Having bad guys who are greedy rich people isn't enough. Believe it or not conservatives are anti corporate at times. Republicans don't think there are no Lex Luthors, to them Lex Luther is George Soros and Ted Turner and Warren Buffet. The Conspiracy Theory community is often all about trying to claim what most liberals think will hurt the corporations is actually exactly what they want, and they're not always entirely wrong.
While Hollywood and Anime do create a lot of genuinely anti Capitalist content in-spite of themselves due to how a Communist Utopia is what most people want, they just refuse to admit it to themselves. There is definitely a lot of media that seems to have potentially Anti-Capitalist themes but is really just coming down as saying this one CEO or group of them are individually Greedy ass holes.
A lot of Media analysis being produced by Breadtube is very offended every time there is a "Good Billionaire" in a movie or TV show. And yes sometimes it seems like they are there specifically to vindicate Capitalism, especially when one serves as a Deus Ex Machina at the end, like the roles Kings sometimes played in stories produced under Feudalism.
I however feel like it is far more of a demonstration of Capitalism as a system if the CEO or Billionaire is at least not a card carrying mustache twirling one dimensional villain, but their business winds up doing evil regardless of that.
This is what the first Jurassic Park and the first Jurassic World do very well. John Hammond and Massrani are both perfectly likable chaps, they have tragic flaws, but they are not monsters. Spielberg I suspect feels similarly to George Lucas about Capitalism, so these movies wind up doing a great job of showing how a system that prioritizes profits over everything else leads to reckless, bad and dangerous decision making even when under a leader who personally seems to not care about profits that much.
The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom are also movies I like (The Lost World I can definitely say I like as much as the two praised above, Fallen Kingdom I need to re-watch before I can make a final verdict). But one thing I have to observe about both is how they default right back to having an utterly unsympathetic Corporate villain.
Of course the Jurassic franchise are not the ones usually singled out when people get offended by the idea of a "good billionaire". A lot of it is directed at Billionaire Superheroes, and that is a complicated discussion to get into given how each individual of these characters isn't even depicted consistently.
We are told Bruce Wayne spends a lot of money on charity and stuff. But it sure seems like it can't be nearly as much as he spends on having an endless supply of military grade bat themed vehicles. And sometimes Wayne Enterprises winds up doing some pretty bad stuff because of how little attention he pays to it. The first Professor Pig episode of Beware The Batman kind of unintentionally vindicated environmental terrorism due to how the villains' actions made Bruce aware of the situation they were protesting.
Leftists argue that the very existence of Billionaires is immoral, that hording that much wealth in the hands of only a few thousand people when millions are starving is wrong. And it's impossible to make that much money without being directly responsible for a lot of exploitation.
I don't disagree with that. We are producing more then enough food to feed the entire population of the Earth twice over, but we don't because doing that isn't profitable. America also has more empty houses then we have homeless people.
But not everyone is willing to see it that way and being a wealthy and/or privileged person, even one far from billionaire status, biases you against seeing things that way. And the fact is no single Billionaire giving up all their wealth to the poor is going to make a long term impact, that can really only happen if they all do it together.
Corporations are not people, but the people running them are. So you can make fiction about how the system is fundamentally wrong and immoral while still depicting some of the rich people unwilling to see it that way as at least not utterly inhuman goblins.
Showing posts with label Jurassic Park. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jurassic Park. Show all posts
Monday, March 30, 2020
Monday, September 23, 2019
Contrived Coincidences in Fiction don't bother me
They really don't. In Patrick Willems' notorious Plot Holes videos he says they're acceptable at the start of a story but not at the finish, I can't even concede that. I think a lot of people underestimate just how many resolutions that everyone loves have a level of contrived coincidence to them.
Describing the T-Rex saving the day at the end of Jurassic Park as a Deus Ex-Machina isn't really true, not only was she part of the story but she was really too important not to feature into the climax. But it was awfully coincidental, she was last seen on the other side of a now reactivated fence.
And it just occurred to me as I was working on this post that that ending qualifies as a Eucatastrophe, a term J.R.R. Tolkien coined.
Ya know what really ancient narrative can be accused of being very contrived? The Book of Esther. Think about it, so much of the book revolves around things like the King having just randomly read the right random thing in the chronicles at exactly the right time.
The late Chuck Missler used to say in response to those objecting to Esther because God is never directly mentioned, that Esther is all about how coincidences are God working undercover. And since I support Death Of The Author I can apply that theory about coincidences to any fictional Coincidence that helps save the day in a story I really like whether their secular writers like me doing that or not.
"What about Coincidences that result in bad things happening?" you may retort, well Romans 8 which Chuck Missler also liked to quote, says "All Things Work Together for Good". Ya know I'm surprised we don't mention that verse more often when arguing for Universal Salvation.
Let me end this post with one particular contrived coincidence I like that many fellow fans of that Anime may have never thought to think of as one. Back in June I made a post on the character arc of Misaka Mikoto in A Certain Scientific Railgun S.
Spoilers below.
In summery it's about her learning the importance of turning to her friends for help. During the Febri Arc, the third act of the season, in episode 21 Misaka is thinking of doing again exactly what she did in the prior arcs and try to handle everything by herself. But then at exactly the right moment Kongo calls her to talk about something perfectly relevant, by sheer coincidence. And that helps her make the right decision in that end.
I've watched most episodes of this show 3 times now, on both the second and 3rd viewing this Chuck Missler on Esther argument entered my mind when this scene came up.
Describing the T-Rex saving the day at the end of Jurassic Park as a Deus Ex-Machina isn't really true, not only was she part of the story but she was really too important not to feature into the climax. But it was awfully coincidental, she was last seen on the other side of a now reactivated fence.
And it just occurred to me as I was working on this post that that ending qualifies as a Eucatastrophe, a term J.R.R. Tolkien coined.
And indeed the most notorious Eucatastrophe Tolkien wrote is largely a contrived coincidence.Eucatastrophe is a neologism coined by Tolkien from Greek ευ- "good" and καταστροφή "destruction".
- "I coined the word 'eucatastrophe': the sudden happy turn in a story which pierces you with a joy that brings tears (which I argued it is the highest function of fairy-stories to produce). And I was there led to the view that it produces its peculiar effect because it is a sudden glimpse of Truth, your whole nature chained in material cause and effect, the chain of death, feels a sudden relief as if a major limb out of joint had suddenly snapped back. It perceives – if the story has literary 'truth' on the second plane (....) – that this is indeed how things really do work in the Great World for which our nature is made. And I concluded by saying that the Resurrection was the greatest 'eucatastrophe' possible in the greatest Fairy Story – and produces that essential emotion: Christian joy which produces tears because it is qualitatively so like sorrow, because it comes from those places where Joy and Sorrow are at one, reconciled, as selfishness and altruism are lost in Love."
- ― Letter 89
In his On Fairy-Stories Tolkien describes eucatastrophe further:
- "But the 'consolation' of fairy-tales has another aspect than the imaginative satisfaction of ancient desires. Far more important is the Consolation of the Happy Ending. Almost I would venture to assert that all complete fairy-stories must have it. At least I would say that Tragedy is the true form of Drama, its highest function; but the opposite is true of Fairy-story. Since we do not appear to possess a word that expresses this opposite — I will call it Eucatastrophe. The eucatastrophic tale is the true form of fairy-tale, and its highest function.
The consolation of fairy-stories, the joy of the happy ending: or more correctly of the good catastrophe, the sudden joyous “turn” (for there is no true end to any fairy-tale): this joy, which is one of the things which fairy-stories can produce supremely well, is not essentially 'escapist', nor 'fugitive'. In its fairy-tale—or otherworld—setting, it is a sudden and miraculous grace: never to be counted on to recur. It does not deny the existence of dyscatastrophe, of sorrow and failure: the possibility of these is necessary to the joy of deliverance; it denies (in the face of much evidence, if you will) universal final defeat and in so far is evangelium, giving a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of the world, poignant as grief.
It is the mark of a good fairy-story, of the higher or more complete kind, that however wild its events, however fantastic or terrible the adventures, it can give to child or man that hears it, when the “turn” comes, a catch of the breath, a beat and lifting of the heart, near to (or indeed accompanied by) tears, as keen as that given by any form of literary art, and having a peculiar quality."- ― On Fairy-Stories
Ya know what really ancient narrative can be accused of being very contrived? The Book of Esther. Think about it, so much of the book revolves around things like the King having just randomly read the right random thing in the chronicles at exactly the right time.
The late Chuck Missler used to say in response to those objecting to Esther because God is never directly mentioned, that Esther is all about how coincidences are God working undercover. And since I support Death Of The Author I can apply that theory about coincidences to any fictional Coincidence that helps save the day in a story I really like whether their secular writers like me doing that or not.
"What about Coincidences that result in bad things happening?" you may retort, well Romans 8 which Chuck Missler also liked to quote, says "All Things Work Together for Good". Ya know I'm surprised we don't mention that verse more often when arguing for Universal Salvation.
Let me end this post with one particular contrived coincidence I like that many fellow fans of that Anime may have never thought to think of as one. Back in June I made a post on the character arc of Misaka Mikoto in A Certain Scientific Railgun S.
Spoilers below.
In summery it's about her learning the importance of turning to her friends for help. During the Febri Arc, the third act of the season, in episode 21 Misaka is thinking of doing again exactly what she did in the prior arcs and try to handle everything by herself. But then at exactly the right moment Kongo calls her to talk about something perfectly relevant, by sheer coincidence. And that helps her make the right decision in that end.
I've watched most episodes of this show 3 times now, on both the second and 3rd viewing this Chuck Missler on Esther argument entered my mind when this scene came up.
Friday, August 2, 2019
Steven Spielberg may be my favorite Film Director even though none of his films make my Top 10
I don't really have a definitive top 10, but I have a relatively strong top 4 and a pretty solid pool of potential top 10s and even my top Spielberg film I currently have trouble seeing as likely to make it. Before I started getting super into Anime letting it dominate my favorites of everything, and watching other stuff I hadn't seen before, there was one Spielberg film that was in the running, Jurassic Park.
Now I'm not saying my top ten films are directed by people who balanced that out with a ton of crap. I'm someone relatively easy to please so my "average" includes a level of praise other people might only give to a 8 or 9 out of 10.
Most theatrical Pokemon films have the same director, only one is in my top 4 but none of them are bad movies. They're just mostly stuff I'd never recommend to someone not inherently into Pokemon.
Most theatrical Pokemon films have the same director, only one is in my top 4 but none of them are bad movies. They're just mostly stuff I'd never recommend to someone not inherently into Pokemon.
All three of Christopher Nolan's Batman movies are among my all time favorite movies, one is still in that top 4 group, another had been a potential top 10 but has slipped down thanks to all the Anime. But I have zero interest in his non Batman movies.
I've seen 6 Miyazaki films, one is in that top 4 and another is strongly in my top 9 of at least specifically Anime films. But without the extraneous circumstances that made ToD Spielberg is not capable of making a film I find as dull as The Wind Rises.
Even when watching a Spielberg film in a genre or with a premise I don't care about I can still go "this is a an expert film maker".
If you think Hook is proof Spielberg can make a bad film, I sentence you to watch this Video Essay.
I've seen 6 Miyazaki films, one is in that top 4 and another is strongly in my top 9 of at least specifically Anime films. But without the extraneous circumstances that made ToD Spielberg is not capable of making a film I find as dull as The Wind Rises.
Even when watching a Spielberg film in a genre or with a premise I don't care about I can still go "this is a an expert film maker".
If you think Hook is proof Spielberg can make a bad film, I sentence you to watch this Video Essay.
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom is Dope
It's what I've been wanting from a Jurassic Park sequel since The Lost World.
People are gonna hate on it, but I don't care, it's different from prior movies and a lot of fun.
A few things bugged me. Mainly that common sequel trope where the couple who got together at the end of the first film we find out broke up somewhere in between so now the romantic plot is them getting back together rather then the more difficult for writers task of continuing the relationship. Ghostbusters II was the first time I saw it so it still doesn't bother me there, but I started seeing it as a pattern with National Treasure: Book of Secrets.
What I want from Jurassic Park films is like what I want from Pokemon films, they don't need to be perfectly flawless pieces of art like the very first JP film and Spell of The Unnown though it is great when they are. What I want is to have fun with the titular monsters. Now with Jurassic Park what I expect is much grittier while Pokemon is a Cartoon, but still there is a lot of ridiculousness I'm fine with.
Now that said, this movie did have more emotional resonance then I was expecting, even as someone who already loved the first Jurassic World film.
We could have had Colin do Star Wars Episode IX, instead we got Abrams again, someone who's good at starting things but not at finishing them.
If you like the previous film you'll probably like this one even more. If you're a snob about your Dinosaur blockbuster films then you'll probably nitpick this to death but I don't care.
People are gonna hate on it, but I don't care, it's different from prior movies and a lot of fun.
A few things bugged me. Mainly that common sequel trope where the couple who got together at the end of the first film we find out broke up somewhere in between so now the romantic plot is them getting back together rather then the more difficult for writers task of continuing the relationship. Ghostbusters II was the first time I saw it so it still doesn't bother me there, but I started seeing it as a pattern with National Treasure: Book of Secrets.
What I want from Jurassic Park films is like what I want from Pokemon films, they don't need to be perfectly flawless pieces of art like the very first JP film and Spell of The Unnown though it is great when they are. What I want is to have fun with the titular monsters. Now with Jurassic Park what I expect is much grittier while Pokemon is a Cartoon, but still there is a lot of ridiculousness I'm fine with.
Now that said, this movie did have more emotional resonance then I was expecting, even as someone who already loved the first Jurassic World film.
We could have had Colin do Star Wars Episode IX, instead we got Abrams again, someone who's good at starting things but not at finishing them.
If you like the previous film you'll probably like this one even more. If you're a snob about your Dinosaur blockbuster films then you'll probably nitpick this to death but I don't care.
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Jurassic World still holds up on repeat viewing
I watched it again yesterday and I still love it.
The ruins of the original park are a nostalgic highlight, but they also serve a poetic purpose. That scene makes me think of "My name is Ozymandias King of Kings, look on my works ye mighty and despair". And it foreshadows how the new park is in the process of suffering the same fate.
A lot of people have been really hard on the film for being Sexist. I get the whole woman not wanting kids being told she does thing is problematic, but the fact remains the first film did the same story-line with a male lead, they're actually evening out the gender treatment here.
The female lead of this movie is brave and smart, she's the one who gets the idea to release the T-Rex.
A lot of other things come down to expected gender roles, I kinda wish the "guy who has the common sense all the more powerful people around him don't" trope that Chris Pratt plays out could be a woman character for a change.
But the fact that it's being held against this film more so then prior JP films or the MCU films I think is really unfair.
One thing some people complain about is the protagonists not being archaeologists this time. I think that's it's strength, the right way to do this movie differently, as in this setting these creatures being alive again isn't quite so new anymore.
In this movie the substance is new while the Nostalgia is Superficial, that's how it should be. In The Force Awaken, which I did love but hasn't yet proven as re-watchable, the differences are superficial while the substance is telling the same story. Again Star Wars should be repetitive, but the Prequels I feel got the balance better.
This movie is still ultimately inferior to the original, and probably even to The Lost World Jurassic Park. But I have a hunch it will in the long run hold up better then a lot of other current films critics are being less dismissive of.
The ruins of the original park are a nostalgic highlight, but they also serve a poetic purpose. That scene makes me think of "My name is Ozymandias King of Kings, look on my works ye mighty and despair". And it foreshadows how the new park is in the process of suffering the same fate.
A lot of people have been really hard on the film for being Sexist. I get the whole woman not wanting kids being told she does thing is problematic, but the fact remains the first film did the same story-line with a male lead, they're actually evening out the gender treatment here.
The female lead of this movie is brave and smart, she's the one who gets the idea to release the T-Rex.
A lot of other things come down to expected gender roles, I kinda wish the "guy who has the common sense all the more powerful people around him don't" trope that Chris Pratt plays out could be a woman character for a change.
But the fact that it's being held against this film more so then prior JP films or the MCU films I think is really unfair.
One thing some people complain about is the protagonists not being archaeologists this time. I think that's it's strength, the right way to do this movie differently, as in this setting these creatures being alive again isn't quite so new anymore.
In this movie the substance is new while the Nostalgia is Superficial, that's how it should be. In The Force Awaken, which I did love but hasn't yet proven as re-watchable, the differences are superficial while the substance is telling the same story. Again Star Wars should be repetitive, but the Prequels I feel got the balance better.
This movie is still ultimately inferior to the original, and probably even to The Lost World Jurassic Park. But I have a hunch it will in the long run hold up better then a lot of other current films critics are being less dismissive of.
Monday, June 29, 2015
Prequel Nostalgia is coming sooner then you might think
Think about it Jurassic World has been a massive success (in-spite of some people's whining) largely because Jurassic Park is now a film people look back on Nostalgically. 20 years latter tends to be a common benchmark for that.
Well The Phantom Menace will be 20 years old in only four years.
I've personally been proclaiming it and other 1999 films what I'm most Nostalgic for for at least five years now. Since then as I've gotten even older what I look back on Nostalgically has expanded to include Episodes II and III, as well as all three LOTR films, hence why I loved experiencing The Hobbit movies so much in-spite of some of my complaints, most of which were purely about Desolation of Smaug.
Maybe that's why Disney is so determined not to have 3 years between films now. They don't want to be running SW off a purely OT Nostalgia based franchise to deep into the time Nostalgia for the Prequels will be jumping off. I think they are running a major risk burning out SW by having not even a year and a half between Episodes, and that's not including the spin offs.
Maybe once this Trilogy is done Disney is planning to do some Prequel based SW projects.
The people at Disney aren't complete idiots, I think it's unwise how they are catering to Prequel haters now, but there is a reason they're being subtle about it. I think they do know the Prequel fans are a massive market, maybe's they are just holding off on trying to tap that till they think the timing is just right.
If not, if they are really planning to keep this only the OT matters approach going indefinitely. It will still be past 2019 when Episode IX comes out. That is when I expect this lack of respect for Prequel fans could start really biting them.
But at any-rate as I said before the New Trilogy needs to bring more Nostalgia to the table if it wants to truly bring new life to Star Wars. Wouldn't matter which aspects of SW the Nostalgia is based on.
Update after seeing The Force Awakens, no spoilers.
The Movie was not like it's marketing, it embraced the Prequel and this person who feels Nostalgia for the Prequels felt this movie spoke to me just as much as the OT fans do.
Well The Phantom Menace will be 20 years old in only four years.
I've personally been proclaiming it and other 1999 films what I'm most Nostalgic for for at least five years now. Since then as I've gotten even older what I look back on Nostalgically has expanded to include Episodes II and III, as well as all three LOTR films, hence why I loved experiencing The Hobbit movies so much in-spite of some of my complaints, most of which were purely about Desolation of Smaug.
Maybe that's why Disney is so determined not to have 3 years between films now. They don't want to be running SW off a purely OT Nostalgia based franchise to deep into the time Nostalgia for the Prequels will be jumping off. I think they are running a major risk burning out SW by having not even a year and a half between Episodes, and that's not including the spin offs.
Maybe once this Trilogy is done Disney is planning to do some Prequel based SW projects.
The people at Disney aren't complete idiots, I think it's unwise how they are catering to Prequel haters now, but there is a reason they're being subtle about it. I think they do know the Prequel fans are a massive market, maybe's they are just holding off on trying to tap that till they think the timing is just right.
If not, if they are really planning to keep this only the OT matters approach going indefinitely. It will still be past 2019 when Episode IX comes out. That is when I expect this lack of respect for Prequel fans could start really biting them.
But at any-rate as I said before the New Trilogy needs to bring more Nostalgia to the table if it wants to truly bring new life to Star Wars. Wouldn't matter which aspects of SW the Nostalgia is based on.
Update after seeing The Force Awakens, no spoilers.
The Movie was not like it's marketing, it embraced the Prequel and this person who feels Nostalgia for the Prequels felt this movie spoke to me just as much as the OT fans do.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
Jurassic World was Amazing!!!
I rarely tear up in the theater. I did for the 3D re release of The Phantom Menace, and I did at the end of The Dark Knight Rises. And now I've done it for Jurassic world. Best movie of this year by far, probably best I've seen since 2012. It can't truly beat the first movie but as someone who is a huge Lost World fan I think this may have done better then it even.
Early on I was reminded how we should never underestimate a good score. It brought the emotions of the first film back beautifully. It appealed to Nostalgia for the original films but also did new things and introduced new ideas. That's what the Star Wars prequels did right and what I am still hopefully optimistic The Force Awakens will do.
It like other sequels brought back things from the original book things the first movie didn't have time for. Like Wong's explaining how none of these dinosaurs are truly natural.
Seeing the Park fully operational was so much fun, then seeing it all descend into Chaos, it was handled very well. It had everything superficial you want from a film like this but also intelligence, the InGen corporate politics, and the emotions, it was all masterfully done. All the humans characters were interesting, likable or unlikable exactly how they were meant to be.
I was iffy when I heard about the hybrid thing at first but it does make sense and they handled it very well.
I highly recommend the film.
Now I want to discus the culmination so.
SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!!!
The Raptor stuff was a lot of fun.
I knew they were gonna let out the T-Rex, and I loved every minute of the build up for it. It was so wonderful. Then the fight happens and it looks awesome.
Then we see there is a Raptor left. I thought I had accounted for all 4 being taken out, but I guess the rumors of Blue's demise were greatly exaggerated.
The Deus Ex-Machina of the original movie was the T-Rex saving them from the Raptors. Now it's the T-Rex and a Raptor teaming up against at the man made hybrid. It was awesome, I felt like a kid again.
And then I did not expect that water Dinosaur to pop up and finish it off. It was just Perfect. This director was a genius. He should be entrusted with a Star Wars film.
The movie was way better then I expected. I Love It.
Early on I was reminded how we should never underestimate a good score. It brought the emotions of the first film back beautifully. It appealed to Nostalgia for the original films but also did new things and introduced new ideas. That's what the Star Wars prequels did right and what I am still hopefully optimistic The Force Awakens will do.
It like other sequels brought back things from the original book things the first movie didn't have time for. Like Wong's explaining how none of these dinosaurs are truly natural.
Seeing the Park fully operational was so much fun, then seeing it all descend into Chaos, it was handled very well. It had everything superficial you want from a film like this but also intelligence, the InGen corporate politics, and the emotions, it was all masterfully done. All the humans characters were interesting, likable or unlikable exactly how they were meant to be.
I was iffy when I heard about the hybrid thing at first but it does make sense and they handled it very well.
I highly recommend the film.
Now I want to discus the culmination so.
SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!!!
The Raptor stuff was a lot of fun.
I knew they were gonna let out the T-Rex, and I loved every minute of the build up for it. It was so wonderful. Then the fight happens and it looks awesome.
Then we see there is a Raptor left. I thought I had accounted for all 4 being taken out, but I guess the rumors of Blue's demise were greatly exaggerated.
The Deus Ex-Machina of the original movie was the T-Rex saving them from the Raptors. Now it's the T-Rex and a Raptor teaming up against at the man made hybrid. It was awesome, I felt like a kid again.
And then I did not expect that water Dinosaur to pop up and finish it off. It was just Perfect. This director was a genius. He should be entrusted with a Star Wars film.
The movie was way better then I expected. I Love It.
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Hard to be Nostalgic about your first Kiss when she's in jail for Murder
Just Tweets today
Jared Welch retweeted
Mike and Cyrus looked they were meeting for an OKCupid date. There was some obvious tension there. #BooRadleyVanCullen #PLLSocialHour
Now that I"m follow @TheFlashPodcast I can't live tweet #BooRadleyVanCullen without seeing Flash spoilers
Jared Welch retweeted
Mikey isn't A, he's just smuggling dinosaur blood out of Jurassic World. #crossoverevent #BooRadleyVanCullen #insidious2
Jared Welch retweeted
Jared Welch retweeted
Oh, Talia, huge mistake listing your husband as your emergency contact. In Rosewood, you need eleven emergency contacts. #BooRadleyVanCullen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)