Greatness comes in many shapes and sizes... but for this masterpiece it came in four. The Impractical Jokers Movie is the single greatest work of media ever conceived. It has a simplistic plot that carries these magnificent characters to their destinies as the comedic gods we know today. The driving force of this movie is the characters. All of your favorites are here including Joe, Murr, Sal, and Q. You get to see them in school before their greatness, out of school before their greatness, and many seasons into their job before their greatness. Each of them experience unique challenges that unlock a special revelation in their complexly written personalities. Joe begins the narrative as a bad hype man, and ends the narrative the exact same way, except this time he's famous! (Truly the writers of this film have hidden a complex allegory for the society in which we live in and how money and fame inevitability raise others' opinions of you.) Sal begins the narrative as the only member of the jokers that doesn't wish to revisit their terrible past, but Sal becomes a driving force in their pursuit to revisit that mystery when it matters most. (He summons a 2-by-4 and he threatens his friends until they make the right decision.) Q begins the movie with a butter knife, and carries that butter knife with him until the end of the line. (He keeps that symbol of pride and determination through some of the most difficult challenges he has ever faced.) And finally, there's Murr, the epitome of a well-written character. Murr begins this movie surrounded by friends and hair. First goes his hair, but throughout the general run-time of this intense narrative, Murr always has his friends to rely on. But then Murr loses a challenge, they leave him all alone, and it destroys him. Yes, the film is essentially just a string of challenges with the weakest plot ever conceived. But this is all just a courier of the theme: the jokers are better as one. And when they finally realize they're better together, Murr still is left alone on the top of a plane during the end of the film. Truly this is art. My words cannot do this movie justice, you must see it yourself. With its varying settings, complex characters, and interesting world, this film is only held back by a simple plot. And isn't that okay? I for one believe that this is the single greatest work of cinema since toilet paper.
2 Comments
The bombastic soundtrack, memorable characters, and surprisingly fun ideas are all terrific aspects of Pirates of The Caribbean; but what really sets this franchises apart, at least in the first three films, is a dedication that really didn't need to be there. Created from a Disney attraction, this project could have very easily been a cash-grab. But because they rose beyond our expectations, because so much effort and charm was put into the first two movies, the franchise grossed nearly 2.7 billion dollars over three films. So why is this series better than it has any right to be? The quality foundation of diverse ideas. In the first movie alone, The Curse of The Black Pearl, a neat historic setting is implemented in the form of a Britain-occupied Caribbean infested with pirates. If the namesake wasn't enough to catch your interest, how about a curse that tackles heavy themes such as "is immortality worth it?." Heavy themes not your speed? Well, the film has some brilliant action sequences involving swordplay and a terrific use of the setting. Still not convinced? How about a comedy? Romance? Political commentary? This movie has it all. And that's not even to mention the other two films of note: Dead Man's Chest and At World's End. In these two films a variety of new settings and challenges are introduced; this includes cannibals, an eldritch god, and a living manifestation of Davy Jones. You know... a metaphor for the bottom of the ocean? The series' coverage is admirable, but to forget characters would be a crime. To start with the obvious... Captain Jack Sparrow. Beyond being one of the most entertaining roles Johnny Depp has ever portrayed, the genius of this character becomes apparent at one key point of the series: the first time Sparrow responds to a question with "I'm Captain Jack Sparrow." Rarely does a fictional character's infamy feel so justified. Jack Sparrow makes the audience respect him, despite having one of his fundamental strengths be dumb luck. This isn't to mention the fact that Captain Jack Sparrow is a Disney protagonist without a moral compass. Every single "good" action he performs, is either unintentional or forced upon him by established circumstances. There is not a single moment in this series where Captain Jack Sparrow is a good man, but rather he is always a bad man forced to do good things for other people. This creates a sense of realism, as the main character of several movies about literal sea-thieves is a bad person, while ensuring he remains likable. Sparrow's greatness can never be properly explained, it must be viewed. There is something about the energy that Depp brings to the character that makes him Captain Jack Sparrow. While the captain may be the star of the show, other additions include two fantastic antagonists: the skeletal swashbuckler, Barbossa, and the loyal soldier Becket. Will Turner, the protagonist of the series, follows a simple, yet well-executed in character arc that makes At World's End a great closer. These movies aren't necessarily the greatest, especially from a technicality standpoint. Someone could easily dive into the choreography or other such aspects and find many mistakes. But these films have charm, and we could all use little of that in these times. There is a large divide between the almost comical scare of old, and the lingering fear that plagues modern viewers. This divide can be mostly attributed to the setup of normalcy in horror. In the 2018 film Hereditary, there is an extended buildup to the supernatural scares of the movie. Though buildups are a necessity in the genre, this example has a key difference: the most horrific aspects are plausible events rather than supernatural ones. This concept seems backwards, but it actually allows the fear to resonate more. When a viewer thinks back on that movie, they aren't going to worry over the generally impossible elements, as they aren't a realistic concern. What they are going to remember are the events that could haunt their real lives. This is normalcy in horror. Looking back on films like Us, this method's effectiveness becomes clear. From a basic standpoint, Us is a movie about a clone tracking down and killing the original. Though this idea can be scary in its own right, it is helpful to remember that movies such as 2019's Gemini Man have a very similar idea. The difference here being that Gemini Man is an action film starring Will Smith. Will Smith playing himself for two roles is the scariest part of that whole experience. So which is scarier Us or Gemini Man? Us uses its final twist to integrate itself with our world, and changes some viewer's perception of our society. Gemini Man's argument for why there are two Will Smiths has been deliberately refuted by scientific study. Now this may be an extreme example, as Gemini Man is not intended to be a horror film, but on the conceptual level, this comparison is the easiest to understand. In order for a film to be truly terrifying, even after the credits roll, it must implement a sense of normalcy. Because without normalcy there wouldn't be horror movies in the first place. (DISCLAIMER: I am aware that the aforementioned horror movies do far more than implement normalcy to strike fear into viewers. But I am also aware that without that normalcy, none of the implemented techniques would pack the same punch.) Many would argue that perfection is impossible to create, but between the many different media there is a crucial step toward achieving it: a mix of idea and execution. Without vision, even something unoriginal, the execution cannot come to fruition. Likewise, without a decent execution, an idea can never really be conveyed. As displayed above, professional wrestling provides a good example of this. Conceptually, nothing about professional wrestling is sensible or cohesive; nor is this "sport" intentionally meant to be funny. The strength of this medium is its execution. People who don't think too hard can find themselves believing this nonsense and, like it or not, that shows good use of their concept. One of the greatest anime of all time, Hunter X Hunter, has a rather random world. It takes traditional shonen tropes and combines them with a weird settings. This makes the world creative, but also disrupts a sense of cohesion and explanation that many other shows possess. Only through expert implementation of shonen story points does this show stand against the odds and become one of the greatest. Now we've established execution is important, but when does a better idea make for a beloved creation? Just look at a crowd favorite: Naruto. Sure, Naruto was a forerunner of many classic shonen anime, and it used spectacle well in its fight scenes. But that isn't relevant today, as many other shows do the same thing. What separates Naruto is its concept. Magic ninja are cool. And this is far from the only example. As much as Undertale's gameplay contributed to its success, what drew all of those players in was an RPG where killing wasn't the only way to win. For another example of a concept-driven game think about Minecraft: a game where the player could "build anything." These are only a few of countless examples. Without both concept and execution can't have a good story. |
AuthorMcRae Walker, an 20-year-old writer and lover of many dorky topics. Archives
September 2022
Categories |
Proudly powered by Weebly