Red Letter Media

[BubbleButt]

You can let this go anytime now, my guy.

 

[ditto]

The Johnny Depp remake was the only time I ever wanted to walk out of a movie.

Now Neil Breen as Wonka.. that's something I'd risk covid to see!

EDIT: Artist rendering

 

[Flexo]

Which seems like a highly arbitrary means of assessing the quality of the film in question. Can you, of the top of your head, jumble together a word-salad of attributes for each major character in the story? No? Then it's obviously a bad film, QED.

That's just a little bit too black-and-white for my tastes.

No, it makes them a bad character, that's the black and white part. The film itself may work with bad characters, but it's going to be an uphill battle. A film where each character and rich and in depth is going to be stronger and have an easier time reaching a quality standard.

Where did I say that one was to only describe visual information? I explicitly criticized the "Plinkett" test in my previous post for relying solely on spoken description in defiance of the fact that cinema is a mixed medium.

Yes, cinema is a mixed medium, but talking isn't. So how in the world is someone supposed to convey that medium? Do you expect for them to project the movie out of their ass? (I mean, I can, but meatbags typically can't.)

You know this is the exact shit that drives MauLer to make 12 hr videos going on about objectivity. Or Plinkett to go on about the stupid ring-theory.

(the rest will resume on the SW thread)

 

[frozenrunner]

In keeping with what @Flexo talked about earlier, there is a fascinating story lurking in the wings about Lee's character: respected, seasoned Jedi grows disillusioned with the Republic in general and the Jedi Order in particular, winds up making a devil's bargain with a Sith Lord, possibly thinking he can outwit him and twist his powers for a good cause, ends up provoking a ruinous war that ends with his death at the hands of his unwitting successor, outplayed at last by the master manipulator he thought he could control.

And not one scrap of that is onscreen.

It should be noted that's pretty close to Saruman's story in The Lord of the Rings.

The Johnny Depp remake was the only time I ever wanted to walk out of a movie.

Now Neil Breen as Wonka.. that's something I'd risk covid to see!

EDIT: Artist rendering
View attachment 1332090

Looks like Gary Shandling, to be honest.

I can't think of another great comedian who would be worse at portraying a man of whimsy...

 

[Lackadaisy]

I never saw the remake because the idea that anyone could ever hope to match Wilder's performance as Wonka was insane.

It's... okay. There's some good bits, but it's mostly inoffensive to bad.

You can let this go anytime now, my guy.

Never underestimate male nerds' autistic desire to debate Star Wars.

 

[Cyril Sneer]

No, it makes them a bad character, that's the black and white part.

And that's wrong.

The film itself may work with bad characters, but it's going to be an uphill battle. A film where each character and rich and in depth is going to be stronger and have an easier time reaching a quality standard.

A character who isn't "rich and in depth" is not necessarily a "bad" character. Not all stories need to have the protagonists' personalities mapped out to the nth degree.

Yes, cinema is a mixed medium, but talking isn't. So how in the world is someone supposed to convey that medium? Do you expect for them to project the movie out of their ass? (I mean, I can, but meatbags typically can't.)

Which medium exactly? Cinema or talking?

You know this is the exact shit that drives MauLer to make 12 hr videos going on about objectivity. Or Plinkett to go on about the stupid ring-theory.

?

 

[Flexo]

And that's wrong.

No it's not.

Let's put it this way: If you throw out any attempt at objectivity, then there is no basis for any comparison between the originals, the prequels, and the sequels. So congrats, you've just rendered the Disney garbage every bit as quality and legitimate as the prequels. I hope you go apologize to all the Reylos out there.

A character who isn't "rich and in depth" is not necessarily a "bad" character. Not all stories need to have the protagonists' personalities mapped out to the nth degree.

Weaker, poorer, whatever adjective you want to use, it's the lesser of the better characters. And if you think personalities aren't mapped out, then you've NEVER listened to actors talk about their craft, because they absolutely will map out their characters to the nth degree.

What do you get if you don't bother with personalities? Fucking Twilight!

Which medium exactly? Cinema or talking?

Have you read anything? Plinkett's test involves a person TALKING about a character in a MOVIE. Cinema - the mixed medium, is the start point. The test part is performed by a viewer and uses WORDS - the more constrained medium, and that is the end point.

A scale is a very simple machine (or measure) that tells you a very limited amount of data about more complicated objects. The Plinkett test, is a scale for characters.

 

[BR55]

And that's wrong.

A character who isn't "rich and in depth" is not necessarily a "bad" character. Not all stories need to have the protagonists' personalities mapped out to the nth degree.

Which medium exactly? Cinema or talking?

?

Man, you really seem to be struggling with the concept of your subjective interpretation/extrapolation not being the objective truth about the Prequels.
That's what everyone is trying to tell you.
And that's why you struggle with the Plinkett Test.
You might think that "Master and Apprentice" is a great characterization for Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan but most people don't.
That is what "films need to stand on their own" means. Characters need to be strong on-screen not in your head.
People are asking you to defend the Prequels based purely on their own merits and whats directly on screen.
But you just keep giving them your own interpretation and head cannon. Not to mention defending said interpretation as brilliant subtext and not your desperate justifications.
So this whole argument is just going in circles.

 

[augment]

Circles within circles... remember ring theory?

 

[RumblyTumbly]

Circles within circles... remember ring theory?

"Its like poetry. They rhyme."
- George Lucas

 

[Intelligent Calcium]

If the RLM studio gets looted live on stream I'm fucking done.

 

[Oaat]

The corona-skits in HitB were meant to be exaggerated jokes but they're going to age like fine wine.

 

[Pokemonquistador2]

Wonder if they'll rotate someone else in for Re:view or if it'll end up Mike and Jay again. Either way, it'll be nice to be in the loop for once. I usually haven't seen whatever they're talking about but most people are familiar with Willy Wonka to some extent, myself included. I hope they contrast it with the newer film more then they let on. That one was fucking awful. Why did they feel the need to give Wonka some sort of creepy tragic back story? Not to mention how Depp's Wonka is basically autistic vs Wilder's thoughtful Wonka. You never get the feeling that Wilder isn't playing a fully developed adult in control at all times. Depp just goes full retard.

Plus, the modern era just can't produce the level of whimsy needed to realize this film. We're too cynical. Burton and Depp had to couch everything in their movie with weirdness in order to make it palatable to modern audiences. Kids of the early 70s didn't blink twice at 4 grandparents sharing a bed and Grandpa Joe only getting out of it when there was Golden Ticket money to be had. It seemed logical in the whimsical storybook universe the movie took place in. The world of the 70's movie was full of eyepopping color and wonderfully crafted props. Burton's world was dark, CG and artificial. Burton has done wonderful work creating gothic universes (his Sleepy Hollow mood lighting and set design were great,) but his Willy Wonka set design just didn't do it for me. And his Alice movies just looked like someone swallowed a Hot Topic and an American McGee game, and vomited all over everything.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

Who cares about willy wanker when RICH EVANS iis dead from AIDS

 

[deeman]

Wich episode is your favorite in RLM? Mine must be between the "Star Wars holiday secial" from BoTW and Jack & Jill from Half in the Bag.

 

[Coolio55]

Wich episode is your favorite in RLM? Mine must be between the *Star Wars holiday secial"fråm BoTW and Jack & Jill from Half in the Bag.

Movie 43. Hands down.

 

[Miller]

Plinkett's test involves a person TALKING about a character in a MOVIE.

Did Mike/Plinkett ever use that test in the sequel trilogy? I remember him wasting half of the TFA review mocking the prequels and the ring theory.

 

[Dom Cruise]

"Its like poetry. They rhyme."
- George Lucas

That's going to be great.
It's going to be great.
That's going to be great.
It's going to be great.

Wich episode is your favorite in RLM? Mine must be between the "Star Wars holiday secial" from BoTW and Jack & Jill from Half in the Bag.

Jack & Jill is a good candidate for Half in The Bag, very hard to say for Best of The Worst.

 

[The Great Chandler]

Plus, the modern era just can't produce the level of whimsy needed to realize this film. We're too cynical.

Oh God, that's true in so many levels! Probably why a lot of modern entertainment looks so dull and empty, we just hate ourselves.

 

[Preferred Penne]

I think Last Vampire on Earth gets the most rewatches from me.