyder's movies to other movies out there and also, taking Snyder's admiration for Campbell as an ultimate commitment of Snyder's never to go against anything Campbell believed.
It does mean you subscribe to Campbell when you take his words and plaster them all over your main character. simple as
It's called an homage. And look, I don't even think these movies are perfect by any means, but what they are is miles ahead of the competition for even attempting to play with these things.
>hOmAge
this actually called moving the goalposts
Not at all, the goal you made up was ridiculous in the first place, since it never was about totally authentic realizations of Campbell's ideas but rather about them being standout movies (in a positive sense).
Campbell wrote many books and gave many lectures on the nature of comparative mythology. many of his words do not specifically relate to story structure. however synder specifically took quotes from his book on story structure. the very words written all over henry cavill, are the very words you are currently defying. ironic
>however synder specifically took quotes from his book on story structure. the very words written all over henry cavill, are the very words you are currently defying. ironic
They aren't about story structure. Snyder used those words to relate to Superman character's arc.
A Hero With A Thousand Faces is specifically about story structure. if you read the book, we wouldn’t be disagreeing. which curtails to my original point: finding actually intelligent people who do this thing called “reading books”. who can speak on this subject from a position of genuine understanding. it’s actually quite maddening that synder allowed a legion of contrarians to quote the professor without actually doing their homework
Okay, but now where back at ridiculous gripes. >I don't like the computer graphics
>It doesn't respect the source material
>He doesn't worship the professor as much as I do
*we are
It's one of those days again.
I’d argue synder worships the professor more than I do. he did, indeed, paint his superman in the professor’s words. but worship is not understanding, nor is it wise to confuse reverence with respect
Yeah, I was being cheeky. Point is, while it's a discussion to be had, it's not the discussion. It doesn't determine whether something is ultimately good or bad.
it kind of does and if read A Hero With A Thousand Faces, you’d understand that. you may deflect the validity of campbell, and that’s fine, but neither or I draped superman in his words
Yeah, I'm actually reading it. Around two fifths through.
And your main critique's still calling Snyder an idiot based on his use of Campbell, which is fine in the sense that you're actually trying to establish a standard for judging a movie beyond "I liked/didn't like it" or crying about the CG or calling things unrealistic. But we're not there yet.
the standard was established when synder put campbell on superman. take it up with him. you’re acting like I did that
Not really. That only puts up the question whether it's a good realization of Campbells ideas, not whether it's a good movie.
if Campbell’s work existed only in an vacuum and only in man of steel, then you may have a point. but it’s existed for decades and become the defacto understanding of story structure, so it’s validity transcends it’s explicit use in mos. furthmore, by placing Campbell’s words in literally every single shot of superman’s suit, it does establish itself as a standard to be measured by. i am weirdly shocked this is a difficult concept for Cinemaphile to comprehend but this IS Cinemaphile, filled with dicky posters and contrarians and shills. I am disappointed in myself for being surprised
Look, I'd love to actually have a discussion to what degree he adheres to Campbell's structure but I'm only two fifths into the book, so that's not a very good position to do that from. Still, my original claim stand, you're applying a much stricter standard to Snyder than anyone else out there making movies because he put some Kryptonian carvings (no one can even read) on the Superman suit, which admittedly looks pretty cool. And, despite Campbell being established, it doesn't make him right on everything and shouldn't be the final standard.
well a separate conversation removed from mos could be “Campbell’s standard” isn’t actually Campbell’s. art and literature are subjective, so this is a difficult concept to comprehend, but ideologies like story structure can be objective. which you may understand by the time you finish the book. we as a species, do not disagree on the existence of the atom. there is no subjective opinion on the reality of the atom. there’s a nucleus and protons and electrons. storytelling adheres to a similar objective truth. beyond Campbell or any subjectivity, every story ever told begins then ends. there is a start and finish. for as long as human beings experience space time in a linear fashion, this will always be objective truth. even if told in a non-linear fashion, it starts, then ends. what campbell asserted is everything inbetween, are the protons and electrons of storytelling. he wrote an extensive book in meticulous detail articulating each and every quark orbiting the nucleus of storytelling. and this becomes a highly controversial and almost offensive reality to the artists and audience of storytelling. who’d prefer to believe in some wishy washy unspoken fuzziness of subjectivity. so when some in this thread say “oh just because it’s not exactly like Campbell says”… just don’t get it. and that’s okay. I mean, really, you’d only have to know the structure of an atom if you were a chemist or physicist. and you’d only have to know the protons and electrons of storytelling, if you were a writer. it’s not precisely crucial information to live a functional life
but what it does mean, is when you discuss films like mos, it becomes a frustrating exercise in futility
This discussion is already tainted because you've a subjective understanding of Man of Steel's plot structure in which you think it fails to capture the Campbell's proposed structure.
Whereas someone else might think that MoS and BvS follows Campbell's structure to a T.
except Campbell’s work is objectively stated and deeply elucidated in a highly articulated book completely with actual graphs. you’re behaving as if Campbell’s work is scratched in hieroglyphics on some stone tablet hidden in some lost temple
You fundamentally don't understand who you're talking to.
my (You) was directed to a person who’d only read 2/5 of the book so I know that
Yeah. You really put Campbell on a pedestal.
I didn’t put campbell on my superman suit
No but you should do some further reading and not overobsess over Campbell.
when synder makes his main character draped in writing from say, hemingway, or rand, I’ll write extensive textposts about those too
honestly you guise just seem mad synder worships campbell but you haven’t read the books to actually talk about it
Okay, it's getting boring now. It's a clear victory for the Snyder faction, because neither has your claim that he misuses Campbell's name been sufficiently proven, nor is it one to drag the movies down with in the first place. Now please, stop being a midwit.
says the guy who read 2/5s of the book
Which is hardly the be-all and end-all, which you'd understand if you weren't a conceited midwit.
no, it is the be all end all. I’ll repeat for fun, the difficulty is finding actually intelligent people. those who do this thing called “reading books”. whom have read the book and actually speak on this subject from a position from genuine understanding.
syndergays. reading books. lol
see
Not even listed on there.
yet listed all over henry cavill
Check these out.
https://thesymbolicworld.com/content/the-symbolic-structure-of-movies-batman-v-superman-2016-part-i
https://thesymbolicworld.com/content/the-symbolic-structure-of-movies-batman-v-superman-2016-part-ii
I don't read Kryptonian and neither do you. And his intent ultimately stands apart from the finished product.
it’s literally from his book A Hero With A Thousand Faces. if synder took the quotes from any other source of Campbell’s, be it his lectures or even his books on oriental mythology, just random Campbell shit, then you and your fellow contrarian would have a point
Because anglo excellence is a myth
a pajeet or mexican can do your job lol. there was nothing special about you other than killing people for centuries for not choosing shitty white dudes
Explain IQ difference. Mexico is below 90 and India is 82.
Means nothing. Socioeconomic metric.
Also if you are going to play that game israelites and asians have 10 points higher than anglos
>jews and asians have 10 points higher than anglos
That's total horseshit. In both cases. israelites are probably around 107, smart Asians around the same and Anglos somewhere around 102 and 104. These are estimates but the idea of the extraordinarily high israeli IQ has been thoroughly debunked, you're grossly overstating Asian IQ and with average IQ per country you can't simply look at Western nations and take it for the IQ of the native population because most Western nations have received a significant amount of immigrants.
>noo you can't use IQ as a metric of superiority if it makes whites look bad
lol typical
you know paco and ranjeet can do whatever you can do lol. that's why you're afraid of the free market and immigration. if you were so superior you would just outcompete them. but that isn't reality now isn't it.
Again, you overstated Asian and israeli IQ. Pretty sad attempt.
And no, Paco and Ranjeet can not and will not.
>Socioeconomic
That's pure cope.
A white guy won the most recent NBA championship and finals MVP award
Anyway, since it doesn't feel out of place here, I'm gonna drop this little reading list.
https://thesymbolicworld.com/reading-list
Snyder has never made a good movie.