Write a controversial opinion

As a species, we need to seriously rethink late in life and extend at all costs.


The outcome cannot be changed. The suffering can.
 
As for plot twists, I recently watched this great video where it’s explained how to write one that works:



She specifically discusses an example where the twist is not at the end of the story, like everyone here seem to imply it should be, but in the middle, and how it retroactively shapes the audience’s understanding of the story so far while still allowing it to move forward.
Anything with stupid big, colored, mis aligned text is an automatic pass.
 
Anything with stupid big, colored, mis aligned text is an automatic pass.
That's just the thumbnail. You do know what a thumbnail is, right? It's meant to catch your eye. Most of the video is just her looking like this interspersed with some basic graphics:

Untitled.png

The content itself is fine and makes some good points.

Try actually engaging with things outside your comfort zone or your own little silo instead of immediately writing them off because you're not willing to look past the surface. There's a controversial opinion. 🤷‍♀️
 
Nuh-Uh, NyNah


My thumbnails aren't purple and mis-alinged either.


Well, there was that one time after the hammer incident. Still wasn't as annoying as the 'Tube though.
 
For sheer entertainment it's hard to beat the first three films from Pirates of the Caribbean. A stellar cast with a rather original plot and excellent effects both practical and computer generated.
How is this controversial? Johnny Depp was born to play Jack Sparrow, Orlando Bloom got to be a blacksmith again, and Kiera Knightly wasn't terrible as Elizabeth Swan. Geoffrey Rush, however, stole the show as Barbosa.

on the theme of Orlando Bloom as a blacksmith - Kingdom of Heaven is a great movie that is remarkable for its gentle treatment of Saladin and its less-kind treatment of everybody' favourite Knights of the Temple of Solomon-
 
This reminds me of that guy we've all seen strutting through the gym locker room, wearing nothing but a towel over his shoulder, thing swinging like a meaty pendulum, showing off his "balance."
This seems somehow worse than watching a sixty year old lubing up her breasts with something that looked and smelled like olive oil.

I still have nightmares though.
 
How is this controversial? Johnny Depp was born to play Jack Sparrow, Orlando Bloom got to be a blacksmith again, and Kiera Knightly wasn't terrible as Elizabeth Swan. Geoffrey Rush, however, stole the show as Barbosa.

on the theme of Orlando Bloom as a blacksmith - Kingdom of Heaven is a great movie that is remarkable for its gentle treatment of Saladin and its less-kind treatment of everybody' favourite Knights of the Temple of Solomon-

I'll go for another controversial movie opinoin: The Matrix sequels were good movies, people were just mad that things didn't go the way they'd have written it in their heads.
 
For sheer entertainment it's hard to beat the first three films from Pirates of the Caribbean. A stellar cast with a rather original plot and excellent effects both practical and computer generated.

I was bored by the third one. But I agree that the first one, in particular, was totally delightful. It was surprising how entertaining it was, and I always appreciate a movie that actually surprises me with how good it is. I'm not a big Johnny Depp fan, but he was just pitch perfect in that role. The movie had a great blend of humor and action.

Best line from the movie:

"That's got to be the best pirate I've ever seen."

"So it would seem."
 
This reminds me of that guy we've all seen strutting through the gym locker room, wearing nothing but a towel over his shoulder, thing swinging like a meaty pendulum, showing off his "balance."

I'm going to have to take your word on this one and pray I never see it.
 
I'll go for another controversial movie opinoin: The Matrix sequels were good movies, people were just mad that things didn't go the way they'd have written it in their heads.
They certainly weren't bad. Their main problem is that the underlying plot shines through only sometimes, because it's too complex for the medium of film.

As a result, most of what people remember from the sequels is campy action scenes and the sesquipedalian soliloquy of the Architect.
 
I'll go for another controversial movie opinoin: The Matrix sequels were good movies, people were just mad that things didn't go the way they'd have written it in their heads.
I'll see your controversial movie opinion and counter with my own: None of the Matrix movies are good movies. Intriguing science fiction premises used solely for the purpose of justifying action set pieces. Cool action set pieces, to be sure, and I was sufficiently wowed by them at the time. But they don't hold up to serious scrutiny, and are ultimately undermined by their own pretensions.
 
I'll see your controversial movie opinion and counter with my own: None of the Matrix movies are good movies. Intriguing science fiction premises used solely for the purpose of justifying action set pieces. Cool action set pieces, to be sure, and I was sufficiently wowed by them at the time. But they don't hold up to serious scrutiny, and are ultimately undermined by their own pretensions.
Oh man, the fun we could have talking about what makes a movie a good one. Even if I grant you that they don't hold up to scrutiny (I don't agree, but I can grant the argument) - shear spectacle is just good fun!

Now, do they get to be "great" movies? Not sure I'd go that far. But good ones? Did you leave having had fun after? I feel like that makes for a good movie.
 
Here is a a controversial movie take: Sahara (the Matthew mcconaughey one) is a massively underappreciated movie.
 
Oh man, the fun we could have talking about what makes a movie a good one. Even if I grant you that they don't hold up to scrutiny (I don't agree, but I can grant the argument) - shear spectacle is just good fun!

Now, do they get to be "great" movies? Not sure I'd go that far. But good ones? Did you leave having had fun after? I feel like that makes for a good movie.

I liked the first Matrix, but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny at all. The basic premise of using human's as a power source is ridiculous.

Also, the Jetson's takes place in the Matrix universe. They live the way they do because they are above the scorched sky, and that's why you never see anyone on the surface.
 
Cool action set pieces, to be sure, and I was sufficiently wowed by them at the time.
Emphasis mine, and it strikes me as an obvious instance of the "Seinfeld is Unfunny" phenomenon. There's been so works after Matrix that play with the notion of reality that the 'original' appears quaint and maybe even lacking in comparison. It's essentially the opposite of rose-tinted glasses.
 
Emphasis mine, and it strikes me as an obvious instance of the "Seinfeld is Unfunny" phenomenon. There's been so works after Matrix that play with the notion of reality that the 'original' appears quaint and maybe even lacking in comparison. It's essentially the opposite of rose-tinted glasses.

If you come to a movie like that "late" it's hard to fairly judge it. First time I watched 48 Hours (the Nick Nolte Eddie Murphy movie) it felt very cliched to me. Found out later that it felt cliched because everyone else copied it, and I'd seen those movies first.
 
I liked the first Matrix, but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny at all. The basic premise of using human's as a power source is ridiculous.
It's not Sci Fi ridiculous, though. Humans do, in fact, emit very weak electromagnetic fields. If you can harness that electricity or convert that magnetism into power (or, heck, with all those wires, just use the electricity generated in the brain), you could, maybe not real world wise, but Sci Fi wise, totally get a bit of electricity from a human.

In fact, I've used that principle to turn on a lightbulb in a science fair project before. The human completed a weakened electrical circuit that, on its own, would not make the light shine but when combined with the human conductor would light the lightbulb (thus demonstrating that the human added something to the circuit).

You'd need a metric crapton of humans, sure, but they kinda *had* a metric crapton.
 
Back
Top