Dark Knight

A place where you can chat about anything that isn't to do with games!
User avatar
Skykid
Posts: 17655
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:16 pm
Location: Planet Dust Asia

Post by Skykid »

Ceph wrote:I can immerse myself in a movie like Dark Knight, but when the silliness gets too strong, my suspension of disbelief is supsended (eg. when Batman uses 30 Million sonar cell phones, or when Two-Face rolls his CGI-eye).
This man speaks the truth.

That cell phone thing was total buffoonery on the part of Nolan and his daft scriptwriter, as were many of the other gaffes, including single-handedly rigging a hospital to be levelled to dust without anyone noticing that there's some chap putting some C4 under beds, rigging two passenger boats to blow up using... oil drums, conveniently (far more easy for one chap to manage - probably only took him a week to get them all into the lower holds without anyone noticing). And of course the Joker managing to crash a party looking for Harvey Dent but not manage, after Batman has jumped out of the window, to find him asleep behind one of the apartment doors.

For all of it's good stuff, there was plenty of lazy, dumb stuff. Annoying.
Always outnumbered, never outgunned - No zuo no die

neorichieb1971
Posts: 7886
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Post by neorichieb1971 »

I thought I was watching law and order most of the time.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
User avatar
Tempest
Posts: 275
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 6:42 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Tempest »

neorichieb1971 wrote:I thought I was watching law and order most of the time.
Image
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15853
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Post by GaijinPunch »

RGC wrote:selling this movie based on how 'A.ma.zing' Ledger is (words of a work colleague, for example).
The last person to play the roll was Jack Nicholson. I think anyone that can hang with that deserves at "amazing" at least. This is also considering it's on the back end of the cowboy butt sex movie.
My first vote would go to Will Ferrell. More Cowbell made me laugh, but his movies are truly shit, surely?
Sounds like someone needs a sense of humor. I laughed balls at Step Brothers.

EDIT: Just saw your location. Never mind. Let's just chalk it up to cultural differences.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

CMoon wrote:MOST film don't offer all of those things, and you talk about the rather obvious legendary films, you get labeled as a film snob. Of course, those films are legends BECAUSE they did all those things.
I dunno, I think a lot of those so called legendary movies are legendary because of too much pretentious filmmaker/movie nerd douchebaggery. I think the chin stroker quotient is far too high when it comes to film lists, declaring unwatchable pieces of shit like Citizen Kane as the some of the greatest movies of all time when the only purpose they seem to serve is so art fag types can sit and deconstruct them. No offense if you like that stuff, and maybe it's just me, but I fucking hate when film geeks dismiss stuff because they don't rise to their intellectual standards just as I hate when lit geeks dismiss stuff like Naked Lunch because of vulgar/grotesque/"pornographic" imagery. It's not so much snobbery as it is conservatism and a preference for the old over the new.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
RGC
Posts: 1486
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:23 am
Location: UK

Post by RGC »

.
Last edited by RGC on Sat Mar 19, 2011 9:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CMoon
Posts: 6207
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:28 pm

Post by CMoon »

Acid King wrote:I think the chin stroker quotient is far too high when it comes to film lists, declaring unwatchable pieces of shit like Citizen Kane as the some of the greatest movies of all time when the only purpose they seem to serve is so art fag types can sit and deconstruct them.
I hope people don't just see Kane as a flim to deconstruct. There is no reason anyone can't sit down and enjoy that film, but calling it the greatest film of all time probably hasn't served it to well.

I'm really split on this because you can learn a lot about cinematic techniques (and how to use B&W) by watching Kane (much the same way you can learn a lot about animation by watching Bambi.) But, if you don't like these films, don't watch them! The idea of a movie-appreciator elite lording their films over you that they themselves don't like is a sort of absurd notion, and unfortunately Kane comes off like that sometime. Personally I really like Kane as a film, but I'm also wowed by everything it accomplishes.

No offense if you like that stuff, and maybe it's just me, but I fucking hate when film geeks dismiss stuff because they don't rise to their intellectual standards just as I hate when lit geeks dismiss stuff like Naked Lunch because of vulgar/grotesque/"pornographic" imagery. It's not so much snobbery as it is conservatism and a preference for the old over the new.
No offense taken, I enjoy films on a lot of different levels. I'll watch high concept-art shit next to low brow barbarian films. I actually find I'm a lot more open to movies than most, but I'm also more critical. You can like a film (for instance, I actually enjoyed Tale of Desperaux which I think everyone hated) and still cite a million things done wrong with it.

For me, geeking out over how a film is made--especially the masterful use of the medium is important. Since a quality director can actually use that medium to effectively communicate a great deal more to the audience than a director who is just emulating other films, the qualities director's films in general will be better. Case in point: Imagine The Good, The Bad and The Ugly filmed in standard Hollywood vision. That is, same soundtrack, same actors, but the guys behind the camera film it the same way they filmed The Magnificent Seven. Would it be the same movie? Would it even be a good movie?

What I'm trying to get at is that there's nothing wrong with just liking a film coz you like it, and hating a film coz you hate it; but don't hate on the people who want to reflect on their movies a bit and think about what makes a good movie good.

And yes, to get back to your original (my original?) statement: I do hold by some of those classics, but with a caveat: Whether now or then, most films are mediocre and highly imitative. The reason why the classics are called classics isn't because they are old but because they're the one out of a hundred (or thousand?) that actually tried to do or be something more. ...or in some cases, they were just fucking great, like Casablanca.
Randorama wrote:ban CMoon for being a closet Jerry Falwell cockmonster/Ann Coulter fan, Nijska a bronie (ack! The horror!), and Ed Oscuro being unable to post 100-word arguments without writing 3-pages posts.
Eugenics: you know it's right!
SHMUP sale page.
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15853
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Post by GaijinPunch »

I'll admit, they're not all great, but he is quite funny.
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=jOjfxEejS2Y

I've never thought the South Park guys were funny beyond shock value. I laughed at Team America, but it's nowhere near as clever as something like The Simpsons back in the day, or more recently Arrested Development.

Sorry to derail, everyone.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
User avatar
RGC
Posts: 1486
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:23 am
Location: UK

Post by RGC »

.
Last edited by RGC on Sat Mar 19, 2011 9:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
D
Posts: 3801
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Almere, Netherlands
Contact:

Post by D »

OK, let's bash the batman movie because it is not realistic............
The comics certainly were, as were the cartoons as was the ideology of the original creator. Yeah man! Right on!
I guess it's an instant conversation/discussion starter. Walk into a room full of people, yank you jeans straight and proudly announce that you didn't like Batman Dark Night.
:lol:
Bar fights have started for less that that
User avatar
Ceph
Posts: 3693
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Europe

Post by Ceph »

D wrote:OK, let's bash the batman movie because it is not realistic............
Sorry, you missed the point. My rekindling of this thread was about this: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... 778#439778
Image
User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15853
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Post by GaijinPunch »

RGC wrote:OK, that was pretty good,
Really easy target as well.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

CMoon: I agree. My point really was just that there's a level of conservatism among film geeks that simply wouldn't allow a film like Dark Knight to be seriously considered as one of the greatest movies of all time, regardless of technical merits. There's a preference of old over new, which makes sense to some extent given a need to see how well a movie stands up over time, but also genre and content preferences as well. I'm all for intelligent criticism, but I think those preferences act as unnecessary gatekeepers. Mind you, I really enjoyed Dark Knight, though it's certainly not one of my favorites of all time, I just think some of the claims of ridiculous situations or silliness holding the movie back are flawed and symptomatic of that.

Some of the stuff skykid mentioned, for example rigging the hospital and the passenger ships with explosives, can god knows how easily be explained by the fact that the Joker is a criminal mastermind that has who knows how many people working under him. I'm all for being critical, but when it results in getting bogged down in explainable details it strikes me as being critical for the sake of being critical. The movie had a lot more going for it intellectually than most people realize (google "Dark Knight Game Theory" and you'll see what I mean).
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Post by Ed Oscuro »

RGC wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:
RGC wrote:Sure, the dude remembered to lick his lips every thirty seconds, but that doesn't make him Lawrence Olivier.
I can't imagine Olivier playing this role any better - although I don't know much about his work.
And yet you are aware of his supposed talents.
At not playing characters like the joker, yes.

Gimme Lon Chaney plz (even further into the past, no problem though, Acid King's comments aside, which I more or less agree with).
User avatar
Udderdude
Posts: 6294
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:55 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Udderdude »

Acid King wrote:My point really was just that there's a level of conservatism among film geeks that simply wouldn't allow a film like Dark Knight to be seriously considered as one of the greatest movies of all time, regardless of technical merits.
I am not a "film geek" by any sense, I think most of the conservative movie film watchers stick to older films. That's mostly because it's good to see which movies stand the test of time, instead of jumping up and proclaiming "OMG BEST MOVIE EVAR" right after it's in theatres and/or watching the Joker do "hurrrr the pencil trick" for the 1000th time on Youtube while giggling like a tard.

There have been examples of previously ignored/neglected film genres getting on the classics list, for instance fantasy movies (LOTR trilogy). The reason being they were amazing examples of cinema, and not just an attempt to make a Batman movie as GRIMDARK as possible.
Acid King wrote:Some of the stuff skykid mentioned, for example rigging the hospital and the passenger ships with explosives, can god knows how easily be explained by the fact that the Joker is a criminal mastermind that has who knows how many people working under him.
Cop-out. Neglecting to explain "details" like this is just lazy writing. The damn movie was so bloated with other crap, would it really have killed them to add this in too?
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Post by Ed Oscuro »

I think it's more relevant than many of the "best" films are of a different era, and generally more staid in their pacing. There certainly is a consistency and internal logic to the line of reasoning that "a good film should be obviously internally consistent and evidently plausible to the viewer," but it's still an argument not everybody should agree with.

The 80s style of action films has its standouts starting at least with Die Hard, but I think that The Dark Knight may be on the vanguard of the genre, although it doesn't seem to be making any obvious breaks with the past.

The failings of the film to explain itself, to me, came at three points:

- Explaining more compellingly how the Joker got his minions; it's clear that he's preying on the mentally ill but that doesn't lead to flash mobs in the real world.

- The impossible sonar machine

- Too clear a "war on terrah lol" theme overall which brings down my enjoyment; I mean, weren't the years past 9/11 bad enough without having us sit through them in compressed form?
User avatar
Davey
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Toledo, OH

Post by Davey »

RGC wrote:Edit: Slight tangent- someone should start a thread entitled 'extremely popular movies/actors you just don't get'. My first vote would go to Will Ferrell.
I was with you until:
RGC wrote:No, in this case I'm willing to accept total blame for lacking whatever is required to appreciate Anchorman.
Anchorman is by far his best movie IMHO. Talladega Nights was okay. But the rest of his movies have like 5 minutes of good parts and 90 minutes of meh. He was pretty good on SNL, though, which is quite a feat given the shittiness of SNL.
User avatar
Skykid
Posts: 17655
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:16 pm
Location: Planet Dust Asia

Post by Skykid »

Udderdude wrote:
Acid King wrote:Some of the stuff skykid mentioned, for example rigging the hospital and the passenger ships with explosives, can god knows how easily be explained by the fact that the Joker is a criminal mastermind that has who knows how many people working under him.
Cop-out. Neglecting to explain "details" like this is just lazy writing. The damn movie was so bloated with other crap, would it really have killed them to add this in too?
Agreed. Lazy writing and lazy film making.

The idea of oil drums in the boat holds is like first draft material. There are a million different ways they could have rigged those boats to blow. Perhaps we could've seen deep sea divers beneath the water with really freaky joker type masks on (similar to those in the heist) swimming up to the hull in the dead of night and placing some form of explosive on it.

Simple yes, but far more plausible.

I mean who the fuck is the security officer on that boat? Whoever he is, I hope he got fired for missing those oil drums on his first pass.

Also, and this pisses me off: Bale puts Dent into a sleeper hold and knocks him out in his apartment. He then shuts the door, and puts a bar through the handles from THE OUTSIDE.
Then he gets into his suit and jumps out the window after a really badly cast chick who couldn't possibly be the love interest of two leading Hollywood men.

Scene over.

WTF?! The Joker, the 'criminal mastermind', managed to completely miss the 'bar in the door handles'? The red flag leading the way to his target, sleeping peacefully on the other side?

That's bullshit. For all of the forgivable junk in Hollywood films, that's a gaffe of epic proportions.
Always outnumbered, never outgunned - No zuo no die

User avatar
CMoon
Posts: 6207
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:28 pm

Post by CMoon »

Acid King wrote:CMoon: I agree. My point really was just that there's a level of conservatism among film geeks that simply wouldn't allow a film like Dark Knight to be seriously considered as one of the greatest movies of all time, regardless of technical merits.
Right! The funny thing is I'm not in that category; I'm one of the few people who have attempted to argue that Dark Knight IS more than just-another-action-film and is worth recognition.

It also isn't a favorite of mine, though now that it is coming out in theatres again I'd like to see it a second time.
Randorama wrote:ban CMoon for being a closet Jerry Falwell cockmonster/Ann Coulter fan, Nijska a bronie (ack! The horror!), and Ed Oscuro being unable to post 100-word arguments without writing 3-pages posts.
Eugenics: you know it's right!
SHMUP sale page.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

Udderdude wrote:
Cop-out. Neglecting to explain "details" like this is just lazy writing. The damn movie was so bloated with other crap, would it really have killed them to add this in too?
It strikes me more as lazy viewing. Seriously, how much do they have to explain to you before something like that is implied? What about the bank heist? Look at allll the shit the Joker choreographed leading up to the ferry sequence. They spend the whole movie establishing Joker as a master criminal, but then suddenly we wonder how he got bombs into place? It makes no sense.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
Skykid
Posts: 17655
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:16 pm
Location: Planet Dust Asia

Post by Skykid »

Acid King wrote:
Udderdude wrote:
Cop-out. Neglecting to explain "details" like this is just lazy writing. The damn movie was so bloated with other crap, would it really have killed them to add this in too?
It strikes me more as lazy viewing. Seriously, how much do they have to explain to you before something like that is implied? What about the bank heist? Look at allll the shit the Joker choreographed leading up to the ferry sequence. They spend the whole movie establishing Joker as a master criminal, but then suddenly we wonder how he got bombs into place? It makes no sense.
Not buying that. A hundred years of film has shown that an audience is not expected to fill in the gaps of their own accord by 'assuming' what is, what isn't, and what might be. Such things exist in film on philosophical levels, not on rational levels.
You're rationalising what is absent because of your affection for the film, which is fine. For me, it's simply not good enough that the director was too half-assed to bother tying up ambiguous plot-holes.
Acid King wrote:CMoon: I agree. My point really was just that there's a level of conservatism among film geeks that simply wouldn't allow a film like Dark Knight to be seriously considered as one of the greatest movies of all time, regardless of technical merits.
For the record, and in-case no-one had noticed, I'd just like to say I'm firmly in the camp that thinks that Dark Knight isn't even close to being one of the greatest film of all time, either artistically or technically.

Not even fooking close mate. :shock:
Always outnumbered, never outgunned - No zuo no die

User avatar
GaijinPunch
Posts: 15853
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:22 pm
Location: San Fransicso

Post by GaijinPunch »

Lazy writing and lazy film making.
Probably not the best adjective for a movie that starts off w/ a bank heist where the leader whacks his own crew, exits only after triggering a gas canister in the manager's mouth, and makes his escape in a school bus.
There are a million different ways they could have rigged those boats to blow.
But they wouldn't be "cheap".
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Lloyd Mangram
Posts: 147
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:27 pm

Post by Lloyd Mangram »

Skykid wrote:I mean who the fuck is the security officer on that boat? Whoever he is, I hope he got fired for missing those oil drums on his first pass.
Given that the city is meant to be rife with corruption, I think you can take it as read that the security personnel were bribed, if not replaced outright.

Look, I too think TDK is over-rated. It wasn't bad, but it was far from brilliant. But if people want to criticise certain aspects of it, forget about the fuel drums on the ferry. Forget about how the Joker rigged the hospital (Bribery! Corruption!) The real turkey in the movie was the sonar cell-phone gimmick, not just because it was ludicrous and inexplicable, but because it led to that long, ugly, and frankly not very exciting scene with Batman working his way through those SWAT guys while continually cutting to the nausea-inducing SONAR VIEW, when that whole section of the film could have better served as a climactic cat'n'mouse chase between the Batman and the Joker rather than turning into the cinema equivalent of someone button-mashing through an army of drones in a scrolling beat'emup in order to get to THE BOSS at the top of the construction complex/carpark/generic deserted location.

*long sentence get!*
User avatar
Udderdude
Posts: 6294
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:55 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Udderdude »

Lloyd Mangram wrote:The real turkey in the movie was the sonar cell-phone gimmick, not just because it was ludicrous and inexplicable, but because it led to that long, ugly, and frankly not very exciting scene with Batman working his way through those SWAT guys while continually cutting to the nausea-inducing SONAR VIEW, when that whole section of the film could have better served as a climactic cat'n'mouse chase between the Batman and the Joker rather than turning into the cinema equivalent of someone button-mashing through an army of drones in a scrolling beat'emup in order to get to THE BOSS at the top of the construction complex/carpark/generic deserted location.
So I wasn't the only one who felt that scene was something right out of a videogame. Didn't make a whole lot of sense that mr. criminal mastermind was just sitting there waiting to get captured like a fucking tool, either. He could have set up another imposter, or just plain booked and left yet another ton of explosive barrels to blow up as soon as anyone got up there. But hey, I guess they decided the movie had to end at some point, so why not end it there? Logic and plot continuity be damned.

Also, Batman's one weakness : Dogs.
User avatar
Skykid
Posts: 17655
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:16 pm
Location: Planet Dust Asia

Post by Skykid »

GaijinPunch wrote:
Lazy writing and lazy film making.
Probably not the best adjective for a movie that starts off w/ a bank heist where the leader whacks his own crew, exits only after triggering a gas canister in the manager's mouth, and makes his escape in a school bus.
Sure thing, but I'd be very surprised if you could honestly tell me that the opening scene wasn't the best put together in the entire movie?

(That guy should probably have spat that bomb out though eh? :roll: )
Given that the city is meant to be rife with corruption, I think you can take it as read that the security personnel were bribed, if not replaced outright.
Ha ha! What's with all this reading between the lines shit?! :D
Always outnumbered, never outgunned - No zuo no die

User avatar
D
Posts: 3801
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Almere, Netherlands
Contact:

Post by D »

I like how he coulnd't turn in his suit and he told Morgan Freeman. That was pretty hilarious. :lol:
User avatar
RGC
Posts: 1486
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:23 am
Location: UK

Post by RGC »

.
Last edited by RGC on Sat Mar 19, 2011 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Acid King
Posts: 4031
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Planet Doom's spaceport

Post by Acid King »

Skykid wrote: Not buying that. A hundred years of film has shown that an audience is not expected to fill in the gaps of their own accord by 'assuming' what is, what isn't, and what might be. Such things exist in film on philosophical levels, not on rational levels.
You're rationalising what is absent because of your affection for the film, which is fine. For me, it's simply not good enough that the director was too half-assed to bother tying up ambiguous plot-holes.
You don't have to buy it but you're essentially saying that writers have to write assuming their audiences are half retarded and can't connect the dots. That's especially stupid in the context of this movie, where the Joker does so many things (Choreographs the bank heist, controls a cadre of goons the source of which is never explained, bribes police officers, implants a cell phone bomb in someone, inexplicably has a school bus to get away in, not to mention all the military style weapons and hardware he has and the truck used in the Harvey Dent chase etc etc) prior to that that there is no reason to show something like that because at that point the audience has already accepted all that stuff unquestionably because of who the character is.

Reasonably, if the audience is willing to accept all of that stuff, which you do, then why would a writer expect them to question how the Joker got bombs into place? It's fucking stupid. It's an irrational critique considering all of the stuff you accept without explanation.
Skykid wrote:For the record, and in-case no-one had noticed, I'd just like to say I'm firmly in the camp that thinks that Dark Knight isn't even close to being one of the greatest film of all time, either artistically or technically.
I don't think so either, but some of the criticisms people are giving are just straight up bullshit. The cell phone critique I agree with but the so called "plot holes"? No fucking way.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
User avatar
Skykid
Posts: 17655
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:16 pm
Location: Planet Dust Asia

Post by Skykid »

Acid King wrote: You don't have to buy it but you're essentially saying that writers have to write assuming their audiences are half retarded and can't connect the dots.
Absolutely not. One of the most common crimes of mainstream movies is babying the audience with moronic 'informative' dialogue and filler.

The Dark Knight is a Batman movie, and as a Batman movie, however serious and dark, it excuses itself from having to illustrate far too much, and therefore has plot holes aplenty.

Big, ugly, plot holes that ruin the integrity of the movie, which is a shame.

It's also got some crap acting, dodgy dialogue and some silly design decisions - but we won't go into that too much. :wink:
Always outnumbered, never outgunned - No zuo no die

User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Post by Ed Oscuro »

Skykid wrote:moronic 'informative' dialogue and filler.
I have the feeling we've been here before!

Anyway, I agree with Acid King, on a gut level. The cell phone sonar was wack but beyond that stuff made some level of sense in the way that a comic book needs to. They found ways to put people into interesting scenarios and that's what they said they'd be doing on the wrapper.

My brain is telling me that they did indeed go overboard with subplots, but hey, I'm all for more stimulation rather than less. We've all seen the "one major plot and a love triangle on the side" plot shape too many times for it to stay fresh.
Post Reply