|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:05 am
 |
|
|
 |
Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly Jesus = ultimate superhero?? lol Not what I meant, but you know us college students. Find two fat guys with long hair and goatees, and eventually there will be a Jesus vs. Superman debate. Not saying it's right, I'm saying were stupid. There is also the rule that for polite conversation, you don't talk about Politics, Religion, or Superman. My point was in all literature, the point is not what happens in them, but the message and morals behind them. And, of course, how strongly those morals resonate. My Superhero comments were based around how I'm one of the few comic book geeks who looks at Heroes from a different perspective. There are grand, mythic qualities to them. Dennis ONeil (who wrote my favorite Comic Ever, the "Green Lantern/Green Arrow" special "Snowbirds Don't Fly) said that Comic Books are a contemperary mythology, and we should be able to derive the same lessons we do out of any good myth. I say there is nothing wrong with aspire to have the strong sense of social justice as the Green Arrow, or have the need to prove oneself like Hellboy, or have the conviction of Superman. Or the Determination of Harry Potter.
But the trouble comes when the philosophical lessons from mythologies contradict the behaviour one has accepted as being the right behaviour. For example (not debating on this, make a new thread if you want to), if one knows that killing is wrong and certain mythologies like comics teach that it's acceptable to kill someone if he has committed outrageous crimes, does one compromise one's morals by accepting the latter to be true?
Relating this back to popular literature based on the supernatural, such as witchcraft and wizardry featured in Harry Potter, why should the lessons found therein be true at all if the entire work is fiction? The rules and lessons found in works of fiction, while sharing similarities with rules and lessons found in reality, should remain in those books, that is, in their proper place. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:19 am
|
|
|
|
Priestley Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly Jesus = ultimate superhero?? lol Not what I meant, but you know us college students. Find two fat guys with long hair and goatees, and eventually there will be a Jesus vs. Superman debate. Not saying it's right, I'm saying were stupid. There is also the rule that for polite conversation, you don't talk about Politics, Religion, or Superman. My point was in all literature, the point is not what happens in them, but the message and morals behind them. And, of course, how strongly those morals resonate. My Superhero comments were based around how I'm one of the few comic book geeks who looks at Heroes from a different perspective. There are grand, mythic qualities to them. Dennis ONeil (who wrote my favorite Comic Ever, the "Green Lantern/Green Arrow" special "Snowbirds Don't Fly) said that Comic Books are a contemperary mythology, and we should be able to derive the same lessons we do out of any good myth. I say there is nothing wrong with aspire to have the strong sense of social justice as the Green Arrow, or have the need to prove oneself like Hellboy, or have the conviction of Superman. Or the Determination of Harry Potter.
I'm a storyteller at folk festivals, and I've found one thing to be true: You ask a kid about Hercules, he doesn't care what he did, he knows what he was: A Hero.
Archetypes are nearly universal. The Heroes, the Righteous Thieves (Robin Hood, Goemon Ishikawa, and any number of beggars and pickpockets that came out of the dark ages), the wise old man. One could admire Robin Hood and never steal anything, but still fight against the exploitation of the poor. What's wrong with that?
People are smart enough to know the difference between fantasy and reality.
Quote: Relating this back to popular literature based on the supernatural, such as witchcraft and wizardry featured in Harry Potter, why should the lessons found therein be true at all if the entire work is fiction? The rules and lessons found in works of fiction, while sharing similarities with rules and lessons found in reality, should remain in those books, that is, in their proper place.
Why would the lessons be true? Because Friendship is real, Love is real, Good and Evil are real. The events depicted are not. The creatures, the fantasies are not. If the struggles with these are depicted accurately, the lessons should be taken into reality.
It's kind of the social responsibility of writers, film directors, cartoonists, to tell stories about morals. Forget how they are shown, it's more important to show them. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:06 am
|
|
|
|
Matt Pniewski Priestley Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly Jesus = ultimate superhero?? lol Not what I meant, but you know us college students. Find two fat guys with long hair and goatees, and eventually there will be a Jesus vs. Superman debate. Not saying it's right, I'm saying were stupid. There is also the rule that for polite conversation, you don't talk about Politics, Religion, or Superman. My point was in all literature, the point is not what happens in them, but the message and morals behind them. And, of course, how strongly those morals resonate. My Superhero comments were based around how I'm one of the few comic book geeks who looks at Heroes from a different perspective. There are grand, mythic qualities to them. Dennis ONeil (who wrote my favorite Comic Ever, the "Green Lantern/Green Arrow" special "Snowbirds Don't Fly) said that Comic Books are a contemperary mythology, and we should be able to derive the same lessons we do out of any good myth. I say there is nothing wrong with aspire to have the strong sense of social justice as the Green Arrow, or have the need to prove oneself like Hellboy, or have the conviction of Superman. Or the Determination of Harry Potter. I'm a storyteller at folk festivals, and I've found one thing to be true: You ask a kid about Hercules, he doesn't care what he did, he knows what he was: A Hero.
How does he know that? Because it was set up to be that way in your story? Because the only reference that kid has of Hercules is the Disney movie? What of real Herculean mythology?
Kids are kids and they'll believe what you tell them until they discover that not everything they are told matches what they have experienced or observed to be the opposite. Tell a kid that some guy is a hero and, until the kid pays attention to what that guy does to make himself a hero or, indeed, not a hero, the guy will be a hero to the kid.
Matt Pniewski Archetypes are nearly universal. The Heroes, the Righteous Thieves (Robin Hood, Goemon Ishikawa, and any number of beggars and pickpockets that came out of the dark ages), the wise old man. One could admire Robin Hood and never steal anything, but still fight against the exploitation of the poor. What's wrong with that?
Archetypes are archetypes. They are artificial constructs; models to which distinguishing characteristics are applied to make one of the archetype different from another of the same archetype.
Sure, one can stand up for the exploitation of the poor. Doing exactly the same thing to the rich in an attempt to fight injustice is simply wrong. Saying it is righteous somehow exempts him from being perceived as having done wrong. Incidentally, the real Robin Hood was most likely a very nasty man.
Matt Pniewski People are smart enough to know the difference between fantasy and reality.
Sleight of hand can be a powerful tool.
Matt Pniewski Priestley Relating this back to popular literature based on the supernatural, such as witchcraft and wizardry featured in Harry Potter, why should the lessons found therein be true at all if the entire work is fiction? The rules and lessons found in works of fiction, while sharing similarities with rules and lessons found in reality, should remain in those books, that is, in their proper place. Why would the lessons be true? Because Friendship is real, Love is real, Good and Evil are real. The events depicted are not. The creatures, the fantasies are not. If the struggles with these are depicted accurately, the lessons should be taken into reality.
It's very easy to take lessons from reality and place them into mythology because they are readily available to us. Because they are already present, there need not be a mythology to teach us lessons about life. Sure, embellishing those life lessons with some pretty scenery and characters is a great way to focus a person's mind on them, but it's not necessary. The trouble comes when such embellishments are used to twist and contort the lessons into something else, like the example I gave above.
Matt Pniewski It's kind of the social responsibility of writers, film directors, cartoonists, to tell stories about morals. Forget how they are shown, it's more important to show them.
Forgive me if I don't share your altruistic view of producers of popular culture. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:36 am
|
|
|
|
Priestley Matt Pniewski Priestley Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly Jesus = ultimate superhero?? lol Not what I meant, but you know us college students. Find two fat guys with long hair and goatees, and eventually there will be a Jesus vs. Superman debate. Not saying it's right, I'm saying were stupid. There is also the rule that for polite conversation, you don't talk about Politics, Religion, or Superman. My point was in all literature, the point is not what happens in them, but the message and morals behind them. And, of course, how strongly those morals resonate. My Superhero comments were based around how I'm one of the few comic book geeks who looks at Heroes from a different perspective. There are grand, mythic qualities to them. Dennis ONeil (who wrote my favorite Comic Ever, the "Green Lantern/Green Arrow" special "Snowbirds Don't Fly) said that Comic Books are a contemperary mythology, and we should be able to derive the same lessons we do out of any good myth. I say there is nothing wrong with aspire to have the strong sense of social justice as the Green Arrow, or have the need to prove oneself like Hellboy, or have the conviction of Superman. Or the Determination of Harry Potter. I'm a storyteller at folk festivals, and I've found one thing to be true: You ask a kid about Hercules, he doesn't care what he did, he knows what he was: A Hero.
Kids are kids and they'll believe what you tell them until they discover that not everything they are told matches what they have experienced or observed to be the opposite. Tell a kid that some guy is a hero and, until the kid pays attention to what that guy does to make himself a hero or, indeed, not a hero, the guy will be a hero to the kid.
And what makes him a hero? He performed great deeds and helped others. He also did many horrible things, which ended up leading to his downfall.
I'm big on Hero stories because we need more heroes. And I like when the hero's vices are his downfall. I like the stories about the the good thieves and scoundrels. Because I listened to these stories when I was younger, and all I could remember about them is this is what is right, and this is what his wrong.
Some Heroes have killed people. Unimportant. Whats more important is they were willing to die for the sake of others. That they were willing to stand up against unbelievable odds. The term "Hero" is thrown around so loosely these days.
I think you give kids too little credit. I was raised on stories my father told me... And when times got tough, I read my own. Comics, big books of fairy tales, ect. And I'm still the same, except I want people to understand why these things are so important.
Quote: Matt Pniewski Archetypes are nearly universal. The Heroes, the Righteous Thieves (Robin Hood, Goemon Ishikawa, and any number of beggars and pickpockets that came out of the dark ages), the wise old man. One could admire Robin Hood and never steal anything, but still fight against the exploitation of the poor. What's wrong with that?
Sure, one can stand up for the exploitation of the poor. Doing exactly the same thing to the rich in an attempt to fight injustice is simply wrong. Saying it is righteous somehow exempts him from being perceived as having done wrong. Incidentally, the real Robin Hood was most likely a very nasty man.
Archetypes are ideas that are recognized, beyond cultural guidelines. And, incidentally, the real Robin Hood never existed. There were many historical records marked "Hood" to be used to refer to unknown bandits. Robin Hood in actuality is a title like 'John Doe'.
What made Robin Hood great? Is he that he robbed? No. According to the more mainstream variation, he took what was illgotten from the rich and gave it to those who had it taken from them.
We recognize stealing as a crime. We always will. But one of the ideas that gets through in the stories or the "Good Thieves" (besides in many fairy tales being stories about how ingenuity gets you through many troubles) is that the true thieves are the ones who rob people of the necessities of life, even if they are the kings and rulers. Robin Hood, according to legend, fought against it.
Quote: Matt Pniewski People are smart enough to know the difference between fantasy and reality.
I've heard the same argument used against the Bible.
I think you give people too little credit. You think that the people today are sheepish, weak minded, and don't know the difference between what is real and not. It isn't the case.
Quote: Matt Pniewski Priestley Relating this back to popular literature based on the supernatural, such as witchcraft and wizardry featured in Harry Potter, why should the lessons found therein be true at all if the entire work is fiction? The rules and lessons found in works of fiction, while sharing similarities with rules and lessons found in reality, should remain in those books, that is, in their proper place. Why would the lessons be true? Because Friendship is real, Love is real, Good and Evil are real. The events depicted are not. The creatures, the fantasies are not. If the struggles with these are depicted accurately, the lessons should be taken into reality.
Which does happen, where the message gets twisted. But if the message is there, and it is strong enough, that will always show through.
Quote: Matt Pniewski It's kind of the social responsibility of writers, film directors, cartoonists, to tell stories about morals. Forget how they are shown, it's more important to show them.
I'm not claiming that is how it is. I'm claiming that is how it should be. Because, like it our not, we've always learned our morals through our stories.
I would hope, that if I ever become a film maker, I can make movies that bring these very real story elements to all. I actually don't see it enough. Sure, Pan's Labyrinth gave us a wonderful story about fighting for something better, and Iron Man was a great story about a man's quest for redemption. I don't see that enough.
But these movies aren't subtle either. I'm sure people, even kids (and yes, despite the graphic violence I will subject a child to Pan's Labyrinth) would understand the moral behind Pan's Labyrinth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:38 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:12 pm
|
|
|
|
Fushigi na Butterfly See, I think you give people too much credit. People tend to believe whatever is popular. If that wasn't the case, we wouldn't have so many sects and denominations of Christianity, and so many people arguing about Biblical interpretation today.
I think it is important to keep in mind how a moral is taught. Pan's Labyrinth had the potential to be an awesome movie- if it hadn't been for the guy getting his face bashed in with a bottle, or the other guy getting his face and hands lacerated, or the fairy eating eyeball monster, or the overbearing tone and ambiance of DEATH throughout the whole thing. I was too focused on covering my eyes from the violence of the movie to notice that it had any moral at all. confused And I certainly hope you would never subject anyone to a movie that graphic against their will.
The world is not all Peace, Love, and Sunchips and I think our stories should show that.
When you read "Rumplestiltskin", did you close the book when the part where he tore himself in half came up? Probably not. Or when the old witch in Snow White got her eyes pecked out by birds? This element has always existed in our stories and we would be fools to continue to ignore them.
It's easy to cover your eyes in the movie, isn't it? But imagine you were in this sort of conflict. I fear the day when somebody will pull red propaganda from my bag and execute me for committing no real crime. The point is you are supposed to emphasize with these people.
It's easy to say "It's too gory" but things like that did happen in Spain within the last Century. And had you ever seen the face of war, you'd realize they showed considerable restraint. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:31 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:08 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:29 pm
|
|
|
|
Poster's note: I have never seen Pan's Labryinth.
I have to agree with Matt.
The genre of fantasy is often where we explore our own world through the sparkling, hazy lens of a place far removed.
The role of stories isn't so much to perform for us as a list of Do's or Don'ts, but to allow us to explore those things safely.
Robin Hood isn't a good man 'cause he steals, but due to his commitment to aiding the helpless around him.
Spiderman isn't a good man 'cause he lies to Mary Jane, but due to his willingness to sacrifice for those who are powerless.
The study and emulation of goodness isn't watching the perfect, but the imperfect.
The life of Christ doesn't show me how I pick myself up when I fall, but the life of Paul most assuredly does.
The magic and the mythology are merely the trimmings that present morality plays as fun.
'Cause let's face it, humanity needs and understands moral rules, even if there is disagreement on what they should be.
Those that long for the power that is portrayed in stories such as Harry Potter aren't stupid or merely searching for a way to fit in.
That thirst is the desperate cry of people looking for meaning and purpose.
We would all like to think that we could rise above the aches and pains of our lives and become the Hero.
(I would seriously love to insert the best definition of a Hero I have ever read, but I can't find the novel anywhere!)
Besides, just 'cause the Truth came wrapped in a pretty story doesn't mean it is no longer the Truth. Didn't Christ Himself tell little stories?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:58 am
|
|
|
|
Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly The difference is, I can control my imagination. I cannot control the graphically violent and gory images on a TV screen in front of me. You can make a point without being blatant about it. I tried explaining this to you, but I guess you are just way too sensative to about everything.... I mean, the movie was far from excessive. We got worse in Passion of the Christ, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, and other major studio garbage..... They told they story. The story involved these things happening. They never went to excess.
Yes, and I cringed during Passion of the Christ (actually, nearly threw up from my seat because I was so disturbed, and was also depressed for about a week), and I saw Saving Private Ryan once and will never see it again. Never seen Schindler's List though. I am sensitive to violence, yes. Perhaps because I've seen too much real violence in my life to just sit idly by while someone on the screen gets the crap beaten out of them. stare
The stories may have involved the implication of these things, but show me where in the Bible it say that Jesus was beaten, each lash tearing and ripping at his flesh, spraying flecks of blood onto the innocent and helpless bystanders- cries of agony tore from his lips, pulled back in a grimace etc. etc. No. All it says is that He was flogged. You can choose to fill in the graphic details yourself. Personally, I don't feel the need to (nor would I want to) in order to get the point that yes, Jesus was severely beaten and it was awful, He really suffered alot for my sake.
And if you're going to say that graphic violence is necessary to make the point, then we need graphic sexuality to get across a story about, say, a prostitute (which the Bible didn't have either- at least the images in Song of Solomon are vague enough that pretty much no children will understand them), or excessive swearing to show that some guy had a potty mouth.
I guess it's all up to personal taste. I personally feel those things aren't necessary, and I refuse to see graphically violent movies. I will continue to stand by my opinion that Pan's Labyrinth sucked because the violence took away from what must have been an amazing plot. If you like gore for its own sake, by all means, go fill your head and heart with it. It's not for me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:00 pm
|
|
|
|
Fushigi na Butterfly Matt Pniewski Fushigi na Butterfly The difference is, I can control my imagination. I cannot control the graphically violent and gory images on a TV screen in front of me. You can make a point without being blatant about it. I tried explaining this to you, but I guess you are just way too sensative to about everything.... I mean, the movie was far from excessive. We got worse in Passion of the Christ, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, and other major studio garbage..... They told they story. The story involved these things happening. They never went to excess.
The stories may have involved the implication of these things, but show me where in the Bible it say that Jesus was beaten, each lash tearing and ripping at his flesh, spraying flecks of blood onto the innocent and helpless bystanders- cries of agony tore from his lips, pulled back in a grimace etc. etc. No. All it says is that He was flogged. You can choose to fill in the graphic details yourself. Personally, I don't feel the need to (nor would I want to) in order to get the point that yes, Jesus was severely beaten and it was awful, He really suffered alot for my sake.
And if you're going to say that graphic violence is necessary to make the point, then we need graphic sexuality to get across a story about, say, a prostitute (which the Bible didn't have either- at least the images in Song of Solomon are vague enough that pretty much no children will understand them), or excessive swearing to show that some guy had a potty mouth.
I guess it's all up to personal taste. I personally feel those things aren't necessary, and I refuse to see graphically violent movies. I will continue to stand by my opinion that Pan's Labyrinth sucked because the violence took away from what must have been an amazing plot. If you like gore for its own sake, by all means, go fill your head and heart with it. It's not for me.
What is different this time is, imagine you WEREN'T sensitive. Those movies wouldn't effect you. Seeing violence is one thing, but seeing a character you care about is different. I'm desensitized to all sorts of movie violence. But I'm also one of the most emotionally sensitive 23 year old men when it comes to movies. For example, I cried during "Tale of Desperaeux".
I really don't think Gore for Gore's sake is what these movies are... Some people will not relate unless they see the real brutality. Other people need to have that "human" jump like I do.
I figure, whatever is needed to best tell the story is suitable. As long as you can justify it. If all you want to do is gross people out, or be edgey, then you missed the point altogether.
Of course, I'm the guy who ends up writing sex and violence, and goes on to film them..... Granted, I've only gone PG-13 tops but I'm coming from a different perspective altogether. I got my product, and I have to explain to people why I make certain decisions.
My latest script features a mermaid.... She's just wandering abouts on land, and she comes across people who are selling mermaid fetuses as a far east delicacy. Not knowing that these are two scam artists who have no idea mermaids even exist.... She's out to get them....
I wanted to make a movie that reminded us that we need to keep focused on our goals, as a recurring theme. Mostly though, the girl is seen as human for the most part... She has legs... But to the people who know what she really is, she is more or less second class. They think of her as a Fish, not a person. Pretty much, we like to dehumanize others when it is appropriate. That, and the vegetarian angle is very obvious there too...
And I am totally getting off topic, as always. See, these are what are called "Brain Droppings". You start thinking, and keep going, and it just... blah..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:57 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:14 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:29 pm
|
|
|
|
Matt Pniewski Priestley Aachren Besides, just 'cause the Truth came wrapped in a pretty story doesn't mean it is no longer the Truth. Didn't Christ Himself tell little stories?
The stories Jesus told are all non-fiction -- not that they happened or did not happen but that they are how the Kingdom of God is.How is that different from a story that talks about right or wrong.... It's not important if they happened or not, but they are proper, moral tales that people should take lessons from.
I've already made my point about how one's morals can be easily distorted by such stories.
I'd like you to read my above post. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
