RiffTrax Forum
 

Damn the Gods! (Titans '10)

Started by TeamRAD, December 17, 2009, 04:34:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

wurwolf

Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on December 20, 2009, 05:46:33 PM
Quote from: Sharktopus on December 20, 2009, 05:46:04 PM
To make a weak modern example, how many readers did Joseph Campbell pick up thanks to Star Wars?
Incidentally, if IV-VI were based on Campbells work, what the hell were I-III based on?

Greed.
Bonhead #2
fs!!


Sharktopus

Quote from: wurwolf on December 20, 2009, 05:58:38 PM
Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on December 20, 2009, 05:46:33 PM
Quote from: Sharktopus on December 20, 2009, 05:46:04 PM
To make a weak modern example, how many readers did Joseph Campbell pick up thanks to Star Wars?
Incidentally, if IV-VI were based on Campbells work, what the hell were I-III based on?

Greed.

I'd say more like self-indulgence.

mrbasehart

Quote from: Imrahil on December 20, 2009, 06:21:33 PM
Quote from: Sharktopus on December 20, 2009, 05:59:49 PM
Quote from: wurwolf on December 20, 2009, 05:58:38 PM
Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on December 20, 2009, 05:46:33 PM
Quote from: Sharktopus on December 20, 2009, 05:46:04 PM
To make a weak modern example, how many readers did Joseph Campbell pick up thanks to Star Wars?
Incidentally, if IV-VI were based on Campbells work, what the hell were I-III based on?

Greed.

I'd say more like self-indulgence.

Nope. Back of a cereal box.

More like the back of his colon.   :)

Tripe

Quote from: Imrahil on December 20, 2009, 06:27:09 PM
Meh. We'd be fine without Tereus and Procne, or Pyramus and Thisbe, or any of the other minor, silly, stupid little myths he so lovingly preserves in his sickeningly sweet jam.
Sometimes you could fit right in at an Oxbridge college. Bravo!  :clap: :clap: :clap:

Sharktopus

Quote from: Imrahil on December 20, 2009, 06:27:09 PM
Meh. We'd be fine without Tereus and Procne, or Pyramus and Thisbe, or any of the other minor, silly, stupid little myths he so lovingly preserves in his sickeningly sweet jam.

Just think, if Shakespeare hadn't read Ovid, we wouldn't have Romeo et Juliet.

. . .

Of course, we also wouldn't have countless love songs that miss the point. I'm looking at you, Taylor Swift.

Cosmic Muse

Quote from: Imrahil on December 20, 2009, 04:37:23 PM
Yeah, Ovid's a wanker.  He wrote fan-fic of the myths, changing whatever he wanted to make it more about "love" or whatever. 

I personally like this Gorgon:



But as Tripe said...there's no one "right" version.  I happen to dislike most of Ovid's, because I find Ovid a pretentious, whiny ass, but he's not "wrong."

Well, Ovid aside, the Greeks created Medusa to be a monster. Does anyone know why a monster is called a monster for God's sake!? Monster's are not attractive creatures in mythology, they are grotesque perversions of humanity. This movie is going to suck anyway, lousy fan waking Medusa design aside. Medusa 2010 is nothing more than masturbation material.
Being a genocidal maniac is not one of my turn ons.

Is it weird to hear the Safety Dance in my head watching Game of Thrones?

Tripe

Monster - from the Latin mostrum which means a portent or omen, nothing in the root or in most of the definitions about ugliness per se. A monster need only inspire fear or disgust or be unsettling. An attractive woman who can turn you to stone with a glance perfectly fits that definition.

So yes I know "why a monster is called a monster for God's sake" apparently you don't.

And I already showed you that the Greeks envisioned Medusa in various ways, many of them attractive (because i suspect they essentially agreed with me that it makes the curse more potent, plus you know it's more fun to sculpt hotties ;)). So if you're going to assume the movie will suck you're going to have to use some other argument than your specious one about the depiction of Medusa.


Sharktopus

There had better be at least a small nod to Bubo or I'll be cross.


Tripe

Well yes I dig automata so I'd like to see the little mechanical owl. :)

Sharktopus

Regarding this (ludicrous) debate over Medusa not being ugly enough:

QuoteConcept designer Aaron Sims considers designing Medusa his most difficult task: "Are they all the same snake in her hair? Do they look more like hair? Are they different in silhouette or in light? And how much of a human face does she have, or is it more like a snake? I worked on one design, and people said it reminded them of Lord Voldemort because there was no nose. You have to be careful so it still looks like it's an original idea."

That's from the IMDb, so take it with a mound of salt, but it sounds like he was going for an original design.

Tripe

#40
Well well that's simply unacceptable, that's completely inaccurate based on my personal conception of the character, damn the gods? Damn the art department more like!!!!!!

This movie will totally suck because they're taking a fictional character and portraying her in a way that they think works in the context of their movie!!!!!

This one Classical author who I'm aware of doesn't show her like that, and he was the only one who ever wrote about her.

;)

anais.jude

Quote from: Draconian Empress on December 21, 2009, 01:07:50 AM
Quote from: Imrahil on December 20, 2009, 04:37:23 PM
Yeah, Ovid's a wanker.  He wrote fan-fic of the myths, changing whatever he wanted to make it more about "love" or whatever. 

I personally like this Gorgon:



But as Tripe said...there's no one "right" version.  I happen to dislike most of Ovid's, because I find Ovid a pretentious, whiny ass, but he's not "wrong."

Well, Ovid aside, the Greeks created Medusa to be a monster. Does anyone know why a monster is called a monster for God's sake!? Monster's are not attractive creatures in mythology, they are grotesque perversions of humanity. This movie is going to suck anyway, lousy fan waking Medusa design aside. Medusa 2010 is nothing more than masturbation material.

In the Empresses defense, I completely agree that the studios probably made Medusa attractive more for the boys who would come to see the film (a la Angelina Jolie as Gendel's MILF mother) than for any artistic merit. Although, the idea that her being beautiful is more interesting because then men would be compelled to look at her and then suffer.

Tripe

But that's not her actual argument.

Her actual argument is: She doesn't look like she did in the original, and that one was perfectly accurate to the mythological depictions.

And that argument is entirely specious.

Sharktopus

To fan the fire, I've always imagined Medusa as beautiful but for the snake hair - too kinky for me - for exactly the reason Tripe mentions. The deadly seductress is a recurring theme in western myths: the sirens, Grendl's mother, others it's too early in  the morning for me to think of... Salome, maybe?

Quote from: TripeHoundRedux on December 21, 2009, 04:59:04 AM
But that's not her actual argument.

Her actual argument is: She doesn't look like she did in the original, and that one was perfectly accurate to the mythological depictions.

And that argument is entirely specious.

Shall we make a list of all the things "wrong" about the 1981 Clash Of The Titans? That could take a while.

Tripe

Right but it's OK to be "wrong" since myths are ultimately mutable.

I mean Calibos is in that movies first and foremost because Harryhausen loved to include ogre types in his movies.