Stealing From the Next Generation

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

I agree with you a lot on this article, Moviebob. I will make one exception though. TMNT, the latest Teenage Mutant Ninga Turtles and obviously more darker than the earlier 80's version, is a lot better than the 80's turtles. Much better storylines, characters, character development, and action. I even recently watched a special "Turtles Forever" TMNT movie where they met their 80's counterparts, and it did a great job of showing how ricidculous the 80's show was.

So yeah, having loveable franchises go darker is usually a bad idea. But I'd perfer the current Turtles show over the 80's one any day.

I hear you, man.

I can generally agree with Bob assuming of course that we are using the modern gaming definition of "mature". Violence for the sake of spectacle, cursing playing stand-in for lesser terms like "zounds" and the basic concept that the hero is always right and will almost certainly always triumph are not hallmarks of the mature game. Games that sink to such base diversions seek to do nothing more than present the premise that perhaps, somewhere, there might be a message worth considering in the blood soaked frames. This is not to say that such things cannot be entertaining, simply that the phrase "mature" is less applicable than juvenile (at best) or depraved (at the very worst).

But, given the way I respond to the various stories and worlds I've been presented I would like to see any number of properties be handled in a fashion legitimately considered to be mature. Any thematic value found in Rainbow Six: Vegas regarding terrorism are lost when the terrorists have no agenda save murder, where the plot is the work of a man passed over for a promotion and the game presents nothing more than an endless shooting gallery to blast through. Why would these men routinely be willing to clog the strip with their corpses if they were fighting for nothing more than gold?

When I play games, I tend to approach it from an analytical point of view. What makes the bad guys tick? Why precisely are they the villians? In your average game or indeed comic book, it would seem that the reasoning was little more than they drew the short straw in the asshole lottery. Dr. Doom has no greater reason to be the villian than the Thing afterall. In some cases, I'm forced to consider the absurdity of a particular plot point. Why precisely WOULD a PMC try to invade the United States? Why would Mercanries, people who fight for no cause save financial gain, be so fanitical in their pursuit of the mad scheme? How precisely did terrorists manage to hijack an aircraft carrier, when such a feat would require penetrating the air cover, disabling the entire support fleet and overpowering some 5,000 sailors and marines without the ship being scuttled in the process? In other cases, I find myself idly considering things the game doesn't even tangentially address. How does the ecology actually work in the Pokemon universe? Are Pokemon leveraged for military purposes or simply for sport?

In fact, were there to be a mature look at the Pokemon universe, there would indeed be tough questions to answer, not the least of which is the moral implications of binding an unwilling creature into servitude and placing it in brutal cage matches with other creatures. Truth be told, a society that believes it is utterly acceptable to send children unescourted into the wild in an attempt to capture creatures that can literally think you to death or spit fire or spray enough electrical energy to run a subway so they may capture these monsters and then seek out like minded individuals so they may partake in a sport that is certainly no better than dog-fighting is probably ripe with problems. What sort of social condition would allow for such activity to be so common, so acceptable?

Arcane Azmadi:

While I get what you're saying here Bob, and I KNOW you didn't mean it this way and almost certainly would have rephrased this if you realized, but doesn't that line of argument sound disturbingly like what Joe Quesada used to justify 'One More Day' and his total rape of the entire Spider-Man canon? His desire to return Peter Parker "to his roots", make him "young and hip" again? He even accused fans who supported the Spider-marriage of "(wanting) him to grow old and die". The parallels were just so unnerving that I HAD to mention them.

One More Day raped Spiderman literally, (Yeah, I understand the full implications of that statement) far more than the Batman, Superman, Transformers reboot.

Look at it: Everything you have worked, strived and battled over is torn from you in a moment where you have no real choice. Quesada needs removing from the industry for that.

I'm probably in the minority here, but I think that kids need to be shown the way the world REALLY works, not the way it's portrayed in, say, Pokemon.
In cartoons people who make mistakes are often given second chances, when in the real world most mistakes can land you in jail, or stigmatize you for life, or trap you in a bad marriage, or any one of a thousand other bad fates. In cartoons the bad guys are punished and the good guys win, when in reality the bad guys can frequently emerge with minimal damage while good people find it much harder to get ahead in life. In cartoons people rarely compromise their beliefs, when in reality almost everyone has their price whether it be monetary or otherwise. In cartoons only the bad guys usually hurt people needlessly, while in reality most people are willing to hurt almost anyone for a quick buck.

Put simply, the lies cartoons tell our kids are not only misleading, but dangerous. Lying to kids in ways such as saying that "the world is a just place" or "People are inherently good" does nothing except make them more susceptible to getting hurt later on down the road. Feeding them a sugar coated version of the world is just as bad as letting them play Grand Theft Auto or whatever when they can't tell whats real and what is fiction. Things such as racism, injustice, murder, genocide, rape, etc are part of reality, and kids need to be taught about those things so they know what is real and how to prepare for the bad things in life. Yes, they may wind up scared but that's a acceptable reaction, after all, the world is a scary place.

Trying to maintain a child's "innocence" is basically trying to keep someone naive. The sooner we disillusion the nation's youth and show them the cold hard reality of life, the better.

Chrono180:

Trying to maintain a child's "innocence" is basically trying to keep someone naive. The sooner we disillusion the nation's youth and show them the cold hard reality of life, the better.

We did that in the Victorian times. Most of us thought it barbaric at the time.

Elesar:
Scooby and Shaggy were always strung out on meth. And the new Battlestar (which is what I assume you're referencing) is only about 10,000 times better than the original. Not joking.

2) You have to recognize what are already kind of adult themes. People assume that comics are inherently for kids, and that's not ENTIRELY wrong. But it's not entirely correct either. Batman, for example, is not an inherently childish concept. It is, when you strip away a lot of our assumptions, about a 10 year old kid who watches his parents die and, again boiling away a lot of stuff, goes completely off the wall crazy, dresses up like a Bat and starts punching criminals. Is it silly? Yes. Are there already adult concepts and stories working their way in? Oh yes.

Just some food for thought.

And delicious food for thought it is too.

I still haven't seen Ponyo, but you're absolutely right about Princess Mononoke. Watching my little brother's response to it, you realise just how grown up a film it really is.

And, eh, Bruce Wayne was 8 when his parents were murdered.... :P I'm sorry, I just turned into "That Pedantic Guy" lol

Another thing, while I agree that films like the Godfather explore themes that would be more suitable for adults, I don't think that UP in particular was actually restricted. It said some very real, painful things about age, regret, loss and the realisation that you were never able to follow your dreams.
A lot closer to the bone for parents watching that with their kids, I think.

Chrono180:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I think that kids need to be shown the way the world REALLY works, not the way it's portrayed in, say, Pokemon.
..
Trying to maintain a child's "innocence" is basically trying to keep someone naive. The sooner we disillusion the nation's youth and show them the cold hard reality of life, the better.

Well, you're right... but children of eight cannot actually handle a lot of that. But they develop that as they grow older.
It's called adolescence and it's a complete balls of a thing to go through.

Can't say I'd do it all over again, but I can say I's gladly go back to my childhood for a day.

People, in an ideal world, enjoy their childhood, but mostly just survive their teens :P

I think C.S. Lewis put it better than I ever could:

"Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Or again, The Dark Knight Returns. At the start of the eighties, Batman was a joke. The reason? Because all people thought of when they pictured Batman was the Adam West series and the older, camper-than-Graham-Norton comics. Frank Miller took a character written off by everyone, and showed people that the person they joked about and let their kids watch on the telly is actually a vicious psychopath devoted to vengeance, and who ultimately dresses up as a bat and beats up thugs because he's addicted to violence.

While I can understand what you are saying MovieBob, I can't agree. Things stagnate if they are kept the same. Maybe you can still enjoy Mario, but I sure as hell wouldn't mind seeing him doing something other than rescuing the same goddamn princess over and over again. Iconoclasm isn't a bad thing.

See, that's the thing: there's a difference between deconstruction, parody, iconoclasm as you call it, and turning a franchise grimdark permanently because that's what the audience wants to see. I can't vouch for The Dark Knight Returns since I haven't read it, but Watchmen (which Bob mentions in the article and, I assume, likes) was Alan Moore looking at the superhero genre and, basically, pointing out that it's ridiculous by showing the disturbing way it would play out in reality. VG Cats does the same thing to video games, frequently; even though it's played for laughs it's still deconstruction in a way. Let me go on the record as saying I enjoy both forms.

But here's the thing about deconstruction: after you've deconstructed something, you don't end up with a better thing, you end up with a pile of parts scattered on the floor. Instead of getting Moore's point about superheroes and looking to other genres for new ideas, the comic book industry got the idea that turning all their "heroes" into violent sociopaths was a cool idea, and thus the Dark Age began. And continued through the '90s because readers, apparently, liked it.

And this ties in with my next point...

Rocketboy13:
I would like to watch the things I grew up with grow, and yes I would like to see them eventually die. I would like to see today's kids get their own heroes like Airbender, Xiao Lin Showdown, Pokemon, and others, and they too would like those things to grow with them, as they watch the kids they babysat get their own heroes which in turn grow, evolve, and die.

Currently geek fiction is in a constant state of purgatory, how many times does Lex Luthor have to try to take over the world, how many times does Link have to save Hyrule, how often does James Bond have to escape the overly elaborate and exotic death?

And yeah, I like Iron Man, and yeah I like Spiderman, but since they were never allowed to grow up we see them make the same mistakes they always do, the Marvel Universe will never get better, it will never get more diverse, it will never die, instead it will slowly turn into a complete zombie as the cultural icons like Spiderman pull readers into limbo with them, and no new characters will ever be allowed to find readers, and will never be able to grow and change.

Just as turning dark, gritty and angsty is different from deconstruction, it's also different from "growing up" and maturing. Some franchises lend themselves to gradually maturing, growing up and growing old before finally dying with dignity. Others, stuck too long in their tired old formulas and chained to a target audience equally resistant to change, should maybe just be shot. As in, deconstructed if there's entertainment value to be had from it, and either way discontinued to make room for new stuff. Because there's always room for new ideas in the world.

Rakun Man:
Young childhood was fun and awesome and I hope the young kids today can enjoy the same experiences... especially SO THAT THEY STAY AWAY FROM THE MATURE GAMES ONLINE.

Lol, I hear ya. If only to avoid the standard Xbox Live conversation of:

"Hey is there a girl on our team?"
"WTF? Who?
"Erm, 1K1LL3VRy1, I think."
"Hey, 1K1LL3VRy1, are you girl?"
"No I'm a boy"
"WTF dude, why do you sound so high pitched?"
"Erm, because I'm 12?"

On the other hand, those conversations usually have me in fits of laughter, but that's just me.

image

Rated M for Mature.

ESRB needs an I for Immature rating. Look at the two latest Game Informer magazine covers. Sheesh!

image

image

first off, I like Wallet Chains and there already are hardcore pokemon derivations (heck mon and collecting games) Pokemon works because of its broad appeal and there is usually some dark or hardcore along the game's merchandise for fans who have such a bent.

2nd, I think that yes if Mario wasn't hamstringing itself on the nolstagia things wouldn't be so bad narratively. Mario 2 moved beyond that gotta save the princess and made a participant. MarioKart has included a more frightful and diversely more 'real' but still characterful elements. Moreover I like the idea of them well taken the characters to the next level. Mario incites speculation and awe. It *has* the capacity to do so while STILL being itself. Softballing the story does it a disservice (screw the waterpack when I heard Sunshine was going to be a divergence from Mushroom Kingdom proper to an island I rolled my eyes) Mario 3 advanced the story and elements from Mario 2 as much as Mario 1 from Mario 2. At the least the Princess was captured *later* in the game adding a sort of faux-dynamic environment while Mario acted a personal envoy and hero for the princess for the various kingdoms. Say again nothing of the rpgs which have included all sorts of story elements that can and can't work while, AGAIN still being Mario. Dress aside Toadstool/Peach didn't seem to to be sucked up into the fluffball in presentation and it would be nice to have the Mario 2 team at it again and work out a different dynamic especially if the simultaneous 4-op is to remain. I mean after all If Bowser and his kids can have a family with this weird group dynamic or even his kid with a weird father and son dynamic lets see what the Mario guys can do in the main installment.

Admittedly I'm thinking less bomberman act zero as implied by the cover and more Where the Wild Things Are or maybe Megaman Zero or Legends.

Think About it.

"Bowser in SMB-1 was FUCKING SCARY. He lived in a grey castle with so much fire it looked like he is the ruler of hell himself. He was covered in spikes. And he had so many hammers it was really frightening. He was The Villain. And we, being kids, loved and hated him for that."

This is more of what I am talking about. Grasping at this and making it work. I'm not opposed to Bowser as the Villain. He's a turtle dragon. And the opening to SMG1 was just right scary and cute and exciting (at least we SAW the kidnapping and it looked AWE inspiring)

"And Peach? She also wasn't a dumb inconsiderate bitch that makes people want to kill her every time she opens her mouth to make her "cute" noise. No, she was a Princess, a girl worthy enough to travel through hell and back to save her. We haven't seen her all that much, so all we knew is that "hell, she must be awesome, if Mario wants to save her THAT much". For all we knew, she might've fucked Mario's brains out the very second game ended, Right there, in Bowser's castle, right on his still warm body. And I'm not saying that she did - but she could have. Because she wasn't yet turned into a dumb cake-eating trophy."

Uhm, I don't follow the sentiment Peach is inconsiderate or needs more sexuality. In the sense of a personality and humans with those will have behaviors and cues of romance, affection, and desire fine, but hugging and kissing (as implied with the meeting of them and the hearts way back when) seems perfectly fine and the spinoff series is sort of going there what with most of them being her initiation but like Kasumi Tendo she's being flanderized from nice to air-headed to hopeless. Hell she actually SPOKE and could crack a joke (endings of SMB1 & 3) She started as a trophy stepped from there and got shoved farther back than the start, incidental macguffin. I think it would be better to expand on her than push her back to cake-eating trophy and victim. I mean juggle it up somewhat Marios 1-3 did. Then again Mario for me is more the late Lou Albano and less Charles Martinet's less than entertaining, for me, version back when he was shilling at Club Nintendo stations in Target in the mid-nineties. I know it isn't his fault,I would replace the performer love his take on Wario which is just right so much as give him better to do, but mario could be less squeaky without losing Marioness I mean he's mr. Average. Yeah puton of adulthood is dumb but so is put on of childishness.)

Or as the poster I'm quoting pointed out. Don't just include it. Most spinoff and even the mainseries are getting better. I like the Turtle dragon as big dumb bully, creepy father, or even diabolic Monster Warlord. I how we expand on that while not losing. And with the fairytale adventure quality we have A LONG WAY TO GO, before we risk losing the all ages appeal of Mario if we can come out with Luigi's Mansion.

This article is worthy of a brofist.

I understand exactly what you're saying Bob, and as usual I agree with you. I hate seeing things I enjoyed as a kid be turned into some dark gritty suckfest.
The Dark Knight is the only thing I could say wasn't bad. I wouldn't let my kids watch it though.

Which Street fighter movie is that?

While I agree with you moviebob, I'd like to see a Pokemon game, not necessarily darker, but without a character who literally says:

"Would you like to join Team Rocket? We're a group of evil do-ers who steal pokemon and want to rule the world! So how about it?"

And now he will have a new Thundercats cartoon...

image

It does NOT look like a happy animation. _

You know what? I wanna see a Lighter and Softer version of Hellraiser. Just to see if they know the reverse process.

Elesar:
Scooby and Shaggy were always strung out on meth. And the new Battlestar (which is what I assume you're referencing) is only about 10,000 times better than the original. Not joking.

In all seriousness, you have a legit point. Trying to rework things that were inherently childish into adult concepts is going, oh how to put this gently, blow. So I agree, to a point. I just want you (and less you because I assume you know this) and everyone else to recognize 2 things:

1) Aiming a story at children is going to restrict your art. Are Wall-E and Up good films? Fuck yes, I loved them. Will they ever have as much brilliance and meaning oh what are my top 3 adult films, say Godfather, Blade Runner or A Clockwork Orange? No, never. Not their fault, but simply aiming it at a younger audience means you have to sacrifice some artistic merit. Want an example from the same director? Look at the difference in quality between Ponyo and Princess Mononoke. (And I liked Ponyo before I hear it).

2) You have to recognize what are already kind of adult themes. People assume that comics are inherently for kids, and that's not ENTIRELY wrong. But it's not entirely correct either. Batman, for example, is not an inherently childish concept. It is, when you strip away a lot of our assumptions, about a 10 year old kid who watches his parents die and, again boiling away a lot of stuff, goes completely off the wall crazy, dresses up like a Bat and starts punching criminals. Is it silly? Yes. Are there already adult concepts and stories working their way in? Oh yes.

Just some food for thought.

I hate to ask, but why are so many people fond of the A Clockwork orange film? The novels were much better. In-fact to this day I still dislike the American who decided to cut out the final chapter of the book and leave it to were Alex is still the same old douche bag he was before. So why is you all enjoy reading a book/watching of a movie with no actual Character development?

I agree completely! In fact I would gust as soon have the things I enjoyed as a child NOT grow up with me.

Though I'd probably lose my collective mind if such a situation would ever befall the Pokemon universe, I'm all for trying to make the series a bit more relevant to an older audience, at least the possibility of a spin-off series like how Capcom split the Mega Man series with the original series and the X Series for older players (or I suppose you could say younger audience as they were easier then their counterparts). It seemed like Nintendo was going to go somewhere in that direction when they made Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness but nothing else happened of it.

Though I'd never wish a series like Pokemon to get all "grim n' gritty", I'd love to see the series go along to have the much more of a story behind it other then "here's your first Pokemon, collect the rest of them and fight a bunch of dudes along the way. Maybe a gang or two as well, I don't know." I'd love to hear a definitive explanation as to why Pokemon exist, who thought of capturing them in small hand-held devices and to have a "gang" that seemed like an actual threat (I know that Team Galactic was attempting to destroy and remake the universe and all that but it's kind of hard to take them seriously with what they wear and also once defeated give the "Next time gadget, next time!" speech).

My feeling is that Nintendo should have a separate series based in a Medieval fantasy setting, with humanity not having the technology or manpower at this time to tame the creatures on mass. The four island nations of Kanto, Johto, Hoenn and Sinnoh are in an uneasy trust with one another (Or maybe they're NOT island nations but were part of a larger continent at one point *hinthintnudgenudgeatdeeperbackstory*) with trade and commodities put on a stand still, allowing the player to start off at any of the island nations to call his own.

Your character would be a kind of Pokemon Hunter, a warrior whose job it is to keep the areas around town settlements and cities safe from the more vicious monsters, selling their fur, meat, horns and etc. for profit, starting off like a typical J-RPG scenario and during your first journey into dungeon to stop one of the first big bad Pokemon, you come across a magical artifact that looks to have existed either long before your time that when activated, binds a Pokemon to your whim, the game turning back into the regular Pokemon formula with a twist as combat is now always like the Double Battle feature from Ruby/Sapphire accept that the second Pokemon is your character.

As you travel through the world, you'd be viewed differently by the various people you meet and help out. Some welcome such an ability, even picturing ways to profit from it or even mass produce it (*hinthintnudgenudgeatdepperbackstory*)while others view it with contempt, finding the ability to make all but the strongest Pokemon do exactly as you will unnatural and unethical. However, as your journey continues, both to stop a potential all out war between the four nations as well as gathering a collection of Pokemon for study by a zoologist, you are joined by other "trainers", those who spent much time with certain types of Pokemon to join your party, dividing the Pokemon you own to your allies so that they're grow stronger under their care and to battle along side you. Now tell me that doesn't sound awesome!

Tl;dr version: I want Pokemon to be more like Jade Cocoon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNpRWHXzNiM

I agree with this column.

Normalgamer:

I hate to ask, but why are so many people fond of the A Clockwork orange film? The novels were much better. In-fact to this day I still dislike the American who decided to cut out the final chapter of the book and leave it to were Alex is still the same old douche bag he was before. So why is you all enjoy reading a book/watching of a movie with no actual Character development?

Well my love of the film A Clockwork Orange was essentially irrelevant to my point (my point being that certain stories need dark content), but given that Stanley Kubrick is both my inspiration and my favorite director, I can't let that go unchallenged, so I suppose I should respond.

Primarily (and ignoring for the moment that at the time Mr. Kubrick was living in Britain), the main reason the final chapter was "Cut" was because when he wrote the screenplay he had only read the American version which did not feature the 21st chapter. The second problem, and much more relevant, is I felt the final chapter actually detracted from the story. It felt forced, like the author had decided to make his point at the expense of a coherent character. There was no reason for him to randomly decide to give up violence, except that the author wanted to make his point. Plus, from a purely filmmaking standpoint, there is no reason to continue it past the menacing voice over in the last scene, and adding something past that in a visual medium would have detracted from the impact

The reason I'm so fond of A Clockwork Orange in film form is that it is so effective at what it is. It shows violence in brutal and realistic form with the intention of shocking it's audience, and in that respect it is a rousing success. I was bored throughout the entirety of the Saw series and A Clockwork Orange scared me more than any other film I have ever seen. So that's why I love it. You're entitled to your opinion, but that's mine, in brief.

Good read!

but I like Todd McFarlane!

MovieBob:
Stealing From the Next Generation

Geeks grow up, but that doesn't mean the things they love should.

Read Full Article

It doesn't mean it can't either. You hated Revenge of the Fallen yes? I don't suppose the giggling 8 year olds every time the most disgusting line of dialogue was uttered brought you any comfort? You know, the kids that thought Mudflap and Skidz were funny? Transformers went from pureley episodic stories to sometimes 2 and 3 part stories and finally got a full blown animated movie. That was growing with its fans. A series that survives long enough escapes it's quick buck market and finds a loyal fanbase. Many things until they reach this point are a goddamn commericial for "buy the new thing".

Transformers is a good example cause it has done both for many years successfully. New series come out pretty often, they're catered to the youth of thier time. But just as Batman doesn't owe me growing up, the series doesn't owe us Robin, or any other manner of Funning up for that matter. The Dark Knight series is darker and that works, but I love the series because of its good writing, cast, cinematography and story. Its a well done movie. Thier creative vision doesn't lend itself well to shoehorning in a little kid that knows acrobatics fighting crime in his colorful circus outfit.

If the creators want to make thier characters for kids forever then they're welcome to it, but that's a fickle audience not everyone wants to play for. Look how many new series come out for kids every year. Do they really need Transformers, Superman, and Wolverine too? I mean come on kids are stupid, they're currently paying 3 bucks a pop for packs of rubber bands that are vaguely shaped like animals, and thier dumber parents aren't slapping them.

I like Mario the way he is now, but Bowser is a joke and i think that he should be more threatening because that would make him more satisfying to beat, and princess Peach should definetely be more affectionate because that would make it more of a prize to complete the game. She's just like Bowser, a joke, an excuse for Nintendo to make another Mario game. I would rather see her be killed by Bowser and the game consists of Mario going after revenge. But then again, that would be a tad stupid.

Note that kid-friendly source material doesn't necessarily mean rainbows and butterflies. The '90s cartoons of X-Men and Batman tackled mature themes head-on while still being pitched to the Saturday-morning-preteen audience segment. By the end of episode 2 of X-Men, one X-Man is tortured, one is dead, and one is in jail, and Jubilee's parents have disowned her. And they still had room to spend 30 minutes fighting giant robots.

I think his "Case and point" is summed up in this fan-made Flash. It's more of a "Michael Bay's Super Mario Bros", a so-hard-core-it's-gay remake of the game's elements.

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/527393

Now tell me, do you want your parents, friends, and (most importantly) Kids having to grow up with Mario being like this, or would you rather them get (more or less) the same Mario you grew up with?

I would like to see things like pokemon and mario or zelda evolve. Evolution doesn't have to mean gritty and angsty.
Personally I would love to see a pokemon game like that but as a spinoff (and without the buff hero, it's pretty unnecessary if he never fights)
Asking your heroes to die may seem wrong, but what's even more wrong is trying to keep them the same your whole life. Times change and so does art if it wants to be relevant.

Elesar:

Normalgamer:

I hate to ask, but why are so many people fond of the A Clockwork orange film? The novels were much better. In-fact to this day I still dislike the American who decided to cut out the final chapter of the book and leave it to were Alex is still the same old douche bag he was before. So why is you all enjoy reading a book/watching of a movie with no actual Character development?

Well my love of the film A Clockwork Orange was essentially irrelevant to my point (my point being that certain stories need dark content), but given that Stanley Kubrick is both my inspiration and my favorite director, I can't let that go unchallenged, so I suppose I should respond.

Primarily (and ignoring for the moment that at the time Mr. Kubrick was living in Britain), the main reason the final chapter was "Cut" was because when he wrote the screenplay he had only read the American version which did not feature the 21st chapter. The second problem, and much more relevant, is I felt the final chapter actually detracted from the story. It felt forced, like the author had decided to make his point at the expense of a coherent character. There was no reason for him to randomly decide to give up violence, except that the author wanted to make his point. Plus, from a purely filmmaking standpoint, there is no reason to continue it past the menacing voice over in the last scene, and adding something past that in a visual medium would have detracted from the impact

The reason I'm so fond of A Clockwork Orange in film form is that it is so effective at what it is. It shows violence in brutal and realistic form with the intention of shocking it's audience, and in that respect it is a rousing success. I was bored throughout the entirety of the Saw series and A Clockwork Orange scared me more than any other film I have ever seen. So that's why I love it. You're entitled to your opinion, but that's mine, in brief.

I liked the movie( kind of) and I think it had a message about how we treat criminals but I don't think the last chapter was just "tacked on" for no reason. It may seem silly but the sudden change is something many people go through. A lot of kids think their going to be psychotic angsty rebels their whole life but around the age of 21 something starts to happen and it happens fast.

On that note, I also like the message of the movie. The character doesn't remain unchanged, imo his violent urges and fantasies stay inside his head. He doesn't learn that what he did was wrong because in his world it's not, all they could do was force him to be afraid to do it.
Kind of what happened to most of us. We watch stupid violent movies and films about serial killers even though most of us will never kill in our lives, but we watch them because a certain part of us wants to but we are (for the most part) too afraid to. It's like a beaten dog (or a trained dog, whatever you prefer) they still want to be free, but the constant "punishment" for attempted escape or freedom has made them too afraid to make another attempt.

The_root_of_all_evil:

Arcane Azmadi:

While I get what you're saying here Bob, and I KNOW you didn't mean it this way and almost certainly would have rephrased this if you realized, but doesn't that line of argument sound disturbingly like what Joe Quesada used to justify 'One More Day' and his total rape of the entire Spider-Man canon? His desire to return Peter Parker "to his roots", make him "young and hip" again? He even accused fans who supported the Spider-marriage of "(wanting) him to grow old and die". The parallels were just so unnerving that I HAD to mention them.

One More Day raped Spiderman literally, (Yeah, I understand the full implications of that statement) far more than the Batman, Superman, Transformers reboot.

Look at it: Everything you have worked, strived and battled over is torn from you in a moment where you have no real choice. Quesada needs removing from the industry for that.

um...can we stop using the word "literally" without understanding the meaning?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here