The Dark Knight Rises - Page 42

Ness · 10-26-2012, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CashmoneyDrew

Because like the Robin line, it's a throwaway line referencing a character in the comics that was put in entirely to be a nod to a certain portion of the fanbase watching the movie.

Ever hear of the saying, "Don't sweat the small stuff"?

But it had nothing to do with a character actually involved in the context of the main story.

CashmoneyDrew · 10-26-2012, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ness

But it had nothing to do with a character actually involved in the context of the main story.

So? How did John Blake's name being Robin fundamentally change him as a character? It didn't. It was a nod. Just like the croc reference, and just like the cat reference in TDK before it.

Jvig43 · 10-26-2012, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CashmoneyDrew

So? How did John Blake's name being Robin fundamentally change him as a character? It didn't. It was a nod. Just like the croc reference, and just like the cat reference in TDK before it.

Ness doesn't understand that analogies don't have to be seeded in the same exact situation or circumstance for them to work. Believe me. Read TWD thread.

There were alot more problems with this movie than taking fifteen seconds to reveal Blake's birth name was Robin.

Ness · 10-26-2012, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CashmoneyDrew

So? How did John Blake's name being Robin fundamentally change him as a character? It didn't. It was a nod. Just like the croc reference, and just like the cat reference in TDK before it.

But that doesn't mean it's necessary since it doesn't serve the narrative. Blake is someone the audience cares about. And Blake is a character invested in the narrative. Your right, it doesn't do anything so why is there? Oh right, it wasn't just a nod. It was put in there for people that still didn't get that Blake was a character inspired by Robin. If anyone is being nodded to, it's the people that couldn't comprehend that facet of the movie.

And regardless of how big or small an aspect of a film is, good or bad, when looking at the movie with a critical eye, I'm allowed to have an opinion of something. There are more important things in the film good and bad, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have an opinion on other things that may not seem as important to you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jvig43

Ness doesn't understand that analogies don't have to be seeded in the same exact situation or circumstance for them to work. Believe me. Read TWD thread.

Right, because that has to do with what I'm talking about.

LOL at trying to bring up the TWD thread (in which I still think you were wrong about within the context of what we were talking about, or rather just didn't get my point) to try and push your God-awful attempt to slight me/push an agenda. Irrelevancy + rude tactic in taking issue with the poster instead of the post FTW. If you're gonna be an asshole, at least go full throttle.

CashmoneyDrew · 10-26-2012, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ness

But that doesn't mean it's necessary since it doesn't serve the narrative.
Blake is someone the audience cares about. And Blake is a character invested in the narrative. Your right, it doesn't do anything so why is there? Oh right, it wasn't just a nod. It was put in there for people that still didn't get that Blake was a character inspired by Robin. If anyone is being nodded to, it's the people that couldn't comprehend that facet of the movie.

And regardless of how big or small an aspect of a film is, good or bad, when looking at the movie with a critical eye, I'm allowed to have an opinion of something. There are more important things in the film good and bad, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have an opinion on other things that may not seem as important to you.

I just think it's funny that you're so offended by something that obviously wasn't meant for you. It's a nod for those that need it, if that's not you, then great! Like I said earlier, no need to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Ness · 10-26-2012, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CashmoneyDrew

I just think it's funny that you're so offended by something that obviously wasn't meant for you. It's a nod for those that need it, if that's not you, then great! Like I said earlier, no need to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Well, I'm happy you're amused.

I wasn't offended. Where did I say that? And why would I be offended? I implied it was something about the film I found to be not necessary/annoying.

I love how whenever folks here have an opinion regarding something, the person that disagrees can't simply "disagree". There has to be some subtext taking issue with the person almost on a personal level.

If something about a movie for instance, big or small I don't find necessary, why is such a big deal that my personal tastes don't coincide with yours? I don't like a scene. That should be the end of it. If you want to talk about whether it serves the narrative, fine. But whether I personally find it good or bad aesthetically is a matter of taste, and that is irrelevant. There are scenes within a lot movies that I don't like, but I understand why it's there and I understand that it pushes the story. This particular one I didn't like, and found that it didn't serve the narrative.

CashmoneyDrew · 10-26-2012, 07:52 PM

Because, like you stated, you have the freedom to state your opinion, but that doesn't mean you have the freedom to avoid me responding to your opinion. Especially since you're posting it in a public forum.

vidae · 10-26-2012, 08:10 PM

He acts the same way about The Walking Dead. Just let it go CMD. It isn't worth it. :)

CashmoneyDrew · 10-26-2012, 09:10 PM

But someone is wrong on the Internet!!!

Brodeur · 10-26-2012, 09:19 PM

Drew, just let it go. It's not worth it.

Bulldogs · 10-26-2012, 09:42 PM

Let it go Drew.

Ness · 10-26-2012, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CashmoneyDrew

Because, like you stated, you have the freedom to state your opinion, but that doesn't mean you have the freedom to avoid me responding to your opinion. Especially since you're posting it in a public forum.

Right, we were already discussing that. And like I said, that's fine. I'm not avoiding how my opinion fits into the context of the story. Just when you keep telling me "it's not a big deal" via metaphors, I'm trying to tell you there is a difference between how I feel about a certain scene or piece of dialogue if I like it or not (personal taste) and whether or not it should be in the context of a story because of classic storytelling tropes. Like I mentioned earlier there are scenes in other films which I don't like, but still believe is necessary to be where those scenes are placed because it serves the narrative. The ladder approach of the two outlines I pointed out we can debate forever, and that's not the issue. Fine, whatever The first though, like when you say something about a mountain/moehill or something...I mean it's like you're essentially telling how I should feel about something within the context of the film. My taste. So I'm just not sure why you keep coming at that angle. It's like essentially saying "I like" or "I don't like" something subjective having to do with personal taste isn't good enough.

But "let it go" Drew. Don't want to ruin the SWDC ~~circlejerk~~ clique.

The Alex · 10-27-2012, 03:53 AM

Get 'em Drew!

Ness · 10-27-2012, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Alex

Get 'em Drew!

I'm repping you for going against the status quo. Good job sir.

Caddy · 10-27-2012, 06:13 AM

I love The Walking Dead!