LogFAQs > #961541082

Mr Lasastryke posted...

it's certainly not ALL nonsense. one thing that makes 1 feel so separate from 2 and 3 is that the original is a very straightforward movie and the sequels are way more symbolic and insinuating. i won't bring up truffaut's law again, but 2 and 3 are movies that definitely get better if you watch them several times. and even then, a lot of the stuff in it only makes sense if you know a decent amount about philosophy and religion. i know i'm coming off as a pretentious "you just didn't get it" asshole - and maybe i am one - but it's pretty frustrating to see 2 and 3 get dismissed as 100% bullshit by people who probably can't even tell the difference between jean baudrillard and ayn rand. (edit: to be perfectly clear, this isn't in response to your post. i'm talking about people in general who dismissed the movies as 100% bullshit.)

first of all, i appreciate your well-thought out post. and yeah, that's part of why why i'm planning on rewatching.

i've become more down with allegorical (as opposed to rational/logical) fiction over time. stuff that used to frustrate me because it didn't make sense i now can take a step back and let wash over me

it's part of managing expectations. on that subject, i think what turned people off was the fact that the sequel to a rational movie was irrational (or allegorical, or to use your words, "less straightforward")

not quite the same, but remember how "drive" was marketed as a "fast and furious" movie, and then people entered the theater and watched an hour of near silence followed by a guy smashing a watermelon? not saying the movie would magically become good, but people would have been less unhappy if they knew what they were getting into from the start

i'm willing to guess that the sequels do not make sense rationally but might be okay allegorically

i've got to imagine the allegory is more interesting than "hey guys, remember jean baudrillard? hey guys, remember ayn rand? hey guys, remember christianity? remember buddhism? remember semester 1 of philosophy?" i think cinema has the ability (and perhaps a mandate) to do more

a friend of mine is finishing up her phd in cognitive science, and she always makes sure to mention that she dislikes the trilogy for reminding her too much of her stoned freshman and sophomore classmates

i'm hoping she's wrong and just extra jaded from 8 years of schooling on the subject