Since the bandwagon for this has appeared...

[GreatSaiyaman123]

It sounds like the creator of the video managed to GASLIGHT you in just under 2 hours into hating one of your favorite superhero flicks.

I'm too lazy to watch all 90+ minutes of the video for a movie I haven't watched in years, so can you just jot down the bullet points on what points the creator of the video was making?

CC has such a hard on for long videos he might have symphatized with had he made a video essay instead

I wouldn't say that in itself constitutes a plot hole when he clearly had confidence and credentials for it to seem safe in theory with the resulting accident being an oversight, though there are many aspects involving the reactor that are plot holes such as how he was able to maintain it whilst running around the city getting resources without a single person seeing him and the fact nobody batted an eyelid on Oscorp giving away what supplies they have on one of the rarest materials on the planet.
Speaking of Spider-Man 2's plot holes, I watched this video recently and the arguments made against the film's writing are very solid, with the reactor plot hole being the tip of the iceburg. I still love the film, but wow, its script is arguably more broken than Spider-Man 3's 2.

There’s a handful of people that keep picking this movie apart because of Otto’s plan, but it’s not like Otto is the worst villain ever. Just average. I think people paying more attention to the science as opposed to the character work are overlooking the point of the movie.

That said, I might watch some bits since I can see it’s not all about Otto. Wouldn’t mind seeing the summary you’ll be giving to Kenshi though 2

 

[Captain Cadaver]

It sounds like the creator of the video managed to GASLIGHT you in just under 2 hours into hating one of your favorite superhero flicks.

I'm too lazy to watch all 90+ minutes of the video for a movie I haven't watched in years, so can you just jot down the bullet points on what points the creator of the video was making?

Prepare for a 3,000+ response .

Seriously though, he managed to point out things that had gone heavily overlooked, mainly due to how (unlike with most poorly written scripts) Spider-Man 2's direction is so competent as to make them difficult to notice, though definitely damaging when they're noticed. These include:

- Mary Jane's character being highly inconsistent. She says she knew Peter was Spider-Man from the kiss at the end of the first film, yet is still chastising him about not being there for her when she should have an idea of the life he lives (even being aware of where his apartment is at the end of the film and therefore knowing how difficult it is for him to balance his regular and superhero lives)? On top of that, her leaving J.J.J.'s son at the altar being framed as a happy ending when this guy has literally done nothing wrong the entire film really shows a misguided directional manipulation of wanting the audience to root for what's a terrible character.
- Doc Ock's inconsistencies. Leaving aside the questionable aspects with the reactor or his acquisition of materials, a lot of the stakes in the plot are ruined by his plot armour and plot armouring of Spider-Man. Doc Ock's very much just a regular human with mechanical arms, yet he's able to take full power hits from Spidey including being knocked into walls and still be fine? The reveal of the sharp point in at least two of his tentacles ruins the stakes of any fight scene with how (despite wanting to kill Spider-Man), he never utilises them in close range situations and the only time it's used outside of the reveal is when he's slowly preparing to use it against Spidey in the climax. Also, the fact he wasn't keyed on to Peter's true identity when he was able to react in a split second to a car being hurled at the window is questionable at best.

There's a lot more, but these two are probably the most damaging factors when considering how much of the plot is devoted to both Mary Jane's character and the conflict with Otto. Overall, the only aspect of the film's main storylines that still holds up as flawless is surprisingly Aunt May's (mainly due to how divorced it is from the Mary Jane and Doc Ock plots).

 

[Papasmurf]

Most of those points were already brought up in a video on CinemaSins that I watched before tbh:

[youtube]bT3tmAhsHRg[/youtube]

I don't think they're TERRIBLY damaging to the film, since Hollywood action movies usually have just as many if not more plot holes and tend to prioritize impact over substance. For instance, I could nitpick the first two (and only well received) Terminator flicks all day on things like the T-800 from the first movie not just blowing Sarah's brains out after Reese's car crashed onto the wall and couldn't make a getaway from the police just because he lost an eye, or Sarah and John's plot armoring in the second movie in general, but that doesn't stop at least the second one from being an innovation in special effects with passable writing and memorable characters.

The only things I really agree with would be Ock being so stupid as to throw a fucking car at someone he could only presume to be a regular human despite needing to keep him alive to lure Spidey out of hiding, as well as his cybernetic parts somehow boosting his durability to asinine levels (which is something I had gripes with as early as 2004 when I first watched the film at 12 years old).

 

[Ultimate Cell]

Do you have a laptop?

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Most of those points were already brought up in a video on CinemaSins that I watched before tbh:

[youtube]bT3tmAhsHRg[/youtube]

I don't think they're TERRIBLY damaging to the film, since Hollywood action movies usually have just as many if not more plot holes and tend to prioritize impact over substance. For instance, I could nitpick the first two (and only well received) Terminator flicks all day on things like the T-800 from the first movie not just blowing Sarah's brains out after Reese's car crashed onto the wall and couldn't make a getaway from the police just because he lost an eye, or Sarah and John's plot armoring in the second movie in general, but that doesn't stop at least the second one from being an innovation in special effects with passable writing and memorable characters.

The only things I really agree with would be Ock being so stupid as to throw a fucking car at someone he could only presume to be a regular human despite needing to keep him alive to lure Spidey out of hiding, as well as his cybernetic parts somehow boosting his durability to asinine levels (which is something I had gripes with as early as 2004 when I first watched the film at 12 years old).

You know the best part about it? CinemaSins does it as a parody of actual critics

I think the car bit is a huge misunderstanding. It was probably a car crash, why would he not only throw the car but also hide just after that? Even if he did throw the car, he probably expected Spider-Man to come avenge his friend.

It sounds like the creator of the video managed to GASLIGHT you in just under 2 hours into hating one of your favorite superhero flicks.

I'm too lazy to watch all 90+ minutes of the video for a movie I haven't watched in years, so can you just jot down the bullet points on what points the creator of the video was making?

Prepare for a 3,000+ response .

Seriously though, he managed to point out things that had gone heavily overlooked, mainly due to how (unlike with most poorly written scripts) Spider-Man 2's direction is so competent as to make them difficult to notice, though definitely damaging when they're noticed. These include:

- Mary Jane's character being highly inconsistent. She says she knew Peter was Spider-Man from the kiss at the end of the first film, yet is still chastising him about not being there for her when she should have an idea of the life he lives (even being aware of where his apartment is at the end of the film and therefore knowing how difficult it is for him to balance his regular and superhero lives)? On top of that, her leaving J.J.J.'s son at the altar being framed as a happy ending when this guy has literally done nothing wrong the entire film really shows a misguided directional manipulation of wanting the audience to root for what's a terrible character.
- Doc Ock's inconsistencies. Leaving aside the questionable aspects with the reactor or his acquisition of materials, a lot of the stakes in the plot are ruined by his plot armour and plot armouring of Spider-Man. Doc Ock's very much just a regular human with mechanical arms, yet he's able to take full power hits from Spidey including being knocked into walls and still be fine? The reveal of the sharp point in at least two of his tentacles ruins the stakes of any fight scene with how (despite wanting to kill Spider-Man), he never utilises them in close range situations and the only time it's used outside of the reveal is when he's slowly preparing to use it against Spidey in the climax. Also, the fact he wasn't keyed on to Peter's true identity when he was able to react in a split second to a car being hurled at the window is questionable at best.

There's a lot more, but these two are probably the most damaging factors when considering how much of the plot is devoted to both Mary Jane's character and the conflict with Otto. Overall, the only aspect of the film's main storylines that still holds up as flawless is surprisingly Aunt May's (mainly due to how divorced it is from the Mary Jane and Doc Ock plots).

Don’t forget the bit about where he asks about how Ock could get his hat and coat

I don’t see why people always talk Otto to criticize the movie. He’s not very different from most run of the mill villains and while this might sound like whataboutism, you can’t really say that makes it worse than e.g. Iron Man with a similarly bland villain.
Otto taking punches from Spider-Man never really bothered me because he takes similar punishment in the comics, so at least it’s comic accurate.

I think MJ is the only thing that really bothers me in the movie. Never liked the way she just dumped JJJ Jr.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Why do you think Avengers is a 5.5/10? It’s about as good as Iron Man, there’s a couple issue with Hawkeye and the Deus Ex Machina ending, but on the other hand it got the fucking Avengers.

Is Captain Marvel really the worst MCU movie with Thor: The Dark World there, or did you just never bother to watch it?

Also, why do you prefer to use 1 as the bottom rather than 0 when giving scores?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

I don't think they're TERRIBLY damaging to the film, since Hollywood action movies usually have just as many if not more plot holes and tend to prioritize impact over substance. For instance, I could nitpick the first two (and only well received) Terminator flicks all day on things like the T-800 from the first movie not just blowing Sarah's brains out after Reese's car crashed onto the wall and couldn't make a getaway from the police just because he lost an eye, or Sarah and John's plot armoring in the second movie in general, but that doesn't stop at least the second one from being an innovation in special effects with passable writing and memorable characters.

They are large problems with the film though due to how damaging the parts with Otto are to the stakes of the film. He had no reason to hold back against Spider-Man, so him not using his hidden blade on multiple occasions that would be an insta-kill (particularly on the train when they were in melee range of each other) is very much a plot hole. Mary Jane's character and her nonsensical decisions are heavily damaging through how intrinsic they are to Peter's motivations throughout the film's entirety as well as the plot points of the finale.

I think the car bit is a huge misunderstanding. It was probably a car crash, why would he not only throw the car but also hide just after that? Even if he did throw the car, he probably expected Spider-Man to come avenge his friend.

Otto still knew where Peter was though. If we're to assume this was an accident, that'd give him a lot of incentive to throw the car literally anywhere else or find better means of disabling it.

[quote[I don’t see why people always talk Otto to criticize the movie. He’s not very different from most run of the mill villains and while this might sound like whataboutism, you can’t really say that makes it worse than e.g. Iron Man with a similarly bland villain.[/quote]Obadiah is far more bland, but his plans at least make sense for what they are. Otto, meanwhile, has a lot of flaws to pretty much every part of his plan and his status as a supposed genius makes this even more pronounced.

Otto taking punches from Spider-Man never really bothered me because he takes similar punishment in the comics, so at least it’s comic accurate.

Comic feats can't be used to justify those of a different continuity. The film never makes it apparent the tentacles provided such a boost to his physical capabilities, thereby making it a flaw.

Why do you think Avengers is a 5.5/10? It’s about as good as Iron Man, there’s a couple issue with Hawkeye and the Deus Ex Machina ending, but on the other hand it got the fucking Avengers.

A far less consistent plot is the main reason, as well as there being less weight behind the climax in terms of character motivation than something like Iron Man. There's also some minor issues that add up enough to be noticeable, such as how dumb the "I'm always angry" line is when you bother to think about it.

Is Captain Marvel really the worst MCU movie with Thor: The Dark World there, or did you just never bother to watch it?

Yes. No other MCU film had that many plot holes when it came to the established continuity.

Also, why do you prefer to use 1 as the bottom rather than 0 when giving scores?

0 would suggest a work to be completely void of anything of worth, a literal nothing. Taking bias out of the way, there aren't many pieces of media I'd say come close to this when even some works with bottom tier writing can still have at least a cool idea or some good superficial aspects.

Do you have a laptop?

Yes. It's what I use for almost the entirety of my use here.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

0 would suggest a work to be completely void of anything of worth, a literal nothing. Taking bias out of the way, there aren't many pieces of media I'd say come close to this when even some works with bottom tier writing can still have at least a cool idea or some good superficial aspects.

Oh really? Then tell me the good things about Captain Marvel, The Last Jedi and (Extra hard!) DB Evolution 2

 

[Captain Cadaver]

Captain Marvel - The twist with the Kree and Skrull was a good...in premise.

The Last Jedi - Visual effects are good, Mark Hamill does the best acting he can with the shit he was given, Luke's arc was an idea that could have worked if it had another movie or trilogy between the OT and Disney trilogy to properly develop it and Ben Swolo is probably the best Sequel Trilogy meme.

DB Evolution - It at least doesn't pass itself off as trying to be canon to the source material, thereby being less insulting than most of Super 2 Also, the take on a realistic visual for capsules being used looked pretty cool.

 

[Ultimate Cell]

What if babadi had gaslighted vegeta to his side

 

[Papasmurf]

How do you think HnK's story would have changed if Raoh won his third battle with Kenshiro (like Alabasta Luffy beating Crocodile on his third try ), essentially leaving him to fight Falco and the residents of Shura Island? It's doubtless that Raoh would end up fighting Kaioh since Kaioh GASLIGHTED the residents of his kingdom to hold false hope for the legend of the savior and such, and I can't see Raoh raising his son much differently than Kenshiro did as his master, but Raoh having his whole band of followers as well as being still evil even after additional layers of his character were explored would probably considerably change the arc of the series.

Also assume that the reason Yuria and Kenshiro didn't have children was due to her fatal illness, so Raoh can't have her pop out any more kids.

 

[Captain Cadaver]

[mention]Ultimate Cell[/mention] He'd get a 3,000+ increase to his battle power and be defeated by his own leakage

Seriously though, Goku would stop him killing Shin and likely have no choice but to finish things quickly with SS3 to knock him out. Because of this, Boo isn't revived and Dabura is killed either by Gohan utilising his rage or Galu backing him up. BoG remains the same until it comes to gathering the Dragon Balls, in which they're used to revive Goku (though Shenron still tells them about SSG either due to the wishes not being used up or simply not wanting to piss off Beerus) and events go pretty much the same as in canon until the Moro Arc, where the absence of Boo means Goku and Vegeta either die on New Namek or are unable to stop Planet Moro.

[mention]Kenshi[/mention] If there's one positive thing Part 2 HnK did, it was showing the bleak repercussions of the wasteland lacking Raoh's authoritative grip with it still being in chaos and new factions rising up in the power vacuum. The Gento Army probably wouldn't even become much of a faction with Raoh still around and Jackoh certainly wouldn't be able to hold Lui hostage for as long as he did. Falco probably joins Raoh once Jackoh is killed and goes on their campaign to Shura. Raoh bothering to take over territory as well as the general charisma he'd exude from his attitude and feats would give him an easier time than Kenshiro had with many switching to his side. He'd likely escape being killed by Kaioh due to Akashachi's help and kill Hyo with or without Shachi's interference. He wouldn't get the same boost Kenshiro did from the Hokuto Soukei shrine due to Hyo's death and generally not thinking it possible, though being as skilled as Kenshiro would have him counter Anryu Tenha against Hyo and therefore have no problem tooling Kaioh with Musou Tensei. After that, he'd likely take Lui as a wife for those Hokuto Soukei genes when considering he obviously wasn't the type to remain celebate despite his love for Yuria (especially if factoring in the Rei Gaiden) and ultimately provide a more stable society for the post-apocalyptic world than what it got.

 

[Keedounan]

What's your overall stance on harem series? Nowadays it seems to be one of the most (if not THE) common type of animes, particularly the seasonal ones. What do you think are the pitfalls that make the vast majority of them fall flat and how would you avoid them?

 

[Papasmurf]

[mention]Captain Cadaver[/mention] But do you think Raoh would be the type to just let Lui's twin sister marry a peon nobody like Bat rather than taking her as his concubine as well? Especially since Kaioh showed interest in bedding her.

 

[ahill1]

What do you think about these lives?

[youtube]scDdiHIP4ag[/youtube]
[youtube]DX0t0SVjIW4[/youtube]

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Another continuity break I found in Captain Marvel: The Winter Soldier shows Fury still had both eyes when he was a high profile in SHIELD, but Captain Marvel says he was a young agent when he lost his eye… TWS also shows him bald and having a goatee when he had both eyes. Maybe CM isn’t canon? 2

 

[Captain Cadaver]

[mention]Keedounan[/mention] They're more often than not pretty worthless due to all adhering to a similar formula of all the girls unrealistically being interested in someone presented as an average guy, their story arcs being cheapened by the protagonist solving all their problems, the main pairing almost always being painfully obvious, limited characterisation, etc. Generally, the best way to have harem elements in a series is by establishing some of the initial tropes of the genre before completely subverting them. Neon Genesis Evangelion is one series that comes to mind which did this very well, as on paper Rei, Asuka and even Misato to some extent seem like they'd fall victim of being part of Shinji's harem, but the series destroys this notion in its second half by instead exploring their character in depth and any harem elements being reduced to existing purely in Shinji's mind; both taking a realistic approach and serving as a middle finger to those looking to this trope as wish-fulfilment.
If a series was to have harem elements within it without any sort of deconstruction, however, the thing to make it most salvageable is to at least make it apparent why so many women would have an interest in the protagonist, which is funnily enough far more common in western franchises than Japanese harem anime. I can understand why multiple women would be attracted to a suave gentleman like James Bond or a dangerous, powerful man like Tony Soprano. I have new clue why they'd have such a keen interest in someone such as, say, the protagonist of Rosario + Vampire.

[mention]Kenshi[/mention] That'd be assuming he's able to keep track of Lin and Bat or choose to adopt them (something unlikely when not even Kenshiro did and Yuria had no qualms with leaving them to their own devices). There's more chance on it if they were to still form the Hokuto Army as an opposition to the Ken-Oh Army, but I'd say Kenshiro's death would certainly act as an additional reality check to that futility if being familiar with Raoh's power wasn't already enough of one.

[mention]ahill1[/mention] A major problem with the live version of Nothing Else Matters compared to the studio version is the volume control, with the guitar's volume being significantly greater than the vocals and often obstructing it during the first half. It's still a good performance, though I'd definitely listen to the studio recording over that live show any day. The live show for The Unforgiven is significantly better, though still not quite the level of its album version when it's apparent Hetfield's vocal range by the time of the mid 00s certainly wasn't as wide as it was when recording the song in 1990 due to age.

[mention]GreatSaiyaman123[/mention] We can only hope that the new Doctor Strange film just handwaves away the CM film as taking place in an alternate timeline and just keeping the bare bones plot points necessary to fit in the main timeline version as anything more than a walking plot hole .

 

[Ultimate Cell]

What is more important in a story worldbuilding or its characters?

 

[Captain Cadaver]

It largely depends on what the focus of the work is. A narrative or theme-driven work such as say, 1984, requires a lot more focus on creating a believable world with important parallels to our own rather than focusing on interesting characters, whereas series with a typical premise can often be saved by interesting characters. For example, the plot of The Sopranos is good, but it's the characters and how they tie into the narrative and its themes that elevate it to a masterpiece.
If having to choose between one element though, it'd be world building as internal consistency is the most important element of a work reaching its full potential. There's only so far interesting characters can bring a story's quality if the laws of the universe are poorly defined or seldom existent.

 

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Since you’ve acknowledged Spider-Man 2 isn’t that good and everything else is mid at best, what’s the best Spider-Man movie for you? Will Andrew CHADfield be getting his due respect now?