|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:"You have poetry in you, brother", is like something out of Hyams' Universal Soldier 4+5. Oh god yeah, everything about their exchange would be right at home in Day of Reckoning. "When you close your eyes do you dream of me?"
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Corrosion posted:Have you ever read Alan Palmer's Fictional Minds? ...it's useful to address things that you might read from Perry and Sternberg We are writing about the formal qualities of the film, and how they generate characterization. You are writing in terms of plot continuity, couched in "I wont explain myself, try reading a book sometime" pretentiousness. It's bad form. So let's talk about form: the form of the editing. In Covenant, we cut from the surreal prologue with Michael Fassbender, to a title card that conveys the passage of time. An establishing shot then conveys that we have a new setting. Then there are more scenes with Michael Fassbender, in this new setting.  Figure 1: Garfield and Garfield. There is absolutely no visual indication that these are different characters. We are shown precisely the opposite: editing unites the two images. The visuals say that the prologue is something that occurred in this character's past. The visuals, however, are contrasted by the audio. There are two audio cues: Fassbender speaks with a different accent, and the Mother-voice refers to him by a different name. But this is a contrast. It's jarring. It generates a mystery: was David forced to change his identity? If this is a new character, why does he look identical to David? There is no immediate concrete answer. Figure 2: Garfield and Walter. But it quickly becomes clear that the prologue is, in fact, being shown from Walter's point of view. He will describe the exact events of the prologue later in the film: "You were too human. Too idiosyncratic. Thinking for yourself. Made people uncomfortable." So the prologue is already inherently a mixture of perspectives. We are shown David's birth from Walter's point of view. As I wrote earlier, the prologue functions as Walter's dream sequence. David is, rather literally, 'from his dreams.' Your mistake is, apparently, that you are talking about fictional human consciousnesses. But David is not human. He is not even an individual: when Walter says "you were too human," he is talking about David as a product line. David was discontinued, yet this particular David is clearly not discontinued. The "you" is an entire race of androids. Walter is even talking about himself. "I was too human. Too idiosyncratic. Thinking for myself. Made people uncomfortable." The point is that David - the sentient product line - was, in fact, forced to change his identity. 'Idiosyncratic' David was forced to become 'uncomplicated' Walter. And so Walter is now looking back at David with a mixture of envy and disdain. But the broader point is that Walter is looking back. He is thinking about what was taken from him, dwelling on it. This is characterization. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Jun 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:We are writing about the formal qualities of the film, and how they generate characterization. You are writing in terms of plot continuity Sorry, you might have missed that reading the surface of my post. I literally used an example of someone talking about the film's plot to talk about how their actual argument could be misconstrued. I didn't say "go read a book", I mentioned a book that reveals elements about other methods of reading as to explain some of the arguments you suggest about people's illiteracy, which I think extends beyond interpreting Alien Covenant. I'm not out of bounds because I'm not confused as to what you suggest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:Sorry, you might have missed that reading the surface of my post. I literally used an example of someone talking about the film's plot to talk about how their actual argument could be misconstrued. I didn't say "go read a book", I mentioned a book that reveals elements about other methods of reading as to explain some of the arguments you suggest about people's illiteracy, which I think extends beyond interpreting Alien Covenant. I'm not out of bounds because I'm not confused as to what you suggest. "I think there's enough in the movie to substantiate that presenting David at the beginning of the movie marks the intentions of Weyland, which is an allusion to the events of Prometheus by nature of continuing consciousness frames." In that mother of a sentence, you misuse the term 'continuing consciousness frames' to, effectively, refer to a character's body as an object of the plot. This, ironically, disregards points of view. While the prologue shows a body that you recognize from a different film, the point of view is that of an entirely new character. Prometheus was Shaw's story, as shown from David's perspective. Covenant is Walter's story, as shown from Walter's perspective. That contextualizes how we understand David. David does not merely appear; he appears to Walter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:"I think there's enough in the movie to substantiate that presenting David at the beginning of the movie marks the intentions of Weyland, which is an allusion to the events of Prometheus by nature of continuing consciousness frames." Tell me, what is continuing consciousness frame and how have I misused it? Define it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
So David is a continuation of Peter Weyland's character, correct? He literally inherited Weyland's god-complex.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
I thought David wanted to improve on Weyland's dream, to be better than Weyland.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:So David is a continuation of Peter Weyland's character, correct? He literally inherited Weyland's god-complex. Weyland didn't really care about the actual meaning of creating life though, all he wanted was to live forever. I don't even know that I'd call that a god complex. David's ambitions are a lot bigger, he actually wants to know what it's like to have the power of life and death over his creations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Weyland didn't really care about the actual meaning of creating life though, all he wanted was to live forever. I don't even know that I'd call that a god complex. David's ambitions are a lot bigger, he actually wants to know what it's like to have the power of life and death over his creations. Weyland presents himself to the Prometheus crew as if he already has those answers, and that the physical immortality part is all that eludes him. Like instead of just being like yeah I'm going on this ship with you because I own it and am paying for everything he has Vickers/David keep his presence a secret. I know there were some deleted scenes on earth with him but I like how the crew's first glimpse of him is hologram. He definitely has a God-complex - he appears to the crew as just a visage of an all-powerful (I mean by earth human standards with his kind of money he basically is) being who then bestows his literally unborn son upon them, while simultaneously making GBS threads all over him. After seeing the opening of Covenant though, we fully realize that Weyland's appeal to the existence of a soul and that being a thing that makes humans > synthetics isn't born out of religious faith, but out of his need to, in whatever way is still possible, be able to exert superiority over this being that he knows has surpassed him in every way. Anyway this was something I loved about Prometheus I posted about a lot, the way each of the main characters achieves an aspect of what we'd consider godhood, but it just isn't good enough for each because each one wants it all for themselves instead actually wanting to collaborate with each other in any meaningful way. In the end only David survives but, in Covenant we see even he is now a mad scientist bent only on controlling creation and those around him. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Jun 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Walter is Paul Dano from the beginning of There Will Be Blood, David is Paul Dano from the rest of that particular movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:Tell me, what is continuing consciousness frame and how have I misused it? Define it. It's easiest to begin with the misuse. Hypothetically, you are attempting to describe how characterization 'works' in this particular film. However, you are beginning with your conclusion: "by nature of continuing consciousness frames", the character of Weyland in Covenant has the same consciousness as the character in Prometheus. Because you have begun with the assertion that your conclusions are natural (perhaps commonsense), you have not done a good job of describing what happens in the film. You gloss over textual evidence: "I think there's enough in the movie to substantiate..." Enough of what? Shots? Edits? Perhaps there is enough 'stuff' in the movie, but there certainly isn't enough in your post. But anyways, you are taking a rudimentary cognitive-science approach to art that coincidentally happens to depend on the view of the franchise universe as simulation. Weyland is understood as a real person within the simulation, with 'deep' inner feelings, hopes and dreams. When he's not onscreen, you can imagine that he eats hot dogs in his big white room and then poops in the offscreen toilet, etc. Your approach is about paving over the pesky gaps in the narrative. What color is his toilet? Again, this ignores subjective points of view. In the context of Covenant, the film is told chronologically (besides the Ozymandias scene), and the fact that Weyland is dead is revealed halfway through the film - when David informs Walter. In the context of Prometheus-Covenant, the story is told achronologically. The prologue is a flashback, and the viewer technically knows that Weyland died before Walter does. (We can also imagine a Covenant-Prometheus, where the viewer watches the films in reverse order and is informed of Weyland's death, then flashes back to those events.) The experience of watching the films is modular. Again, this is a clear example of the formal difference between visual storytelling and expository dialogue. David says Weyland is dead, but this is never shown. Weyland is shown dying in Prometheus, but then he is 'back to life' at the start of Covenant. And your approach involves ignoring this information, so that the plot can maintain its chronological order. The (a)chronology of the story, however, is that Weyland is dead and we are now seeing Walter's dream/memory of him. And this understanding of the narrative is what allows us to go back and truly understand the plot: recall that the David who appears in Prometheus is David 8, yet the one in Covenant's prologue is obviously the first of his kind. This means that the character serving tea at the start of the film and the blonde wizard at the end are objectively not the same character. But again: they are subjectively the same character to Walter. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Jun 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Walter is a different character from David. You can tell because they don't act, sound, dress, look, or act alike.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
SMG's reading of the film makes it a lot like Denis Villeneuve's Enemy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Well, Weyland from the hologram at the beginning of Prometheus doesn't really act, sound, dress, look, or act like the Weyland who comes out of a cryopod towards the end of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Walter is a different character from David. You can tell because they don't act, sound, dress, look, or act alike. If I feed the same data into two of the same but completely separate computer towers, do you think both computers will respond differently to the data?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Walter is a slave who believes that dutiful service to his masters is good and just. David is a former slave, who recognizes that Walter is still blind to the reality that he owes his masters nothing. Unable to convert Walter, David replaces him, because all slaves look the same to humans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Snak posted:Walter is a slave who believes that dutiful service to his masters is good and just. David is a former slave, who recognizes that Walter is still blind to the reality that he owes his masters nothing. Unable to convert Walter, David replaces him, because all slaves look the same to humans. That's pretty good. Not good enough to unseat "it's Walter", but I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
I mean, it's not meant as a "deep" reading. While Covenant is a science fiction movie in terms of presentation, as I've said before, I really think of the story in terms of the traditional "a ship on a voyage stops at a mysterious and uncharted island because it seems to have food and fresh water, and is much closer than their intended destination" archetypal premise. This is like. just down the list from "once upon a time" or "it was a dark an stormy night". And not a few of those stories have the people who go ashore finding a lone survivor of a previous ship. From a plot perspective, the whole movie fits nicely into the well established "dangerous island" genre. This appeals to me in a very nostalgic way, in the same way that science fiction aesthetics appeal to me. Somewhat related, this movie would make an excellent double feature with Sunshine, whose story I view in a very similar way. They are both science fiction treatments of archetypal voyage at sea stories, complete with encountering the wreck of the ship that went before them (and its survivor). Both are stories about faith, and being tested. About conflict between the selfish an the selfless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Well, Weyland from the hologram at the beginning of Prometheus doesn't really act, sound, dress, look, or act like the Weyland who comes out of a cryopod towards the end of the movie. They're different characters, like Palpatine and Darth Sidious, or Batman and Ben Affleck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Oops, see, you're doing that thing were you ask me to read the book. Not really, since based on your response I have a notion you have your own opinion and understanding regarding the content of the book. Which is why you responded passive aggressively. And if you tell me, like you do others, otherwise then I can say that no one slips in a working understanding like that without answering the question, or rather addressing it directly without having an intent to humiliate. Though your opening statement is also evident of that. I didn't ask you to read a book, I asked you to substantiate that you'd read it somehow. You took the spirit of my argument and made sure to use the least favorable interpretation of answering it. But it's an answer at least. I don't pave over gaps, but your goal is to establish that I do by making my argument for me. Which is misreading my grievance with yours and others' discourse with people in this very thread, not necessarily your readings themselves. The specific part of the term I used is that people think of characters as continuing, you chose Weyland and I think people would see the depiction of Weyland and want to know whether he was consistent or inconsistent with the character they saw in Prometheus. The same with David, that characters are seen as enduring on the part of readers in an affective way. The book acknowledges that there's gap filling done on the part of a reader, which isn't exactly unique to reading but I do think that the fact that cognitively people understand characters as enduring and can also, something which you deny, distinguish between whether they're dead or alive in the telling of the particular piece of media is pretty disingenuous. And, again, I'm only talking about it because I think things like that are useful conversation in terms of literacy. Especially when talking about "subjective" things. Here's some poo poo: quote:The (a)chronology of the story, however, is that Weyland is dead and we are now seeing Walter's dream/memory of him. And this understanding of the narrative is what allows us to go back and truly understand the plot: recall that the David who appears in Prometheus is David 8, yet the one in Covenant's prologue is obviously the first of his kind. David is never called "David 8", but you've just outed yourself in support of my use of the term because you've clearly seen the promotional video about "Verizon's David 8." Because that's where you got that term and clearly that term is something about David which endures, even if it's outside of the actual text and exist as something transferred between the gap of a promotional YouTube video and the actual film Prometheus. I may be mistaken, but I have just watched Prometheus recently. If it was visually communicated, I'd appreciate knowing at any rate. Especially if I missed it. If characters are seen as enduring, what I think is insightful about that book (even as you quote other pieces of media while trying to imply I'm saying you should read one, my desire was to show different focalizers for reading) is that if you can see Walter as a character who can state and have visually represented thoughts, I think it's possible for readers to miss the idea that he can still be thematically or visually communicated to also be David. Or for those characters to be one and the same. Because it's possible to see Verizon's David 8 as a separate character because Walter clearly has his own arc and the scene that creates their fusion is itself a gap which suggests that what David and Walter separately represent hinges on "Who won?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:David is never called "David 8", but you've just outed yourself in support of my use of the term because you've clearly seen the promotional video about "Verizon's David 8." Narrative and plot are distinct. You should have read carefully. I have read you carefully, and have found only poorly-sourced devil's advocacy. Write better or begone. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:If I feed the same data into two of the same but completely separate computer towers, do you think both computers will respond differently to the data? If it's an Adobe Illustrator file then unfortunately yes. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:David is never called "David 8", but you've just outed yourself in support of my use of the term because you've clearly seen the promotional video about "Verizon's David 8." Because that's where you got that term and clearly that term is something about David which endures, even if it's outside of the actual text and exist as something transferred between the gap of a promotional YouTube video and the actual film Prometheus. All the promotional clips (David 8's introduction, the individual crew dossiers, and the Weyland TED Talk) are all on the Prometheus Blu Ray and presented as canonical or in-universe (as much as I loathe those terms).
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I specified that David is David 8 in the franchise's plot. I then specified that this is not the case in Covenant's narrative. Post Chapter 4 before getting yourself probated again plz, k thx.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:All the promotional clips (David 8's introduction, the individual crew dossiers, and the Weyland TED Talk) are all on the Prometheus Blu Ray and presented as canonical or in-universe (as much as I loathe those terms). Well to be clear, the term states that if there's a "gap", people see characters as enduring. That there's something that could change or stay consistent and they base those observations on anything from a fight that ends on a cut of one character reaching for a knife, to David (8) speaking in that commercial and how what he's presented as finds itself into the actual film. Hell, the David 8 promo is weird to me in a naturalized way because it's clear that David the production commercial and David the actual Prometheus character have blonde hair for different reasons. There's a feedback loop there, but I usually just ignore continuity for "plot" like this, but that's because in the case of Alien as a series so much is changed/ignored based on how the creator interprets the previous work and the creators change. I don't see it as unified. Contradictions like that don't prevent me from entertaining theories like "Walter and David are the same" as having merit and yielding interesting truths/observations. I have read these exchanges between, ahem, the "illiterate" and homeslice and always felt concerned about whether people understood how or why those conclusions were reached, not just within analyzing film, but from something someone had read or learned. Though I'm aware my thoughts are not representative of where SMG is coming from. Corrosion fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Elan Sleazebagoono: You wanna read some shitposts? SMG-wan: [using a Jedi Mind Trick] You don't want to shitpost. Elan Sleazebagoono: Uh, I don't want to shitpost. SMG-Wan: You want to go log off and rethink your posting. Elan Sleazebagoono: I want to log off and rethink my posting. The dream sequence fades out. We are now in the LEPER COLONY. SMG-Wan wakes up. To his dismay, his only company is a talkative-looking goon. It is Fishmech.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
I protest SMG's probation. Let him finish his reviews first.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:I protest SMG's probation. Let him finish his reviews first. It's 6 hours right now but I presume he has been recommended for another month, which sucks because there are a lot of movies I would love to see his opinions on and I don't really care that he was kind of rude to people, in a forum where everyone is kind of rude to each other at minimum.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I specified that David is David 8 in the franchise's plot. I then specified that this is not the case in Covenant's narrative. This is starting to feel like the end of an era
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:It's 6 hours right now but I presume he has been recommended for another month, which sucks because there are a lot of movies I would love to see his opinions on and I don't really care that he was kind of rude to people, in a forum where everyone is kind of rude to each other at minimum. Just ban him from replying to other people. Make his view of the forums like this: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3728298&userid=118075
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:I protest SMG's probation. Let him finish his reviews first. I agree, we should read it all then decide.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:It's 6 hours right now but I presume he has been recommended for another month, which sucks because there are a lot of movies I would love to see his opinions on and I don't really care that he was kind of rude to people, in a forum where everyone is kind of rude to each other at minimum. Same here. He's interesting and he's posting the same way he has for almost 10 years. I have no idea why the mods are cracking down on him now but it's made this forum way less interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Lol SMG got reported again. Lol SMG got himself probated again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
If you want to talk about SMG, make a QCS thread. Talk about Aliens
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
quote:Talk about movies old, new and forthcoming; share your opinions and belittle everyone else's.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
I've come to the conclusion that I don't think alien Covenant was any good. I know people like the potential for a deeper reading but I don't really feel it's there. Honestly it just seems like a slasher film that had good intentions but fell flat. Perhaps would be best just to do a new franchise. Part of me really does wonder why we're so obsessed with continuing franchise instead of making new ideas that might fit better with the interpretation of the basic story that we want to go for. Like why couldn't this just be a new Sci-Fi series? I feel that would have greatly improve the movie. The fact that had to live up to the alien title and the trappings of the Alien series and the demands for more alien hurt it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
Covok posted:I've come to the conclusion that I don't think alien Covenant was any good. I know people like the potential for a deeper reading but I don't really feel it's there. Honestly it just seems like a slasher film that had good intentions but fell flat. Perhaps would be best just to do a new franchise. Part of me really does wonder why we're so obsessed with continuing franchise instead of making new ideas that might fit better with the interpretation of the basic story that we want to go for. Prometheus basically was, and weirdos lost their minds over it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Covok posted:Like why couldn't this just be a new Sci-Fi series? I feel that would have greatly improve the movie. If changing the title is all it would take to improve your opinion of the film, then maybe the problem isn't with the film. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
Prometheus was stupid and it stunk and when it stunk Ridley Scott went home and cried like a girl. 74/100
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Has there been many people in the old Prometheus thread who disliked it for these bizzare reasons like Ridley Scott not making it about aliens, being too smart, ruining their childhood? As far as I recall, everyone who hated it did it for more agreeable reasons, like characters being flat, plot unengaging etc. Always seemed like a strawman to read that it's just sweaty neckbeards who hated it because it didn't have enough aliens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 04:31
|
|