• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Unpopular Opinions

Moe_Syzlak said:
Sure. The whole movie hinges on the themes of chaos and that people aren’t inherently good when push comes to shove. Yet everything the Joker does from the opening bank robbery to the finale is elaborately planned and could fall apart if just one little thing doesn’t go according to these ridiculously overwrought plans, making the Joker the least chaotic character in the movie. Everything that happens seems to happen because it is scripted and nothing feels organic.
Click to expand...

Joker isn’t actively trying to be chaotic himself, he lies and manipulates and makes himself seem chaotic, but of course he plans. His goal is to bring down order and establishment, and yet he, hypocritically, plans everything very orderly and particularly. Maybe he realizes this, maybe he doesn’t, but I think that is one of the many reasons he’s such an interesting villain. I think what’s important here is that Batman here isn’t a perfect encapsulation of order either, and that’s what Joker tries to prove, that all the ideals that Batman, Harvey Dent, Gordon, etc. try to uphold are inherently flawed. So it matters less that he himself isn’t completely chaotic, in fact I think it deepens the conversation.

Moe_Syzlak said:
Harvey Dent and his prosecutor girlfriend pursuing organized crime yet have zero protection. Not one but two ferries are loaded with barrels of explosives and no one notices. A billionaire hosts a party with all the elite of Gotham and there’s no security. And why was the Joker there? Just to look for Dent and throw Rachel off the balcony? Did he just go home after that? The cell phone bomb in the dude’s stomach goes off and everyone but the Joker is incapacitated. And even stupid stuff like Dent only realizing the nurse is Joker when he removes the mask!? Fake/fake out deaths. The dude who knows who Batman is never says anything!? Even after Batman is a wanted fugitive!? In short, it’s a poorly written movie.
Click to expand...

I don’t know Moe, I feel you can break down the plot holes of every movie like this if you want to, and it’s fun to poke holes on that but I hesitate to call anything poorly written just for that because there are far more important things in a movie than “perfect logic”. Of course I know you know this though and I understand your greater issues lie with the themes, and that these plot holes are more noticable to you because the greater themes don’t work for you very well either.

Moe_Syzlak said:
The themes don’t ring true as many many of the people on the ferries seemed okay with sacrificing the other ferry full of people even if they wanted someone else to pull the trigger.
Click to expand...

Batman may say that the city wants to believe in good as a whole, but in my opinion Nolan isn’t trying to say a definitive answer that people are believing in good, if he did then A) he wouldn’t have shown people ready to sacrifice the other ferry (although the man’s hesitation to go through with it says a lot), and B) he wouldn’t make the final conflict be about someone who lost the good they had in Dent. I think he’s just trying to say there are people that still want to believe in good and that’s what’s important, that people aren’t just impulse and survival vs morals and ethics that Joker is trying to prove.

Moe_Syzlak said:
And the dangers of tech surveillance but only if someone bad is using it!? Batman is as willing to break his own rules as the Joker thinks he is. It’s a movie that thinks it is smart but instead is both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. It’s hard to feel any emotion when things are so obviously structured to happen in order to advance the plot. And if Ledger wasn’t so compelling I think the film would receive far more scrutiny.
Click to expand...

The tech surveillance subplot is exactly the point, especially with Lucius Fox resigning after Batman uses it. Batman is authoritarian, he uses tools of, for lack of a better word, the “enemy” to gain an advantage, follows his own jurisdiction (like traveling to Hong Kong and breaking a ton of laws to capture and bring a mob boss), and is not a hero. And Wayne realizes this because he wants to retire when Dent uses hope and diplomacy to restore order in the city instead of how he does things.

I think the film is a brilliant conversation about these themes and wants you to think about them, not to give you one definitive answer or moral statement. And I think Rises would have been far more interesting if they took the opportunity to explore these themes further, but we all know what a thematic mess of a movie that is (as much as I like the main throughline of the story).
 
I get everything you’re saying here, but unfortunately for me, it doesn’t work. As I said, it’s a superhero movie, but it clearly has aspirations beyond that typical fare. And as a result I hold it to a higher standard. It failed to meet that standard for me. Honestly I think Nolan (and his brother) could use a strong story editor for most of his films. But I don’t think TDK is a bad movie, it just isn’t as good as the hype. And my point was to specifically address the fact that I think that Ledger’s performance is the very thing that elevates it.
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
Honestly I think Nolan (and his brother) could use a strong story editor for most of his films.
Click to expand...

I actively avoid anything written by JJ Abrams because he's a terrible storyteller - has creative ideas but no idea how to actually wrap them up into a coherent story with a decent ending. So he just piles on more and more zany twists until he's in so deep there's no way to create a satisfying resolution. Lost. Alias. Star Wars.

(I consider this an unpopular idea because Abrams' work generally appears to be popular, although some people here might agree with me)
 
@Malthus i don't like Snyder's stuff, typically, but I do like Watchmen: Director's Cut, and think he was pretty much the perfect person to adapt the graphic novel. It's flawed, but it's kinda crazy how close he gets to a perfect adaptation IMO. I can't imagine anyone else getting the aesthetic down like that.

So maybe I'll check out Rebel Moon sometime.
 
The Scribbling Man said:
@Malthus i don't like Snyder's stuff, typically, but I do like Watchmen: Director's Cut, and think he was pretty much the perfect person to adapt the graphic novel. It's flawed, but it's kinda crazy how close he gets to a perfect adaptation IMO. I can't imagine anyone else getting the aesthetic down like that.

So maybe I'll check out Rebel Moon sometime.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think the flaws are glaring (Hallelujah I’m looking at you), but I think his revised climax works much better on screen than written version would have. And that itself may be an unpopular opinion.
 
unfair said:
I actively avoid anything written by JJ Abrams because he's a terrible storyteller - has creative ideas but no idea how to actually wrap them up into a coherent story with a decent ending. So he just piles on more and more zany twists until he's in so deep there's no way to create a satisfying resolution. Lost. Alias. Star Wars.

(I consider this an unpopular idea because Abrams' work generally appears to be popular, although some people here might agree with me)
Click to expand...
I think this is becoming more and more common. I’m nearly 100% certain that GRRM has written himself into a corner that he has no escape from , for example. I’d much rather have an earned ending that is predictable than an unearned shock ending. Abrams, M. Knight, Nolan, et al sadly seem to rely on the latter.
 
Here's an unpopular opinion:
The ending of the Watchmen movie makes way more sense than the comic book.
It ties Ozymandias' plot together way better. Driving Doctor Manhattan away from humanity, uniting East and West, and even his efforts to produce free energy for the world all being the same plan makes him feel much more like an evil genius who plans for everything, and it's much more satisfying when the plot is revealed because of how well all of the pieces fit together.
On top of that, a giant squid appearing in New York somehow bringing about world peace doesn't make any sense at all. Wouldn't the Americans be worried that the Soviets were somehow behind it? And why would the Soviets care that New York was destroyed? I don't think the vague threat that something similar might one day happen to them is enough of an incentive for them to want to put aside their differences even if the West was willing.
People usually say that in the movie the Soviets would think the US was behind it because DM was a US asset, but two major American cities were destroyed and tens of millions of American citizens were killed. There's no way that the Soviets would believe that the US government ordered that. They might blame America for DM's actions, but the whole point of Ozymandias' plan is that it doesn't matter whether East and West like eachother, they're forced to cooperate in the interest of self preservation. They believe that DM is out there waiting for an opportunity to strike so they have to be able to present a united front at any point for the rest of time.
I'm not saying that Ozymandias' plan would work, but it at least feels like a plan that a super genius would come up with. In the comic, at least to me, it really doesn't.
 
unfair said:
I actively avoid anything written by JJ Abrams because he's a terrible storyteller - has creative ideas but no idea how to actually wrap them up into a coherent story with a decent ending. So he just piles on more and more zany twists until he's in so deep there's no way to create a satisfying resolution. Lost. Alias. Star Wars.

(I consider this an unpopular idea because Abrams' work generally appears to be popular, although some people here might agree with me)
Click to expand...
I thought this was just the standard mainstream opinion on JJ (at least from audiences, not from hollywood execs) but maybe that's my bubble talking
 
Count me in on Alien 3.
Even more unpopular, I prefer the Theatrical Cut to the Assembly Cut.
I prefer the alien coming from the dog MUCH more than the ox. It matches the creature design, puppet size & the creatures movements much more closely & I love that it's Mans Best Friend turned against him. It makes sense that the dog would go sniffing around the crashed ship. The facehugger attack is an effective scene & the alien/dog's attack on it's previous owner is iconic.
Speaking of iconic scenes, the birth/funeral is one of the best scenes in the series & switching the dog for the ox robs us of better effects shots & thematic depth.
There are some character moments in the AC that I prefer, but I'll sacrifice that for the more brisk runtime & pacing of the TC.

It's problem, for me, is that everybody looks & sounds alike. Splashes of color on wardrobe would'a went along way...

Also, I would like to see an alien/ox hybrid. Horns, sturdy legs, ect. I remember they made a toy like that. Neat.
 
Last edited:
Ray Danger said:
It's problem, for me, is that everybody looks & sounds alike
Click to expand...
This was my problem with Aliens, I can't tell Micheal Biehn and Bill Paxton apart, and there's like one other guy who looks the same too I think. I did have the same problem with 3 to a slightly lesser degree. I need to watch them both again really.


Ray Danger said:
Also, I would like to see an alien/ox hybrid. Horns, sturdy legs, ect. I remember they made a toy like that. Neat.
Click to expand...
Iirc it was from a cartoon that didn't get made. I'm so curious about what an Alien cartoon would've been like...
 
unfair said:
I actively avoid anything written by JJ Abrams because he's a terrible storyteller - has creative ideas but no idea how to actually wrap them up into a coherent story with a decent ending. So he just piles on more and more zany twists until he's in so deep there's no way to create a satisfying resolution. Lost. Alias. Star Wars.

(I consider this an unpopular idea because Abrams' work generally appears to be popular, although some people here might agree with me)
Click to expand...
YES. He's great at writing pilot episodes of TV series and that's it.
 
Beyond Thunderdome is a better movie than Fury Road in every way that matters.
 
Mac & cheese and boneless fried chicken belongs on a pancake sandwich. As long as I believe that in my heart to be true, you can’t tell me otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Ray Danger said:
I like Ewoks & I'm glad they went with them instead of Wookies in RotJ.
The comedy bits go a bit too far in places, but most of it works.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, how do you like the two Ewoks movies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom