Author Topic: The Incredibles  (Read 5321 times)

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2004, 11:36:40 PM »
no, you mistake my meaning.

I was very specific in saying "the most original movie ever." movies in established genres can be very original. But if they're in an established genre, they're already assuming a set of already generated ideas, and therefore cannot be the most original EVER.

EUOL

  • Moderator
  • Level 58
  • *****
  • Posts: 4708
  • Fell Points: 33
  • Mr. Prolific [tm]
    • View Profile
    • Brandon Sanderson dot com
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #31 on: November 15, 2004, 01:47:56 AM »
Wait.  You expect me to believe that you meant that statement literally?  Why say it then?  It has no meaning.  Of course it wasn't the "Most original movie ever."  It would be insane to expect that--in fact, I doubt the most original movie ever is even accessible to a normal viewing audience.

I put fort that you're now backpedaling and trying to find an argument to explain your statement.  In the colloquial vernacular, the statement you used implies a weakness or an opposite meaning.  For example:

"He's not the smartest man I ever met."  Does not mean, literally, that you expected him to be the smartest man ever.  That statement is a euphemism for saying "He's not very smart."  That's how we use the language.

So, when you said "It wasn't the most original movie ever," your statement meant "It wasn't very original."  Then you proceeded to say (essentially) "If it were original, it couldn't be a superhero movie."

And so I quibbled.  I didn't mistake your meaning.  You may not, however, have said what you meant.
http://www.BrandonSanderson.com

"Technically, I don't even have a brain."--Fellfrosch

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #32 on: November 15, 2004, 07:15:07 AM »
no, you mistook my meaning. I said it that way because i was arguing against Spriggan. Sprig said the Incredibles wasn't original. I said it was. I wouldn't make the literal argument that it was the most original ever, y'know, in the history of cinema. it borrows heavily from, to state only the most obvious, The Watchmen and The Fantastic Four. But despite not being the MOST original, it had quite a bit that was unique and creative about it.

Spriggan

  • Administrator
  • Level 78
  • *****
  • Posts: 10582
  • Fell Points: 31
  • Yes, I am this awesome
    • View Profile
    • Legacies Lost
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #33 on: November 15, 2004, 07:23:32 AM »
Obviously you don't know the meaning of "Original", either something is or it isn't.  There's no somewhat or "parts of" here SE.  So I win, you loose.

Also you've got the fact that the director said the biggest hangup with the movie was getting permission to use all the names and some of the storys from comic book people since about every thing in the movie has been done before.  Heck, the big robot's name was lincenced from Lucas.  There is no Originality when to make your movie you have to lincence the right to use that name with those set of powers in a superhero movie.
Screw it, I'm buying crayons and paper. I can imagineer my own adventures! Wheeee!

Chuck Norris is the reason Waldo is hiding.


The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #34 on: November 15, 2004, 08:05:42 AM »
Quote
Obviously you don't know the meaning of "Original", either something is or it isn't.  There's no somewhat or "parts of" here SE.  So I win, you loose.

That's a fallacious argument, on so many levels. I think you know it, too, so I'm not going to address it further.

Yes, they borrowed a lot. But they made some very creative applications of the ideas, like I said before. not every line was stolen. Not every character was stolen. Part of the lisencing is that Marvel and DC will sue at the drop of the hat. The mere fact that there's a young speedster probably gets the panties of execs over at DC in a bundle because they happen to have a young speedster named Impulse. Does that mean that Dash and Impulse are the same character? Hardly. But it's not the powers that i'm focussing on. It's how they use them. and it's how they work the story. No, you haven't seen that story before. You've seen elements of it before in several different places, but you've not seen it put together that way.

stacer

  • Level 58
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
    • Stacy Whitman's Grimoire
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #35 on: November 15, 2004, 11:16:00 AM »
Maurice Sendak once said, "The difference between a bad artist and a good one is, the bad artist seems to copy a great deal. The good one really does copy a great deal."

"I'd like to place myself in the latter category," he added. "Where does it come from? You steal it. It's a very simple thing. It's what I've been doing all my career. Pictures, music, ballet, street scenes, anything is there to take. There's no such thing as an original."

Another time, he said:
"I've always been a vigorous thief, but I've always felt that if you steal, you've got to turn it into you. If you just steal, then you're nothing but a lousy crook."

He borrows--or as he says, steals--motifs and compositions all the time. If you look at Outside Over There or Where the Wild Things Are, you've got some great originality combined with some very classic looks. I think originality and borrowing can happen at the same time.

I've just always liked how open Sendak is about how he "steals."
Help start a small press dedicated to publishing multicultural fantasy and science fiction for children and young adults. http://preview.tinyurl.com/pzojaf.

Follow our blog at http://www.tupublishing.com
We're on Twitter, too! http://www.twitter.com/tupublishing

Skar

  • Moderator
  • Level 54
  • *
  • Posts: 3979
  • Fell Points: 7
    • View Profile
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2004, 11:37:13 AM »
I have to say amen to Stacer's/Sendak's comments.  Stealing happens in all art, often the person doing it is not even aware of it.  "Original" ideas are few and far between and, frankly, are usually not a very good or polished example of the root idea the first time they're trotted out into the light.  Making an idea yours, as Sendak talks about, is just as creative and difficult as popping up with a new idea in the first place.  

I think the word "Original" is often misused as a universally good modifier.  An original movie is often not a good movie.  Old ideas used in original ways and combinations are usually far better and more satisfying than the tired old "avante gard" "like nothing you've ever seen before" "challenging" films/books/songs.

The same kind of paradigm operates in science.  The cutting edge of experimentation is necessary but usually not immediately useful.  Most of the really innovative and useful (useful in science being used as a parallel for good in movies) discoveries are nifty combinations of old ideas.  Post-it notes, velcro, teflon etc... all came as a new application of old ideas and techniques.

So blah.  Original is not necessarily good and good is not necessarily original.
"Skar is the kind of bird who, when you try to kill him with a stone, uses it, and the other bird, to take vengeance on you in a swirling melee of death."

-Fellfrosch

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2004, 12:05:47 PM »
OK, well, Skar's review has been posted.

42

  • Staff
  • Level 56
  • *
  • Posts: 4350
  • Fell Points: 8
  • Unofficial World Saver
    • View Profile
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2004, 12:10:23 PM »
I would have to agree with Skar and Stacer. Originality is really not that important.

Usually, when someone says something is original, it means that they have not persoanally seen something like it. But when you start nit-picking, you can usually find plenty of unoriginal elements.

And still, alot of it is based on what your personal background and experiences had givin you. On of the great things about the children's market is that they see almost everything as original. Just look how they are bringing back toys from fifteen years ago. To the kids getting these toys, the new versions are the original ones and the old versions are the copies.

Every once and  while, something truly original shows up, but it's not worth holding your breath for it. One theory of Aesthetics says that nothing is original, everything stemming from some premortal existance.

For everyday criticism, orignality kind of needs to take a back seat to things like craftsmanship, social relevence, and market demands. Bad critics get so focused on finding originality, that they tyically end up jaded and dissappointed almost every time.
The Folly of youth is to think that intelligence is a subsitute for experience. The folly of age is to think that experience is a subsitute for intelligence.

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #39 on: November 15, 2004, 12:16:11 PM »
hrm... thought I'd linked this already, but I guess not. our review (by skar) is up.

stacer

  • Level 58
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
    • Stacy Whitman's Grimoire
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #40 on: November 15, 2004, 12:33:26 PM »
Edit question: Skar, do you mean self-conscious, or subconscious?
Help start a small press dedicated to publishing multicultural fantasy and science fiction for children and young adults. http://preview.tinyurl.com/pzojaf.

Follow our blog at http://www.tupublishing.com
We're on Twitter, too! http://www.twitter.com/tupublishing

Skar

  • Moderator
  • Level 54
  • *
  • Posts: 3979
  • Fell Points: 7
    • View Profile
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #41 on: November 15, 2004, 12:38:16 PM »
subconscious, as in the audience being viscerally but not consciously aware that the person speaking is really standing in a studio behind a microphone rather than streaking through the sky in a private jet or lifting a monster robot in his arms.
"Skar is the kind of bird who, when you try to kill him with a stone, uses it, and the other bird, to take vengeance on you in a swirling melee of death."

-Fellfrosch

The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers

  • Administrator
  • Level 96
  • *****
  • Posts: 19211
  • Fell Points: 17
  • monkeys? yes.
    • View Profile
    • herb's world
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #42 on: November 15, 2004, 12:43:02 PM »
you mean, he WASN'T tossing around giant robotic monsters? All my illusions are shattered!

Skar

  • Moderator
  • Level 54
  • *
  • Posts: 3979
  • Fell Points: 7
    • View Profile
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #43 on: November 15, 2004, 12:48:04 PM »
And good riddance too.  Toss the shards in the dust-bin along with your ninja monkeys.
"Skar is the kind of bird who, when you try to kill him with a stone, uses it, and the other bird, to take vengeance on you in a swirling melee of death."

-Fellfrosch

Skar

  • Moderator
  • Level 54
  • *
  • Posts: 3979
  • Fell Points: 7
    • View Profile
Re: The Incredibles
« Reply #44 on: November 15, 2004, 12:49:28 PM »
I'm sorry.  I take back what I said about the stupid ninja... hey.  cut it out, that hurts...about the RADIANT ninja monkeys.  They are obviously real.
"Skar is the kind of bird who, when you try to kill him with a stone, uses it, and the other bird, to take vengeance on you in a swirling melee of death."

-Fellfrosch