Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Monday, July 21, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
some good quotes...
So here are some of my fav quotes from this article i found today.
"Modern organizational theorists have noticed how bureaucracies tend to replace the goal for which they were originally established with the goal of advancing their own survival and interests. This is no less true of churches than of other human institutions. Through much of human history, even modern history, churches have been tribalistic"
"If hate equals the absence of love, then a love that justifies killing can be perceived easily as hate."
"A religion that teaches love but legitimates war is problematic for many. In the United States, the vocabulary used by the presidential administration to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is often influenced by religious terms and ideas. The "other" is "evil" and perpetuates it. No good comes from this other and so the other should be "hunted down" in order for the "divine right of freedom" to be bestowed upon a wanting people groaning under the weight of social and religious oppression."
"Accordingly, if the punishment of sin is death and Jesus fulfilled that punishment, then death as a retributive act should no longer justified within Christianity "
(one favorite quote of mine) "I contend that we are both athiests, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"
"Modern organizational theorists have noticed how bureaucracies tend to replace the goal for which they were originally established with the goal of advancing their own survival and interests. This is no less true of churches than of other human institutions. Through much of human history, even modern history, churches have been tribalistic"
"If hate equals the absence of love, then a love that justifies killing can be perceived easily as hate."
"A religion that teaches love but legitimates war is problematic for many. In the United States, the vocabulary used by the presidential administration to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is often influenced by religious terms and ideas. The "other" is "evil" and perpetuates it. No good comes from this other and so the other should be "hunted down" in order for the "divine right of freedom" to be bestowed upon a wanting people groaning under the weight of social and religious oppression."
"Accordingly, if the punishment of sin is death and Jesus fulfilled that punishment, then death as a retributive act should no longer justified within Christianity "
(one favorite quote of mine) "I contend that we are both athiests, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"
Thursday, July 17, 2008
A survey for the world...
I had this idea just now, of a UN ethics council. They would put together a survey and every person in the world fills it out. Everyone writes down the things they want everyone to learn, only, religion, and science cannot be included in your submission. The survey would look something like this:
"If you woke up and there was no science or religion tomorrow, what would be the things you would want every person on the planet to learn in order to be a good person, and to be successful with people, and life in general. Please, do not mention God or science in your answers. For this questionnaire, assume that not even you have religion or science in your own life. And that the concept of both are forgotten, and in fact never known. Assume that everyone has a universally high intelligence, and everyone can understand language, and that everyone has the ability to live, eat, shelter, everything needed to survive. Do not think about how this world would look, what conveniences we would or would not have, nor how such ideas will be taught/enforced, only the question of what you would want every person on the planet to know and learn in order to be a good person and to be successful with other people, and with life in general."
Please, I urge everyone who reads to take this survey. And leave your answers in the 'comments' area of this blog.
"If you woke up and there was no science or religion tomorrow, what would be the things you would want every person on the planet to learn in order to be a good person, and to be successful with people, and life in general. Please, do not mention God or science in your answers. For this questionnaire, assume that not even you have religion or science in your own life. And that the concept of both are forgotten, and in fact never known. Assume that everyone has a universally high intelligence, and everyone can understand language, and that everyone has the ability to live, eat, shelter, everything needed to survive. Do not think about how this world would look, what conveniences we would or would not have, nor how such ideas will be taught/enforced, only the question of what you would want every person on the planet to know and learn in order to be a good person and to be successful with other people, and with life in general."
Please, I urge everyone who reads to take this survey. And leave your answers in the 'comments' area of this blog.
Perspectical point of logic
Okay, so here is something that started to be a circular argument in my head, but I broke the cycle and came to a conclusion. it started with this...
Define: logic-the principles that guide reasoning within a given field or situation;A method of human thought that involves thinking in a linear, step-by-step manner about how a problem can be solved
Define: point of view-A position from which something is seen; outlook; standpoint; An attitude, opinion, or set of beliefs; The perspective from which a narrative is related
logic is usually referred to and seen as objective. and yet, logic tells me that I shouldnt touch something hot, and tells a child nothing of the same. logic also tells me there is no santa, but it convinces the young that there certainly it. logic tells a theist that creationism is the only way that makes sense, however, logic tells me that evolution is the only way.
so, logic clearly isnt objective, just as the phrase 'common sense isnt common' implies. so, I believe that faith is rooted in logic. people who claim a feeling that god told them to make a turn, and they narrowily miss a car crash, or to not walk around dark alleys. logic is that voice in the back of your head, your conscience. however, it seems that this voice tells almost everyone different things.
it tells an alcoholic to drink. it tells a murderer to grab a gun. it tells a theist there is a God. and it tells an atheist that there isnt. it tells children to touch things that are hot. it tells adults to not jump into a bonfire. logic tells an atheist they got lucky. logic tells a theist God intervened and so on and so on...
so there it is, logic is just as subjective as point of view. point of view effects logic, and it seems that logic reinforces point of view. so, my thought was, that we really need to quit referring to logic as an objective thing, or combine the terms for point of view and logic. if we define logic further, and lay down a set of rules and terms and statements and things that define what logic is, then people can say 'logic told me ___". but that will never happen, because not everyone can agree on what is and isnt logical, based on their perspective and point of view.
SO! in colclusion, I hope that everyone will stop using the term 'logical' and 'logic' because these are in fact subjective things, and not universally shared. instead I hope everyone can start using the terms 'point of logic' and 'perspectical'
Define: logic-the principles that guide reasoning within a given field or situation;A method of human thought that involves thinking in a linear, step-by-step manner about how a problem can be solved
Define: point of view-A position from which something is seen; outlook; standpoint; An attitude, opinion, or set of beliefs; The perspective from which a narrative is related
logic is usually referred to and seen as objective. and yet, logic tells me that I shouldnt touch something hot, and tells a child nothing of the same. logic also tells me there is no santa, but it convinces the young that there certainly it. logic tells a theist that creationism is the only way that makes sense, however, logic tells me that evolution is the only way.
so, logic clearly isnt objective, just as the phrase 'common sense isnt common' implies. so, I believe that faith is rooted in logic. people who claim a feeling that god told them to make a turn, and they narrowily miss a car crash, or to not walk around dark alleys. logic is that voice in the back of your head, your conscience. however, it seems that this voice tells almost everyone different things.
it tells an alcoholic to drink. it tells a murderer to grab a gun. it tells a theist there is a God. and it tells an atheist that there isnt. it tells children to touch things that are hot. it tells adults to not jump into a bonfire. logic tells an atheist they got lucky. logic tells a theist God intervened and so on and so on...
so there it is, logic is just as subjective as point of view. point of view effects logic, and it seems that logic reinforces point of view. so, my thought was, that we really need to quit referring to logic as an objective thing, or combine the terms for point of view and logic. if we define logic further, and lay down a set of rules and terms and statements and things that define what logic is, then people can say 'logic told me ___". but that will never happen, because not everyone can agree on what is and isnt logical, based on their perspective and point of view.
SO! in colclusion, I hope that everyone will stop using the term 'logical' and 'logic' because these are in fact subjective things, and not universally shared. instead I hope everyone can start using the terms 'point of logic' and 'perspectical'
Saturday, July 12, 2008
The same reason you don't like homosexuals...
Is the same reason athiest dont like theists. What are the biggest complaint/worry from straight people in regards to 'the gays'?
(I am excluding the part that the bible says homosexuality is bad, because in order to believe that statement, you have to believe in the Bible as word directly from God, and was only penned by man. And this creates a circular agrument, "well, the bible says so." "yes, well, I dont believe the bible is God's words, but man's, men from thousands of years ago" "well, no, it came from God, and i believe so." "okay... still not answering anything her...", and at this point it just becomes a mud-throwing, unending argument that pits ego versus ego)
Here are the most common things people dont want homosexuals to do:
"I dont want them turning my children gay."
"I dont want them just fucking each other in the ass in the streets, and flaunting their homosexuality everywhere they go, and on everything i see."
"What they do in the privacy of their own home is their thing, just dont try and bring me into it, no sir."
Here are the most common things athiests dont want theists to do:
"I dont want them turning my children into theists"
"I dont want them just shouting out their beliefs all over the place and in the streets. I dont want their beliefs everywhere I go."
"What they do in the privacy of their own home is their thing, just dont try and bring me into it, no sir."
Now, take for a moment, if you are thinking of arguments, please hold off. If you are a theist, imagine that your worst fears came true:
Tomorrow morning, you wake up, and everything you feared has happened. Homosexuals are right outside your house fucking each other in the ass and have gay sex on almost every street corner. Some people are waving signs, and you cant go far without seeing a billboard, bumper sticker or t-shirt that says "Love gays!" or some inspirational quote from a famous fag. And your currency, the thing you value most, money, the very thing that drives almost everything in the world, says on it "In fag we trust". At work, you see men kissing men and women kissing women and fondling each other. And if you try and say anything, everyone looks at you like you are a pervert for not enjoying same-sex love. At school, your children are being taught in Sex-Ed both sides of the equation, how to have sex with males, as well as females.
And the government gives money, and tax breaks, to gay-based organizations. And only homosexuals who demonstrate their homosexuality are elected into any government office, not because of a law, but because the majority of people in this fake USA only elect people who will pass bills for gay-rights, and who publically display, as often as possible, their homosexuality.
To be fair, I am not a homosexual, and am in fact happily married. I do not have many gay friends, and I have no real backing from the gay-community.
So lets take this paragraph now, and just replace words here. I am not restructuring any sentences, and this is not a simple trick of english language that completely flips any context. A single word in a sentence can change a meaning, but here the idea is the same, a few extra words were deleted to keep content: (i.e. the bark of a tree, the bark of a dog)
Tomorrow morning, you wake up, and everything you feared has happened. Theists are right outside your house converting people and have churches on almost every street corner. Some people are waving signs, and you cant go far without seeing a billboard, bumper sticker or t-shirt that says "Love God!" or some inspirational quote from a famous theist. And your currency, the thing you value most, money, the very thing that drives almost everything in the world, says on it "In God we trust". At work, you see men and women wearing crosses or praising the Lord. And if you try and say anything, everyone looks at you like you are perverse for not enjoying God's love. At school, your children are being taught in Science both sides of the equation, evolution and creationism.
And the government gives money, and tax breaks, to faith-based organizations. And only theists who demonstrate their faith are elected into any government office, not because of a law, but because the majority of people in this real USA only elect people who will pass bills for faith-based-rights, and who publically display, as often as possible, their faith.
So, I submit the following: either accept gay people, as everyone else, or just quit saying that those are your concerns. Gay people aren't like you, they respect your privacy, your beliefs, your lifestyle, maybe its time to start reciprocating the same? Because I bet that if homosexuality ruled this country, it would not infiltrate every aspect of American society as badly as theology has...
Disclaimer: I understand it is not as bad here as in other countries. I understand I am privileged to be an American. So if I recieve any comments regarding my patriotism, love of country, or the fact that it is way worse in other countries, I will promptly remove it from my site. Also, any arguments that become cyclical (based on circular logic) will be removed as well, because that is, as i said, an endless cycle pitting ego versus ego, and nobody wins.
(I am excluding the part that the bible says homosexuality is bad, because in order to believe that statement, you have to believe in the Bible as word directly from God, and was only penned by man. And this creates a circular agrument, "well, the bible says so." "yes, well, I dont believe the bible is God's words, but man's, men from thousands of years ago" "well, no, it came from God, and i believe so." "okay... still not answering anything her...", and at this point it just becomes a mud-throwing, unending argument that pits ego versus ego)
Here are the most common things people dont want homosexuals to do:
"I dont want them turning my children gay."
"I dont want them just fucking each other in the ass in the streets, and flaunting their homosexuality everywhere they go, and on everything i see."
"What they do in the privacy of their own home is their thing, just dont try and bring me into it, no sir."
Here are the most common things athiests dont want theists to do:
"I dont want them turning my children into theists"
"I dont want them just shouting out their beliefs all over the place and in the streets. I dont want their beliefs everywhere I go."
"What they do in the privacy of their own home is their thing, just dont try and bring me into it, no sir."
Now, take for a moment, if you are thinking of arguments, please hold off. If you are a theist, imagine that your worst fears came true:
Tomorrow morning, you wake up, and everything you feared has happened. Homosexuals are right outside your house fucking each other in the ass and have gay sex on almost every street corner. Some people are waving signs, and you cant go far without seeing a billboard, bumper sticker or t-shirt that says "Love gays!" or some inspirational quote from a famous fag. And your currency, the thing you value most, money, the very thing that drives almost everything in the world, says on it "In fag we trust". At work, you see men kissing men and women kissing women and fondling each other. And if you try and say anything, everyone looks at you like you are a pervert for not enjoying same-sex love. At school, your children are being taught in Sex-Ed both sides of the equation, how to have sex with males, as well as females.
And the government gives money, and tax breaks, to gay-based organizations. And only homosexuals who demonstrate their homosexuality are elected into any government office, not because of a law, but because the majority of people in this fake USA only elect people who will pass bills for gay-rights, and who publically display, as often as possible, their homosexuality.
To be fair, I am not a homosexual, and am in fact happily married. I do not have many gay friends, and I have no real backing from the gay-community.
So lets take this paragraph now, and just replace words here. I am not restructuring any sentences, and this is not a simple trick of english language that completely flips any context. A single word in a sentence can change a meaning, but here the idea is the same, a few extra words were deleted to keep content: (i.e. the bark of a tree, the bark of a dog)
Tomorrow morning, you wake up, and everything you feared has happened. Theists are right outside your house converting people and have churches on almost every street corner. Some people are waving signs, and you cant go far without seeing a billboard, bumper sticker or t-shirt that says "Love God!" or some inspirational quote from a famous theist. And your currency, the thing you value most, money, the very thing that drives almost everything in the world, says on it "In God we trust". At work, you see men and women wearing crosses or praising the Lord. And if you try and say anything, everyone looks at you like you are perverse for not enjoying God's love. At school, your children are being taught in Science both sides of the equation, evolution and creationism.
And the government gives money, and tax breaks, to faith-based organizations. And only theists who demonstrate their faith are elected into any government office, not because of a law, but because the majority of people in this real USA only elect people who will pass bills for faith-based-rights, and who publically display, as often as possible, their faith.
So, I submit the following: either accept gay people, as everyone else, or just quit saying that those are your concerns. Gay people aren't like you, they respect your privacy, your beliefs, your lifestyle, maybe its time to start reciprocating the same? Because I bet that if homosexuality ruled this country, it would not infiltrate every aspect of American society as badly as theology has...
Disclaimer: I understand it is not as bad here as in other countries. I understand I am privileged to be an American. So if I recieve any comments regarding my patriotism, love of country, or the fact that it is way worse in other countries, I will promptly remove it from my site. Also, any arguments that become cyclical (based on circular logic) will be removed as well, because that is, as i said, an endless cycle pitting ego versus ego, and nobody wins.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
A Previously Thought to be Failed Project lol
this was previously listing too much meta for a once failed project
removed for the players protection
remember, this is not a game... :)
removed for the players protection
remember, this is not a game... :)
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
The Growing Trend Of Open-Endedness
Alrighty, so, after becoming enraged about a forum post I saw somewhere else, I decided, officially, to rant. Here is an edited version of that rant (edited so people can understand what i'm saying without having to know about the forum or the other posts on it which im replying to) I am going to include a comic that illustrates my frustrations:
This seems to be a new thing for writers and such to do with their movies. They leave a bunch of things open ended, or they leave the ending completely open-ended. The fact of the matter is that this is LAZY. People dont like it, I mean, yes, you get tons of people to your online sites, and to your message boards, because with so much open-endedness, its up to the people to decide, however, this limits the audience. its very hard for people to start watching a series like LOST without watching it from the beginning, so you lose audience there, plus you piss people off by not releaseing any new information to them, and only adding questions for them to ask other just-as-confused people. the fact is, if the fans need to make most of the content in your story line, then it shows not that you are creative, but that the audience is creative, and that you are lazy. I really hope people stop doing this, it has become a trend to leave things open-ended and it really needs to stop. If I wanted to make up my own ending, or listen to 10000 other theories of how things could have ended up, I would have just watched the first episode, and imagined all the rest, and save myself the hassle. The big reason this upsets me is that movies like Cloverfield (which wasnt that open-ended, and didnt really need much explaining) get overshadowed by the who/what/when/where/whys that everyone has come to ask themselves for everything because nothing is being given to people or explained to people anymore! An example of this working well is in The Incredible Hulk movie. When Hulk gets blasted by the sound-wave machines, you are not explained that they are sound-wave machines, or how they work, or who created them, or about the subjects used to test it, because you dont need to. It is essentially useless information to spend the time and energy to expain this. I applaud The Incredible Hulk for realizing that its audience isnt 3-year-olds with no imagination.
Cloverfield was a great movie, and it really had almost nothing to do with the viral marketing for it, other than to make people ask more and more questions, speculate more and more, and spend a ton of time making up things that really dont matter. I too am looking forward to a sequel, but not because I want answers, but because I want to see what else they can do without needing to explain everything. There is a huge difference between leaving small, unnecessary, things alone. Such as with Cloverfield, you didnt need to know the creatures origins, or how it was made, you only needed to know its destructive force, and how it was effecting things around it. Good job!
However, there is a difference between not explaining things that dont make much of an impact on the story (origins of the creature, origins of the sound-wave machines from The Incredible Hulk) and just plain putting things into your story that you either forget to explain, or dont intend to explain. Like a poorly edited kung-fu film. People are not watching your movie to make up their own endings, plot twists, and events, it's YOUR movie. YOU went to school for this.
You dont have to spoon-feed your audience things, because generally we get things, but you also dont need to constantly put things into your movie or show that are inexplicable, and deterr from your own story. Your misdirection is working Mr. Abrams, we arent paying attention to the main plot lines, we are waiting for you to explain the goddamn creature and in the meantime, slowly losing interest in your show as you continue to give us only questions. You are setting yourself up for an epic fail when you dont explain anything in your ending, because inevitably, if you have been uncreative this far as to leave hundreds of plotpoints unexplained, then you will be just as uncreative with your ending, an ending which should hold answers, I will bet $100 will only disappoint those clinging to the hope for answers. Good job Mr. Abrams, you have misdirected your audience right into other channels, and television shows because after four seasons (and two more planned) you still havent explained shit, and it looks like you yourself have no fucking clue what you even have put into this show.
Keep in mind, I have never watched LOST other than the first few episodes. I was interested when the survivors were on an island with what I thought and was hoping to be scary monsters/dinosaurs. Then six episodes later, and no mention of these things/thing other than in the background noise, and I felt like I was being lead around into a whole lot of nothing. Years later I read the wiki on the show and still, nobody has a fucking clue what the thing is, except that it isnt dinosaurs or montster, but some kind of possible nano-machine cloud. I am so glad I didnt keep watching because I would have been sorely disappointed. and have you seen the wiki on that show? the actual new-information season-by-season is ridiculous, at most it reads like "so-and-so dies. so-and-so disappears. some flashbacks." but when you read the full articles 1% of the stuff from the season is useless dialogue/flashbacks and the other 99% is speculation on things that seemed unimportant but someone people 'know' they are.
I suggest that if something is a plotpoint that will be explained later, TELL PEOPLE THAT! Everyone and his dog has a fucking blog. Tell people "yeah, we will revisit the story of so-and-so next season, so lets try and focus on other things, like this thing over here, which will be the main focus of this season." or "yeah, just stop focusing on this, this, this and that, we arent going to explain them, because we really didnt intend for anyone to notice that shit, what the hell kinda crazy fucking following have we creative that people have to start noticing shit like THAT?"
I am still upset about the Sopranos ending, because after all the time all of the fans spent watching episode after episode, we were expected to make our own ending up. This idea, as I said, isnt creative, but lazy, and its like saying "well if we take any ending, we will piss some group off, so lets just do no ending and let everyone make up whatever they want, that way everyone is happy." but the fact is, that really just enrages EVERYONE and causes people to argue for days and hours about what was the REAL ending.
As a writer, if you leave loose ends in your story, you are a bad writer, not some creative, innovative thinker. I am very tired of people thinking this is new or creative or innovative, the choose-your-own-adventure novels have been around for quite some time, and I think people should warn their audience how long a show will run, generally, and if the endings will be open ended, or if they will leave a lot of questions up to the audience. I for one would love this, because then I would know what I was getting into: a choose your own adventure tale that I am, essentially, creating myself.
So long as he is considered 'visionary' and creative JJ Abrams will stay true-to-form and probably have viral marketing, story lines, and plot points left unknown and unsolved. Again, I apologize for this rant and realize that I am only adding to the problem of speculation on open-ended things online. I just wholly dont believe in spending money on DVD box-sets 2,3,4,5 seasons worth at 50 bucks each, for a storyline that has limited continuity, plot holes, and no ending in sight, like LOST, and then getting rave reviews from people touting you as visionary and creative. Leading your audience around by the nose is like putting a carrot on a stick infront of a donkey, its cruel and unusual punishment.
One classic example of this is the movie Contact. No, we didnt need to know the origin of the aliens, and I applaude you for not telling us, and no, we didnt need to know all the exact tech-specs and alloys used to make the machine, thank you for that, but if you are going to have a movie whose focus is alien contact, and very little focus on the main characters past, DO NOT have the aliens show themselves as her GODDAMN FATHER, and the alien planet as, essentially, a beach, with some extra moons.
Now, if the focus had been the main character, her relationship with her dad, and everything seemed to be her tied into that, then the aliens showed themselves as her father, then it would be touching, because her pain was eased and she was happy, and the movie would have been a women-empowerment tale, with a sci-fi twist. Instead you had the whole movie shouting at you "sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, HUMAN NEED TO SAY GOODBYE TO LOVED ONES" and the anti-climaticisim ensues. Again, back to mis-direction. You mis-direct people right out of the movie theatres. That would be like the ending to cloverfield being that the monster goes up to the top of a building and rubs its face on someone with a machine hooked up to his arm, who is laughing manically as he looks down at all the carnage. You just go, WTF? where did that come from? (and the questions ensue) was the creature a machine? who is this guy? since he was standing on a Macy's building, how was Macy's involved? does that movie have to do with Terminator since it was a man controlling a machine? etc. etc.
the simple fact about theme is this: keep to the theme. If you have a theme about aliens, and contact, do not have the ending be a woman losing her regret from her past. Either have aliens in their true form who give her sage advice about earth's place in the universe, which she LATER takes to the micro-level and applies it to her own life and feels better, OR you have a movie about a woman struggling to get rid of her past, and how every man she meets reminds her of her father, and how, every man who stands in her way is standing in her way for getting over her past, her past, focus on her past, her struggle with men, her past, and then have the aliens appear as her father, soothe her pain, give her resolution on a macro and micro level as a scientist and for her father. That would be a Lifetime movie, and probably a damn good one. The following pretty much sums up my rage
This seems to be a new thing for writers and such to do with their movies. They leave a bunch of things open ended, or they leave the ending completely open-ended. The fact of the matter is that this is LAZY. People dont like it, I mean, yes, you get tons of people to your online sites, and to your message boards, because with so much open-endedness, its up to the people to decide, however, this limits the audience. its very hard for people to start watching a series like LOST without watching it from the beginning, so you lose audience there, plus you piss people off by not releaseing any new information to them, and only adding questions for them to ask other just-as-confused people. the fact is, if the fans need to make most of the content in your story line, then it shows not that you are creative, but that the audience is creative, and that you are lazy. I really hope people stop doing this, it has become a trend to leave things open-ended and it really needs to stop. If I wanted to make up my own ending, or listen to 10000 other theories of how things could have ended up, I would have just watched the first episode, and imagined all the rest, and save myself the hassle. The big reason this upsets me is that movies like Cloverfield (which wasnt that open-ended, and didnt really need much explaining) get overshadowed by the who/what/when/where/whys that everyone has come to ask themselves for everything because nothing is being given to people or explained to people anymore! An example of this working well is in The Incredible Hulk movie. When Hulk gets blasted by the sound-wave machines, you are not explained that they are sound-wave machines, or how they work, or who created them, or about the subjects used to test it, because you dont need to. It is essentially useless information to spend the time and energy to expain this. I applaud The Incredible Hulk for realizing that its audience isnt 3-year-olds with no imagination.
Cloverfield was a great movie, and it really had almost nothing to do with the viral marketing for it, other than to make people ask more and more questions, speculate more and more, and spend a ton of time making up things that really dont matter. I too am looking forward to a sequel, but not because I want answers, but because I want to see what else they can do without needing to explain everything. There is a huge difference between leaving small, unnecessary, things alone. Such as with Cloverfield, you didnt need to know the creatures origins, or how it was made, you only needed to know its destructive force, and how it was effecting things around it. Good job!
However, there is a difference between not explaining things that dont make much of an impact on the story (origins of the creature, origins of the sound-wave machines from The Incredible Hulk) and just plain putting things into your story that you either forget to explain, or dont intend to explain. Like a poorly edited kung-fu film. People are not watching your movie to make up their own endings, plot twists, and events, it's YOUR movie. YOU went to school for this.
You dont have to spoon-feed your audience things, because generally we get things, but you also dont need to constantly put things into your movie or show that are inexplicable, and deterr from your own story. Your misdirection is working Mr. Abrams, we arent paying attention to the main plot lines, we are waiting for you to explain the goddamn creature and in the meantime, slowly losing interest in your show as you continue to give us only questions. You are setting yourself up for an epic fail when you dont explain anything in your ending, because inevitably, if you have been uncreative this far as to leave hundreds of plotpoints unexplained, then you will be just as uncreative with your ending, an ending which should hold answers, I will bet $100 will only disappoint those clinging to the hope for answers. Good job Mr. Abrams, you have misdirected your audience right into other channels, and television shows because after four seasons (and two more planned) you still havent explained shit, and it looks like you yourself have no fucking clue what you even have put into this show.
Keep in mind, I have never watched LOST other than the first few episodes. I was interested when the survivors were on an island with what I thought and was hoping to be scary monsters/dinosaurs. Then six episodes later, and no mention of these things/thing other than in the background noise, and I felt like I was being lead around into a whole lot of nothing. Years later I read the wiki on the show and still, nobody has a fucking clue what the thing is, except that it isnt dinosaurs or montster, but some kind of possible nano-machine cloud. I am so glad I didnt keep watching because I would have been sorely disappointed. and have you seen the wiki on that show? the actual new-information season-by-season is ridiculous, at most it reads like "so-and-so dies. so-and-so disappears. some flashbacks." but when you read the full articles 1% of the stuff from the season is useless dialogue/flashbacks and the other 99% is speculation on things that seemed unimportant but someone people 'know' they are.
I suggest that if something is a plotpoint that will be explained later, TELL PEOPLE THAT! Everyone and his dog has a fucking blog. Tell people "yeah, we will revisit the story of so-and-so next season, so lets try and focus on other things, like this thing over here, which will be the main focus of this season." or "yeah, just stop focusing on this, this, this and that, we arent going to explain them, because we really didnt intend for anyone to notice that shit, what the hell kinda crazy fucking following have we creative that people have to start noticing shit like THAT?"
I am still upset about the Sopranos ending, because after all the time all of the fans spent watching episode after episode, we were expected to make our own ending up. This idea, as I said, isnt creative, but lazy, and its like saying "well if we take any ending, we will piss some group off, so lets just do no ending and let everyone make up whatever they want, that way everyone is happy." but the fact is, that really just enrages EVERYONE and causes people to argue for days and hours about what was the REAL ending.
As a writer, if you leave loose ends in your story, you are a bad writer, not some creative, innovative thinker. I am very tired of people thinking this is new or creative or innovative, the choose-your-own-adventure novels have been around for quite some time, and I think people should warn their audience how long a show will run, generally, and if the endings will be open ended, or if they will leave a lot of questions up to the audience. I for one would love this, because then I would know what I was getting into: a choose your own adventure tale that I am, essentially, creating myself.
So long as he is considered 'visionary' and creative JJ Abrams will stay true-to-form and probably have viral marketing, story lines, and plot points left unknown and unsolved. Again, I apologize for this rant and realize that I am only adding to the problem of speculation on open-ended things online. I just wholly dont believe in spending money on DVD box-sets 2,3,4,5 seasons worth at 50 bucks each, for a storyline that has limited continuity, plot holes, and no ending in sight, like LOST, and then getting rave reviews from people touting you as visionary and creative. Leading your audience around by the nose is like putting a carrot on a stick infront of a donkey, its cruel and unusual punishment.
One classic example of this is the movie Contact. No, we didnt need to know the origin of the aliens, and I applaude you for not telling us, and no, we didnt need to know all the exact tech-specs and alloys used to make the machine, thank you for that, but if you are going to have a movie whose focus is alien contact, and very little focus on the main characters past, DO NOT have the aliens show themselves as her GODDAMN FATHER, and the alien planet as, essentially, a beach, with some extra moons.
Now, if the focus had been the main character, her relationship with her dad, and everything seemed to be her tied into that, then the aliens showed themselves as her father, then it would be touching, because her pain was eased and she was happy, and the movie would have been a women-empowerment tale, with a sci-fi twist. Instead you had the whole movie shouting at you "sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, sci-fi, aliens, HUMAN NEED TO SAY GOODBYE TO LOVED ONES" and the anti-climaticisim ensues. Again, back to mis-direction. You mis-direct people right out of the movie theatres. That would be like the ending to cloverfield being that the monster goes up to the top of a building and rubs its face on someone with a machine hooked up to his arm, who is laughing manically as he looks down at all the carnage. You just go, WTF? where did that come from? (and the questions ensue) was the creature a machine? who is this guy? since he was standing on a Macy's building, how was Macy's involved? does that movie have to do with Terminator since it was a man controlling a machine? etc. etc.
the simple fact about theme is this: keep to the theme. If you have a theme about aliens, and contact, do not have the ending be a woman losing her regret from her past. Either have aliens in their true form who give her sage advice about earth's place in the universe, which she LATER takes to the micro-level and applies it to her own life and feels better, OR you have a movie about a woman struggling to get rid of her past, and how every man she meets reminds her of her father, and how, every man who stands in her way is standing in her way for getting over her past, her past, focus on her past, her struggle with men, her past, and then have the aliens appear as her father, soothe her pain, give her resolution on a macro and micro level as a scientist and for her father. That would be a Lifetime movie, and probably a damn good one. The following pretty much sums up my rage
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
