(Just read the bold to keep it short)If the leg is taken away, Yes.
Capt.Failure wrote: Evil_the_Nub wrote: shamone wrote: Capt.Failure wrote:
G1 Smoketreader wrote: How could someone making a childrens movie allow Marijuana to be taken by the main characters Mother?
Because Transformers being for children is a limit you arbitrarily impose on it.
yes imagine arbitrarily imposing that mantle on a movie based on a toyline, based on a cartoon, based on a toyline, based on a cartoon, based on a toyline for children
and then a movie that is marketed towards children, how dare you suggest that its a movie for children.
It may not be exclusively for children, but it is their target market.
Robocop, Aliens, and Terminator all had toylines and those were certainly not kid movies. The Transformers movies are marketed for general audiences, not a specific age group. That's why we have a rating system, so people will know beforehand what kind of content a movie has.
In short: the arguement that Transformers is soley for children and films/series should be developed around that doesn't have a leg to stand on.
I do wish to argue that Teenagers are still Kids. Altho laws begin providing rights to folks at age 18, the true coming of age is not and has not been observed to happen until age 21 in plenty of cultures and traditions.Do what you like with that but even the brain is not fully developed until age 21.
I don't know the English word to help me express myself. There is a Greek slang word, Provlepe,(pro-vle-PEH) meaning to foresee foreseeably, or to be foreseeably foreseeable
.I believe M.Bay should have been Provlepe
about the nature of the final cut of that scene.The scene itself should also have been Provlepe
to him.On what grounds? On the grounds of context.On the grounds of looking after someone elses kid or at least helping them to do it on their own.On the grounds of common moral courtesy and decency.It depicts a mother ignoring everything around her as soon as she comes into contact with drugs, and being observed at her happiest in 3 films when she takes them.There is what explanation
for a parent to explain? Desire. Escape. Otherwise boredom.People have argued about the ratings of these films and what good parents should know.What about what a good director should know and think?What about what a proper toymaker should DO?.It's okay for them or is it neglect?
Governments all around the world are either making commercials themselves which educate the whole family on which rating means what, or demanding that TV stations do it to be considered worthy of their social position.Everyone
walks into the cinema knowing what to expect from the rating.Even 'bad' Parents.They are expected to be provlepe
on an issue.They are expected to be ready to discuss an issue.
The depiction of Sams Ma taking drugs, IMO is Ambush
.It not only has no business in this film or in the story, but is inserted out of context with what else is going on.The resignation to the fact that a parent has to be confronted with it and then handle it alone is nothing other than the excercising of sociopolitical immunity.There should have at least been a provided physical (for lack of better term) handhold for the parents to start talking from.
An event to SHOW to the kid saying "it stems from here", a reason for her to do that which was appropriate to the movie, justifiable to/of the thought patterns of the character and considerate of the sensory intake of the audience: a degree of cooperation in the finality of the explanation of the event from the depicters quarter.I do not feel one was provided.They (we) were just left with the depicted event on a whim to include it.
Robocop (toy line later) showed Drug use, unavoiodably (because it's part of the Mythos and therefore should not be taken out of it), as did Batman (Toyline first)(Scarecrow) and Spiderman (Toyline first)(the Venom suit).Ratchet (Toyline first) also walks into power lines, which IMO is a drug reference and depiction of drug use, albeit veiled.Note that I am not complaining about Ratchet.
In my view, which of course is one view amongst many,Robocop (contemporary for its' Era, outdated now) simply gave Punks Nuke.At the time of filming, generic Punks, just like Zeds crew from Police Academy 2(?) had no reason to explain their motivation.They were Punks and behaved that way.There was a reason for the depiction of drug use in the story-from everything relying ultimately on Robocop to a reflection of how dangerous a (proper Human) Cops' job can be to the depiction of corporate and syndicate corruption in the upper social echelons. There is something there to tell a Kid or an adult.In short, a consequence
Batmans Scarecrow? I am not confident that he is depicted to suffer a consequence specifically
for drug use.Drug use itself, is, however, depicted here as something that causes horror, dementia, suffering, torture.There is something there for a kid to see for itself, and a handle/foothold (the suffering aspect) is provided for parents to start working/talking from.
Spiderman is depicted as very happy (but not his happiest) when he and the Venom suit adopt each other.(I personally treat it all as a vague reference to the overall issue of Drugs, like Ratchets Powerline event-it's there permanently as soon you see it, it's not if you don't).Spiderman is arguably the most powerful when in the Venom suit.I wouldn't say there is a depicted consequence in the graspable, material package, but he goes on to lose things all over the place, from the adherence to the last advice of his Uncle (basically treasure) to Mary Jane to whetever anyone else would list.
Ratchet walks into Power lines accidentally.That's a good enough motivation for me to be happy with it.In actuality the observation that a TF would do that is more realistic than not (tho sensors should have detected the lines).His (and also "our" good friend, Ironhide, provides some degree of consequence through his unenthused response).Furthermore it is established that standard electricity doesn't really have the effect of a weapon on TFs.Absolutely fine for me.It gives more than one result than furthers the story and Ironhides attitude is a good enough consequence to move along with.
Why I brought up Sams Mum is this: Sam Witwicky is the Vessel for each TF viewer to bring himself into the story.He is there to be identified with.His family could have been a broken one-this has been done before (but usually with consolidation at the end).Some would say it is
a breaking one.
Sams' Parents are a depiction of contemporary parents.No argument.The film had to somehow be tweaked away from just small child Audiences.No Argument.Even Disney films have DISGUISED adult dialogue or dialect here and there.Therefore, it is both appropriate to accept adult references in a Kids film and a contemporary art both to insert and to notice
adult entertainment in a kids' flick.As such, it should be appreciated as any other Art will be.No argument.In the specific case of Sams Mum, she is depicted as being her happiest (IMO) when on the stuff.
Others have the right to disagree, but I feel she is not even happier when her own son is 'ressurected' (tho in all fairness, she wisens up as a character when she has to let go of Sam-I see and acknowledge that story arc).She defends that stuff against the Father figure,
(and I'm not importing chauvanism here but family unity,please acknowledge) has no character motivation to take it in order to help herself complete the adventure
in some boosted way and leaves the Parent
(of the kid watching the show), In my Opinion, Ambushed
.Why should the parent have walked in expecting to have to deal with the specific portrayal as it stands?Going beyond the 'little' kid to the teenager: The whole event just reminds the highschooler what to look for in Uni.This was the second most watched movie in the world when it was released, I believe.
In short: The rating is a flimsy excuse for the decision to leave everyone out on a branch when justifying Sams Ma.She didn't NEED the cookies.She WANTED them.NOBODY forced her but she took them basically in front of her family.The moviegoers training (to know ratings)is a flimsy excuse for the context, content and message of said event to be left uncriticized.It is OUTSIDE of provlepe expectations for the rating to be left unable to explain Sams Mas actions in a positive way without being derogatory towards either her character profile or else the moviemakers,which is unfair to actual mothers in her position. One man refused to (bother) adjust(ing) a situation exposed to billions (after DVD watching also) just because.Nobody stopped him.He didn't try to stop himself.He didn't give a.
Within context of my first post: He didn't want to tone it down.He doesn't know how and, doesn't care how, and he knows it's no skin off his back anyway so he won't search how, because he never did this for YOU.Next to what he contributed, he caused a lot of damage. Therefore, altho TFs were going to be brought to life for us anyway, they were brought to life at a great cost.The fandom alone is in partisan war over how to justify a man who does not justify himself.Was it worth it? Hasbro had a list of 20-odd Autobots and 12-odd Deceps from G1 alone, ready to go,of which 5 vs 6 were originally marketed in TF1.Was that worth it? The Kids could have had a toy who was a theoretician (Skids) who instead became a written off no-show.Was that worth it?
Furthermore, there IS a consequence to everything we do-we just pay less attention to the good consequences and the invisible ones. DISCLAIMER: I have been away and will be away again for a long while.I will not be present to continue contributing to this conversation so i'm basically out of whatever direction it takes and what new points will be raised.After discussing all this with my wife and some friends, we decided it would be a good deed to leave this counter-opinion posted anyway for younguns to see both sides.Point being I'm not trying to ride a High horse at other posters expense or stand on their shoulders.Everyone is right.We figured if we honestly care about this issue then leaving behind some visibly guarded advice on our take would be a good deed.I repeat that this doesn't mean the rest of the opinions are wrong.That's all.Keep having fun, Gang.