Buffy: Synchronized slaying. Faith: New Olympic category?

'Conversations with Dead People'


Buffista Movies 5: Development Hell  

A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.


Laga - Jun 08, 2007 2:04:26 pm PDT #8995 of 10001
You should know I'm a big deal in the Resistance.

Eli Roth hatorz might enjoy this image but I gotta say that looks like a wimpy flogger.


IAmNotReallyASpring - Jun 08, 2007 3:51:49 pm PDT #8996 of 10001
I think Freddy Quimby should walk out of here a free hotel

Especially if the characters are supposed to be assholes deserving of the violence they receive.

That Roth creates characters that he regards as deserving torture raises a striped crimson and vermilion flag with me as to his quality as a writer.

It's not so much the inclusion of characters who use the slurs in the movie (many, many, MANY times from what I've heard) but Roth's insistence that there's nothing bigoted about using words like "gay" and "fag" as derogatory terms that makes me see red

Agreed. To argue that there's nothing homophobic about calling somebody a 'fag' is more than a little out of it. And even if that wasn't the case, intent isn't everything. Context counts.


Strega - Jun 08, 2007 4:41:35 pm PDT #8997 of 10001

Roth doesn't use the word "deserve." But it is kind of traditional in horror movies for bad shit to happen to bad people because they're bad people, so I'm not sure how that necessarily indicates poor writing.


§ ita § - Jun 08, 2007 4:51:30 pm PDT #8998 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I know nothing of Eli Roth movies, but it's not rare in fiction at all for people to "deserve" what happens to them. Sometimes they don't, and that can be the point, and sometimes they do.

Is the argument that no one deserves torture, but that other negative things can be deserved, or that writers shouldn't write characters that deserve negative things, period.


brenda m - Jun 08, 2007 4:52:20 pm PDT #8999 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there

I've only seen trailers, so take this for what it's worth.

They certainly suggest that women (and men) open to sex pretty much = deserve, even if the word isn't used.

Lots of things are traditional. That doesn't count for a whole hell of a lot in my eyes if there's not a lot else factoring in.


quester - Jun 08, 2007 5:09:34 pm PDT #9000 of 10001
Danger is my middle name, only I spell it R. u. t. h. - Tina Belcher.

In PotC2, it was back to the strange island folk, and the little dog was on the throne.

Oh yeah! I forgot about that! I laughed like a loon when he turned up at the pirate summit! Thanks ZenK!


IAmNotReallyASpring - Jun 08, 2007 5:22:04 pm PDT #9001 of 10001
I think Freddy Quimby should walk out of here a free hotel

Roth doesn't use the word "deserve."

Yeah, but he says "As far as the movie being misogynistic, that's just totally absurd. I purposely made these guys dicks at the beginning, because they get tortured for behaving that way" and that's a statement that implies he thinks their fate was deserved. Had he meant that as a simple A-follows-B set-up, I don't see why he would refer to the men as 'dicks' rather than 'men who objectify others' and avoid lending the whole statement a moral tenor.

But it is kind of traditional in horror movies for bad shit to happen to bad people because they're bad people, so I'm not sure how that necessarily indicates poor writing.

That bad things should happen to people who act poorly is a traditional aspect of horror I find to be poor writing. I find Roth, as a traditionalist in that respect, writes poorly. And as those last two sentence attest, I know a thing or two about poor writing.


IAmNotReallyASpring - Jun 08, 2007 5:41:22 pm PDT #9002 of 10001
I think Freddy Quimby should walk out of here a free hotel

ita:

Is the argument that no one deserves torture, but that other negative things can be deserved, or that writers shouldn't write characters that deserve negative things, period.

From my side, the writer should write characters and leave thoughts of what they deserve to the portion of their audience or readership that happen to entertain them.


§ ita § - Jun 08, 2007 6:10:01 pm PDT #9003 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

the writer should write characters and leave thoughts of what they deserve to the portion of their audience or readership that happen to entertain them

Do you think it happens often? I see it mentioned that the writer should set their own interpretation aside and let the audience come to their own conclusions about stuff--but I think the reason it's mentioned so often is that it doesn't happen easily.

And I think that can stand independently from the quality of the finished work.


bon bon - Jun 08, 2007 7:03:36 pm PDT #9004 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.

From my side, the writer should write characters and leave thoughts of what they deserve to the portion of their audience or readership that happen to entertain them.

leaving Roth out of this, I'd think you'd want to limit this statement more. It's like saying Oedipus shouldn't marry his mother in Sophocles' play because the playwright shouldn't determine what he deserves after killing his father. Crafting a fate for the very characters you are responsible for creating is an essential part of storytelling, and their "deserts" is a critical piece in that. The concept of hamartia is a fairly well-established one in art after 2500 years, I'd think.