Koba starts out sympathetically, but grows progressively more crazed as the film goes on. But he isn't as multidimensio
-
savagebiscuits — 10 years ago(July 17, 2015 01:54 PM)
Allegorical Science fiction. That means the science is key to the story.
Not really. It's the allegory that's the important part in these films, the science is just the dressing. Of course there's some science in there, but it's more a critique of human hubris than an exposition about what literally will come about.
When the science is flawed or the story is not consistent with it's own logic and both is the case here, then you have real issues here.
The only issue is your literalist need to have perfect order that sucks out anything of meaning in the film. Not seeing the wood for the trees springs to mind.
Escape the POTA glosses over that because those plot hole are real plot holes. Stop denying that.
I'm not denying that there are plot holes, I just don't think they're as important as you're attempting to make them out to be. It's a pity that you just let details get the better of you.
Just accept that this movie, while very entertaining is pretty flawed
Again, you're attempting an argument that I never put forth. Of course they're flawed to some degree, but so are most, if not all, science fiction to some extent or other. What is important about most of them, particularly the allegorical sort, are the meanings, story, character, satire, message and other narrative things. Overly focusing on the holes is effectively just focusing on nothing much at all in a lot of the cases.
Now, personally, I would have been quite happy with just the original film, because it told the story in such a great and impactful way. It didn't need the sequels to be great. Still, the sequels exist, and despite what I just said, I do find something enjoyable and meaningful about them, flaws and all. But, then again, I'm not one to obsess over minor details to damn them. If they were narratively weak films that said little, then plot holes might well stand out more, but there is something powerful about the stories that ends up brushing aside such problems. Anyway, a lot of these plot holes are explainable, while the ones that aren't don't really detract from the story even if worth the mention. -
JamesA1102 — 10 years ago(July 20, 2015 06:54 AM)
Not really. It's the allegory that's the important part in these films, the science is just the dressing. Of course there's some science in there, but it's more a critique of human hubris than an exposition about what literally will come about.
The only issue is your literalist need to have perfect order that sucks out anything of meaning in the film. Not seeing the wood for the trees springs to mind.
I'm not denying that there are plot holes, I just don't think they're as important as you're attempting to make them out to be. It's a pity that you just let details get the better of you.
Again, well said! On a personal note, I'm getting very tired of these self-righteous nitpickers who's goal seems to be to beat the fun out of everything for everyone else.