1641 Hey…

by

I’ve been the person on both sides of this door. I’ve been that person when they were happy to see me and when they weren’t. I don’t know if this is just something we only do in our youths, but I kind of hope the last time I was them wasn’t my last time. Have any of you ever shed tears on a doorstep, happy or sad? Have you ever waited, looking at that hollow slab of metal, or wood, wondering if a smile would be on the other side when it opened? It’s weird how many doors I can still see so clearly in my memory because of the moments I spent in the times between knowing and not.

I think if I watch enough videos of people complaining about movies I’ll be able to write the perfect script. The notion came to me after hours and hours of listening to every possible grievance over Star Wars. It seems like if I listen long enough I should be able to crack the code and create the ultimate movie. As far as insane notions go this is one of the tamer ones I’ve ever been moved to act on…

55 Comments

Booty call!

Hmm, links to mentioned comic strips please.

The really frustrating thing is: if you do write the perfect movie script, studio heads won’t be able to understand it and it therefore won’t get done (’cause, hey, you can’t do a decent movie for less than 50 mil, right?)

Hollywood is a walking corpse and has been for at least 20 years. Probably longer.

I’d argue they’ve gotten into necromancy personally. Afraid to death to try anything new. Stuck in the “blockbuster” mentality they inflicted on themselves after the Original Star Wars movie made its huge splash in 1977.

I wonder what’s bothering Nina.
Maybe it’s her history with (Ms.) Alex, or something.

She said a bunch of comics ago that she was out of sorts (over the Maddie working at the library when she can’t even pronounce it right), and that she needed some perspective to get her head on straight.

Or drink

Or sex

So it looks like she might be looking for option C

I read a novel about book banning once. A professor made the point that it is literally impossible to have a book that nobody would object to. A student said “How about _Pride and Prejudice_? That’s a harmless bit of fluff… who could object to that?” The professor said “It contains no asians, no black people, no minorities of any sort.” (And now that it’s the 21st Century, people would also be upset that it contains no homosexuals, trans people, etc.)

Rewrite it: stick in some Asians, some blacks, queer folks. Someone will get bent out of shape that you overlooked, I don’t know, Hawaiians or asexuals or something. Okay, rewrite to stick those in. Pretty soon people are complaining that there are too many characters, and most of them are irrelevant to the story.

So, there’s no such thing as a perfect movie. Only a perfect example of a particular genre, such that people who love that genre will love it. And you will never get 100% agreement… I have read people saying that the original Star Wars movie is lame, while I regard it as a 10 on the 10 scale.

I do think watching critics can be educational. I wish George Lucas had been able to watch the Plinkett review of the prequels before he made them, somehow… he might have avoided some of the disasters. I was stunned in the Phantam Menace Plinkett review when he asked his friends to describe characters from the movie: not allowed to describe what they look like or what their job is. It’s easy with the original movie and impossible in the new one. “Who is Han Solo?” “He’s a rogue, a real charmer, self-confident, rough exterior but a heart of gold, loyal to his friends…” “Who is Qui-Gon Jinn?” “He’s… a teacher. Wait, that’s his job. He’s… wise?”

But probably the best way to learn how to do something is not so much to read critics tearing down bad examples, but study good examples (and think carefully about why they are good).

I read that book too. It’s called “Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury if anyone’s interested. :)

Pretty sure you were just joking, but for the record, the book I was thinking of is called _The Day They Came to Arrest the Book_ by Nat Hentoff. It’s about some parents who want to ban the book _Huckleberry Finn_, because they get bent out of shape that people use the n-word in it (i.e. “nigger”). The ironic thing is that the book has a strong anti-slavery message, but the parents can’t get past that hurtful word, and one black kid in the class is also upset about being given homework where he has to read that word in print.

I feel like neither that student nor the professor actually knew how to appreciate Pride and Prejudice if they could dismiss it as “a harmless bit of fluff”. Austen was a surprisingly incisive author once you catch onto her wit, and she frequently skewers the absurdities and contradictions of 19th century upper-class life in her novels — and a lot of what she satirizes still exists today in some form or another.

What can someone object to in Pride and Prejudice? How about that marriage is less about love than about money and social position, that many men prefer pretty but brainless wives so that their sense of entitlement isn’t challenged, that a woman who doesn’t marry and have children is seen as a failure (although at least not doomed to a life of poverty these days), that men and women need to earn each others’ respect rather than just assume it — and that society, when you understand all its restrictions and constructs, is really a pretty nasty piece of bullcrap.

It’s possible I’m mis-remembering and it was some other book. It’s also possible that the character, a teen girl, didn’t spot the undercurrents of the book that you spotted. (I know I get more out of books as an adult than I did as a kid. Heck, not just books. When I was a kid, the significance of Kirk putting his boots back on while sitting on a bed in a bedroom with an alien chick? Whoosh, right past my head.)

Consuming vast quantities of random whingeing isn’t going to help you, and that’s what “teh interwebs” are full of: passionate, inconsistent whingeing. Pick just a few quality individual viewpoints and follow what they have to say.
My most common complaint about movies is that it’s rare to see an interesting story cleverly executed with excellent fidelity to the story-universe’s internal logic. The logic part usually is dropped first in favor of random drama and action.
There are some dramatic shortcuts that just piss me off: overly convenient power-ups and techno-magic inventions (it’s the magic of fairies and belief and not thinking too hard!), time travel, and the whole Star Trek space battle thing where ships take turns firing individual shots at each other, and there’s always time to talk and make up a new strategy during the battle. (Imagine fighter jets hovering in place and doing the same thing!) There’s always an exception, of course, for a humorous take on bad tropes, if it’s done cleverly and subversively.

Ah, you mean movies like Hot Shots or Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.
Not just tongue in cheek but full out pan fried with plenty of mustard and caramelized onions Baloney.

The Baloney is sliced so thick you know it for Baloney but not so thick that you hate it and are sick of it, just that sweet spot where you love it and still know you are being fed Baloney.

I agree. I actually am a fan of both of those films. I’m a fan of similar B films / flashy films, too.

I hope you have seen _Grindhouse_. Totally a hoot.

The fake trailers are fun, _Planet Terror_ slams the action level to 11, and _Death Proof_ is worth watching. _Death Proof_ is more interesting once you realize that absolutely all the car stuff was done in real life with real cars and stunt drivers (at one point there were three generations of stunt drivers on screen at once), and once you realize that Zoe Bell was having the time of her life (her whole career as a stunt performer, she was trained to keep her face from showing on camera; for _Death Proof_ she did her own stunts and let the camera see her face). I was kinda disappointed with _Death Proof_ the first time I saw it, but I watched the special features on the DVD and liked it a lot better retrospectively.

I love that last panel. That’s all.
You people are saying smth like she comes because she is frustrated because of Alex etc.
But what I really think is she just want to see Ed. That simple.

I haven’t been in Nina’s shoes too often, because of a fear of hearing the judgemental voice in my head being echoed by people I care about. “This is stupid. You can’t just show up, unannounced, with problems that probably are that important, even IF they like you…” I wish I hadn’t let that fear stop me, because I know if I were in Ed’s shoes, I’d be honored to be the first person to help a friend in distress. (Though, much like Ed, I usually make the mistake of being too concerned, and not warm or welcoming enough.)

Well, after that kiss, there has been a very large un-dropped shoe – no real discussion about feelings and relationship issues . Maybe now it can be dropped.

Hmm…
Ed’s got a honor streak (I think) and he might feel he’s taking advantage of Nina’s mood. On the other hand Nina would be taking advantage of him as a cure for her mood. So doe’s that balance it out?

Just saying, there is hopefully some contextual conversation either before or after things possibly happen.

On a personal note, I really hope something does happen. :)

Ok. Resist urges. Be calm, enjoy Nina being in the story again, do not expound profoundly on the ramifications of this.

Must…. Resist….. Empathetic…. Exposition…. And……shipping……of …….ed…and….nina

Is it still “shipping” if they’re obviously on trajectory for a romantic relationship in-canon?

Yes. It generally doesn’t matter at what point in a relationship two characters are at-if you’re rooting for them to either get or stay together it’s shipping.

There’s cannon shipping- such as two characters who are in a relationship, suggested as to be heading towards a Like Ed and Nina, or 2 characters in the same universe trlationship

(Damm mobile phone) who could/have met and you want to see them together.

Non Canon is another whole different scene.

Ok. My urges have got the best of me.

This is something that could go horribly horribly wrong. ED needs to stay true to his respectful, nervous, kind self or her showing up and needing to talk could explode into a negative relationship that speaks out of control in such a manner that it will quickly tear the whole store apart.

I’ve seen this kind of thing before. Nina has threads to everyone, and ed has a few too. If the Nina threads are pulled away from the ed threads it will pull on Thomas/Carol, jo/jess, and reveal the whole string of relationships to management. Firings well ensue, insisting that those who are left, probably jo, the other smoker guy(can’t remember his name) and of all people wes.

Ed will rage, jess will rage at ed, Thomas and Carol may stay together as Thomas will at this point be unwilling to let their relationship be hurt, but Thomas and ED might have a falling out if ed hurts Nina, Jo will cling to Nina.

Really we’re standing in a series of powder kegs and people are playing with matches.

My heart wants to believe it’s not in Edwards personality to try anything, but Nina is vulnerable right now and it IS in eds personality to be a white knight.

I don’t know if you can hear me Ed, but for the love of god, even if she gets naked tonight don’t. I repeat, don’t. If you and her are to be together you need to be the paragon of restraint. You can hug her, you can hold her, you can comfort her, and if she wants to, let her kiss you, but do not let sex happen tonight.

I’m pretty sure Ed is afraid of messing things up so he will be on his best behavior. After all, you don’t meet people like Nina in your life often. If anything, Ed would try to help her the best he can.

I don’t know how well writing stories relates to writing screenplays, but one thing to remember about stories- there are no new ones. You may not realize what plot it’s following, but there always is one, and it has always been done before. It may differ in style , execution, and from whose perception it’s told, but it’s been done before.
“You’re a jedi, Luke.
“You’re a wizard, Harry.
“You’re an Israelite, Moses.

Wolverine is Frankenstein’s monster, and destroys his creator in the end. (now you’re seeing Mickey in “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” yelling, “It’s Alive!!)

Yeah, I’ve been on either side of that door, too (and in airports and bus stations) and I can tell you for sure that it’s not just a young person’s thing because I’m doing it to this day, and will be opening the door to someone I care about weeks from now, and close it behind them when they leave a few days after that. So happy/sad on a sliding scale. I’m 62. Doubt I’ll be doing this at 80, mind you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.