Posted by sean at threshold6n.jpmorgan.com on August 06, 2001 at 11:38:23:
In Reply to: playing devil's advocate... posted by UltraViolet on August 06, 2001 at 08:31:47:
: I haven't seen the movie but I assume the final image is the same.
: But just to play devil's advocate: what if Burton hadn't seen the comic, but was simply looking for a way to make a nod to the Statue of Liberty ending of the original film ? There are only so many well-known American monuments you could symbolically use to make this type of statement... *it could happen*
No, Lincoln is there as a symbol of freeing the slaves and whatnot. But it even goes as far as being exactly the same, in that, in the movie, they haven't re-built the statue, just changed the head. That's how it looks, anyway. And, here's my beef ... if you're going to decide to change it from Earth, which makes *zero* sense, then you have to accept the fact that you can't have an ending as cool as The Statue. They tried, and miserably failed to do so. (Stealing from "Earth vs. The Flying Saucers" *again*, Tim? It didn't work too well with "Mars Attacks". Aw jeez.)
: Meanwhile, everyone who's seen POTA seems to be saying the ending doesn't make any sense to them at all and the movie isn't very good. So whatever Burton did, no one's understanding what the heck he meant anyway.
The ending is the worst kind of set-up for a sequel, because it makes the movie not stand on it's own. If the movie were good, it'd be like at the end of "Back To The Future"; you'd say "Ohmygod, how can the car fly? I have to see the second one." But because it sucks, you're left saying "Well that doesn't make any sense." And then you go back home and read comics and find plagiarism in it too.
If he was gonna steal from comics, I wish he had made a reference to King Solomon from "Tom Strong".
Kevin: If I had a scanner and all the neccessary stuff, I'd've posted it. So thanks, Chris.
"You should have stolen more of Gruber's ideas. Then at least you'd have ideas."
Post a Followup