Best Sci-Fi Tournament -- Round 1, Group O

[Mattrick]

Butterfly Effect was an interesting idea but I didn't like how it was done. Too much unecessary effects and tricks distracted from the human story they were trying to tell. It's not as if the acting was bad but the story needed more skilled actors than it had, the one true bright spot being Ethan Suplee who was the only real engaging one...imagine this film with Gosling and Johansson instead of Kutcher and Smart, it would just feel more authentic in the tragedy aspect. It was passible film but nothing I'll watch again.

[pathoftheturtle]

Really pleased with the response to The Butterfly Effect. Such a great under-appreciated film (I guess because Kutcher's in it). But it's a really well done sci-fi story.

Well, it's a natural counterpoint to 12 Monkeys. Some fiction posits time as static -- even if you travel around past and future, every tiny event is fated. Directly opposite are stories presuming time is fluid and essentially unpredictable; tiny variations eventually result in drastic change. An equally uncomfortable notion. Films such as Looper and T2 moderate to some degree of elasticity; the course of events is possible but difficult to alter, thus some measure of control is conceivable. BttF starts outfluid highly fluid but then makes it harder in later chapters for change to cause total catastrophe. Subtly, so as to maintain suspense. Ultimately, though, there's more story in BE than the nerdy premise. They knew they needed a form of destiny to reassert or risk their film being merely formulaic horror. In the director's cut, this involved a controversial gimmick a little too basic and still closely connected to the one idea. I feel the theatrical cut was superior, depicting relatable human experience of inevitability.

Finally found a bad movie that you seem to like. The Butterfly Effect his awful. I'm shocked so many people voted for it.

I think I'm more conscious of its failure than pablo is. We both seem to sympathize with its intentions. That was an attempt to make a movie of perspective in time travel literature which had never appeared in film before. It was executed awakwardly. I know this is no masterpiece. But you have the wrong idea of me if you think I'm just an anal-retentive perfectionist with no tolerance for mistakes. I can recommend an interesting flop. I just don't find interesting films that make the same mistakes others have made again and again. Not sure how pablo feels, but I know I am more comfortable expressing support for a project that fell apart due to over-thinking than endorsing masses squeezed out by under-thinking. I confess; experimenting is not necessarily better than retreading the same territory, and sometimes I like to try experiments just for the sake of being different. Not all bad movies are created equal, IMO. But then, I never said that I can do no wrong.

[Still Servant]

Really pleased with the response to The Butterfly Effect. Such a great under-appreciated film (I guess because Kutcher's in it). But it's a really well done sci-fi story.

Well, it's a natural counterpoint to 12 Monkeys. Some fiction posits time as static -- even if you travel around past and future, every tiny event is fated. Directly opposite are stories presuming time is fluid and essentially unpredictable; tiny variations eventually result in drastic change. An equally uncomfortable notion. Films such as Looper and T2 moderate to some degree of elasticity; the course of events is possible but difficult to alter, thus some measure of control is conceivable. BttF starts outfluid highly fluid but then makes it harder in later chapters for change to cause total catastrophe. Subtly, so as to maintain suspense. Ultimately, though, there's more story in BE than the nerdy premise. They knew they needed a form of destiny to reassert or risk their film being merely formulaic horror. In the director's cut, this involved a controversial gimmick a little too basic and still closely connected to the one idea. I feel the theatrical cut was superior, depicting relatable human experience of inevitability.

Finally found a bad movie that you seem to like. The Butterfly Effect his awful. I'm shocked so many people voted for it.

I think I'm more conscious of its failure than pablo is. We both seem to sympathize with its intentions. That was an attempt to make a movie of perspective in time travel literature which had never appeared in film before. It was executed awakwardly. I know this is no masterpiece. But you have the wrong idea of me if you think I'm just an anal-retentive perfectionist with no tolerance for mistakes. I can recommend an interesting flop. I just don't find interesting films that make the same mistakes others have made again and again. Not sure how pablo feels, but I know I am more comfortable expressing support for a project that fell apart due to over-thinking than endorsing masses squeezed out by under-thinking. I confess; experimenting is not necessarily better than retreading the same territory, and sometimes I like to try experiments just for the sake of being different. Not all bad movies are created equal, IMO. But then, I never said that I can do no wrong.

I don't think that. It just seems like most of the films you like lean to the more critically acclaimed side. It's just the first time I've seen you like a film that most people hate.

I was just being playful. I didn't mean any offense.

[mae]

It's rated a 7.7 on IMDB, so most people clearly like it.

[pathoftheturtle]

I was just being playful. I didn't mean any offense.

It's cool, bruh. I used no uncertain terms just to ensure that things were clear. I ain't mad atcha.

Sometimes it's hard to see where other people are coming from. And sometimes, it is hard to see just why it is so hard for other people to see where you are coming from. But I did not mean to offend, either.

[Mattrick]

Personally, I think too many people get offended in such discussions. If someone loves Transformers and someone says Transformers sucks they take it as a personal offence, 'you insult what I like therefore you insulted me'. I thinks it's a product of both insecurity and people defining themselves by their choices in entertainment. Not saying that happened here but I've encountered it a lot. Maybe I have thick skin taking abuse for being a wrestling fan all my life but if people don't like what I like I either a) totally understand why someone might not like something I love or b) I think they are missing out on something.

[Still Servant]

Personally, I think too many people get offended in such discussions. If someone loves Transformers and someone says Transformers sucks they take it as a personal offence, 'you insult what I like therefore you insulted me'. I thinks it's a product of both insecurity and people defining themselves by their choices in entertainment. Not saying that happened here but I've encountered it a lot. Maybe I have thick skin taking abuse for being a wrestling fan all my life but if people don't like what I like I either a) totally understand why someone might not like something I love or b) I think they are missing out on something.

I'm not so much a wrestling fan now, but I was a huge wrestling fan growing up and long into my 20's. I totally agree with you about people taking it too personally and one person not liking something that you like isn't necessarily a knock on you as a person.

I have no problem with people not liking wrestling, but I do take offense when people trivialize it and make fun of it. I know a lot of people that look down on people that watch wrestling and question their taste in anything once they learn they are a fan of wrestling.

The funny thing is that people that look down on wrestling usually have things in their own life that most people would feel the same about. For instance, my sister used to get on me for watching wrestling and couldn't understand what people liked about it. Then again, she loves watching soap operas. Have you ever tried to watch a soap opera? They are dreadful. We are talking serious bottom of the barrel form of entertainment here.

So it's all relative. We just have to understand that everybody has different tastes in all departments. Not just entertainment. We've come a long way with video games, but I can't tell you how many people still look at me sideways because I play video games. These same people spend hours on their phones playing Candy Crush and games like that. Guess what, THEY ARE VIDEO GAMES TOO!!

It's so frustrating.

[pathoftheturtle]

Soap operas and comic books are cut from the same pattern. (Don't believe that? Just watch a little "Smallville.") And pro wrestling is just comic books for people who don't like all the reading. I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to raise interest in improving our civilization. I just wish there were more video games about things other than crime and warfare. I don't support censorship. But if we don't let authoritarians dictate values in art and we also do not exercise choice in what we create and consume with personal awareness, then what is to prevent the natural spread of plain decadence?

[Mattrick]

Does survival horror count as warfare because it's about all I play if I can help it. What about something like Assassin's Creed or Mass Effect? Or a puzzle game like Catherine which is about relationships and infidelity? There are a lot of very inventive games out there that have nothing to do with crime or warfare. The problem with the video game market is that it's key demographic is 14-25 so a lot of games are catered to them, much like the way films are catered to them. The films/games for more discerning games/movie watchers are often smaller pictures without as much marketting.

Pro-wrestling isn't for people who don't like all the reading. Actually, wrestling fans read a lot. They might not be reading fiction but they read a lot. The market for books written by wrestlers for wrestling fans is pretty large with some of them writing multiple books. It all started with this guy: whose autobiography (which is pretty huge too) was number 1 on the New York Times Bestseller list (he's written multiple books, fiction/non-fiction/comicbook) since. I've been a wrestling fan for 24 years, I hate comic books and I love reading. This is why I developed a thick skin with liking pro wrestling because people like Path have pre-conceived assumations about the sort of people who watch it i.e. reading comic books is really taxing to them. Whether people acknowledge it or not pro wrestling is an artform, no different than acting, dancing or performing in some other way. I appreciate pro-wrestling for the artform it is and those who ignorantly slag it like path, well, they fall into category B as I listed above. Wrestling is for people that can't handle reading a comic book haha I mus av emagynd i red ull dem buks n stufs bcuz dees comix b tuff in muh brane!

[pathoftheturtle]

For someone who says he has a thick skin about it, I think you're overreacting to one offhand comment. Certainly I was generalizing -- that was the idea. It was not really intended as personal attack. I happen to have known some people who absolutely did give up comic books because the writing was too hard for them. Of course, to assume that other people are like those you have known in the past is the very definition of prejudice. It's like what you said recently on another thread about Verhoeven, I think - the fact that a director can produce art doesn't prove that none of his movies are prurient. And the fact that literate people can follow pro wrestling doesn't prove that that is what it's for.

I don't know enough about video games to seriously discuss specific titles. I admit that. I do like puzzle and problem-solving games; that's one of the types I'd like to see more of. I'm not a fan of "zombie" stories. I tend to believe that survivalism in general is inherently anti-social and the zombie myth is bascially a convenient method for desensitizing people to the potential scenario of killing other people in social upheaval. What is a zombie but a supernatural metaphor for dehumanized outsiders to one's own tribe?

[pathoftheturtle]

I said we don't need thought police.
I didn't mean someone in particular must not be policing themselves.
I only brought self-policing up because…
…ah dunno…
…something about forums…
…The Butterfly Effect…
…?
Say Mike, did you like part 2 at all? It's sort of surprising how rare it is for sequels to get better. That case might be more talked about if it weren't still in its own way rather mediocre.

[Still Servant]

Soap operas and comic books are cut from the same pattern.

I agree with that. I will also say that wrestling too is very much like a soap opera, which I also bring up to my sister in an argument.

As far as video games are concerned, I can understand why it seems like the only games out there involve crime and warfare, because those games have really saturated the market. They are very popular. That being said, there are tons of games that have a lot more going for it than violence. In fact, there are a bunch of games (usually Indy) that are downright masterpieces of art and storytelling. Just like with a good movie, sometimes you just have to dig to find the ones that break the mold and are worth watching/playing.

Some games are forced into conforming to the violent norm in order to sell copies. A game like Bioshock Infinite was forced to add-in more combat against the wishes of the creator. A game like that is political, religious and social commentary wrapped in a blockbuster FPS.

Also, I'm with Matt, the Mick Foley book is one of the best books I've ever read. No joke.

[pathoftheturtle]

I've played some alright PC games, I just don't have enough interest in digging to purchase any of the consoles -- especially since they're all so quickly outmoded.

[Mattrick]

For someone who says he has a thick skin about it, I think you're overreacting to one offhand comment. Certainly I was generalizing -- that was the idea. It was not really intended as personal attack. I happen to have known some people who absolutely did give up comic books because the writing was too hard for them. Of course, to assume that other people are like those you have known in the past is the very definition of prejudice. It's like what you said recently on another thread about Verhoeven, I think - the fact that a director can produce art doesn't prove that none of his movies are prurient. And the fact that literate people can follow pro wrestling doesn't prove that that is what it's for.

I wasn't overracting. But there is a big difference between comparing wrestling to soap operas or soap operas to comics and saying 'pro wrestling is for people who don't want to bother reading anything; one is comparing two modes of storytelling and another is literally insulting the viewer. If someone tells me pro wrestling is gay I'm not offended; when someone says wrestliing fans are lazy stupid idots that's entirely different, that is a personal attack. All I did was point out was the ignorance in your generalization.

I don't know enough about video games to seriously discuss specific titles. I admit that. I do like puzzle and problem-solving games; that's one of the types I'd like to see more of. I'm not a fan of "zombie" stories. I tend to believe that survivalism in general is inherently anti-social and the zombie myth is bascially a convenient method for desensitizing people to the potential scenario of killing other people in social upheaval. What is a zombie but a supernatural metaphor for dehumanized outsiders to one's own tribe?

The zombie metaphor is extremely flexible and offers some good storytelling oppourtunities. Survival stories are as old as stories themselves. Stories were built on mythologica heroes overcoming monsters, epic journeys and the gods themselves. The storytelling and thematical possiblities with zombie horror is endless really. There is a lot of cliched, trite zombie stuff (like all genres/sub genres) but there are a lot of great stories and ideas that can come out of them. Your dehumanized outsider is one aspect of the zombie. There is also the loss of self. The hive mind. The mindlessness. The drive of base urges. The loss of conventional society, the nullification of currency, power, technology, refridgeration, medical care, government, shopping. ethics, law, order, rationality... These are all themes in most post-apocalyptic scenarios but zombie horror just has a lot of other avenues you can take it, the nature of what a zombie is (and in contrast what a human is) provides a lot of untapped potential too. As played as it has become there is going to be someone that comes along and totally re-invents it. While you may think it's preparing us it's desensitizing us to kill people, I think with todays technological and corporate dependable people lacking the skills it would take to survive in such a world it wouldn't take them far...sure video games might make it easier for someone to kill someone else in that situation but it won't help them catch dinner...or cook it, or treat that increasingly worrisome infection cut on their leg lol

[pathoftheturtle]

I call 'em like I see 'em -- I've watched enough scripted wrestling to know it's sripted poorly. Nothing ignorant about that. There's such a thing as good writing, and on the other hand there's costumed melodrama. I'm not insulting the viewers: I'm insulting the material. If different people want to associate themselves with that, I can't say what any one is thinking. But don't blame me if people just think that your taste is lousy! Personally, I'm sure there's lots of good reasons apart from that and simply being uneducated. i.e. lack of self esteem, mental illness, poor upbringing, temporary insanity, excessive drinking... the list goes on and on! Sorry if I seemed insensitive before.

[Still Servant]

My favorite part of wrestling was always the athletic wrestlers that had tons of moves. Seeing two great wrestlers go at it really is like watching a dance. The choreography is just amazing. I feel the same way about many martial arts films.

There are generalizations about every aspect of life. As long as we all realize there are exceptions to every single one of those generalizations, then we should all be okay.

[Mattrick]

I call 'em like I see 'em -- I've watched enough scripted wrestling to know it's sripted poorly. Nothing ignorant about that. There's such a thing as good writing, and on the other hand there's costumed melodrama. I'm not insulting the viewers: I'm insulting the material. If different people want to associate themselves with that, I can't say what any one is thinking. But don't blame me if people just think that your taste is lousy! Personally, I'm sure there's lots of good reasons apart from that and simply being uneducated. i.e. lack of self esteem, mental illness, poor upbringing, temporary insanity, excessive drinking... the list goes on and on! Sorry if I seemed insensitive before.

You did it again...you say you're insulting the material and not the viewr then you say people must have terrible self esteem, be drunks, be products of terrible parenting and be mentally ill to enjoy it...again, thats insulting the viewer and it just makes you seem like a douche.

[Mattrick]

My favorite part of wrestling was always the athletic wrestlers that had tons of moves. Seeing two great wrestlers go at it really is like watching a dance. The choreography is just amazing. I feel the same way about many martial arts films.

We're in a golden age of in ring workers and some of the youth talent is simply mindblowing. This guy Cesaro is ridiculously strong for his size and can do things no one has ever done in that ring while a guy like Seth Rollins is so innovative and his curbstomp finisher is deadly looking. If you have 20 mins check out this absolute clinic of wrestling ability:

http://m.youtube.com/results?q=cesaro&sm=3

[pathoftheturtle]

My favorite part of wrestling was always the athletic wrestlers that had tons of moves. Seeing two great wrestlers go at it really is like watching a dance. The choreography is just amazing. I feel the same way about many martial arts films.

Sure, Olympic wrestling is different -- that's sport, not fiction, and has nothing to do with how to judge sci-fi. Some martial arts movies are good; they can have decent story and acting, although they usually don't because it is beside the point for the creators and not how they generally look at their viewers.

I call 'em like I see 'em -- I've watched enough scripted wrestling to know it's sripted poorly. Nothing ignorant about that. There's such a thing as good writing, and on the other hand there's costumed melodrama. I'm not insulting the viewers: I'm insulting the material. If different people want to associate themselves with that, I can't say what any one is thinking. But don't blame me if people just think that your taste is lousy! Personally, I'm sure there's lots of good reasons apart from that and simply being uneducated. i.e. lack of self esteem, mental illness, poor upbringing, temporary insanity, excessive drinking... the list goes on and on! Sorry if I seemed insensitive before.

You did it again...you say you're insulting the material and not the viewr then you say people must have terrible self esteem, be drunks, be products of terrible parenting and be mentally ill to enjoy it...again, thats insulting the viewer and it just makes you seem like a douche.

Well, if I go all the way and say that you're also brain damaged, then will you finally get that I'm joking?

[Still Servant]

Path, you gotta' throw an emoticon in there or something, bro.

Anyway, I was talking about professional wrestling. You may not be able to respect or appreciate pro wrestling, but I find it hard to believe you won't at least concede that it takes some athletic ability. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to do 90% of the moves that these guys do. None of us would. These wrestlers also make nasty hits look easy. They are literally taught the proper way to take hits and falls.

[pathoftheturtle]

Nobody understands my sense of humor.
I tried to express my opinion that it's like the lowest form of soap opera (although I believe there's some art that is NOT just the same) in a jocular way. I think it's overreacting to take that part seriously and overlook the gist.

Yes: they're athletic. Obviously. But isn't that off-topic here?

[pathoftheturtle]

Did you at least pick up on my facetious attempt to blame the butterfly effect for how this conversation turns out?

[needfulthings]

LOOKS LIKE THE BEST OF TWO WORLDS!

[pathoftheturtle]

LOOKS LIKE THE BEST OF TWO WORLDS!

Subtitles? Still too much reading!

[Still Servant]

Did you at least pick up on my facetious attempt to blame the butterfly effect for how this conversation turns out?

Indeed I did. I thought it was very clever.

However, I couldn't tell if you were serious about The Butterfly Effect 2 being better than the original. I didn't even know they made a second and I know exactly zero actors from that film. Judging by the ratings, I find it hard to believe it's better than the original.