3 ms·

As a writer, you can choose to convey character and plot points in many different ways. You don’t have to use things that are considered “hip” at the time of wr

As a writer, you can choose to convey character and plot points in many different ways. You don’t have to use things that are considered “hip” at the time of writing. It seems to me that Johnson’s foremost concern was having all those elements in the film, after which he reverse engineered some of the character and plot points you’re talking about.

HWR_14 4y ago
You don't have to have anything in a movie. The question isn't "why include hip things", the question is "were those hip things just tacked in". They weren't. They served a purpose. You could replace them with some generic thing, I suppose. But how would that make the movie better? Meanwhile, if you eliminate them, the story gets worse. Unlike most product placements, which are at best removable background and at worse make the movie worse. Meanwhile, I imagine Zoom arose naturally to solve the speakerphone but still need to see characters issue. I'm guessing Among Us was added because someone on the set played it and thought it would add something, and Twitch seems like the best real-life example of someplace that you would expect a modern tech mogul to help someone set up a streaming channel. Far from being tacked in, those seem like the best possible solutions to those problems. And COVID is a fact now. You could release a movie in NYC in 2003 with the Twin Towers still in them, but I don't think people would claim you were being "hip" removing them. They would say you seem out of touch for leaving them in. Even if the story was set in "indefinite past time when they still could have existed"
- mypastself 4y ago
  I don’t know if they were tacked on, exactly, but they seemed to be the purpose rather than a tool. If you showed the NYC skyline in 2003, you’d have to go out of your way to show the Twin Towers. Edward Norton saying how “pando” changed things, on the other hand, is going out of your way in the opposite direction. I feel like the early-00s equivalent of this movie would be the CGI dancing baby on Ally McBeal (“justified” by the character’s ticking biological clock), except almost every scene would have one such meme or topical reference.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    The majority of skyline shots are stock images. In 2003 it was a choice for which you showed. Were they obviously added because they were recent things and not timeless, yes. But I don't see how ignoring recent events would have been good either. Instead, if you're trying to write how out of touch tech billionaires are to the current world, you have to show the current world. How do you even have a character like Duke divorced from the current environment?

HWR_14 4y ago

You don't have to have anything in a movie. The question isn't "why include hip things", the question is "were those hip things just tacked in". They weren't. They served a purpose. You could replace them with some generic thing, I suppose. But how would that make the movie better? Meanwhile, if you eliminate them, the story gets worse. Unlike most product placements, which are at best removable background and at worse make the movie worse. Meanwhile, I imagine Zoom arose naturally to solve the speakerphone but still need to see characters issue. I'm guessing Among Us was added because someone on the set played it and thought it would add something, and Twitch seems like the best real-life example of someplace that you would expect a modern tech mogul to help someone set up a streaming channel. Far from being tacked in, those seem like the best possible solutions to those problems. And COVID is a fact now. You could release a movie in NYC in 2003 with the Twin Towers still in them, but I don't think people would claim you were being "hip" removing them. They would say you seem out of touch for leaving them in. Even if the story was set in "indefinite past time when they still could have existed"

mypastself 4y ago
I don’t know if they were tacked on, exactly, but they seemed to be the purpose rather than a tool. If you showed the NYC skyline in 2003, you’d have to go out of your way to show the Twin Towers. Edward Norton saying how “pando” changed things, on the other hand, is going out of your way in the opposite direction. I feel like the early-00s equivalent of this movie would be the CGI dancing baby on Ally McBeal (“justified” by the character’s ticking biological clock), except almost every scene would have one such meme or topical reference.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  The majority of skyline shots are stock images. In 2003 it was a choice for which you showed. Were they obviously added because they were recent things and not timeless, yes. But I don't see how ignoring recent events would have been good either. Instead, if you're trying to write how out of touch tech billionaires are to the current world, you have to show the current world. How do you even have a character like Duke divorced from the current environment?