Zombieland

Started by MacGuffin, June 19, 2009, 11:46:40 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

children with angels

Quote from: Gold Trumpet on March 19, 2010, 03:41:19 PM
If you didn't notice, most people here carry on with an authoritative tone for their own ends. For me, it's assumed more so because I have taken unpopular stances and stuck to them and that has struck some people the wrong way because I was going after their favorites.

No, it isn't that - it really isn't: it's your tone. There's a big difference between a one or two line review stating "This was awesome. It was the best X ever" and your approach, which will open with a similar statement and then elaborate on it at length in a manner that implies a whole theoretical framework and value system which others don't share (because it's pretty idiosyncratic), but which you want to educate them about. There's nothing wrong with the long posts and elaboration, but when you combine it with with a particular kind of language, a desire to educate, and (especially) a fondness for inflammatory and knowingly contentious one-liners, it guarantees you will get impassioned (and personalized) opposition.
"Should I bring my own chains?"
"We always do..."

http://www.alternatetakes.co.uk/
http://thelesserfeat.blogspot.com/

Gold Trumpet

Quote from: children with angels on March 19, 2010, 04:06:02 PM
Quote from: Gold Trumpet on March 19, 2010, 03:41:19 PM
If you didn't notice, most people here carry on with an authoritative tone for their own ends. For me, it's assumed more so because I have taken unpopular stances and stuck to them and that has struck some people the wrong way because I was going after their favorites.

No, it isn't that - it really isn't: it's your tone. There's a big difference between a one or two line review stating "This was awesome. It was the best X ever" and your approach, which will open with a similar statement and then elaborate on it at length in a manner that implies a whole theoretical framework and value system which others don't share (because it's pretty idiosyncratic), but which you want to educate them about. There's nothing wrong with the long posts and elaboration, but when you combine it with with a particular kind of language, a desire to educate, and (especially) a fondness for inflammatory and knowingly contentious one-liners, it guarantees you will get impassioned (and personalized) opposition.

Still mostly disagree. First, you mislabel the rest of the board. Their tone isn't so simple and straight forward. Unlike a lot of people, I hardly ever name call or try to put someone else down for their position. I try to keep it respectful, but name calling and put downs do get very personal here and it can be an egregious conversation for someone on the short end of a debate about something when other people start to chime in and group mentality takes over a little. As far as I'm concerned, that's a negative tone and it happens all too often.

Second, do I have a different theoretical position that people may disagree with? Sure, but I'm trying to explain myself to make it understandable for myself and others because when I'm reviewing something, I fully don't know yet where I stand. Writing something out helps me think out my feelings, but this isn't just a set up for me to feel superior to anyone else. I would have better language that would put more people down if I was doing that.

Do I sometimes have a tone? Sure. I'm not disagreeing with that. Was calling Zombieland the best zombie movie ever a contentious line? Yes, of course. I don't mind that because everyone says lines like those and because the majority of my reviews are based in just trying to hone into an interpretation of the film, it's not that big of a deal. If I thought the majority of my reviews were meant to just get a rise out of people then I would be siding with you, but I am evolving. Years before I was more about contentious one lines and trying to assume a niche on the board. It was heartfelt in its own way, but I knew I needed to mostly get beyond that. Now I feel I am more about trying to rationalize a position. My position may still be disagreeable and on a different theoretical level, but I think it's more even handed with its approach.

In the end, the reason why I believe my tone isn't too jarring or overwhelming compared to other people on the board is that I remember I used to get kudos from people when I praised a film they liked and everything I said connected to something they could admire but I remember I would get very unfavorable comments a week later about my tone from the same people when I said the wrong thing about a film they liked. It's worked like that with me and again, I don't believe I am angelic on the board, but I certainly don't believe my tone is what makes me stand out for the negative.

Sleepless

From Empire:

Undead road trip comedy Zombieland was a shot of pure fun when it burst on to the screen in 2009. But while there have been occasional moans of life from a sequel that has been gestating almost since the first movie arrived, it seems the concept's home will be on television, since Amazon is now developing Zombieland as a TV show.

Back in 2011, it looked like US broadcast network CBS would be the channel to pick it up, but not much more was heard beyond the release of some casting pages that showed the producers looking to find people to play Tallahassee, Columbus, Wichita and Little Rock – as assayed in the film by Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg, Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin respectively – with a couple of original additions to boost the ensemble.

Now, though, Broadcast Now (via io9) brings word that Amazon is looking to get the series produced with the intention of showing it on its instant video service, much the same way as Netflix is planning a new series of Arrested Development and the American take on House Of Cards.

It's all early days right now, but it could be a good fit for the service, even if it means the Zombieland show might not get quite as wide an audience as one of the big broadcast networks. Then again, it wouldn't have the crushing ratings expectations and would be able to push the envelope in the same way as HBO or Showtime across the pond.

Lest you think the ideas won't stretch, think again: original writers Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese first planned the script as a TV show pilot, so this is simply the wheel turning once more. We suspect we've got a ways to go before anything solid emerges on either front, but we would certainly be open to a return visit to the zombie-infested world. We're keeping up with our cardio just in case.
He held on. The dolphin and all the rest of its pod turned and swam out to sea, and still he held on. This is it, he thought. Then he remembered that they were air-breathers too. It was going to be all right.