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

Film Script Analysis - Page 12

post #551 of 602
I would love to know what agent thinks entertaining is. It would probably be nightmare fuel.
post #552 of 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

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

 

Lookity here, Mr Diegetic!

post #553 of 602

unnnnggggghhhh Lady Ghostbusters.

post #554 of 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

I would love to know what agent thinks entertaining is. It would probably be nightmare fuel.
giphy.gif

Everyone here knows that my idea of entertainment is THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.'s sandwich scene.
post #555 of 602
Speaking of garbage scripts we need to dissect.

(Bradito I'm so sorry babe I tried)
post #556 of 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

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.
Absolutely. We're talking about the presence of or lack of conflict.

Classic Bond's conflict is very external.
post #557 of 602

Resurrecting Bradito's screenplay thread to talk about three acts versus five acts with The Avengers analysis:

 

post #558 of 602
Thread Starter 
The Avengers is a three act movie with one protagonist, Captain America, as the leader of a group.

The end.
post #559 of 602
Boring.
post #560 of 602

Thing is, Cap has the least dramatic arc in the film (at least as released, where his 'man out of time' situation is minimized). Sure, he gets disillusioned when he finds out that SHIELD is secretly using Hydra tech, but that pales in comparison to the challenges depicted for Black Widow, Hulk, and Thor.

post #561 of 602
Thread Starter 
I don't know why these YouTube goofballs keep needing to reinvent the wheel.
post #562 of 602

A question I've been asking myself is, are character arcs necessary? I recently watched White Line Fever and the hero is pretty much the same guy throughout. He reacts more and more extremely in response to more and more extreme opposition, but that's it.

post #563 of 602
Thread Starter 
Lots of protagonists don't change, and it's fine. James Bond pre-Daniel Craig, Marty McFly in BttF part one, Steven Seagal -- those characters typically effect change in others.
post #564 of 602
Why is Bradito so boring?
post #565 of 602
Thread Starter 
Let's make a YouTube about how boring I am.
post #566 of 602

That's a good point about Marty. The movie sort of suggests that his character is improved through his experience, growng to understand and respect his parents, but in fact he just changes them out for better ones.

post #567 of 602
If Bradito is the protagonist, does he change?
post #568 of 602

He is the shadow to your light. To change him you must change yourself.

post #569 of 602
Thread Starter 
Hammerhead raises a good point about the growth arcs in Avengers. The big three -- Cap, Tony and Thor -- don't really change. But, they have their own standalone films in which they undergo changes. So the Avengers movie gives the growth arcs to the supporting players.
post #570 of 602
Marty has a subtle arc in BttF. In original 1985 he gets no respect (from the principal, from the school talent show judges) and is frustrated by his lame parents. In 1955 he not only learns to appreciate that his parents are people too, he gets a taste of what being appreciated would be like. He's suddenly the most popular kid in school and gets to rock out with an amazing guitar solo.

But even with all that fame and glory, he still needs to get back to 1985 and when he does he's happy ("Wow, ah Red, you look great. Everything looks great."). Of course, this is undercut by the fact that he has to get back to 1985 or he'll erase himself from existence, and that when he does get back to 1985 it's a new, super-idealized version.

But the arc is still there.

And the arc of The Avengers isn't for the individuals, but for the group. They learn how to work as a team.
post #571 of 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Hammerhead raises a good point about the growth arcs in Avengers. The big three -- Cap, Tony and Thor -- don't really change. But, they have their own standalone films in which they undergo changes. So the Avengers movie gives the growth arcs to the supporting players.

 

Thor gets a pretty solid moment of truth after he's been dumped in that field and has that look where he's doubting if he's still worthy to lift Mjolnir.

 

I didn't mention Hawkeye's mind-control plot because it's kind of boring.

post #572 of 602
Thread Starter 
Another great point by Hammerhead.

Hammerhead +1
Bart -1
post #573 of 602

I mean, Bradito's incredibly boring point that Cap, Tony and Thor don't change is really wrong, because the movie flat-out spells out Tony's arc by having Cap and Tony discuss the value of sacrifice.

 

And then Tony learns the value of sacrifice. 

 

But that's part of my point about teamwork. 

post #574 of 602

So, what's Fincher really complaining about? Did he even want to make a Marvel movie at some point, or did Marvel even ask him? There isn't a lot in his body of work to suggest superheroes are in his wheelhouse.

post #575 of 602
Thread Starter 
Bart -1
post #576 of 602

Bart³

post #577 of 602
Thread Starter 
I should probably see Avengers again.

Bart -1,000,000
post #578 of 602

OK, you two clearly have some kinda thing happening here so I'm gonna go.

post #579 of 602
Thread Starter 
I miss Hammerhead.
post #580 of 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post
 

So, what's Fincher really complaining about? Did he even want to make a Marvel movie at some point, or did Marvel even ask him? There isn't a lot in his body of work to suggest superheroes are in his wheelhouse.

To go along with the ideas the video went into, I think Fincher is complaining less about such-and-such structure and more about the details/variations within that structure when it comes to superhero movies (not just Marvel).  And when it comes to superhero movies, there can be a lot of variations in superficial dressings, but the overall trajectory of them is going to be fairly limited to "heroes overcoming the villains by the end". 

 

Just looking at Fincher's filmography, you know he's not interested in being confined to that.  The closest he's come to making something like that I can think of is... PANIC ROOM?  But even with that movie, he looks for ways to defy the usual comfort that such stories provide.

 

 

That said, for someone who isn't into formula, Fincher used a very formulaic method to diss the same-iness of superhero movies!

 

"I DON'T COTTON TO HOLLYWOOD'S FORMULAIC THREE ACTSssssss!!!"

post #581 of 602
Thread Starter 
How dare he...?!
post #582 of 602

how dare ME???

post #583 of 602
Thread Starter 
Hasn't David Fincher only made studio films his entire career? They're edgy to be sure, but not exactly reinventing narrative structure.
post #584 of 602

I don't think he's criticizing marvel movies for NOT reinventing narrative structure.

 

He's just saying the kinds of stories that marvel tells are very limited for his tastes.  

 

I'm sure he has no problem with making films at a studio (outside of his experience with alien3woof!).  

 

He's at least more polite about it than Iñárritu!

post #585 of 602
Thread Starter 
Superhero movies are definitely the cineastes' punching bag of late. Never mind the preponderance of spy, assassin, former hitman, government agent, and independent intelligence officer working for a clandestine organization movies that seem to come out every week. Folks gobble those up and act like they've never seen a flick where someone gets shot in the head before.

But superhero movies are too samey!

@_@
post #586 of 602

and it's not as if Fincher hasn't made OSCAR-BAIT before!

 

that's another genre that's often a punching bag!

 

 

Superhero movies are a really convenient target... probably because nobody regularly asks directors like Fincher if they're gonna be directing one of these super successful spy, assassin, former hitman, government agent, independent intelligence officer, maverick lawyer, oscar-bait true story etc etc etc when they're out promoting something else.

 

Those never really feel specific enough to FEEL like they're taking over the mainstream movie landscape.  Particularly when it comes to the marble cinnamon universe, which has become its own thing that everyone else has stumbled in trying to chase.  And now they're at a point where they're releasing three movies a year, with all the omnipresent marketing blitz that comes with it.

 

All the other genre fare listed above don't get that kind of push very often anymore.

 

 

I wonder what him taking over on World War Z2 is going to be like...

post #587 of 602
Thread Starter 
I remember when Fincher was up for the first "Spider-Man."

And the third "Mission: Impossible."

The good old days.
post #588 of 602

oh yeaaah!

 

maybe Fincher was pulling an Aronofsky!

 

stringing along these big name properties (as Aronofsky did witih batman, wolverine, robocop?) and then ditching them to make other things!

post #589 of 602

Gonna piss off Bradito again and bring back Lessons from the Screenplay to talk about Fincher's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo:

 

post #590 of 602
Thread Starter 
Oh, you and your YouTubes I never watch!
post #591 of 602

Validate me!

post #592 of 602
Thread Starter 
I only saw the American version once, but I seem to remember it having a beginning (Act I), a middle (Act II) and an end (Act III). Not unlike the Swedish version and the book they're both based on.
post #593 of 602

video watch video watch

post #594 of 602
Thread Starter 
Nah, I'm more interested in y'all's opinions rather than giving views to some chucklehead who's too lazy to write a blog.
post #595 of 602

Bradito!

 

Fuck?

post #596 of 602
Thread Starter 
Remember when you used to write overlong treatises that I only skimmed, but I'm sure could've been whittled down to a few good points? Whatever happened to that Bart? Now you post YouTubes.

:'(
post #597 of 602

No used to about it!

 

Here's a massive post I wrote five days ago about Valerian and Dune: http://www.chud.com/community/t/159488/valerian-and-the-city-of-a-thousand-planets-2017-post-release-thread/150#post_4460573

 

like share subscribe

post #598 of 602
Thread Starter 
Page me when it's an essay that's not about Valerian.
post #599 of 602

:(

post #600 of 602
Thread Starter 
*clicks link*

Mother of God, the wall of text! Bart is back!

*skims*
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