CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Script Analysis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Film Script Analysis - Page 11

post #501 of 556
Hey, I love Bond and I love CASINO ROYALE, but I'm not blind to its flawuhs!

If Craig wasn't in it, folks would not like it very much. He elevates it. Big time.
post #502 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agentsands77 View Post

If Craig wasn't in it, folks would not like it very much. He elevates it. Big time.

 

And Eva Green.

post #503 of 556
It's ok guys

Relax

Once you realize the movie HAS flaws it's OK to kinda forget about em, if the film is good

"NOOOO! Once a film is revealed as flawed, we must TEAR IT DOWN!"
CONTINUALLY
FOREVER

Lest people think we're unintelligent plebs who don't "get it."
post #504 of 556
don't get in the way of our tearing down

we do it to build it back up!
post #505 of 556
Yout average focused film discussion thread for old mobies.
post #506 of 556
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Yout average focused film discussion thread for old mobies.

Eff yout
post #507 of 556

Nah eff u.  

post #508 of 556

The best Bond adventures are the ones where Bond has no idea where his assignment is leading, and the revelations just get bigger and bigger. I don't get that from CR.

post #509 of 556
Thread Starter 
Have you seen CR?
post #510 of 556

Yeah, and I have the same problems as other folks here with the airport sequence feeling redundant and Eva Green showing up too late.

post #511 of 556

Yeah, I had to go to sleep. That was a fun start/attempt though. Maybe we should define the scenes before we do a discussion and give peeps a chance to watch the movie with that in mind?

post #512 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Yeah, it's a really extensive detour that mostly establishes what a cold bastard Bond is with women to contrast his relationship with Vesper later (as opposed to the way the Madagascar stuff simply establishes what a cold bastard he is in general).  

Does that not make it worthwhile, then, since Vesper's ability to bypass Bond's defenses is so unique? The next film is basically just Bond working through his grief over her loss. There's a serious effort made to make Vesper a lasting part of Bond's, or at least this Bond's mythology.
post #513 of 556
Oh it's definitely worthwhile! I'm just saying that the detour is extended. But not because of the stuff about how he treats women. It's the action stuff that's overextended.
post #514 of 556
I know you guys are tired of me posting Folding Ideas, but here's a really great video about The Chronicles of Riddick. It's only 12 minutes:

He makes some really cool points about how Riddick doesn't exactly follow the Campbellian hero's journey. He starts off exceptional, doesn't really change and stumbles into upsetting the status quo.
post #515 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

He makes some really cool points about how Riddick doesn't exactly follow the Campbellian hero's journey. He starts off exceptional, doesn't really change and stumbles into upsetting the status quo.

I haven't forced myself through his no-doubt-soporific video yet, but it sounds like he's talking about the ever underrated static protagonist!

Once upon a time that was a perfectly respectable format for genre stories, where you have an inherently interesting but basically static character whose role is more to be a dynamic element in other people's stories. It's the Man With No Name thing.

I'm not sure it's an improvement that it's now expected for people like Bond to go through some contrived emotional journey of discovery every time.
post #516 of 556
Watch the video! He actually loves CoR, but is fascinated by the static aspects.
post #517 of 556
Thread Starter 
No videos in my beloved thread.
post #518 of 556

even a pixar movie like Wall-E is about a static protagonist that disrupts the status quo

post #519 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

No videos in my beloved thread.

unnnggghhh apologies.

But how about that static protagonist, eh?
post #520 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

No videos in my beloved thread.
LONG LIVE BRADITO, OUR WISE AND BENEVOLENT RULER!

MAY HE SHIELD US FOREVER FROM YOUTUBE PUNDITS!
post #521 of 556
Thread Starter 
Bart does raise a serious question: how about those static protags?

Bond, Wolverine, Snake Plissken.

What do you guys think?
post #522 of 556

Isn't John McClane a static protagonist? The first 20 or so minutes of DIE HARD John's just doing what other people tell him to do: sit in my limo, go to that floor, make fists with your toes, etc. And most of his actions are just reactions to what Hans and his buddies do.

post #523 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post
 

Isn't John McClane a static protagonist? The first 20 or so minutes of DIE HARD John's just doing what other people tell him to do: sit in my limo, go to that floor, make fists with your toes, etc. And most of his actions are just reactions to what Hans and his buddies do.

McClane's arc as a protagonist is learning to apologize to his wife for being a jerk.  Plot-wise, he's static... just being who is naturally is and responding to an extreme situation.  But as a character, that extreme situation does force him to go through something that gets him to open up to someone about how he really feels about his wife's career.

 

Ironically, he never actually says all of that stuff directly to his wife.  Al hears it all!

 

 

Forrest Gump is another fairly static character who remains who he is through the tumult of baby boomer history as well as his friends and family members.

 

Rob Roy is another static character who remains steadfast in his beliefs and worldviews, which serves to contrast to the villainy that holds power.

post #524 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Bart does raise a serious question: how about those static protags?

Bond, Wolverine, Snake Plissken.

What do you guys think?

It's noteworthy that two of the three exist in neverending franchises (although we could spend all day coming up with other examples), where too much character growth could mean shutting off the money printing machine. The sentencing of Tony Stark to repeat the same arc like some kind of modern Sisyphus is another example that several posters here keep coming back to in other threads, probably because the fact that he actually has an arc (over and over again) makes him sort of stand out like a sore thumb. The trend with this kind of modern serial hero is he's static, not for storytelling reasons, but for financial ones. In the 90's, comic fans coined the term "plot armor" to describe the Joker's one true superpower, his merchandising value to his publisher, which protects him from ever suffering a final defeat at the hands of Batman.

Someone like Grant Morrison might argue that the unchanging nature of these kinds of heros is what makes them as magical as they are. They're modern culture's constellations, Orion and Scorpio forever chasing each other, with one never catching the other. What stands out to my eye is how good individual installments can sometimes be; there are, unquestionably, good Bond movies, and Wolverine and Plissken have at least one good movie, each, regardless of what I think of their respective franchises.
post #525 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Bart does raise a serious question: how about those static protags?

Bond, Wolverine, Snake Plissken.

What do you guys think?
I don't know that Wolvy is one, at least in the Jackman movies. He's a bit too tortured and has an ongoing arc through the movies.

But, in general, I like 'em. Particularly for franchise fare. In an age when overstated DRAMA has kinda infected our mass entertainment (it seems that almost every new franchise installment promises to be the one that pushes its characters to the BREAKING POINT), it's nice to have central figures who aren't burdened with overblown arcs.
post #526 of 556
My favorite (almost) static character is Neil McCauley from HEAT. He's devoted his life to a simple and efficient principle: "don't get attached to anything". Meeting Eady forces McCauley to challenge this. And he does change and accepts there are things he can't leave behind. The tragedy is that said thing is killing Waingro, which leads to Neil walking out on Eady.
post #527 of 556
Thread Starter 
McClane has an arc in the first "Die Hard." "She's heard me say 'I love you' a thousand times; she's never heard me say 'I'm sorry.' I want you to tell her that, Al. I want you to tell her that John said he was sorry." He finally gets over himself and his bruised ego over his wife's successful career, and in doing so, is ultimately able to salvage his marriage by killing all the bad guys and saving Holly.

In "Die Hard 2," he's static, which is probably why it doesn't resonate as well even though it has bigger explosions.
post #528 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

Someone like Grant Morrison might argue that the unchanging nature of these kinds of heros is what makes them as magical as they are. They're modern culture's constellations, Orion and Scorpio forever chasing each other, with one never catching the other.

 

Basically. A lot of the most enduring characters are basically archetypes, and you've got archetypical characters going all the way back to the earliest myths. And it works - for a good Sherlock Holmes story you don't need him to be anything other than Sherlock Holmes. I'd say the push to humanise archetypes with origin stories and forced displays of growth is a pretty recent phenomenon.

 

The only problem with tv and film is that as the years roll on the harder it gets to avoid questions like "why hasn't Riker captained his own ship yet?", even though intellectually you know the answer is "because his role on the show is to be the second in command guy".

post #529 of 556
I'd say there's plenty of evidence that you can create a ripping genre yarn with a static protagonist, but is it an impediment to being something more? I mean, I wouldn't argue that Bond or Star Trek don't manage to remain perfectly functional narratives when they're at their water-treadiest, but when you look at the consensus choices for their strongest outings, they tend to be the ones with the most intensely personal conflicts (dead son, dead wife, etc.) that out the generally-static heroes through some real changes.

I suppose what I'm asking is what's the most depth that you can invest in a fundamentally static character?
post #530 of 556

I'd say the impediment is more about the fact that the static characterization is due to the realities of maintaining an on-going series.

 

A static protagonist isn't an impediment to something more if the work is a standalone where the great change comes about in the world that the character inhabits.  The problem with an on-going series is that there is a sense of formulaic repetition with the static character doing the same thing over and over.  Any big change that happens in the world surrounding that character is usually represented by the characters surrounding the static protagonist.  And in the case of an ongoing series, the only characters that will live on in future installments are usually the ones that are just as static as the hero.  Anyone who goes through a major change will probably not be in the next one.

 

The entries into series like Trek or Bond that are perceived as being the strongest is usually because they can show the series taking a break from routine like a pressure release valve.  And by nature, you can't get intensely personal with the static hero too many times because it's the easiest element to reach levels of parodies.  

"Last time they killed my wife... but THIS TIME, it's REAAAAAALLY personal!!!"

 

 

Part of the reasoning behind reboots of this stuff too, I'm sure.  They can get personal with a fresh slate!!!

post #531 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

I'd say there's plenty of evidence that you can create a ripping genre yarn with a static protagonist, but is it an impediment to being something more? I mean, I wouldn't argue that Bond or Star Trek don't manage to remain perfectly functional narratives when they're at their water-treadiest, but when you look at the consensus choices for their strongest outings, they tend to be the ones with the most intensely personal conflicts (dead son, dead wife, etc.) that out the generally-static heroes through some real changes.

 

Reminds me of Last Action Hero, where Schwarzenegger's franchise has been running so long his character has run out of immediate family to avenge and is presently seeking the killers of his favorite second-cousin.

post #532 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

I know you guys are tired of me posting Folding Ideas, but here's a really great video about The Chronicles of Riddick. It's only 12 minutes:

He makes some really cool points about how Riddick doesn't exactly follow the Campbellian hero's journey. He starts off exceptional, doesn't really change and stumbles into upsetting the status quo.

Oh good, this guy again.  Helps when I'm having trouble getting to sleep!

post #533 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

I suppose what I'm asking is what's the most depth that you can invest in a fundamentally static character?

 

I guess you're somewhat forced to burden him/her with a backstory that provides the depth, like with Logan. Or the most extreme example I can think of: Leonard from MEMENTO. You don't get more fundamentally static than him, Leonard has no character arc, he can't have one because of his medical state. But during the film, even though Leonard stays the same, our perception of him changes. I don't know if there's a term for this, "viewer-arc"? But since MEMENTO's such a concise narrative, I don't think you can really continue it to MEMEN2, M3MENTO and so on...

post #534 of 556

I think there's definitely a difference, however, between characters like Bond in the old movies that are static, and characters like Captain America that are thrown into situations that force them to question their world views and choose not to change. 

 

It doesn't say anything about Connery Bond, for instance, that he doesn't tend to have a story arc but it says volumes about Cap that he maintains his inherent 1940s decency across multiple movies.

post #535 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

Oh good, this guy again.  Helps when I'm having trouble getting to sleep!

All you're proving is how completely shallow you are. 

post #536 of 556

I just watched the video. Sorry, but it's the most boring man on earth talking about what sounds like the most boring film on earth!

post #537 of 556

I appreciate that you watched the video. A lot of really insightful commentary comes out of this guy, even if he is a little blandsville. 

 

And yet, you guys won't watch him but some Eggo waffles show up in a teaser and you lose your mind.

 

OMFG

post #538 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

All you're proving is how completely shallow you are. 

I watched all of his videos.  Just joking about how bland he is, which I'm sure even he would admit.  If you want the REAL hookup I'll give you that good shit.  

post #539 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

I just watched the video. Sorry, but it's the most boring man on earth talking about what sounds like the most boring film on earth!

SEE BART?!  Apologize right now!!!

post #540 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

I watched all of his videos.  Just joking about how bland he is, which I'm sure even he would admit.  If you want the REAL hookup I'll give you that good shit.  

You watched the videos, you're fine! It's the people that won't even give him a chance, even when he's puppet guy (and he is in that CoR one) that bug me. But then will post Red Letter Media, in which helium-filled balloons have somehow gained sentience. 

post #541 of 556

I like his Suicide Squad video the best because as cheap as it is anger and annoyance sells, and having something to razor focus on helped him make some excellent points.  He has has some great thoughts on Man Of Steel too.  

 

But for entertainment value as well as an actual valuable education of film history, a film history that Nooj and I both weren't aware of you cannot beat this.

 

 

Now quickly, lets get the hell out of this thread before my best friend wakes up and kicks us out of his thread with the passion of 100 thousand fiery suns for posting videos!

post #542 of 556

You have bestowed upon me a boon, Free-Man. For this, I owe you a debt.

post #543 of 556

post #544 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 even when he's puppet guy (and he is in that CoR one) 

 

*takes video off "Watch Later" list*

 

I've watched at least two of his "I'm actually a human" videos. NFW am I subjecting myself to that soporific voice coming out of a cheap puppet.

post #545 of 556

You're pushing me, MM. That's two instances of soporific being used in this thread, you fancy pants talkers.

post #546 of 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

I like his Suicide Squad video the best because as cheap as it is anger and annoyance sells, and having something to razor focus on helped him make some excellent points.  He has has some great thoughts on Man Of Steel too.  

But for entertainment value as well as an actual valuable education of film history, a film history that Nooj and I both weren't aware of you cannot beat this.




Now quickly, lets get the hell out of this thread before my best friend wakes up and kicks us out of his thread with the passion of 100 thousand fiery suns for posting videos!
That guy is marginally better than Folding Ideas guy.

But still, all these videos suffer terribly from these people trying to build up a following by trying and failing to be entertaining as well as informative.

Just get the hell on with it.
post #547 of 556

'Too entertaining, funny and witty' is not a charge I'd level at the Folding Ideas guy.

post #548 of 556

Jesus guys, can we just pin at the top of CHUD the usual complaints about Dan Olson? If you don't want to watch the videos don't, but if you do don't caveat it with boring, beard, scruffy hair.

post #549 of 556
CgXY950WEAELUZk.jpg
post #550 of 556

Pontius Pilate, wash hands, etc.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Script Analysis