TV/Movies Megathread

[The Brain]

Age of Ultron is on the telly. It appears to be a snoozefest.

[Josquius]

I've started watching Netflix's Bright, starring Will Smith.  Only about half way through.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Will Smith I'd think this was the greatest pile of horseshit I'd ever seen, but somehow he makes it watchable.

I watched it too.
I am most amazed that they got Will Smith in a netflix only movie. And that netflix is blowing such sums on movies. Just....wow.

It's not the "Worst film of the year already" that the reviews say. Pretty meh. The whole thing feels more like a pilot for a TV series than  anything else.

[celedhring]

Apparently it's been a big success and Netflix has already commissioned a sequel 

I checked it out of curiosity but only withstood 20 minutes. It's terrible. The lame 90s buddy cop movie version of Shadowrun.

[Admiral Yi]

Why Him?

Father Bryan Cranston doesn't like his daughter's main squeeze, James Franco.

Movie studios have a big can in the warehouse labeled Generic Date Movie.  They ladled some out and this is what you get.

[jimmy olsen]

[Malthus]

Watched a good documentary over Xmas:

'David Attenborough and the Empire of the Ants'

About the mega colony of wood ants in the Jura mountains, excellent photography and interesting topic, well worth a viewing.

I'm interested in seeing that one.

[Malthus]

Amusing that this person mentions Greek mythology in this context - a mythology which is, basically, indistinguishable from modern superhero fare.

The average Greek peasant was unlikely to have any direct experience with, say, driving a chariot containing the Sun.

[Oexmelin]

The author does set the basis of their comparison in "film": the evocation of Greek myths is there to make the point that substitution fantasies are nothing new. 

I do think there are considerable differences between Greek myths and superhero fare.

[HVC]

The author does set the basis of their comparison in “film”: the evocation of Greek myths is there to make the point that substitution fantasies are nothing new. 

I do think there are considerable differences between Greek myths and superhero fare.

For one this modern superhero films have a lot less beastiality.

[Malthus]

The author does set the basis of their comparison in "film": the evocation of Greek myths is there to make the point that substitution fantasies are nothing new. 

I do think there are considerable differences between Greek myths and superhero fare.

Of course there is, one is a product of ancient Greece and the other is modern - but the difference doesn't exist in the way this author claims.

"What sets the 21st century superhero film apart is the break it represents between both indexical reality ... and any known physical reality".  [Emphasis added]

Except that the Greek mythology the author already referenced (represented on say a painted vase)  represents exactly as much of a "break" from the "indexical reality ... and any known physical reality" of the average ancient Greek as a 21st century superhero film (if not more so: Tony Stark making a robot suit that can fly is closer to the average person's physical  and "indexical" reality than the son of Apollo being given the chance to drive the Sun about is to the average ancient Greek).

Indeed, some modern superhero fare is just repackaged, rewritten and science-fiction-ified mythology: think of the mighty Thor.  Dr. Strange is, literally, a wizard. It isn't as if storytelling hasn't had wizards in the past, is it?

[celedhring]

Ancient myths had a very strong connection to reality, though. They explained it. I.e. "how does the Sun rise every day?", "hum, because some dude puts it on a flying chariot and crosses the sky with it". I certainly don't see this in the modern superhero.

The other big function of the ancient myth - institute and legitimize the social order - is probably a more apt analogy. Superheroes are perceived as models of conduct, and embody certain virtues (selflessness, courage, friendship) that western society aspires/pretends to represent. A lot of superhero stories revolve around achieveing that ideal moral state (i.e. Iron Man, Spidey) or how this example is lived up to (The Cap, Supes).

Heck, Tony Stark's story has been seen a zillion times in ancient myths or religion. The sinner that sees the light and becomes a hero/saint.

[Malthus]

Ancient myths had a very strong connection to reality, though. They explained it. I.e. "how does the Sun rise every day?", "hum, because some dude puts it on a flying chariot and crosses the sky with it". I certainly don't see this in the modern superhero.

Some are certainly 'just so' stories ... but most aren't (though people keep trying to find meaning to them).

Is Jason's search for the Golden Fleece really an mythological explanation for placer gold mining around the Black Sea? ... maybe.

In many cases, the mythological meaning lies within the human experience (Oedipal myth, anyone?) - which superhero movies of the 21st century can do as well as ancient myths (assuming they ever get around to depicting mother-fucking ... well, maybe something like Deadpool could go in that direction.  ).

The other big function of the ancient myth - institute and legitimize the social order - is probably a more apt analogy. Superheroes are perceived as models of conduct, and embody certain virtues (selflessness, courage, friendship) that western society aspires/pretends to represent. A lot of superhero stories revolve around achieveing that ideal moral state (i.e. Iron Man, Spidey) or how this example is lived up to (The Cap, Supes).

Heck, Tony Stark's story has been seen a zillion times in ancient myths or religion. The sinner that sees the light and becomes a saint.

Well, this for sure. The trappings of the particular powers don't really matter - what matters is the method of triumph of whatever virtues are being highlighted.

Samson in the Old Testament is very much like Superman: he's super-strong (and thus unbeatable), but has a fatal weakness - for Superman, it is Kryptonite; for Samson, his hair ... the interesting part of the myth is always going to be 'why the weakness gets exploited, and how that exploitation is overcome so that virtue triumphs'.

Certainly a lot can be learned about the societies making these stories by such details - but the specific claim in the article, that superhero films represent the dominance of "managerial intelligence over the hands-on worker" seems to me, to put it mildly, a stretch.  Sounds a lot more like the author has an axe to grind, than a real insight to deliver.

[The Minsky Moment]

The average Greek peasant was unlikely to have any direct experience with, say, driving a chariot containing the Sun.

No but a typical Greek farmer-hoplite might have some passing familiarity with chariots and their basic principles of operation.

Jason and Odyesseus may confront strange beasts (really just amalgams of existing ones) but basically they are long distance mariners out in unfamiliar waters - an experience at least some of the listeners of those tales could have directly.

[celedhring]

Some are certainly 'just so' stories ... but most aren't (though people keep trying to find meaning to them).

Is Jason's search for the Golden Fleece really an mythological explanation for placer gold mining around the Black Sea? ... maybe.

Many - although I will concede that certainly not all - could also be explained as real events given a mythological coat, and then passed down. Jason's story is about him dethroning Pelias and becoming king. Thus his whole legend, and the Argonauts, seem to me a justification of this act that subverted the existing order. Thus with Argonauts one can claim that he had divine support, and the many heroic acts he performed made him deserving of the throne. The legend might mask actual events of whoever the mythological Jason is based around, like a raiding expedition to Asia Minor that brought back many riches that gets transformed into the story of the Golden Fleece.

Then again, superhero films are doing that to a degree. Why did the Allies win World War II? Because Captain America took down the Red Skull. (And since Captain America embodies the virtues that America wants to see in itself, it gives us a mythological justification of why that happened)

Certainly a lot can be learned about the societies making these stories by such details - but the specific claim in the article, that superhero films represent the dominance of "managerial intelligence over the hands-on worker" seems to me, to put it mildly, a stretch.  Sounds a lot more like the author has an axe to grind, than a real insight to deliver.

Oh, on that I can agree. But I'd really be interested in a proper examination of why superhero films are so ingrained in the current zeitgeist.

[garbon]

No but a typical Greek farmer-hoplite might have some passing familiarity with chariots and their basic principles of operation.

Okay but then say with Spiderman, the typical person has a familiarity with spiders and the stickiness of webs. Also would understand the general principles of acrobatics and swinging on a rope. And spidey sense just as a heightened sense of spacial awareness.

The lack of physical reality is shared commonly in both sets (chariots flying through the sky, a man swinging from building to building on ropes made of web like material) even if there are a lot of day-to-day familiar elements included.