Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9601478" data-attributes="member: 6801228">And just calling something a strawman doesn't make it a bad opening point in a discussion. I don't even know what your issue with the example of the Iron Man movie is, all you've done is point and say "STRAWMAN!!!" like that is in anyway meaningful. Unless you are showcasing the Fallacy Fallacy you don't really have a counter-point here.Well gosh golly, no internet?! Why that must have been something. Completely meaningless as a point though. I've listened to an awful lot of comic book and movie criticisms and critiques. I've listened to people talk about the Superman Radio Play and that happened before the internet. So did the original release of Watchmen. The original Nosferatu movie. Lot of things before the internet.So.... what? I can't say that the Raimi films were good movies made when spider-man movies weren't in the culture zeitgeist because 20 years prior someone, somewhere, made a spider-man movie that didn't do nearly as well? That's a really poor and bad argument to make.Well lookie there. A Strawman argument! See, I said the PATTERN is that hardcore fans, as fans of the Status Quo, LARGELY do not argue for good changes. Does that make them a monolith? Not in the slightest. Does that mean they ONLY want origin stories? Not in the slightest. Does that mean nothing has ever happened in any medium with hardcore fans? Not in the slightest. Does that mean new stories don't exist? Not in the slightest. So.... every single critique you have of my argument is factually wrong and has nothing at all to do with what I said, except to take it to an extreme position that cannot be defended, so you can easily knock it down. You know.. like a straw man. Hardcore fans of Star Wars recently (I don't know how recently) lost their minds, because a character in the new Acolyte show, who was a minor character in the prequel movies, had his birthday "changed". And by changed, I mean that his birth year was mentioned once in material that is no longer canon, and was recently re-established in canon, for this show, for the purposes of having him as a character in the show. These are the same hardcore fans who propose ideas for Star Wars that are just taking established characters and placing them in established conflicts. The same people who wanted to see how Han Solo stole the Millenium Falcon. They are not the people who came up with the ideas in Andor, which took a completely different tone, to my knowledge only had like one or two previously known about characters, and completely lacks Jedi. And is also wildly popular and successful. Did one person who claims to be a hardcore fan, at one point, suggest a new idea that was actually good? Sure, yeah, I bet they did. But as a PATTERN, a TREND, a GENERAL RULE OF THUMB NOT UNIVERSALLY TRUE, hardcore fans don't suggest the weird and interesting takes, they don't suggest breaking the established story. Which is why you need fresh takes. New Perspectives.And to turn this to DnD again... it wasn't hardcore, self-identified grognards who came up with Humblewood, Grim Hollow or Wandering Tavern. They were the ones suggesting Mystara, Birthright, Darksun, established IPs that are already part DnD.</blockquote>

Verification