PDA

View Full Version : Dooms messages



geeman
12-30-2003, 09:10 PM
One more thing about the subjectivity of movies: Sometimes a picture just

speaks to you. There`s some inexplicable confluence of the film makers`

psychological pathology and your own that makes the viewing a shared

experience between the two parties, and one has a kind of empathic

relationship to the movie. This can be in spite of the fact that you

intellectually recognize that the film just isn`t that great. I call these

"Secret Sin" movies. They`re the films that you watch and don`t

necessarily tell people how much you like them because you know that they

really aren`t good enough to merit your adoration. I`m a film buff, so I

have lots of these. One of mine is Altered States. William Hurt, Blair

Brown. Lots of psychedelic, drug-induced visuals and pseudo-scientific

dialogue. It has a simplistic, even banal, basic theme and the kind of

smarmy "I love you... Oh, I love you too" ending that would normally makes

me want to throw my popcorn. I still love the flick. It rocks. If it`s

on TV or if someone happens to pop it into the VCR (I`m sure it exists on

DVD someplace, but I don`t have a copy) I can`t help watching it. I`m

entranced. It`s just too much fun to watch. One can`t legitimately knock

such an opinion on a movie because it is pretty much the definition of

subjectivity. Arguing the point would be like arguing about whether or not

one likes broccoli, wall paper or the color orange.



There is a difference, however, between enjoying a movie in spite of

oneself, and actually confusing it being a good movie, and that`s the

distinction I`m trying to draw here. When it comes to fantasy films, I

think there`s definitely a secret sin aspect involved for me personally,

and I`m sure for most gamers. There`s just something fascinating about

people swinging swords (the obvious Freudian aspect aside) that makes such

things more watchable than another film. One should, however, recognize

that factor when trying to objectively rate a movie. The LotR series are,

objectively, nowhere near "tens" when considered

intellectually. Cool? Absolutely. Entertaining? Yes. Quality

films? Pretty much. Well adapted for the screen? No, not

really. Perfect? Hardly.



If the argument is that The Return of the King "rocks" then, hey, no

argument from me. It does rock... whatever that means. If the argument is

that the film is a masterpiece, or that Jackson completely encapsulated

JRRT`s work then I have to disagree and I can cite chapter, verse, scene

and sentence to show that`s not true.



Highlander is another film that is, objectively speaking, not at all

good. In fact, it`s pretty bad. Far worse than any of Jackson`s work

going back to The Feebles. It`s outright dumb in many ways. I`ll still

watch it. I watched it again just the other day. There probably is a

secret sin aspect of the film that relates to BR also, in that some of the

plot points of Highlander coincide with bloodtheft, regency and divine

aspects of characters who are, otherwise, human. I suppose it`s sensible

to extend the thinking into campaign settings. BR is in many ways a secret

sin setting. Much of the basic material is objectively not very good. The

domain level is rife with holes, the published materials are full of

internal inconsistencies, and some of the writing is mediocre at best. In

a genre that represents a secret sin, however, BR is a particularly sinful

setting.



Gary

Birthright-L
12-30-2003, 09:32 PM
> BR is in many ways a secret

> sin setting. Much of the basic material is objectively not very good.

> The

> domain level is rife with holes, the published materials are full of

> internal inconsistencies, and some of the writing is mediocre at best.

> In

> a genre that represents a secret sin, however, BR is a particularly

> sinful

> setting.

>

> Gary





I nominate the above for the first verse of our official Birthright

themesong. I can start writing up some guitar tabs, and I can have the

gaming group sing the chorus. Someone around here must have a triangle

we could use...



--Lord Rahvin