Spiderman: Homecoming was pretty boring and generic *mild spoilers*

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Movies: At the Theater
  3. Spiderman: Homecoming was pretty boring and generic *mild spoilers*

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#11
rockus posted...
There's a big difference between a standard three act structure and a three act structure. It's malleable, the beats can be hit at any time or subverted and the 1st act doesn't necessarily have to end at the 20 - 30 minute mark. Or, like Gravity, it could barely have a first act since we all know who the f*** Spiderman is.


Gravity has a very clear first act. What are you talking about?

We do know who Spiderman is. Movies will still have three acts unless they're extremely unconventional.


It barely does actually. If it were to have gone the traditional route, its first act would've been on Earth and it would've introduced their lives in equilibrium. The movie starts with them already in space and the shift to danger occurs very quickly. I liked it myself, some film scholars think it sucks because it didn't have a proper first act. Oh well.

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#12
rockus posted...
You didn't really expand or anything. Just saying a character is sanctimonious doesn't really explain your criticism so all we have to go on is vague claims about SJWesque qualities which without any real explanation sounds petty.


You found it petty, that's your prerogative. I have no problems if you liked her character, opinions and s***. I thought she was annoying and sanctimonious, which I would say is a pretty suffice reasoning considering the little screentime she has, not much more I could say.

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#13
rockus posted...


I mean I get it, you read a screenwriting book once or had an intro film class or something.


Nice edit. Don't see the point of this addition considering how unnecessary it is.

User Info: rockus

rockus
9 months ago#14
You know that you can edit posts, right? No need to post three times in a row.

TruthAndJustice posted...
rockus posted...
There's a big difference between a standard three act structure and a three act structure. It's malleable, the beats can be hit at any time or subverted and the 1st act doesn't necessarily have to end at the 20 - 30 minute mark. Or, like Gravity, it could barely have a first act since we all know who the f*** Spiderman is.


Gravity has a very clear first act. What are you talking about?

We do know who Spiderman is. Movies will still have three acts unless they're extremely unconventional.


It barely does actually. If it were to have gone the traditional route, its first act would've been on Earth and it would've introduced their lives in equilibrium. The movie starts with them already in space and the shift to danger occurs very quickly. I liked it myself, some film scholars think it sucks because it didn't have a proper first act. Oh well.


It has a pretty clear and proper first act. It doesn't need to be set on Earth to set up its characters, their location, the situation, what they have to now do, and any themes it may have, all of which it's able to do in its first 20/22 minutes. And the first act doesn't end just when they're hit with debris, it ends after they are and the two surviving characters assess the damage and casualties to their craft and what they have to do afterwards which occurs roughly around 22 minutes into a 90 minute movie. Which is a proper length of time for a first act for the movie's runtime. The exact moment of being hit with debris isn't what entirely disrupts their situation providing them with a new conflict to overcome, it's the irreparable damage to their craft and confirming the deaths of the rest of their crew which does. You're confusing what could perhaps be labeled the script's Inciting Incident with what would be a first act turn.
http://thetramp.filmaf.com/owned
http://ReelFilmTome.com

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#15
The inciting incident is when they first learn about the debris, not when the debris hits. When the debris hits, that's their point of no return and thus the end of the first act.

It's semantics at this point, people always argue where the first act break is etc. The general consensus is that Gravity doesn't have much of a first act, if at all, it's usually its common criticism, not an opinion I share, though.

User Info: rockus

rockus
9 months ago#16
TruthAndJustice posted...
The inciting incident is when they first learn about the debris, not when the debris hits. When the debris hits, that's their point of no return and thus the end of the first act.

It's semantics at this point, people always argue where the first act break is etc. The general consensus is that Gravity doesn't have much of a first act, if at all, it's usually its common criticism, not an opinion I share, though.


Actually like I said, discovering that their craft is irreparably damaged would be that turn, because they have now decided that they must change their course of action, because if it wasn't they would not have to do so and thus wouldn't be a "point of no return" as you put it. I don't know what that has to do with semantics, that's the clear plot point of the movie.
http://thetramp.filmaf.com/owned
http://ReelFilmTome.com

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#17
Semantics is right there, our interpretations vary. You're saying when the characters realise that there's no point of return, that's when the act breaks. I disagree, it's not when the characters realise, it's when it's realised in the plot, and that's when the debris hits. You can have characters not realise they're in a point of no return, it doesn't mean the first act doesn't end until the character stops being in denial.

User Info: rockus

rockus
9 months ago#18
But a plot is propelled by the choices of its protagonist(s) and their realization of the situation is going to be instrumental in those choices they shall make, as it is in this film, choices which will thus move that plot forward. Not only that, but it's also important to reveal this to the audience as well, as spectators (or readers) of that particular story. That turn is not revealed to the spectators until its revealed to the characters on screen in this particular moment in the film. So again, you're mistaken.
http://thetramp.filmaf.com/owned
http://ReelFilmTome.com

User Info: TruthAndJustice

TruthAndJustice
9 months ago#19
The debris didn't occur by the choice of the characters, in fact, traditionally, it would've shown the characters to make their choice to go into space. No such thing in Gravity, they are already in space and the debris hits, not due to the choices the characters makes. IIRC it's not even the case of the characters choosing to stay too long that gets them into trouble, they were in trouble no matter what.

This goes completely against the point you've just made. The 1st act usually ends when characters make their choices (there are cases where it's the plot that propels the plot forward, like Gravity, which apparently is a sign of a bad film but I don't believe that bulls***). This is why Gravity is considered not to have much of a 1st act at all.

Kinda odd how a topic about Spider-Man has been dominated by Gravity. Whoda thought?

User Info: rockus

rockus
9 months ago#20
TruthAndJustice posted...
The debris didn't occur by the choice of the characters, in fact, traditionally, it would've shown the characters to make their choice to go into space. No such thing in Gravity, they are already in space and the debris hits, not due to the choices the characters makes. IIRC it's not even the case of the characters choosing to stay too long that gets them into trouble, they were in trouble no matter what.

This goes completely against the point you've just made. The 1st act usually ends when characters make their choices (there are cases where it's the plot that propels the plot forward, like Gravity, which apparently is a sign of a bad film but I don't believe that bulls***). This is why Gravity is considered not to have much of a 1st act at all.


I was speaking in general about three act plots and the importance of character decisions propelling plots. Also, there is a distinction to be made between a protagonist's choices moving a plot forward between events that occur in the narrative. I wasn't suggesting that every plot event must be triggered by the story's central character, quite the opposite, rather that because of these events those characters now have choices to make. Which doesn't at all contradict my point I was making as, like I said, would point to the two of them making the choice to head to the International Space Station by MMU being the end of the first act, a choice they reach after discovering that their shuttle has been damaged by the debris.

Also, being in space doesn't need a choice to be made because it isn't a plot point in context to the story as a written script precisely because it isn't a choice that is made in the course of the movie's narrative, nor does it have to be. Just like a first act doesn't have to take place on Earth before they go into space. These things aren't included in the plot by script or in film because they aren't necessary for the narrative arc that is the movie. The difference between plot and narrative from story. We don't need to see the decision to go into space unless the plot had the need to present conflicting desirable alternatives depending on the choice to stay on Earth or not to stay on Earth. It's merely a part of what presumably would take place before the on screen narrative began. They're in space because that's the setup of the movie and part of their job that places them into space. It's like asking for a movie about a cop to include the reason why the protagonist became a cop. We don't need to see the choices that Riggs and Murtaugh made to become cops, just like we don't need to know the choices that got Gravity's characters into space.

I suppose it's odd that we are talking about Gravity at such length but you brought it up and I was using your example of it since I don't think your criticisms of a movie's use of a three act structure are entirely valid because I find you're mistaken on how three act structures work in the first place, because of this particular example you used.

Three act structures are the way studio films and most films in general are made, Gravity included. Gravity's criticisms on its writing come not from its lack of a three act structure but just from mostly pretty thin writing within that three act structure. The frame is still there, it just happens to be missing a lot of the meat that makes it up. As I would suggest that your problems with Spider-man: Homecoming likely come not from its use of a three act structure but in that you find the writing within that structure lacking and would suggest to dig deeper into what you find lacking about it, to better clarify your argument on the merits of the movie.
http://thetramp.filmaf.com/owned
http://ReelFilmTome.com
  1. Boards
  2. Movies: At the Theater
  3. Spiderman: Homecoming was pretty boring and generic *mild spoilers*

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived