Jump to content
  • entries
    610
  • comments
    1,306
  • views
    415,902

The Question of So What


Ta-metru_defender

724 views

Essays, Not Rants! 183: The Question of So What

 

A professor who I had, who I didn’t really like, once told me that I could probably connect any variety of works. But that didn’t necessarily mean I had an essay. Another professor said that you know you’re paper’s successfully if there’s a point that could be proven wrong. Most succinctly, when I presented an idea for a paper to her, yet another professor responded with “So [beep]ing what, Josh; so [beep]ing what?”

 

Which, y’know, is a really good question. I can talk a bunch about how Madame Bovary’s titular protagonist wants a life akin to what would be known as the melodramatic genre, but where’s the point? That’s what I had to figure out if I wanted to write a legitimately good essay. Well, stories are a lot like that too. You can have a plot and all that, even be perfectly plotted and so on, but so what? A story’s gotta have a point.

 

This is the big thing with action movies. On the one hand, we have Die Hard and Mad Max: Fury Road; arguably two of the best proper action movies, well, ever. Both of these movies have clear themes, which both amount to the ability of anyone to step up and be a hero, regardless of profession and gender, respectively. Look at the massive reaction to both movies, Die Hard remains a staple nearly three decades after it came out and is referenced constantly. Time will tell if Fury Road has the same staying power, but it’s sure looking that way.

 

And why do these films stick? Because the points made them matter. Look at The Expendables, it’s good dumb fun, but the only real point to it is that it’s really fun to see ‘80s action heroes on screen together. It’s pure mindless fun, and there’s certainly a time and a place for that (The Expendables sits proudly on my shelf), but I doubt most people will really care in a few years. Or take a look at Expendables 3, which dispatched with the famous cast in favor of younger ones; it was still mildly fun, but tried to be something it wasn’t (a movie about the old becoming to old and having to hand the baton over, but not give them the proverbial sins-of-their-fathers instead of, y’know, watching action heroes do action hero stuff).

 

It’s science fiction that rides on this a lot. Star Wars has the good old anyone can save the world theme driving it (along with a very clear good wins thing). Godzilla has a lot to say about nuclear weapons and is at its best when it uses its kaiju as a metaphor. Or, at the very least, most memorable.

 

Neill Blomkamp’s filmography may be a good example in and of itself. District 9 is plainly an allegory for Apartheid that has us sympathizing with someone who’s an obstinate racist who’s forced to confront the other on a personal level. It works so well because it’s not content to present institutionalized racism in another guise, it actually says something about it. Elysium, on the other hand, says very clearly that a stratified healthcare system has issues and… well, that’s about it. It amounts to commentary saying nothing, which you can kinda maybe afford in a weekly blog, but not so much in formal papers and films.

 

 

 

Oh, and for the record, the importance of interpreting Madame Bovary as Emma wishing to enact melodrama is that it paints her as a quixotic figure actively escaping blame for her own failings.

5 Comments


Recommended Comments

Pink SPIRIT. :P

 

Nope, you have a good essay if you're right. I don't care if you have the most well constructed argument in the world, if you're wrong, your essay is garbage.

 

I'm right, that's what. Or you're right. And that's why you should care or not care about my essay. Period. Dot. End of story.

Link to comment
Die Hard and Mad Max: Fury Road; arguably two of the best proper action movies, well, ever.

 

Raiders of the Lost Ark, now feeling dejected and alone, slowly raises a hand gesture to say 'hi.'

 

Though in all seriousness, to what extent does a movie have to have a point to, you know, have a point? I'd argue that The Expendables serves its point rather well. It's an homage to 80's action in the model of an 80's action movie using 80's action stars. It sure as heck wasn't a great movie (like a lot of the 80's action movies it was homaging), but it clearly knew what it wanted to be from the get go. Much like Fury Road, it had a point and stuck to it. You could argue similarly for Raiders of the Lost Ark, its point being to be a model and homage to early serial adventures. Does a movie really need a deeper theme to have a point, or to tell a story in an entertaining way? Personally I don't think so.

 

And while this is only tangentially related to your essay, I have to say that I was surprised by Fury Road. The scene where Max and Furiosa were trying to pull the truck out of the mud is probably one of my favorite movie scenes of the year. It's definitely one of the better contemporary action films.

 

And I apologize for making such a low-blow criticism... but I don't understand your third sentence, or how it ties into the point of that introduction:

 

Another professor said that you know you’re paper’s successfully if there’s a point that could be proven wrong.

 

...Could you clarify that sentence? Or at least what your professor was trying to say?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

 

Elysium, on the other hand, says very clearly that a stratified healthcare system has issues and… well, that’s about it.

Huh, I always got the impression that Elysium was calling for less restrictive immigration policies or open borders. I might have missed the healthcare commentary. Which makes me feel stupid because the director is about as subtle as someone throwing a bag of hammers. Might be just me to be honest.

Link to comment

V1P1:

 

To your last point, basically what he meant was that if your paper said something as indisputable as to be obvious (Sim City is a computer program) it wasn't a good essay. You had to take a stand (Sim City is not a game as it lacks a true goal and other things that make games games).

 

And yeah, I think the difference here is, imo, the whether a movie sets out to complete its goal (which the first Expendables does and the third fails) and making a point. I guess I wasn't clear enough in this post, but I think that's the difference. The point, and it being a point worth making is what sets apart really good fiction?

 

Oh, and Raiders is seriously one of the best. But id didn't come up during the bar conversation I had with a friend about "Fury Road being the best action movie since Die Hard."

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...