I very much agree with almost everything you've said in this video - EXCEPT your use of Luke's mistake in TLJ being objectively bad! I don't believe it's inconsistent, but that's because I've got a different take on the objective facts of the film (and how it was presented). Personally I believe the film is intending to make us believe that it wasn't ever something Luke would have ever done, but simply a moment of weakness that spawned the worst possible consequences. It wasn't that he actually wanted to kill Ben - but that he was led to him out of fear, and in a moment of panic he reflexively turned on his lightsaber. He didn't try to use it, he simply turned it on - but it was this that scared Ben and led to the events of the films. Anyway, besides that (and also your Endgame thoughts you HEATHEN xD) this is an absolutely fantastic video. I think you've done a spectacular job of presenting the flaws with this increasing slide we've seen towards discrediting objectivity (both in society as a whole, and regarding media criticism & creation). I also adore the way you've addressed storytelling in Part 5 - the point of us telling stories is that we have something we're trying to say, there is something a story is trying to do. We can, as you've well pointed out, see if the story manages to reach its goal or miss the mark. So glad I've found your channel; we need more dramaturgically-minded educational content like this!
Thanks so much for your kind words and for politely disagreeing with me around TLJ and Endgame. Super nice to see people being able to engage with discussion instead of just throwing shit at each other lol . Would love to have more discourse with you in the future :)
A difficulty with giving objective scores to movies is that they combine different skill sets. So if the writing is poor but the acting, the cinematography and the sound track are amazing, how do you rate the movie? A writer might give the movie an average or poor score while a photographer, an actor or a musician might give it a good score. There are objective criteria but how do you weigh each of them objectively? The same line delivered by actor A or actor B might completely change the impact of a scene. The background music can help build up tension or distract from a key moment. Another difficulty is historical and geographical context. Being among the first to approach a difficult or controversial topic that might cost you your career or even your life has more impact than being the 10th movie this year about the same topic, even if all other quality factors are equal. For example, a war movie that is basically a propaganda piece for the country compared to a movie that depicts a more truthful story. If it's the same quality for both, would you say that they are objectively equal? Great topic, thanks for a very interesting video!
Yeah there are absolutely a thousand things that contribute to a film/TV show's quality, but I would argue that good writing is the base upon which everything else is built. The most powerful and successful films that have an enduring legacy all have great writing in common. One day I would like to develop a set of metric numbers to determine quality, but yes it is super hard! I'd argue that a great film/TV show MUST have great writing and can still be good even if the cinematography isn't that great, however a film that has great cinematography but bad writing (one of the Transformers films for example) can't really be very good in the long run... Glad you enjoyed the video :D
Which video would you rather make next: "Creating the perfect Lois Lane", "Jimmy Olsen: Superman's most underrated supporting character", "Writing the ultimate Lex Luthor redemption story", "Creating the perfect Toyman", "Creating the perfect Batman", "Dick Grayson: Batman's most important supporting character", "Creating the perfect Scarecrow/Scarecrow: Batman's most underutilized villain", "Writing the perfect Batman character journey/life story", "Creating the perfect Doctor Doom", "The Incredible Hulk: Marvel's most misunderstood monster", "Cyclops: Marvel's most overhated hero", "Deadpool: Marvel's most misunderstood antihero", or would you rather make a video about how you would fix Wolverine's story and character?
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
I very much agree with almost everything you've said in this video - EXCEPT your use of Luke's mistake in TLJ being objectively bad! I don't believe it's inconsistent, but that's because I've got a different take on the objective facts of the film (and how it was presented). Personally I believe the film is intending to make us believe that it wasn't ever something Luke would have ever done, but simply a moment of weakness that spawned the worst possible consequences. It wasn't that he actually wanted to kill Ben - but that he was led to him out of fear, and in a moment of panic he reflexively turned on his lightsaber. He didn't try to use it, he simply turned it on - but it was this that scared Ben and led to the events of the films.
Anyway, besides that (and also your Endgame thoughts you HEATHEN xD) this is an absolutely fantastic video. I think you've done a spectacular job of presenting the flaws with this increasing slide we've seen towards discrediting objectivity (both in society as a whole, and regarding media criticism & creation). I also adore the way you've addressed storytelling in Part 5 - the point of us telling stories is that we have something we're trying to say, there is something a story is trying to do. We can, as you've well pointed out, see if the story manages to reach its goal or miss the mark. So glad I've found your channel; we need more dramaturgically-minded educational content like this!
Thanks so much for your kind words and for politely disagreeing with me around TLJ and Endgame. Super nice to see people being able to engage with discussion instead of just throwing shit at each other lol . Would love to have more discourse with you in the future :)
A difficulty with giving objective scores to movies is that they combine different skill sets. So if the writing is poor but the acting, the cinematography and the sound track are amazing, how do you rate the movie? A writer might give the movie an average or poor score while a photographer, an actor or a musician might give it a good score. There are objective criteria but how do you weigh each of them objectively? The same line delivered by actor A or actor B might completely change the impact of a scene. The background music can help build up tension or distract from a key moment.
Another difficulty is historical and geographical context. Being among the first to approach a difficult or controversial topic that might cost you your career or even your life has more impact than being the 10th movie this year about the same topic, even if all other quality factors are equal. For example, a war movie that is basically a propaganda piece for the country compared to a movie that depicts a more truthful story. If it's the same quality for both, would you say that they are objectively equal?
Great topic, thanks for a very interesting video!
Yeah there are absolutely a thousand things that contribute to a film/TV show's quality, but I would argue that good writing is the base upon which everything else is built. The most powerful and successful films that have an enduring legacy all have great writing in common. One day I would like to develop a set of metric numbers to determine quality, but yes it is super hard!
I'd argue that a great film/TV show MUST have great writing and can still be good even if the cinematography isn't that great, however a film that has great cinematography but bad writing (one of the Transformers films for example) can't really be very good in the long run...
Glad you enjoyed the video :D
Which video would you rather make next: "Creating the perfect Lois Lane", "Jimmy Olsen: Superman's most underrated supporting character", "Writing the ultimate Lex Luthor redemption story", "Creating the perfect Toyman", "Creating the perfect Batman", "Dick Grayson: Batman's most important supporting character", "Creating the perfect Scarecrow/Scarecrow: Batman's most underutilized villain", "Writing the perfect Batman character journey/life story", "Creating the perfect Doctor Doom", "The Incredible Hulk: Marvel's most misunderstood monster", "Cyclops: Marvel's most overhated hero", "Deadpool: Marvel's most misunderstood antihero", or would you rather make a video about how you would fix Wolverine's story and character?