Meanwhile a lot of you guys thought the directors ending to "Dodgeball" was funny, and I was violently offended by it.
I did think that ending was hilarious, but I suspect that's probably entirely because it was presented as an alternate ending. If I'd watched the movie and it had just ended there, I would likely have been very irritated.
Like he somehow breaks the Reapers, and they go forth and extinguish all organic life instead.
Thereby becoming what they were created to stop from happening.
And a bit of messing with "God's Plan" thrown in
Keep me away from writing stories, I'm the worst.
I'm a fan of video games that let you be the bad guy.
It was intensely disappointing to discover you couldn't stay with UNATCO in Deus Ex.
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
I said "out of nowhere", Tamin. You are deliberately misreading what I wrote to be a blanket statement when it was not.
There is literally no foreshadowing or build up to what happens in that show. Plenty of other works I've enjoyed greatly have skipped forward in time or even backward and it's great. I'm reading one now actually. The difference is that they were well written, I guess.
Re: ME3 endings and why I don't buy indoctrination
Once you start questioning the reality of events, there is no reason to stop. If you buy the existence of the entity, there is little reason not to buy its characterization, which in turn suggests that it has no reason to lie to you. It doesn't have a skin in the game aside from ideology, and I think the fact that it is willing to let you make a choice is reasonably convincing.
More concretely, the blue and green endings just don't make sense if indoctrination is true, as I mentioned before.
It's a nice idea but it isn't borne out by the actual mechanics of the ending.
I'm a little confused
If shepherd is indoctrinated how do the blue and green endings not make sense? They are the trap choices.
I absolutely agree that indoctrination doesn't fit as a valid alternative ending btw
Because the events of those endings would not have occurred. If indoctrination were the case, it would be revealed that you have screwed it all up you goddamn sucker.
plus Shepard is dead so it can't even be an illusion in his indoctrinated mind; we are seeing reality.
@Regina Fong I see you choose the only correct ending to ME3. Good on ye. /nod nod
Indeed!
Not there yet, but I've already decided how it ends. The end is the bad part. I'm still looking forward to the parts of the game I've yet to do pre-shitty-ending-writing taking over.
But in response to EM:
It doesn't matter to me that blue/green don't "fit" with indoctrination because those choices are little more than unmeasurable sub-quantum noise.
They are options I didn't pick, because I picked the other one.
Also if you pretend green doesn't exist, then the story is actually:
Shepard shoots the Illusive Man, then blows the Reapers the fuck away after flipping the bird to the star kid.
Then in my headcanon, is picked up by Normandy after jumping off the exploding Citadel into space, only survives it just fine because fuck it, he survived the first time and now is even more cyborg.
I went red too
Actually the conversation between my Shepard and littlestarshit would have gone:
"Which one kills the Reapers?"
"Well the red one does but..."
"OK, thanks, got me some reapers to kill"
"Wait! You should know that by doing so that..."
"Reeeaaaaally don't care about anything else you have to say. You can shut up and go away now"
"You don't understand! What you're about to do..."
"I said shut the fuck up. This entire thing is dumb. All of it. But I came here to kill reapers, so I'm gonna kill reapers. Now go away you annoying little shit."
+1
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
I'm sure there can be situations where that abrupt out of nowhere change does something for the plot, but it's not here. George R.R. Martin wrestled mightily with planning to skip his book series forward 5 years and then decided he just couldn't. In my opinion, that's because he's a good writer and realized his error.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I'm sure there can be situations where that abrupt out of nowhere change does something for the plot, but it's not here. George R.R. Martin wrestled mightily with planning to skip his book series forward 5 years and then decided he just couldn't. In my opinion, that's because he's a good writer and realized his error.
His publisher probably said 'Time skip?! Just write another book! Hah hah hah *serpent's tongue flicks out*"
I'm sure there can be situations where that abrupt out of nowhere change does something for the plot, but it's not here. George R.R. Martin wrestled mightily with planning to skip his book series forward 5 years and then decided he just couldn't. In my opinion, that's because he's a good writer and realized his error.
His publisher probably said 'Time skip?! Just write another book! Hah hah hah *serpent's tongue flicks out*"
More like JESUS GEORGE PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WRITE ANOTHER BOOK IT'S BEEN SIX YEARS
Re: ME3 endings and why I don't buy indoctrination
Once you start questioning the reality of events, there is no reason to stop. If you buy the existence of the entity, there is little reason not to buy its characterization, which in turn suggests that it has no reason to lie to you. It doesn't have a skin in the game aside from ideology, and I think the fact that it is willing to let you make a choice is reasonably convincing.
More concretely, the blue and green endings just don't make sense if indoctrination is true, as I mentioned before.
It's a nice idea but it isn't borne out by the actual mechanics of the ending.
I'm a little confused
If shepherd is indoctrinated how do the blue and green endings not make sense? They are the trap choices.
I absolutely agree that indoctrination doesn't fit as a valid alternative ending btw
Because the events of those endings would not have occurred. If indoctrination were the case, it would be revealed that you have screwed it all up you goddamn sucker.
plus Shepard is dead so it can't even be an illusion in his indoctrinated mind; we are seeing reality.
Well, I would imagine that once the choice is made there would be no reason to disintegrate Shepherd, but to fully indoctrinate him and remove his agency. Your position does make sense though.
Psn:wazukki
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
Man, that sex face in panel 3. Weird.
What comic is that? I like the art and I like Conan type stuff.
I'm going to laugh when GRRM's books get so long and so slow that one 900 page novel fills out half an episode of the show because it's 5 pages of internal monologue, 1/2 page of dialogue, 1/2 page of exposition, and 894 pages of detailed descriptions of heraldry.
I'm going to laugh when GRRM's books get so long and so slow that one 900 page novel fills out half an episode of the show because it's 5 pages of internal monologue, 1/2 page of dialogue, 1/2 page of exposition, and 894 pages of detailed descriptions of heraldry food items (edit:) and sex and dongs.
Also if you pretend green doesn't exist, then the story is actually:
Shepard shoots the Illusive Man, then blows the Reapers the fuck away after flipping the bird to the star kid.
Then in my headcanon, is picked up by Normandy after jumping off the exploding Citadel into space, only survives it just fine because fuck it, he survived the first time and now is even more cyborg.
I went red too
Actually the conversation between my Shepard and littlestarshit would have gone:
"Which one kills the Reapers?"
"Well the red one does but..."
"OK, thanks, got me some reapers to kill"
"Wait! You should know that by doing so that..."
"Reeeaaaaally don't care about anything else you have to say. You can shut up and go away now"
"You don't understand! What you're about to do..."
"I said shut the fuck up. This entire thing is dumb. All of it. But I came here to kill reapers, so I'm gonna kill reapers. Now go away you annoying little shit."
I don't like fiction which depends on me actually listening to my enemies opinions. They're my enemies. As good adversaries I expect them to lie their ass off to me and try and confuse and delude with implications of grand importance to their evil works which I couldn't possibly comprehend.
And then Shepard sets off a large anti-matter explosion.
Damn I loved the ME2 ending sequence - that was an explosion which had gravitas.
+2
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
I'm still chuckling over being upset by that since the subtitle a TRUE underdog story does mean they are almost guaranteed to lose.
@Regina Fong I see you choose the only correct ending to ME3. Good on ye. /nod nod
Indeed!
Not there yet, but I've already decided how it ends. The end is the bad part. I'm still looking forward to the parts of the game I've yet to do pre-shitty-ending-writing taking over.
But in response to EM:
It doesn't matter to me that blue/green don't "fit" with indoctrination because those choices are little more than unmeasurable sub-quantum noise.
They are options I didn't pick, because I picked the other one.
That's kind of a silly thing. The ending is going to be dumb no matter how hard you try to believe it isn't. Picking different endings doesn't alter the preceding events.
Dealwithit.gif
+1
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
I just want to be mad at ME3 since my readiness rating was 100% since i played all MP when it came out but by the time I beat it, my rating dropped back to 50%. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.
I will give a pass (not a cookie, but a pass) for a lame or meandering ending as they struggle to reach their destination. Mark Twain, I forgive you for Huck Finn. You just didn't know how to end it. It's OK. You said what you needed to say on the river and it was beautiful and no one will ever forget it, even though they will be annoyed that the story goes on for 100 pages after that.
However.
I do not give passes for smirking, arch, "look at how bright my ideas are" endings when they are handled poorly and cleave against the narrative that has occurred to that point.
There is a reason I consider the BSG ending to be weak but acceptable even as most of you consider it high treason.
Meanwhile a lot of you guys thought the directors ending to "Dodgeball" was funny, and I was violently offended by it.
Wait. Why were you offended by the ending of dodgeball? Because their losing completely undercut the underdog theme?
Because it was a feature length film whose entire drama was just a set-up for a really stupid joke at the audience's expense.
Whereas the end of BSG was the writers having difficulties bringing a lengthy saga to a close after they had previously shot their load but then become committed to additional series episodes.
The first is a God damn hanging offense.
The second is a thing that just happens and it's not such a big deal.
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
Listen, as long as that one guy and that sort of one girl got to bone, I'm happy.
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
You really would have not enjoyed any of Dodgeball if it'd ended that way? You're not in the minority since it tested bad, but this seems like the same knee-jerk reaction against spoilers when they've been show to actually enhance enjoyment.
The journey, not the ending.
This is also why I quit BSG way before the ending.
I said "out of nowhere", Tamin. You are deliberately misreading what I wrote to be a blanket statement when it was not.
There is literally no foreshadowing or build up to what happens in that show. Plenty of other works I've enjoyed greatly have skipped forward in time or even backward and it's great. I'm reading one now actually. The difference is that they were well written, I guess.
I am not misreading anything.
But, fine. You answered my question; you did not intend for it to a blanket statement. Thank you
Re: ME3 endings and why I don't buy indoctrination
Once you start questioning the reality of events, there is no reason to stop. If you buy the existence of the entity, there is little reason not to buy its characterization, which in turn suggests that it has no reason to lie to you. It doesn't have a skin in the game aside from ideology, and I think the fact that it is willing to let you make a choice is reasonably convincing.
More concretely, the blue and green endings just don't make sense if indoctrination is true, as I mentioned before.
It's a nice idea but it isn't borne out by the actual mechanics of the ending.
I'm a little confused
If shepherd is indoctrinated how do the blue and green endings not make sense? They are the trap choices.
I absolutely agree that indoctrination doesn't fit as a valid alternative ending btw
Because the events of those endings would not have occurred. If indoctrination were the case, it would be revealed that you have screwed it all up you goddamn sucker.
plus Shepard is dead so it can't even be an illusion in his indoctrinated mind; we are seeing reality.
If indoctrination theory is true, then
the blue and green endings are hallucinations that Shepard is seeing during the final moments of succumbing to reaperization, rendering her compliant to the transformation to a completely cybernetic lifeform under reaper control
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
You really would have not enjoyed any of Dodgeball if it'd ended that way? You're not in the minority since it tested bad, but this seems like the same knee-jerk reaction against spoilers when they've been show to actually enhance enjoyment.
The journey, not the ending.
This is also why I quit BSG way before the ending.
I am not spoiler averse unless it ruins a legit reveal.
Like, spoiling the Sixth Sense is so wrong.
But if you spoiled Saving Private Ryan for me I would say that that doesn't cheapen the film for me at all.
You really would have not enjoyed any of Dodgeball if it'd ended that way? You're not in the minority since it tested bad, but this seems like the same knee-jerk reaction against spoilers when they've been show to actually enhance enjoyment.
The journey, not the ending.
This is also why I quit BSG way before the ending.
I am not spoiler averse unless it ruins a legit reveal.
Like, spoiling the Sixth Sense is so wrong.
But if you spoiled Saving Private Ryan for me I would say that that doesn't cheapen the film for me at all.
I'm sure there can be situations where that abrupt out of nowhere change does something for the plot, but it's not here. George R.R. Martin wrestled mightily with planning to skip his book series forward 5 years and then decided he just couldn't. In my opinion, that's because he's a good writer and realized his error.
Oddly, I was going to use him as an example of having a very loose chronology.
weeks pass between chapters, at least two chapters I can think of turn the clock back months while we catch up with what the character's been doing for all that time.
I don't see why the disintegration/immolation has to be taken literally.
I think you are being too literal, EM.
I get what you are saying, "If you question this, it all unravels!" but really, no.
No it doesn't.
There's some friction with the whole laser beam thing down on Earth though. If that's the moment when you supposedly went to lala land (if you picked the red ending) then what? You aren't on the space station so you can't kill the reapers. You are in a pile of rubble on Earth and nothing has happened outside of your head.
I'm kinda surprised how long people have been burning up over the end of ME3. I feel like people had just picked it up last time I was here and that was maybe 6 months ago.
but like any audience-crafted explanation for an in-work plot hole, indoctrination theory requires a certain disregard for occam's razor, presuming things to be narratively true without any reason for them to be so
which is why such audience theories sound suspiciously like conspiracy theories, because they're borne of similar thought processes
It's just in this case, an audience-crafted theory is adopted for its aesthetic appeal, not because the theorist believes it is true in an empirical sense
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Posts
If you're referring to this specific case, then, yes, it wasn't handled well.
But that wasn't my question.
It sounds like you're saying no story should ever skip forward in time. That seems pretty short-sighted to me.
I did think that ending was hilarious, but I suspect that's probably entirely because it was presented as an alternate ending. If I'd watched the movie and it had just ended there, I would likely have been very irritated.
I'm a fan of video games that let you be the bad guy.
It was intensely disappointing to discover you couldn't stay with UNATCO in Deus Ex.
There is literally no foreshadowing or build up to what happens in that show. Plenty of other works I've enjoyed greatly have skipped forward in time or even backward and it's great. I'm reading one now actually. The difference is that they were well written, I guess.
Because the events of those endings would not have occurred. If indoctrination were the case, it would be revealed that you have screwed it all up you goddamn sucker.
Indeed!
Not there yet, but I've already decided how it ends. The end is the bad part. I'm still looking forward to the parts of the game I've yet to do pre-shitty-ending-writing taking over.
But in response to EM:
It doesn't matter to me that blue/green don't "fit" with indoctrination because those choices are little more than unmeasurable sub-quantum noise.
They are options I didn't pick, because I picked the other one.
well
that was nice and creepy
I went red too
"Which one kills the Reapers?"
"Well the red one does but..."
"OK, thanks, got me some reapers to kill"
"Wait! You should know that by doing so that..."
"Reeeaaaaally don't care about anything else you have to say. You can shut up and go away now"
"You don't understand! What you're about to do..."
"I said shut the fuck up. This entire thing is dumb. All of it. But I came here to kill reapers, so I'm gonna kill reapers. Now go away you annoying little shit."
Li-You know what, I'm not gonna spoil it. It's too beautiful.
His publisher probably said 'Time skip?! Just write another book! Hah hah hah *serpent's tongue flicks out*"
That's our Claremont!
More like JESUS GEORGE PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WRITE ANOTHER BOOK IT'S BEEN SIX YEARS
What comic is that? I like the art and I like Conan type stuff.
--LeVar Burton
I think you are being too literal, EM.
I get what you are saying, "If you question this, it all unravels!" but really, no.
No it doesn't.
I don't like fiction which depends on me actually listening to my enemies opinions. They're my enemies. As good adversaries I expect them to lie their ass off to me and try and confuse and delude with implications of grand importance to their evil works which I couldn't possibly comprehend.
And then Shepard sets off a large anti-matter explosion.
Damn I loved the ME2 ending sequence - that was an explosion which had gravitas.
That's kind of a silly thing. The ending is going to be dumb no matter how hard you try to believe it isn't. Picking different endings doesn't alter the preceding events.
Dealwithit.gif
Because it was a feature length film whose entire drama was just a set-up for a really stupid joke at the audience's expense.
Whereas the end of BSG was the writers having difficulties bringing a lengthy saga to a close after they had previously shot their load but then become committed to additional series episodes.
The first is a God damn hanging offense.
The second is a thing that just happens and it's not such a big deal.
The journey, not the ending.
This is also why I quit BSG way before the ending.
I am not misreading anything.
But, fine. You answered my question; you did not intend for it to a blanket statement. Thank you
If indoctrination theory is true, then
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
webcomics or real comics?
I am not spoiler averse unless it ruins a legit reveal.
Like, spoiling the Sixth Sense is so wrong.
But if you spoiled Saving Private Ryan for me I would say that that doesn't cheapen the film for me at all.
i think like 1 or 2 are going to be okay
i feel so sad when someone came up to me and said 'hey uh so um i have a collection of short stories um so uh'
Fables! Planetary! Lucifer!
Webers. I got some Amazon money, but I want to spend it on some novels. Ben Fountain's new one, and many others.
Yeah, I agree with that.
Oddly, I was going to use him as an example of having a very loose chronology.
weeks pass between chapters, at least two chapters I can think of turn the clock back months while we catch up with what the character's been doing for all that time.
they aren't quite romance novels but they will both have romantic plots/subplots
Every time you post about novels and how they're no good I feel like I'm going to throw up
which is why such audience theories sound suspiciously like conspiracy theories, because they're borne of similar thought processes
It's just in this case, an audience-crafted theory is adopted for its aesthetic appeal, not because the theorist believes it is true in an empirical sense
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.