The Lego Movie VS ???
Round one my opponent chooses a movie that he or she thinks is superior in quality to The Lego Movie. He or she may not present any arguments in round one, but will be able to say why his or her movie is superior to The Lego Movie in rounds 2 to 4. My opponent does not necessarily have watched the Lego Movie, neither do I have to have watched his movie; we can search up the summary for our selves, and the key parts of the movies can be featured either in clips, pictures, or supported by sources.
My opponent may not choose any movie listed on this particular exact website:
(In other words, none of the top 100 classics movies)
The one exception I will make is "Twelve Angry Men".
My opponent also cannot choose these movies:
-Toy Story 2
-The Godfather II
Good luck and have fun to whoever accepts.
I believe There Will Be Blood directed by Paul Thomas Anderson is superior.
NOTE: Burden of Proof is shared.
There Will be Blood is a confusing movie. At least, the summary I read says so. Is the main character, Plainview, the bad guy? If so, then the movie is either a sad tragedy or a horror movie. Is Plainview the good guy? If so, he shows no traits of goodness throughout his greed and cruelty. So Plainview must be the bad guy. Good. I got that clear.
1. The superior beginning of The Lego Movie
There Will be Blood might actually have an eye-catching beginning. I don't know. I haven't seen it. But the beginning does not immediately present us with a problem; it is slightly boring as the summary puts it: a man is harmed in a mine accident but in turn gets lucky and starts a mining business. Sure, it might be slightly exciting, but it can't beat the beginning of the Lego Movie. The Lego Movie starts off literally with a BAM--We see the antagonist, Lord Business easily take down the door and the sole guardian of the mysterious weapon named the Kragle, then we hear a strange "prophecy" that a "special one" will defeat Lord Business.
This beginning is so eye-catching and exciting, it confuzzles you and makes you want to find out what the heck is going on. On the other hand the beginning of There Will be Blood seems pretty normal and straight-forward: Good guy gets harmed, good guy gets lucky.
My opponent will probably argue that since I came to the logical conclusion that Plainview was the bad guy, then the beginning is decieving, and the bad guy of There'll be Blood is obviously superior. But this is actually not the case...
2. The antagonist The Lego Movie is superior
That's right, my friends. I daresay Lord Business is superior to Plainview. If Eli was the villain, this would be super obvious, since he's too obssesed with God and too easily manipulated by the "good guy" and was very cowardly especially by the end, since Plainview got his awesome business and isn't even giving the other half to Eli since Plainview is so selfish. Yeah, even if Plainview is the good guy, he's so cruel he might as well be the bad guy. So let's have this showdown; Plainview vs Lord Business. You might say "well 9space even said it himself, the beginning made it seem like he was the good guy, it makes you care about his injuries and feel sympathic about his start of a mining business. However, Lord Business is far better than Plainview. He's dastardly and mean, hiring the unpredictable Bad Cop to do his dirty work.
After he found about the good cop side, he cruelly erased that side and forced him to freeze his own parents, showing how evil he really was. He even killed the good old master-builder, who turned into a ghost as a result of thus.
However, once it is revealed that Lord Business was only the father in the child's imagination, we get an idea of how severe his father is. "The Man Upstairs" is portrayed as such a selfish man that his son gave him an entirely new personality, with cruelty and ruthlessness. However, once it is revealed that he permanently glues the Legoes solely for his purpose and gives no chance to see his son's creations, his father really sees that he has been limiting his son too much. Lord Business sees the creativity that flows and the possible creations he could do with the help of Emmet. This all makes sense and is connected together, thus we have a developed villain that is not one-sided, he has a good heart to him and realizes he was wrong to limit his son! The child's father/Lord Business is willing to change; he doesn't have to be evil and selfish, he can get his way, not everything has to be perfect in one place!!! This lesson is simply amazing!! On the other hand does There'll be Blood teach a lesson? "Don't trust others"? "Don't pray to God too much and piss Plainview off??" No, this R-rated movie certainly doesn't teach a lesson. Although the antagonist succeeds in his plan epicly and maliciously manages to throw everyone in his path away, he's otherwise one-dimensional, he doesn't give Eli the least chance. A true villain would get rid of Eli when Eli least suspects it and have Eli trust him until the very last needed moment. Sounds familiar?
Yeah, we're not talking about The Lion King, but I'm making an example of an actually detailed and good villain. Similarly, Lord Business easily manipulates the whole world into oblivion with his own "Hakuna Matata": "Everything is Awesome". This catchy song gives the illusion of happiness, and care-free the world simply doesn't have. The father is giving the son toys, and possibly playing with him with other games to give the illusion that he wasn't limiting his creativity nor limiting his expression of his imagination. Lord Business is simply far too dastardly, evil and sadistic for this Plainview guy to even think of beating.
3. The good guy in The Lego Movie is better
Of course, if Plainview was the good guy Emmet would stand no chance. However my analysis of the movie highlights the impossibility of Plainview being the good guy. Again, even Plainview states in the synopsis that he wants nobody else to succeeds and doesn't even give Eli the other 5,000 dollars he promised. Definitely not things a good guy would do. So we can only suppose Eli was the good guy. But Eli is so dumb! He just prays to God forever and ever and ends up financially broke, pleading Plainview for the money. Of course, Eli is so dumb even at the end of the movie he hasn't figured out who was the bad guy. On the other hand at least Emmet built the only thing that survived a massive explosion, even if not intentionally.
He even came up with a clever plan to infiltrate Lord Business's building that almost worked!! In fact, he was like one inch from getting the piece of resistance onto the kragle when the bad cop and his minions came bursting in. Source: http://v.gd...
On the other hand Eli was nowhere close to even putting a stop to Plainview or even realizing he was the bad guy. This just shows that the main character/protagonist/good guy in the Lego Movie has more development and is a more likeable character than Eli ever was in TWbB.
4. The superior ending of the Lego Movie
You may think "alright you got me on those two but there's no way you can beat my movie's ending", but you're wrong yet again. Everyone loves a happy ending. No matter if Plainview is the good guy or the bad guy, you're rooting for him. He manipulates everyone successfully and gets rid of his rival, then says "I'm finished." (see: http://www.imdb.com...) That's good right? All the problems are solved. Plainview got his amazing oil company, nobody can do anything to stop it, Eli's annoying praying is gone. However, The Lego Movie kicks TWbB's butt in the ending. In The Lego Movie, after the extremely tense moment of the interaction between Emmet and Lord Business, or to be more accurate, the father-and-son reaction, the two conciliate and unfreeze everyone, and they all live happily ever after....and things seem lame, right? You expect things to go right while "lame" heroic music plays, after all, it's a PG movie! However, the ending is more than unpredictable. After all the cruelty of Lord Business, he finally changed and decided to admit his son's freedom, and everything is going happy--until there's revealed that the son has a sister and the father wants the sister to play as well....which leads to the humorous cliff-hanger ending where not everything is alright, and ironically the solution only caused another problem.
"WE ARE COMING TO TAKE OVER"
(Batman) "Oh, NO."
As you can see the ending is far superior because there's a humorous cliff-hanger at the end in contrast to the "happy ending" of There'll be Blood.
In conclusion I have shown 4 ways The Lego Movie is better than There'll be Blood. Onto you, con. Good luck on your rebuttals.
The quality of a film can in certain aspects be judged. If I have 3 identical films, none of them are in any way 'unique' in relation to the other, the quality thereof may be judged for certain aspects. The production, set, character, music etc. Now, if a fourth film arises, changes the essential framework of a film, it can be said that this film is 'unique'. Now, uniqueness is not in and of itself 'good' but if those unique changes, the changes are themselves amazing, we can say, this film not only took a bold step by breaking the mould, but itself created a groundbreaking and revolutionary film. A film that stepped away from the general consensus to try something new. This is 'There will be Blood'. Now, I am arguing this film did something unconvential, it attempted things either not done often that proved it to be a one of a kind film. Three notable points
1. A morally confused protagonist.
2. Plot structure
3. Supporting characters.
Now, these points are in all films, but it is how these are done in 'There Will Be Blood' that make it outstanding in quality and also groundbreaking in terms of an overall film. These positive remarks will ultimately prove it to be a 'classic', that will stand the test of time and will not fall into the more general categories of film like 'The Lego Movie' will.
1. Daniel Plainview.
Notably the acting is just superb, it is convincing and thought-provoking, for now, let's look at how Daniel Plainview is as a man. His motives are Capitalism, money and idealism, he conveys himself as a man of notable respect, able to win crowds and manipulate people around him. He cannot simply be a 'baddie' or a 'good guy', my opponent has not seen the film and so, those terms for anyone who has seen it, is overly simplistic. Daniel Plainview finds himself caught on multiple tracks, from being an oil baron, father, and a 'man of the people'. His ability to transition throughout the film, from someone of admirable qualities, a business man who knows how to play the field, to what becomes a reclusive alcoholic, almost embittered, but with no discernible reason beyond and I quote
"I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed. I hate most people."
He is interesting to watch, to see, to observe his callous nature and then on the other hand is soft spoken and confidence filled reassurance. To call him a 'baddie' is to ignore almost all the progress, turmoil and distress he goes through. Like saying 'Jacob's ladder' is just a bit weird, would be the equivalent of calling Plainview simply 'bad'. His development is totally astray from a thriller, or an action, to me, that makes him a memorable character. You are constantly observing, for slight movement, little remarks. I hold this type of development in a character as a protagonist is as unnerving and exciting as Anton Chigurh in 'No Country For Old Men', but this film makes him a main character, note the Citizen Kane esque development and transition a main character gets.
The Plot is unconvential and intense, Tarentino-esque dialogue, intense subtlies and importantly no obvious resolution or hero. These types of films do not get made as often as they used to because they are risky. I am unsure as to why my opponent doesn't acknowledge the importance of difference. My points previous all note the differences, but remember, I specified why these differences all tied into the film. The plot is intricate, each character interacting in a world created for them, acting into a plot that doesn't follow a stale tradition of intro, attempt, all-time low, heroic high, nicely tied resolution. Note, Batman trilogy for this or any recent family comedy.
We know it and anticipate the 'hero' at his lowest, rising up and defeating his demons, getting the girl and so be it. Even when this plot is tightly followed, like the Lego Movie, the overall structure leaves no amount of realism, no amount of spontaneity, and connecting yourself to the film becomes a tedious exercise in futility.
Futility in 'There will Be Blood comes from watching the slow destruction, random inexplicable scenes, from the burning of the oil rig, to the oil pipe line conversion. The dominating power of Plainview, and Eli allow for these events to be moulded to their will, and makes the entire situation more believable, they work themselves into the scenes, make them their own, capitalise, admit defeat and this is what makes it engaging, it engages you via the risks it takes.
3. supporting actors
The characters are fantastic, Eli, Plainview's son, the growth and change of his son in the shadow of his father, in light of the family relationship Eli has with his father, the circular attitudes of Eli beating his father, when he receives a beating from Plainview gives a surreal insight into how the characters are reacting within the framework of the film. I will post a view of Mr.Bundy's acting and the parisoners, espciecally Eli's, he blows away most actors I have seen, note the subtle words of Plainview, the reaction of Eli, the attempt to disgrace Plainview, and the drive of the pastor in light of that. It is gripping, and this is just one of a many scenes of turmoil and intrigue.
I will give a quick rebuttal to my opponents summary of 'There Will Be Blood'.
It is a portrait of a man, not a picture of him,and. The intro sets the tone and pace of the move, a necessary move, it also displays the determinism, drive and movites of the opponent, we can see this in relation to the his dirve to get to the town, and going straight to a jewellers to check the ore. I won't use the words 'Good Guy' or 'Bad Guy', in the way I won't use 'Superhero', they have no place in this film, they are too simplistic.
My opponent's belief that his character is 'better' than Plainview, means nothing in light of the fact, my opponent hasn't watched the film. Now it is not a requirement for the debate, but when discussing the specific nature of the character, I would suspect watching the film would stop him from saying these sorts of things.
"Plainview got his awesome business"
"he's so cruel he might as well be the bad guy"
"A true villain would get rid of Eli when Eli least suspects it and have Eli trust him until the very last needed moment. Sounds familiar? "
Since you posted a picture of the Lion King, and asked 'does this sound familiar' you're implying somehow that is it like the Lion King, it is not, Eli doesn't least expect anything, the characters are different, and the motives are not equal. Plainview doesn't view Eli as a king or owner of anything, so I see how not watching the movie wreaks any attempt to discuss it here. Plainview is just better developed entirely, his character persona, and motives are subtle and questionable, and note the video's I posted, and how they truly dissolve the black and white narrative my opponent wants to use.
"Everyone loves a happy ending."
Do they? How do you know that? I don't, I prefer a good film with a decent sad ending, that a bad film with a happy ending.
The ending of 'There Will Be Blood' is not attempting to resolve and tidy anything as my opponent believes, it is a portrait into the development of a man and his beliefs and motives, my opponent's comparison's don't really work.
The three points above, combined with the real set, pace and tone of the movie, make it a surreal and successful risk in what can be considered a unique and engaging film, in my second post I will discuss soundtrack and reception. and compare this film to my opponents and also critique his arguments. I also want to say, if you are going to critique my film, you need to be accurate.
Goldman, Michael (November 1, 2007). "Old-Fashioned Filmmaking". Retrieved February 24, 2008.
1. Daniel Plainview
The simple fact is that we can't decide whether this guy is good or bad. We don't know. My opponent even says he's caught on multiple tracks, so I'll just step back and pretend this guy is supposed to be a Captian-Jack-Sparrow neutral-kind of guy. However, in order for you to like him and sympasize with him, he has to be the good guy. We cannot feel sorry for the bad guy, and even though he suffered injuries, these are so minor compared to his vast achievements that he HAS to be the good guy for us to like him. If we end up with an unlikable character still surviving at the end of the film and living a happy life; then we won't like the movie. Take The Lego Movie's villain, for example. We hate Lord Business, and it would be unbelieable if we knew he would survive before we got to the cilmax of the film. Lord B. simply seems too torturous and cruel before he is presented as an actual human, he CANNOT survive if he only had this one side. All we see of Plainview is mean, manipulative, evil, selfish. My opponent hasn't said ONE GOOD THING he's done. EVER. He wants the business for his money. He wants to kill everyone in his way, and betray his own son. We just can't live throughout the movie with such an evil character living. On the other hand at least Lord Business had a light side to him, he was torturing his son mentally on the inside so much that his son viewed it as "erasing good cop", "killing the master builder", "maliciously taking full control of the Lego Universe", but in reality it was just his selfish mind. The father learned to look at the problem from another perspective and really absorbed a lesson from his son, showing that he listens. In fact, he goes so far as to suggest his sister joins! This really shows development within our villain, while There'll be Blood simply has a villain we can't possibly live with and will force us to squirm in our seats, waiting for the ultimate demise of this dastardly b*itch, only to find out he succeeded with his evil plan.
My opponent makes very interesting points that make me want to go and watch There'll be blood. However, although There'll be blood seems to have a very intricate plot that seems to be trying to be a realistic film--no real "good guy" or "bad people", The Lego Movie is very complex as well. It is very confusing when it starts off and leaves you thinking hard about what just happened. Questions go through your mind as the movie goes on. In merely the first 20-minutes or so, you're left with a lot of unsolved problems. Here is a few mind-boggling questions that people probably are thinking after Wyldstyle saves Emmet:
-What is the Kragle?
-What does Lord Business want to do with the Kragle?
-Why does everyone have to follow the "instructions"?
-Who is this "special"?
-What is this "piece of resistance"?
There are, of course, many more unsolved mysteries, and those make the movie complex as well as make you actually think about the movie. The Lego Movie is certainly far more complex than your average PG movie, and it could certainly match up to the level of There'll be Blood.
3. Supporting guys
My opponent tries to say Eli is an amazing actor using merely one scene. That's actually fine for me. I'll use the most gripping scene I know--once again, you meet the climax of the movie.
(source: http://www.imdb.com...) In the climax, our main character Emmet states: "You don't have to be the bad guy. You are the most talented, most interesting, and most extraordinary person in the universe. And you are capable of amazing things. Because you are the Special...And so is everyone. The prophecy is made up, but it's also true....And you... still... can change everything." This is so heart-touching, I almost cried at this scene. This alludes to the very beginning of the movie, where the old master builder makes a "prophecy" on the spot about someone being the Special so that everybody would have faith and hope to go on, and the one claimed to be the special would have the courage to save the day, regardless of not being a Special. However, the master builder's plan falls short when Emmet really can't defeat Lord Business and realizes that he isn't really a Special. But the master builder encourages him on nevertheless, saying "You can do it if you believe you can", and Emmet gets transported to the real world and encourages the real son to fight on with the Piece of Resistance. Then he gets transported back and both Emmet and the son tell the villain that he was amazing, talented, extraordinary in reality. He didn't have to make everything to seem "perfect" and therefore "boring". He didn't have to lock away his son's creativity. This crucial lesson came from a lame plan. It transformed into a "trust in yourself", which was still lame and cliche. Then it transformed into a lesson to being a father, a lesson to standing up for oneself, a lesson that is taught in few other films. If Plainview is the "bad guy", then Eli made a poor job of standing up to his old man. If Eli is the true "bad guy", then he is a terrible bad guy. He didn't even once come close to beating his father, and did so much immoral things that Plainview simply had to ruthlessly kill his own son. *Shakes head* Eli is really not a good character, whether good or bad. Plainview is simply much too OP for Eli to even fathom to defeat, since he fooled the public, fooled his competitors, and most importantly, fooled his own son.
Interesting...so the movie There'll be Blood is basically about a clever man's life and success in business? I apologize, I seemed to got it wrong. However, The Lego Movie still beats There'll be Blood.
-It has comedy which families will like along with their kids, and there's load of jokes in there
-It is very very complex for a PG movie, possibly comparable with There'll be Blood
-It has a sweet nice romance that combines very well with the comedy
-It has action and excitement, combining with the audience's confusion to stir up the tension and actually have us care about this Lego Universe
-It has an amazing, pretty much unbeatable climax, the most intense scene in the movie and one of the best solutions eer
-it has some pretty dark parts as well that contrast greatly against the comedy, as mentioned above Lord B. can be very cruel and sadistic
-Everyone is very developed. Emmet may be uncreative but he's still smart, coming up with a nice plan that 99% worked, the pirate's personality is cool and interesting, Batman is super cool, along with Wyldstyle, and the unikitty is not a one-sided always-giddy character. Did I mention Lord B. has a light side in addition to his cruel side? Yeah, it's pretty amazingly executed
-The ending is pretty much also undefeatable
Thus, I have upheld my resolution. Although There'll be Blood might be a masterpiece in a realistic, different way that entertains in a different direction, The Lego Movie features positive emotions along with emotions but transfers into a sad, tense emotion as Emmet starts to lose his battle, and the emotions go back up to joyous and a sly ending cliff-hanger caused just by the solution. And of course, the characters are more developed. There'll be Blood only needs to develop 2 characters (okay, 3 counting H.W.) while The Lego Movie manages the difficult task of developing all of the main cast very deeply, including Emmet, Lord B, Unikitty, Batman, WyldStyle, and Vitruvius.
Back to you, con.
Continuing my positive arguments.
The soundtrack is an original composition by Johnny Greenwood, the guitarist for Radiohead. It contains ominous and subtle violins to just keep the character's presence and interaction with each other at the level of surreal 'forward' planning, adding to Plainview and Eli, the pastor's motives, actions and deceit. It not only intensifies the scenes, it creates the atmosphere for believability, something most films don't acknowledge. Films notably treat the soundtrack as a 'time-waster', something to keep you occupied in the background. Comedies and Action films do this, they use the soundtrack to convey the emotions that they fail to convey by their actors.
The Lego movies' song is fine, it is upbeat, but that means nothing in terms of quality, appealing to the mass is obviously a popular move, but I don't think we can just assume popular music is quality music, and for me, the risk 'There Will Be Blood' to have no singing, bar the actors, no upbeat tempo, unconventional uses of an orchestra, could have totally ruined the film, but it didn't. It created memorable scenes.
In Conclusion there is no doubt 'There will be Blood' is a masterpiece it ins own right, which makes it harder to show how the Lego Movie could be better, remember my opponent needs to show that the Lego Movie is better, not just good but better than my movie, now a comparison of very obvious points.
I would conclude the film that has memorable moments and characters, that will last. My opponent has not shown why his film is even note worthy let alone good, he singles out some minor points of contention, but that doesn't mean his movie is 'better' just that it has better parts. I have given a detailed summary of why my film will last the ages, and is overall a better production, at most my opponent shows, some very minor portions are better, that is if I concede everything, and that still would not be enough.
With risks like Plainview's development and character, the original composition of music to not carry but amplify the acting thereby relying on the actors ability to create the complexity of the character, I must now quickly note the camera, the camera was a Panavision XL 35mm, the pace of the film perfectly matches the camera, and that itself needed the full believability of the set, which was almost always handcrafted, and the acting.
Well clearly both have a large soundtrack, but the involvement and detail of TWBB's seems to be so0mething of an original production, compared to the Lego Movies cheaper attempt to simply 'make audience's enjoy the music. Nice, but simply not in the ball park of what TWBB attempted. TWBB's music amplified moment, not carried it. You can watch the entire film with no soundtrack and still get the general emotions, but you cannot do that with the Lego Movie, the Lego movie uses music as a crutch, not as asset, the risk therefore makes it a unique, and quality driven film centred around the actors and their transitions in life at the turn of the century.
On Character development
It seems like TWBB is just a clear winner on this, from the acting, emotion and subtle nuances, this simply cannot compare to the more obvious, and if I am honest stale recycled emotions that 'Lego blocks' convey. I doubt my opponent will really try argue that you could even scratch the surface of the emotions and turmoil conveyed by the actors. Afi's jury notes, and I agree
Daniel Day-Lewis creates a character so rich and so towering, that "Daniel Plainview" will haunt the history of film for generations to come.
Does my Opponent have a single notable example of a character of this depth? No, let's be honest, it's characters are largely superficial, and are used as plot devices or comedic light, they don't have the development my characters do, and so, which is better?
"My opponent hasn't said ONE GOOD THING he's done"
Plainview created jobs, infrastructure, held events and encouraged his son to join him on trips, to bond, he even accepted his 'brother' back into his life. The moral character of Plainview may be fraught with bad but it is overly simplistic to just state he is a 'bad guy'. He notably stops Eli's father from beating his little daughter.
yeah, I just don't buy the Lego Movie, which I have seen, really has a plot as deep and engaging as TWBB, the religious undercurrent of a Cain and Abel-esque relationship of the twins, the concept of Capitalism, these are just touching on the themes, the Lego Movie does not have the memorable themes or moments to really carry it farther than TWBB.
"My opponent tries to say Eli is an amazing actor using merely one scene."
Go watch the movie, if needs be, but it is evident the detail and characters far surpass the Lego Movie.
"the movie There'll be Blood is basically about a clever man's life and success in business?"
No, it is far more in depth of tone, religious, political, family, community, greed, depression, alcohol and power.
-It has comedy which families will like along with their kids, and there's load of jokes in there
No doubt, but I never said it didn't, I said it simply won't last the ages compared to the multiple factors relating to TWBB.
'Possibly', do you want me to answer if it is or not? I need an argument, I gave some heavy details about the plot in my opening, we don't really have that from you.
1. An original and tailored soundtrack
2. Memorable, detailed and engaging, and relatable characters both good and bad relation ability. While the Lego Movie's cannot compare against them in any real way.
3. A surreal look into the life of a man and the time he lived in. Nothing in the Lego Movie really relates, hits home and makes you think, it is not that type of movie, and unfortunately it will not last the ages that serious movies do.
Outstanding cast, setting and production
It is not a cheap shot to challenge the Lego Movie on depth, relatability or characters, those things make a movie memorable, they make it a classic, and a classic beats a 'decent' or 'funny' movie. Citizen Kane beats There's something about Mary, There Will Be Blood beats the Lego Movie in both the general (plot, characters, music, acting) and the specific (transitions, emotive ability, turmoil).
My opponent also never gave us reason to consider his movie any good, he said why his movie may beat mine in specific areas (intro, main character), but never gave us an overall idea as to why the movie is overall better. Venom in the early Spider-Man movie may be a slightly cooler villain than the Indiana Jones, and maybe Indiana Jones isn't as fleshed out a character as Peter Parker, for arguments sake that is, but still 'overall' all things considered, Indiana Jones is just a better film, for specific details. Those details have been given for my film, and his arguments have been seriously challenged to the point where his opening doesn't really capture what TWBB is really conveying.
My opponent has not given reason to believe his film is overall a good film, I have for mine. He has only picked very minute and specific points, but that won't win the debate. I am not arguing the Lego Movie is bad, I am simply saying it is not as good compared to mine, for the overall and broad reaching points, my opponent needs to address. For my notable factors and comparisons, I feel it is obvious TWBB is simply a masterpiece in its own right and while we have no positive arguments for the overall film of 'Lego Film', and his comparisons have been challenged seriously, I believe we can conclude TWBB is a better quality film.
"AFI Movies of the Year Official Selections".American Film Institute. Retrieved November 18, 2012.
The Lego Movie actually has a pretty soundtrack even ignoring "Everything is Awesome". From the first moment Lord Business enters, you are grabbed by tension and excitement, along with nervousness, even if you're not sure what is going on. The cool plan, the infiltration, the doomed defeat, the music transitions from cool to exiting into sad gloomy failure, perfectly fitting alongside with what is going on. The soundtrack even changes to humorously suit Emmet's love for Wyldestyle. Especially the climax music, it feels chilling to the heart and makes it seem as if the whole world has stopped just for Emmet to talk to Lord Business. It shows the Father really is dedicated to his son and is willing to give his son one last chance to defend himself, while his son is really looking deep into his heart and speaking the whole truth. The amazing interaction while the Father unfreezes is just simply heart-warming, and the nice-music that goes along with it leaves our guards down for the slap of the hilarious ending in our faces, with dramatic music playing for emphasis.
This is a very minor point. The Lego Movie looks like stop-motion animation but is actually (mostly) CGI. It nearly had me fooled, too, had I not looked it up. See: http://stopmotionexplosion.com...;
Actually, I'm sure you can watch The Lego Movie without the music (with the possible exception of Everything is Awesome). The crude moments of Lord Business are still very crude, you still know Emmet is crazily in love with Wyldstyle, you still get to enjoy the calm peaceful moment of father-and-son relationship getting solved, and most importantly you still aren't prepared for the slap in your face when you learn the fact the son has a sister that is going to play with him, causing a nightmare invasion in his imagination. In these crucial moments, the music really isn't a crutch, it amplifies just as TWbB manages.
Plainview vs Legos?
I have provided Lord Business. I have shown many examples of why he has a lot of dimension to his character. In addition, Emmet is very complex as well as I have shown in my previous rounds. Voters and my opponent, please read more carefully and decide whether or not I have shown Lord B/Emmet as complex as Plainview.
Good things Plainview has done: Oh, I'm sorry. It seems Plainview seems to have balanced out all his malicious intents, but that still doesn't excuse his selfishness in wanting no competition and willingness to kill Eli when he gets in the way.
My opponent makes some good points about the themes from There'll be Blood. However, does this beat the amazing lesson from the Lego Movie?? It is up to him to show that the themes/lesson from There'll be Blood are portrayed better than the amazing lesson, I have already shown how awesome and detailed it is displayed and what effort the producers went through to teach people about such a lesson.
1. The Lego Movie has just as good of a soundtrack
2. The Lego Movie has good awesome developed characters that can be compared up to the characters in There'll be Blood
3. The Lego Movie is actually a symbollic representative of the battle that goes on between father-and-son, if they showed the real "battle" it would be boring, but in his imagination we really get to see how he feels and how far he think he is restricted due to his father's unwillingness to allow his creativity to flow. The Lego Movie is actually 4/5 abstract representation, it shows the son's feelings and how developed he really is, providing a parrallel world for you to see how tense the father-and-son relationship has gotten. The Lego Movie is such a masterpiece, it shows lego life without actually showing real life while still making sense.
I have upheld my resolution and not only defeated my opponent in big parts of the movie--as he considers, but little parts of the movie as well.
This was a good tough debate.
VOTE FOR ME.
Fun debate, I enjoyed it, I suspect my opponent enjoyed it too, at least I hope he did.
My challenge in this debate was to describe why TWBB is a classic, I gave summaries, descriptions of the plot and explanations of the use of music and filmography. Now, this was because, a film is like a fine car's engine, lots of little singular pieces that pull together to make a beautiful finished product. My opponent though didn't actually give us a reason to suspect his film is good, let alone overall better than mine. Now, I don't doubt Lego Movie is a decent film, but not compared to mine, and since no argument was given.
My opponent did pick apart singular aspects of my film, and let's pretend I conceded them all, even though I countered them. Those singular points wouldn't prove his film is of a better quality overall. Parts of an engine being slightly better than another, is possible, but if that car cannot perform when all is said and done, then it has failed. If those singular parts don't mesh into a film but rather sit on the platform without interaction, then we can say it is not a good finished product. Now, TWBB, to me, has met any criterion set, especially on the very general points, which I wanted to stick to, music, film, plot, character development and the film overall.
No doubt, the music on the 'Lego Movie' is decent, but that doesn't tell us on a comparison why it is better like I argued previous, it is not using it as boldly and originally as TWBB, re-read my specific points in relation to this.
See, the point of Plainview is to be complex, dark and ultimately a glimpse into the sadder side of mining and family. I think this just requires you to watch the film, everyone should.
That doesn't really prove yours is better than mine, this seems like a concession.
They can be compared, but again, my examples, videos and explanations back up the strength of the development over the 'Lego Movie'.
1. From Plainview to Eli to Bandy, the characters are developed, moulding their sets to their will, interacting with each other in both attempts to connect and gain, and ultimately cementing themselves in the history of film, unlike The Lego Movie's characters.
2. The Plot is unorthodox, a risk, a successful risk, a reinvention of the traditional plot, a risk that works with the other factors, it doesn't like The Lego Movie, employ a used and tired plot.
3.Plainview himself was a risk, and alone his character is striking and memorable, over any character in The Lego Movie.
4. Music, set and filming work together to create a world for these individuals to inhabit.
In conclusion, TWBB is simply a better quality film.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|