Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    The first half of the post was, you'd have thought he'd have caught it with 'heavy-going' coming from a man who didn't even find Inception particularly heavy-going.

    I should still add, I love the first film.
    Forgive my confusion, I'd never before seen someone jump from disagreeing sarcasm in one sentence to serious agreement about another issue in the next without skipping a beat.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Manged to watch 'the town', and I must say I loved it, top movie :yy:
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    Howard Shore better be back for this one. :hmmm:

    Or I might kill a penguin.


    The evil penguins would get their revenge :mwuaha:

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    Forgive my confusion, I'd never before seen someone jump from disagreeing sarcasm in one sentence to serious agreement about another issue in the next without skipping a beat.
    There's a first time for everything. With regards to your rant about Pokemon, you've approached the entire franchise and film with a narrow lens. Through this lens, you've emerged with the view that the film promotes some form of slavery and using beings against their will for violent purposes. That may be what is apparent when you have stripped away most of the meat, but that's not what it is. Your one interpretation has no bearing on the moral message. The moral message in all Pokemon episodes and films have been about friendship. Pikachu and the other Pokemon are Ash's friends, not slaves. This is apparent from the first episode. Pikachu is not captured, is not forced into submission - it does not even like Ash. It takes a while for the bond to build. When it does, it's one promoting care and friendship. Pokemon aren't force to fight either. Charizard refuses to fight for most of the early series, he completely ignores Ash. Only through time does he respect his trainer. Each fight in Pokemon is not a violent and forced submission, it's the bond between trainer and Pokemon strengthening. The theme has always been clear, and only a narrow view presents the underlying (yes, it's there) premise of slavery. Pokemon is not too different from pets in real life, it teaches you that they should be respected and cared for.

    It does not have the emotional impact, almost soul destroying, of something like Bambi which can change your view on life and teach you about loss. But it's not aiming for that. Bambi does that well, and that's why it is so treasured. Pokemon - it's clearly against anything approaching permanent loss. Pokemon rarely die, they faint from exhaustion. Ash doesn't die, he is revived again from his sacrifice, from his love and the strength of his friendship. That's what Polemon is conveying, and quite successfully.

    And that's why, reading over your post, I largely disagree with you disregarding some of the underlying values such a franchise presents. Other films have done it better, other films have conveyed another message - more serious and brutal and with an unmatched level of emotional impact. But Pokemon certainly isn't a total waste.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone have a MacBook Pro?

    Mine arrived today and I think I'm going to pull my hair out!

    What are the Mac suitable equivalents for ConvertXToDVD and Nero?

    I have NO idea how to work this thing, seriously considering sending it back.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.deadline.com/2011/04/alys...rican-reunion/

    Alyson Hannigan has been confirmed for American Reunion! (American Pie 4) I wasn't even aware they were making another one. Seems like most of the original cast have signed contracts and they'll be filming over the summer. What are people's thoughts? I really enjoyed 1 and 2, 3 had its moments, but overall didn't quite deliver as well as the first two instalments, in my opinion. Interested to see how the 4th one will turn out.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aja89)
    Does anyone have a MacBook Pro?

    Mine arrived today and I think I'm going to pull my hair out!

    What are the Mac suitable equivalents for ConvertXToDVD and Nero?

    I have NO idea how to work this thing, seriously considering sending it back.
    Roxio Toast Titanium.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    There's a first time for everything. With regards to your rant about Pokemon, you've approached the entire franchise and film with a narrow lens. Through this lens, you've emerged with the view that the film promotes some form of slavery and using beings against their will for violent purposes. That may be what is apparent when you have stripped away most of the meat, but that's not what it is. Your one interpretation has no bearing on the moral message. The moral message in all Pokemon episodes and films have been about friendship. Pikachu and the other Pokemon are Ash's friends, not slaves. This is apparent from the first episode. Pikachu is not captured, is not forced into submission - it does not even like Ash. It takes a while for the bond to build. When it does, it's one promoting care and friendship. Pokemon aren't force to fight either. Charizard refuses to fight for most of the early series, he completely ignores Ash. Only through time does he respect his trainer. Each fight in Pokemon is not a violent and forced submission, it's the bond between trainer and Pokemon strengthening. The theme has always been clear, and only a narrow view presents the underlying (yes, it's there) premise of slavery. Pokemon is not too different from pets in real life, it teaches you that they should be respected and cared for.

    It does not have the emotional impact, almost soul destroying, of something like Bambi which can change your view on life and teach you about loss. But it's not aiming for that. Bambi does that well, and that's why it is so treasured. Pokemon - it's clearly against anything approaching permanent loss. Pokemon rarely die, they faint from exhaustion. Ash doesn't die, he is revived again from his sacrifice, from his love and the strength of his friendship. That's what Polemon is conveying, and quite successfully.

    And that's why, reading over your post, I largely disagree with you disregarding some of the underlying values such a franchise presents. Other films have done it better, other films have conveyed another message - more serious and brutal and with an unmatched level of emotional impact. But Pokemon certainly isn't a total waste.
    You do a good job of selling the franchise's positive aspects. But like anybody would have to, the only way you can do this is by ignoring it's roots. On the original Pokemon games there isn't a single mention of friendship (beyond a couple of insignificant characters), and the aim is two-fold; to collect them all and to train them until you are the best. There's no sense of caring for them, everything is done for one of these two purposes. In future instalments I believe they try to introduce mood mechanics and so forth, but the only way a player would take notice of them is to achieve one of their primary goals. So, if anything, the message is that you should treat things based on what you want to get from them.

    Now, obviously the TV and films are different to the video games, but I do not believe they can be viewed as distinct identities. Firstly, the overarching tagline is "Gotta catch 'em all". With a collection well into the triple digits by now, you can't suggest that this is a similar relationship to pets, when it's more akin to insect-collecting. As for the TV shows, from what I can remember they do express a lot of importance between the friendship of Ash and Pikachu. But this doesn't get away from the fact that there is a clear distinction between the majority of humans and pokemons in the world of owner and owned, and the central mechanic is still one of fighting. If anything, I would equate it to a PG version of ****-fighting as opposed to owning a pet.

    Now, the first film is pretty clear in it's anti-violence message, I don't think that can really be disputed. And yet the franchise started out with the video games, for which the whole premise was one of violence. This is so contradictory that it makes the whole thing so hollow and empty. It would be like The Situation talking about abstinence.

    For the record, I have fond memories of Pokemon. I enjoyed playing them when I was younger. But I don't buy them on a moral front; it's like trying to say that Yu-Gi-Oh teaches you about Egyptian history.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    You do a good job of selling the franchise's positive aspects. But like anybody would have to, the only way you can do this is by ignoring it's roots. On the original Pokemon games there isn't a single mention of friendship (beyond a couple of insignificant characters), and the aim is two-fold; to collect them all and to train them until you are the best. There's no sense of caring for them, everything is done for one of these two purposes. In future instalments I believe they try to introduce mood mechanics and so forth, but the only way a player would take notice of them is to achieve one of their primary goals. So, if anything, the message is that you should treat things based on what you want to get from them.

    Now, obviously the TV and films are different to the video games, but I do not believe they can be viewed as distinct identities. Firstly, the overarching tagline is "Gotta catch 'em all". With a collection well into the triple digits by now, you can't suggest that this is a similar relationship to pets, when it's more akin to insect-collecting. As for the TV shows, from what I can remember they do express a lot of importance between the friendship of Ash and Pikachu. But this doesn't get away from the fact that there is a clear distinction between the majority of humans and pokemons in the world of owner and owned, and the central mechanic is still one of fighting. If anything, I would equate it to a PG version of ****-fighting as opposed to owning a pet.

    Now, the first film is pretty clear in it's anti-violence message, I don't think that can really be disputed. And yet the franchise started out with the video games, for which the whole premise was one of violence. This is so contradictory that it makes the whole thing so hollow and empty. It would be like The Situation talking about abstinence.

    For the record, I have fond memories of Pokemon. I enjoyed playing them when I was younger. But I don't buy them on a moral front; it's like trying to say that Yu-Gi-Oh teaches you about Egyptian history.
    It so does, minus all the card game, monsters and magic gibberish :rolleyes:

    like Digimon is a just an allegory for modern technology encapsulating and being a part of kids modern entertainment, leisure etc and the fact how they can get so engrossed in technology it replaces everything else... ok I'm probably reading way into it, but Digimon was awesome
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elisabethbridge)
    http://www.deadline.com/2011/04/alys...rican-reunion/

    Alyson Hannigan has been confirmed for American Reunion! (American Pie 4) I wasn't even aware they were making another one. Seems like most of the original cast have signed contracts and they'll be filming over the summer. What are people's thoughts? I really enjoyed 1 and 2, 3 had its moments, but overall didn't quite deliver as well as the first two instalments, in my opinion. Interested to see how the 4th one will turn out.
    omg that is awesome can't wait for that ! wasn't a huge fan of American wedding but it's such a classic series
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Watvhed Source Code last night with the GF. Totes recomend it like.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Just to keep everyone up to date on the goings on of the forum, Entz is having a review of the stuck threads in all of the forums. For film, we're going to be unsticking two; the "what film is this" thread and the "last film you watched thread".

    For the "what film is this" thread, it was important at the time to create a megathread for all of the threads floating around but they've seemed to die away recently and with only 150 posts in 6 months it was decided that it wasn't really a needed enough resource to keep it a sticky. However the thread will still be around and threads on that topic will continue to be merged into it, so please any threads you see on that topic still report them.

    As to the "last film you watched" thread, I've never really seen the point of it as a sticky as it hardly showcases the best the forum has to offer by being very low content (I can't imagine very many people sit through and read all of the posts). It also is more than enough active to keep a place easily on the front page, so doesn't really need to be preserved as a sticky.

    This should take the amount of stuck threads down from 5 to a much more tidy 3.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    You do a good job of selling the franchise's positive aspects. But like anybody would have to, the only way you can do this is by ignoring it's roots. On the original Pokemon games there isn't a single mention of friendship (beyond a couple of insignificant characters), and the aim is two-fold; to collect them all and to train them until you are the best. There's no sense of caring for them, everything is done for one of these two purposes. In future instalments I believe they try to introduce mood mechanics and so forth, but the only way a player would take notice of them is to achieve one of their primary goals. So, if anything, the message is that you should treat things based on what you want to get from them.

    Now, obviously the TV and films are different to the video games, but I do not believe they can be viewed as distinct identities. Firstly, the overarching tagline is "Gotta catch 'em all". With a collection well into the triple digits by now, you can't suggest that this is a similar relationship to pets, when it's more akin to insect-collecting. As for the TV shows, from what I can remember they do express a lot of importance between the friendship of Ash and Pikachu. But this doesn't get away from the fact that there is a clear distinction between the majority of humans and pokemons in the world of owner and owned, and the central mechanic is still one of fighting. If anything, I would equate it to a PG version of ****-fighting as opposed to owning a pet.

    Now, the first film is pretty clear in it's anti-violence message, I don't think that can really be disputed. And yet the franchise started out with the video games, for which the whole premise was one of violence. This is so contradictory that it makes the whole thing so hollow and empty. It would be like The Situation talking about abstinence.

    For the record, I have fond memories of Pokemon. I enjoyed playing them when I was younger. But I don't buy them on a moral front; it's like trying to say that Yu-Gi-Oh teaches you about Egyptian history.
    I think it is entirely fair to ignore the roots. The discussion at hand is focused on the films and TV series. Games offer a limited narrative, and like many franchises which start off as video games, they then develop - the development is outwards. In the modern context, many games incorporate moral messages and underlying themes. But I refuse to believe a game like Pokemon does (especially one of violence which is a game mechanic than a point of narrative), or it would be fair to then use that in this argument. You're unlikely to find any morals or signs of friendship in a Black and White gameboy game where the focus is interactive entertainment and fighting - in the same sense as something like Street Fighter. Pokemon, in many aspects, is derivative of fighting games.

    The overarching tagline that you've brought up, "Gotta catch 'em all", is just a poor choice of words that have been ported over from the video games. In the video game sense, it makes complete sense to have that tagline. The tagline is the purpose and overall quest in a nutshell. You don't simply collect all the badges, and defeat the Elite Four. There has to be that element of re-playability (which Pokemon is famous for). That comes in the form of the tagline, to encourage you to capture every Pokemon once you've defeated the Elite Four. It's the last quest, the quest for total completion.

    In the TV series and films, I hardly ever see that tagline in play. My memory of Pokemon is, of course, fuzzy from not watching it for such a long time. But if I recall correctly, 'catching them all' is not what the purpose highlighted in the show is. Becoming a Pokemon Master is, but not catching and enslaving every single Pokemon that can be found. Ash's capture count does not approach the 'triple digits'. He does not throw a Pokeball left, right and centre in an attempt to capture every Pokemon. In fact, many of the Pokemon under Ash are ones he has rescued from being mistreated by other Trainers. The number of Pokemon he has, in series 1 or the first film, is the size of a medium sized family. His Pokedex, as a substitute to capturing, actively documents every encounter. On that basis, I would say it is closer to pets.

    On regards of the central point being violence in fighting, the focus in the films and TV series is on the nurturing of the Pokemon he is close to, the ones he has captured. They grow stronger the more they fight. They evolve. I would argue that's the rules that have been written for the world. Fighting is growing. And it's not violent fighting either. Each Pokemon is born with a set of attacks and type, each Pokemon utilises that against other Pokemon. It is nothing more than play fighting. Even in the video games, Pokemon are treated when they are tired/fainted at the Pokemon center. There is a whole establishment dedicated to treating them.

    Where there is a negative theme, it is amongst the 'villains' who seek to indiscriminately capture Pokemon or enslave them to do their bidding. And it is clear, always clear, in the TV series and films that Ash and his gang are against this philosophy. Time and time again, whether they are faced with a villain or a legendary Pokemon, they will state the paragraph about how Pokemon are their friends, how Pikachu is his best friend. The bond between Pokemon and Trainer is stronger and more apparent than the bond between the humans themselves. I've never seen any real signs of friendship between Ash's friends - Misty and Brock. But Ash's friendship with Pikachu is done to the point of exhaustion. As is his struggles with Charizard.

    I'm certainly not advocating that Pokemon has this unparalleled message. But I'm certainly against the view that that the themes it presents are 'usability - using a Pokemon for your own purpose'. I'm certain that the clear theme and moral message it presents is one of friendship between a trainer and between a Pokemon. And this is stronger than anything you see between the human companions themselves. And I certainly don't think it fair to bring the video games into this, I would view them as pretty distinct even though there are numerous similarities.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    gaiz, I think Cambo should give his enlightened and informative opinion on the issue and we should then agree with him
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    I really hope this Film Club thing works. It would make a nice change for the Film forum, and it would increase the sense of community and the quality of discussion. I remember a few times where this thread has approached something similar when 3 or more members have watched the same film on the same channel, but it's never been expanded upon.

    And there's Fight Club and No Country for Old Men on TV next week. So if this works, those are definite contenders for a future Film Club.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    I think it is entirely fair to ignore the roots. The discussion at hand is focused on the films and TV series. Games offer a limited narrative, and like many franchises which start off as video games, they then develop - the development is outwards. In the modern context, many games incorporate moral messages and underlying themes. But I refuse to believe a game like Pokemon does (especially one of violence which is a game mechanic than a point of narrative), or it would be fair to then use that in this argument. You're unlikely to find any morals or signs of friendship in a Black and White gameboy game where the focus is interactive entertainment and fighting - in the same sense as something like Street Fighter. Pokemon, in many aspects, is derivative of fighting games.

    The overarching tagline that you've brought up, "Gotta catch 'em all", is just a poor choice of words that have been ported over from the video games. In the video game sense, it makes complete sense to have that tagline. The tagline is the purpose and overall quest in a nutshell. You don't simply collect all the badges, and defeat the Elite Four. There has to be that element of re-playability (which Pokemon is famous for). That comes in the form of the tagline, to encourage you to capture every Pokemon once you've defeated the Elite Four. It's the last quest, the quest for total completion.

    In the TV series and films, I hardly ever see that tagline in play. My memory of Pokemon is, of course, fuzzy from not watching it for such a long time. But if I recall correctly, 'catching them all' is not what the purpose highlighted in the show is. Becoming a Pokemon Master is, but not catching and enslaving every single Pokemon that can be found. Ash's capture count does not approach the 'triple digits'. He does not throw a Pokeball left, right and centre in an attempt to capture every Pokemon. In fact, many of the Pokemon under Ash are ones he has rescued from being mistreated by other Trainers. The number of Pokemon he has, in series 1 or the first film, is the size of a medium sized family. His Pokedex, as a substitute to capturing, actively documents every encounter. On that basis, I would say it is closer to pets.

    On regards of the central point being violence in fighting, the focus in the films and TV series is on the nurturing of the Pokemon he is close to, the ones he has captured. They grow stronger the more they fight. They evolve. I would argue that's the rules that have been written for the world. Fighting is growing. And it's not violent fighting either. Each Pokemon is born with a set of attacks and type, each Pokemon utilises that against other Pokemon. It is nothing more than play fighting. Even in the video games, Pokemon are treated when they are tired/fainted at the Pokemon center. There is a whole establishment dedicated to treating them.

    Where there is a negative theme, it is amongst the 'villains' who seek to indiscriminately capture Pokemon or enslave them to do their bidding. And it is clear, always clear, in the TV series and films that Ash and his gang are against this philosophy. Time and time again, whether they are faced with a villain or a legendary Pokemon, they will state the paragraph about how Pokemon are their friends, how Pikachu is his best friend. The bond between Pokemon and Trainer is stronger and more apparent than the bond between the humans themselves. I've never seen any real signs of friendship between Ash's friends - Misty and Brock. But Ash's friendship with Pikachu is done to the point of exhaustion. As is his struggles with Charizard.

    I'm certainly not advocating that Pokemon has this unparalleled message. But I'm certainly against the view that that the themes it presents are 'usability - using a Pokemon for your own purpose'. I'm certain that the clear theme and moral message it presents is one of friendship between a trainer and between a Pokemon. And this is stronger than anything you see between the human companions themselves. And I certainly don't think it fair to bring the video games into this, I would view them as pretty distinct even though there are numerous similarities.
    I'm not going to offer a rebuttal for this, as I have neither the knowledge nor the interest in Pokemon anymore to try and expand more than what I've already said (and to be completely honest I was half-drunk and pissed off at someone when I made my original post ). Looking back on it now I can't help but think of it as weird though in retrospect. :p:

    On a slightly less confrontational note, I'm currently about halfway through the Drawing of the Three. Compared to this richness the first book seems so shallow and colourless, I can't believe how good it is.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    I'm not going to offer a rebuttal for this, as I have neither the knowledge nor the interest in Pokemon anymore to try and expand more than what I've already said (and to be completely honest I was half-drunk and pissed off at someone when I made my original post ). Looking back on it now I can't help but think of it as weird though in retrospect. :p:

    On a slightly less confrontational note, I'm currently about halfway through the Drawing of the Three. Compared to this richness the first book seems so shallow and colourless, I can't believe how good it is.
    Weird that we had a lengthy debate on morals in a kids' anime show from a decade ago or weird that your version of drunk dialling is coming on the Film forum and producing a sound and coherent rant about a film? :teehee: Still, it's better than full-on drunk Phalanges where you couldn't spell a single word properly. :teehee:

    That trend of being more involved, and finding each successive book better than the previous is going to continue. But then you're going to hit this wall, in a book or two or three, and you're going to come on here and rant about how awful and waste of time a certain book was. How you've last faith in the series. But until then, glad to hear you're enjoying the books! Should have ordered as many as you could before your library started charging for them. :ninja:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by lukejoshjedi)
    like Digimon is a just an allegory for modern technology encapsulating and being a part of kids modern entertainment, leisure etc and the fact how they can get so engrossed in technology it replaces everything else... ok I'm probably reading way into it, but Digimon was awesome
    Nostalgia overload. The days of running around with a Gum watch that flipped open, pretending there were Pokemon and Digimon in there. It was like Pokemon, but they kept evolving. At will too. And at times, they would combine together and become one. :zomg:


    (Original post by Penguinsaysquack)


    The evil penguins would get their revenge :mwuaha:
    If the club fails, you'll be the first to go. The rest can do no more than a little dance like the ones in Happy Feet. Penguins, honestly.
    Offline

    2
    Char char!
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    If the club fails, you'll be the first to go. The rest can do no more than a little dance like the ones in Happy Feet. Penguins, honestly.
    :unimpressed:

    Have you forgotten about the penguin in Wallace and Gromit? That guy was an evil mastermind
    And he would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for that mangy mutt!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.