Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86672 posts
Thu Dec-23-21 01:47 AM
44. "And I respected the shit out of her for doing this." In response to In response to 33
here's a 30 minute stretch where this shit gets meta as fuck >and starts making fun of itself. At that point, I knew the >"fans" are gonna hate this. > >There's a lot here with certain characters that are going to >infuriate people.
The first act is essentially a comedy about her internal debate whether making yet another sequel to a film whose selling point was its originality has any merit, if it's possible to make something that extends a story in a fresh manner or if all an audience wants is the same safe nostalgia trip so many movies offer.
At a time when nostalgia is at peak popularity, I wouldn't be surprised at all if such meta commentary and self-reflexive dialogue tanks with the same fans who love "redpilled" and shit.
Also, the very end, which I won't spoil... it of course makes perfect sense textually for the film, but it of course contains an element tailor made to piss off a certain subset of moviegoers. I actually really loved the choice, not because it's "woke" or whatever, but because it's built to and fits thematically to a T. But... yeah, lmao. Folks will be mad.
I *do* think that people are right to be miffed about the exclusion of Fishburne and, to some extent, Weaving. I think you could've found a way to make them both work pretty easily. That said, if one of the central fucking themes is "we're not giving you what you expect, we're changing it up to keep it fresh, that's more important than the safety and the comfort of nostalgia"... then I also get why they made some of the timeline choices they did and casting decisions they did.