thebackalleys
doritos and tomodachis
You are not logged in.
( Login | Register )

GUNS OF TEH AWESOME

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mishkamash
  • *
  • 4,154 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://mishkamash.sheezyart.com/
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #100 on: November 28, 2008 05:29 PM »
i agree with what psi said because it makes sense!
<lenko> i saw a hedgehog on the way home if i was drunk i would have yelled IM DOCTOR RRRRROBOTNIK and chased it 

Offline emanhattan
  • *
  • 4,655 posts
  • 29
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://emanhattan.newgrounds.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #101 on: November 28, 2008 05:36 PM »
Im going to write this without checking so Im sorry if I mispelled anythingñ

Ok, egoraptor, I get you. You are a human like all of us, you like money and having fun making cartoons and eating ice cream.
I respect that. I dont think there is anything wrong with that.

And you can animate pretty well if you try, because some of your work is pretty neat too.

The problem isnt that you have fun, the problem is that you dont see that you are damaging more artists than the ones you claim you are influencing to animate.

while the animations that you make in like, one day get a fuckton views, other artists are dying to get some people to notice them.

a god example being leafworthy. His khale flash was impressive, and it is currently number 47 of the top 50 in ng (wich doesnt work at all because on the top there should be it and the brackenwood cartoons).

This man worked probably 4 or 5 months in that flash, and he only got like 150,000 views. you see how unfair that gap is? You made gears of awesome and released it less than a week ago and it already has the double of it.

I just remembered that kirbopher made his brawl movie and released it at  about the same date, and he got like 5 times that ammount of views. you see?

kirbopher and leafworhy.
who deserved most views?
who worked the most?
who truly puts passion and effort into making something incredible just to see how a mediocre cartoon recieves all praise?

Have you ever found yourself in a similar situation? or can you recall an excelent piece that got ignored because some AWESOME VAGAINAZ was in top of the frontpage at Ng?

What makes you think leafworthy is not human too and that he doesnt like getting money and getting views and taking crap? huh?
You can win money and all if you want but you have to keep in mind that there are a lot of artists that work a lot and that are not recieving as much attention as you are. I asume getting 150,000 for a movie you made must be awesome, but getting one million views for some sloppy work must be even more awesome!

One day you will make something original or incredible you put your soul into, and will be most likely ignored because someone lazyer than you made a crappy thing. oh and he is going to say its for fun too.

All animators in Ng deserve some attention, you included, but you have to admit that you are influencing good animators to be ignored.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2008 05:39 PM by eman »

Offline emanhattan
  • *
  • 4,655 posts
  • 29
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://emanhattan.newgrounds.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #102 on: November 28, 2008 05:50 PM »
oh and one more thing.

I REALLY REALLY tried to just ignore the awesome things and try to keep my mind off all that stuff. I liked before all
the massvoting started.

but it is REAAAAAAAAAAALLLY fucking hard not to think about it when every fucking single place in ng has something about egoraptor written there.

I LOVE TEH EGORAPTR MAKE MORE AWESOM MOVIZ....

YOU SHOULD BE LIKE EGORAPTOR BECAUISE....

THIS NO FUNNY YOU WNAT TO BE FUNNY YOU SHOULD BE LIKE EGORA9TOR

pretty much this is what bothers MY own self about it.

I think your stuff is overrated, and recieves a fuckton of views, but Im not directly affected by that.

its you fans that are SUCH FUCKING DICK SUCKERS that make me wanna die
« Last Edit: November 28, 2008 05:51 PM by eman »

Offline sQueef
  • *
  • 4,822 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://campnorth.tv/profile/squeef
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #103 on: November 28, 2008 05:52 PM »
WHO CARES ABOUT ANY OF THIS SHIT
FUCK YOU FAGGOTS
Oh, wretched ephemeral race … why do you compel me to tell you what it would be most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is utterly beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. But the second best for you is—to die soon.

Offline emanhattan
  • *
  • 4,655 posts
  • 29
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://emanhattan.newgrounds.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #104 on: November 28, 2008 05:54 PM »
I just realized how gay I am for ranting all that shit.

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #105 on: November 28, 2008 05:57 PM »
God why the fuck would you have an opinion damn man you are shit for having an opinion you should be like AlvinEarthworm he has no opinions and that makes him really great

Offline sQueef
  • *
  • 4,822 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://campnorth.tv/profile/squeef
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #106 on: November 28, 2008 05:58 PM »
FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, wretched ephemeral race … why do you compel me to tell you what it would be most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is utterly beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. But the second best for you is—to die soon.

Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #107 on: November 28, 2008 06:01 PM »
Quote from: Squeef
WHO CARES ABOUT ANY OF THIS SHIT
egoraptor

Offline shura
Male
  • *
  • 3,154 posts
  • 12
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #108 on: November 28, 2008 06:31 PM »
can we just kill it?

Offline Cambo
  • *
  • 126 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://cambo.newgrounds.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #109 on: November 28, 2008 06:54 PM »
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: Squeef
WHO CARES ABOUT ANY OF THIS SHIT
egoraptor

i think it's pretty retarded to say after the countless posts, threads, rants and CARTOONS bitching about how egoraptor is killing originality, that only egoraptor cares about this.

OH UNLESS SHOCK HORROR THOSE MYTHICAL ANIMATORS WHO ARE CRYING OVER THEIR LACK OF ATTENTION AT THE HANDS OF THE AWESOME SERIES - UNLESS [size=]NOBODY ACTUALLY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THEM[/size]



but i doubt that's the case because that'd be hypocritical! and nobody here is a hypocrite.

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #110 on: November 28, 2008 07:01 PM »
Fuck you idiots.  Would you really want people to be inspired by someone who has the receptiveness of Illwillpress?  Would you want people to think that listening and responding to criticism is a chore?  Its great and all for people to get a start on art, but learning to recieve criticism is essential for improvement.

I respond to every shitty review on even the shittiest of my flashes, and often write serious replies on serious critiques.

I don't give a shit about some E-faggot's art career, I would rather see a next generation of people like Mindchamber than Alvin-Earthworm.

But thats just my opinion buzz buzz buzz

Offline ZekeySpaceyLizard
  • *
  • dinky doodle
  • 4,947 posts
  • 61
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • zekeyspaceylizard on Skype
    • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #111 on: November 28, 2008 07:03 PM »
The story of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is about a man who createdsomething that messes with nature, and nature came back to mess with himbecause nature is more powerful than man. Victor Frankenstein was very interested in natural philosophy andchemistry and basically tried to play G-d by creating life. When hefound the secret of activating dead flesh, he created a superhuman beingcomposed of rotted corpses. What he did was considered unthinkable, andhe was haunted by his own creation. When the monster escaped, Frankenstein knew that he had to deal withthe consequences of what the monster might do. Frankenstein received aletter one day which informed him of his younger brother William'smurder, and immediately suspected that he was responsible, for he wasthe creator of the hideous monster. A friend of the family namedJustine Moritz was the "presumed" murderer, and Frankenstein wasdetermined to prove her innocent. Circumstantial evidence, however, ledthe courts to believe Justine guilty, because found in her pocket was aphotograph which had belonged to William. Justine had been put to death, and Frankenstein had yet to find hiscreation. Finally, upon their meeting, the monster confessed to hiscreator of what he had been through, how he was rejected by society, andfinally, how he had come to kill William. When William had revealed hisname to the monster, the monster immediately figured that by killing theyoung boy, he would have revenge on Frankenstein for giving him life. The monster did not understand the concept of right and wrong and heespecially didn't mean to kill anybody. His expression of anger endedup being violent, even fatal to the victim, and it just worked out thathe killed people. As the monster's story continued, he demanded of Frankenstein a femalemate who he can be with until his end, and promised to live away fromsociety. Frankenstein, meanwhile, tried to restore the monster'sdemented mind so he could live a normal life. Although at first Frankenstein agreed to create a friend for themonster, he changed his mind for fear that between the two of them, hislife, as well as many others, would be in danger. The creature wantedrevenge, and so everything important in Frankenstein's life ended upbeing destroyed, including his wife and best friend.
Most Americans have some idea of who Frankenstein is, as a result of many Frankenstein movies and popularity of monster. However, most people’s ideas are incorrect about Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein is the name of the scientist, not monster, and the monster himself is not the inarticulate, rage-driven criminal that Robert de niro shows in the 1994 film version of the novel. Shelley’s original Frankenstein was misrepresented by this Kenneth branagh film, most likely to send a different message to the movie audience than Shelley’s novel shows to its readers. The conflicting messages of technologies deserve being dependent on its creator (address by Shelley) and poetic justice, or triumph over evil (showed by the movie) is best represented by the scene immediately preceding Frankenstein’s monster’s death.
In Shelley’s novel, the final picture of Frankenstein’s monster reveals important qualities of his inner nature; he is shown in the last moments of his life to be felling, fully conscious of his guilt, and firm in his decision to end his life. This is the conclusion of a long series of events providing insight into how the monster changed as a result of his creator’s actions and the actions of the people with whom he came in contact. Up until this final point, he has changed from being good and hopeful to being caught up in the desire for a companion, to being evil and only focused on revenge. All these changes are recounted by the monster himself in this scene. (Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine)
He was at one point motivated by many good things like as virtue and honor, so much so that he wanted a companion to share in his happy life. “When I first sought it [sympathy], it was the love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affection with which my whole being overflowed, that I wished to be participated. . . . Once my fancy was soothed with dreams of virtue, of fame, and of enjoyment. . . . I was nourished with high thoughts of honor and devotion.” (154) He did not start out as an evil being, but rather was good by nature and exposed early in his life to good things. (Allen, g.s)
Frankenstein’s and society’s rejection of the monster, however, drove him to an uneven passionate pursuit for a companion. He forced Frankenstein to create a female monster, and he provided motivation by killing Frankenstein’s loved ones and threatening to kill more of them. The monster recalls in this final scene of Shelley’s novel how his desire drove him to evil. “. . . do you think that I was then dead to agony and remorse?--He . . . suffered not more in the consummation of the deed;--oh! Not the ten-thousandth portion of the anguish that was mine during the lingering detail of its execution. A frightful selfishness hurried me on. . . .” (153) At that point in the novel, the monster has changed from good in nature to evil in nature. His own desires are more important to him than the well-being of others and he is willing to commit murder in order ensure the fulfillment of his desire.
The second change the monster makes is becoming totally motivated by revenge. He becomes completely evil, not looking for a companion but only the unhappiness and suffering of Frankenstein, his creator. “... I was the slave, not the master of an impulse, which I detested, yet could not disobey. ... The contemplation of my demoniacal design became an insatiable passion.” (153-4) although the monster may have wanted to behave in an honorable way, he give up to his anger and decided to live for the purpose of ruining the life of Frankenstein.
All of these changes, though, after Frankenstein die. Upon seeing Frankenstein’s corpse, the monster is overcome by sorrow and remorse. He exclaims, “Oh, Frankenstein! Generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me?” (153) At this point, Shelley’s message about technology is most clear: Technology’s benefits and dangers dependent on its makers. Throughout the book, various passages have hinted about this idea: The early philosophers’ work is disapproved because of the ideas that the scientists believed in, such as the philosopher’s stone. Though their technology laid some foundations for other scientists, their work was considered “trash” because of the creators themselves. The monster’s changes and his ultimate fate mainly dependence on Frankenstein’s actions. (Vlasopolos)
As we have seen, when Frankenstein rejects his monster, the monster seeks companionship of another form as a result of Frankenstein’s actions. When Frankenstein destroys the second monster he was working on, the monster changes his entire reason for living. This also is purely because of the creator’s actions. On a more appreciate level; the monster’s predisposition for evil most likely was the result of the inventor’s state while he was working on his invention. Frankenstein was strike by an intense frenzy while he was working on his monster; as a result, he created an ugly creature that ultimately would be rejected by society and turn evil. The emotional state of the creator affected the technology he was responsible for.
Shelley’s message is a powerful one; however, it is messed up by the Kenneth branagh film version of her novel. In this version, the monster does not seem to undergo any changes at all, besides becoming angrier and seek for revenge. There is no clearer lesson to be learned about technology; in fact, one of the only messages showed by the movie is that of poetic justice, the “bad guy” getting what he deserves. The message about technology is ambiguous, but most likely has something to do with the mix-up of brain. (Aldiss, brain w)
By the end of the movie, the monster has become bad evil, as he became in the book. The reason for this is unclear--perhaps he has become more evil because he was scared by the people who had just chased him to the end of the world, or perhaps this is just the natural result of his criminal brain influencing his behavior. The message is that evil creates evil, which doesn’t provide any new insights about technology; it can be applied to nearly any situation, especially one with a monster involved. The monster is not used as a demonstration of how the creator affects his technology. Instead he is used to scare the movie audience and portray a horrific evil resulting not from the creator’s actions, but various mistakes and torturing.
Robert de niro portrayal of Frankenstein’s monster has created a false myth of an evil, unintelligent monster that is not at all similar to the one Shelley displays in her novel. Not only does the movie spread a false interpretation of Shelley’s work, it provides the public with no lasting message about technology or about the effects of misplaced human love. Shall we then seek revenge? Shall we destroy that what is evil? Of course not--Shelley gave us all to learn a lesson of tolerance and of correcting our mistakes. Perhaps if a more accurate film version of Frankenstein were available to the public, more people would be motivated to read the book and learn Shelley’s powerful message.


Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #112 on: November 28, 2008 07:05 PM »
Quote from: Cambo
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: Squeef
WHO CARES ABOUT ANY OF THIS SHIT
egoraptor

i think it's pretty retarded to say after the countless posts, threads, rants and CARTOONS bitching about how egoraptor is killing originality, that only egoraptor cares about this.

OH UNLESS SHOCK HORROR THOSE MYTHICAL ANIMATORS WHO ARE CRYING OVER THEIR LACK OF ATTENTION AT THE HANDS OF THE AWESOME SERIES - UNLESS [size=]NOBODY ACTUALLY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THEM[/size]



but i doubt that's the case because that'd be hypocritical! and nobody here is a hypocrite.
you're the one dealing absolutes

Offline LordZeebmork
  • *
  • 2,493 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #113 on: November 28, 2008 07:23 PM »
this post probably won't make any sense since I can't be bothered to read any of it

okay now that I think of it this bitching is really lame and pointless and yeah I have to agree with egoraptor at least a bit

there's no real point bitching about things. yes, newgrounds is attracting fucktards by frontpaging mindless shit like the awesome series, and yes, that sucks, but the site owners don't give a fuck about that as long as they make money (sellouts) and those fucktards spend more of their parents' money on ng shirts than intelligent users would. so yeah, the awesome series fits the purpose of newgrounds, which is to make money. if you want a better portal, go to campnorth or something. hell, set up your own.

I usually hate making flash so I haven't signed up on campnorth yet (and I probably never will) because I don't feel like fucking it up with my talentless shitty flash and talentless shittier art but that isn't relevant at all so um
 anyway

egoraptor seriously what makes you think your fans will branch out beyond video game parodies? hopefully they'll grow up, and I've seen that happen before with other things (example: daveb0t started off making madness shit) but it doesn't happen that much

hell, look at me. after I got sick of all the vg shit on newgrounds, I started watching a pile of old j00bie/LL shit and I fucking loved it. then I discovered animutations, fucking loved those, and decided to get flash so I could make some. (actually I think I originally intended to be the next majinpiccolo or some gay shit like that but I realized that that wouldn't work since I was 12 and squeaky prepubescent voiceacting sucks dick!!) two years later I haven't made anything but kes/sinitron ripoffs and shitty animutations. mainly because I'm too lazy to finish any of my larger projects, and as I said, I hate flash.

also egoraptor the only problem I have with you is that you seem to actually think that your awesome series is good or takes any sort of flash skill and anyone who disagrees is an idiot. I wouldn't blame someone who can't get a better job than working at target for supporting that piece of shit store and I would hope that if you get your thumb out of your ass and stop being an egotistical faggot nobody would have a problem with you aside from making shitty video game bullshit. (not like that would ever happen since most of the members here are elitist fuckers who think everyone not in the ss should be kicked off the internet)

hell, you seem to at least be able to either formulate a semi-coherent argument or bullshit enough to confuse me (and thanks to my iq of something like 144 (this is the part where everyone on tba jumps on me for saying shit that I can't prove), that isn't exactly easy) and that's more than some of the regulars here can do.

Quote from: Belief
some people here (faggots like zeebmork and davebut) are spamming gay shit like blank screens cause they're simply bored and don't have a life, they act like they don't care about NG and just want to read funny reviews.
you are an idiot

I have only ever submitted two blank screens so uh

and yeah NG is past the point where it can be saved from mindless consumerist bullshit but if I didn't give a shit about it at all I wouldn't go there.

I make shitty spam because I like making it, and I've liked watching it since sometime in 2003/2004. reviews are definitely part of it but if the reviews and drama were the only part of submitting that I cared about I would have stopped a long time ago.

if I felt like it I could use egoraptor's argument here. apparently I'm like a newgrounds legend or something by this point but I really don't care. people like c1ph3r and labusch like the shit I churn out, and labusch at least seems to have some flash potential, at least from his mozz movie, which he deleted. (now all he needs to do is stop talking like scarymoviefucker.)

but I don't give a shit about getting my dick sucked, or for that matter, any shit on newgrounds besides doing what I like.

Quote
i know that this won't help NG improving but oh well it's fun.
yeah this is what I think about spamming pretty much
« Last Edit: November 28, 2008 07:24 PM by LordZeebmork »
let's all set our phasers on "boring"

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #114 on: November 28, 2008 07:52 PM »
Oh I didn't even notice the part about spam bashing.

Teh fuck you Psi.  Over the years I've submitted about 30 fucking flashes, and all of them were a joy to make, however shitty the outcome.

How this has any bearings over my opinions and the way I view the flash world makes no sense to me, especially since the effort to get something past judgement is absolutely non-existant.  The SS and KK has already raped the portal so hard that nothing is unable to pass without the right application of deception and simple psychology.

If I want to make a shitty loop to a Bill O'riley remix song, I'll do it because I want to.  I'll submit it to NG as an added bonus.  If all I enjoyed was the reviews and trolling, I would not be here.

I do enjoy getting people pissed, but I enjoy a nice debate or insightful review much more.

I guess i have to make a large flash being entirely spiteful to its target audience in order to be cool.

PLUS I enjoy watching flashes like
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/101332
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/436308
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/373298
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/397014
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/390180
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/395798

There is no point bitching about this shit but to see someone better themselves is good.

And yeah I see what ego meant about spam being made because we enjoy it but I don't crank out the same spam flash for my entire flash career.  (I leave that to Afrounderscorestud)  Also what I typed is really gay but fuck, you need to look before you leap.

But I still love to pleasure myself

This statement was made to release any sexual tension encountered.^^

BRB taking my meds

Offline f0d
  • *
  • 2,991 posts
  • 2
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #115 on: November 28, 2008 08:14 PM »
davbut and zeebmork stop typing about yourselves
I have more of a life writing this review at 1145 pm than you guys do making these movies. . .

Offline Swoop
  • *
  • 59 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #116 on: November 28, 2008 08:36 PM »
Read all of it top to bottom. I don't think anything he's expressed is unreasonable. I'm not surprised by most of the response to it either, but I think this was worth be put out there for the sake of "both sides" of the spectrum.

Oh bug you, where d'you find these songs, Heh.

Offline LordZeebmork
  • *
  • 2,493 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #117 on: November 28, 2008 08:51 PM »


fight the system

okay what the fuck why doesn't it work fuck you freehostia suck a dick
« Last Edit: November 28, 2008 08:49 PM by LordZeebmork »
let's all set our phasers on "boring"

Offline f0d
  • *
  • 2,991 posts
  • 2
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #118 on: November 28, 2008 09:03 PM »
Quote from: Zekey
The story of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is about a man who createdsomething that messes with nature, and nature came back to mess with himbecause nature is more powerful than man. Victor Frankenstein was very interested in natural philosophy andchemistry and basically tried to play G-d by creating life. When hefound the secret of activating dead flesh, he created a superhuman beingcomposed of rotted corpses. What he did was considered unthinkable, andhe was haunted by his own creation. When the monster escaped, Frankenstein knew that he had to deal withthe consequences of what the monster might do. Frankenstein received aletter one day which informed him of his younger brother William'smurder, and immediately suspected that he was responsible, for he wasthe creator of the hideous monster. A friend of the family namedJustine Moritz was the "presumed" murderer, and Frankenstein wasdetermined to prove her innocent. Circumstantial evidence, however, ledthe courts to believe Justine guilty, because found in her pocket was aphotograph which had belonged to William. Justine had been put to death, and Frankenstein had yet to find hiscreation. Finally, upon their meeting, the monster confessed to hiscreator of what he had been through, how he was rejected by society, andfinally, how he had come to kill William. When William had revealed hisname to the monster, the monster immediately figured that by killing theyoung boy, he would have revenge on Frankenstein for giving him life. The monster did not understand the concept of right and wrong and heespecially didn't mean to kill anybody. His expression of anger endedup being violent, even fatal to the victim, and it just worked out thathe killed people. As the monster's story continued, he demanded of Frankenstein a femalemate who he can be with until his end, and promised to live away fromsociety. Frankenstein, meanwhile, tried to restore the monster'sdemented mind so he could live a normal life. Although at first Frankenstein agreed to create a friend for themonster, he changed his mind for fear that between the two of them, hislife, as well as many others, would be in danger. The creature wantedrevenge, and so everything important in Frankenstein's life ended upbeing destroyed, including his wife and best friend.
Most Americans have some idea of who Frankenstein is, as a result of many Frankenstein movies and popularity of monster. However, most people’s ideas are incorrect about Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein is the name of the scientist, not monster, and the monster himself is not the inarticulate, rage-driven criminal that Robert de niro shows in the 1994 film version of the novel. Shelley’s original Frankenstein was misrepresented by this Kenneth branagh film, most likely to send a different message to the movie audience than Shelley’s novel shows to its readers. The conflicting messages of technologies deserve being dependent on its creator (address by Shelley) and poetic justice, or triumph over evil (showed by the movie) is best represented by the scene immediately preceding Frankenstein’s monster’s death.
In Shelley’s novel, the final picture of Frankenstein’s monster reveals important qualities of his inner nature; he is shown in the last moments of his life to be felling, fully conscious of his guilt, and firm in his decision to end his life. This is the conclusion of a long series of events providing insight into how the monster changed as a result of his creator’s actions and the actions of the people with whom he came in contact. Up until this final point, he has changed from being good and hopeful to being caught up in the desire for a companion, to being evil and only focused on revenge. All these changes are recounted by the monster himself in this scene. (Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine)
He was at one point motivated by many good things like as virtue and honor, so much so that he wanted a companion to share in his happy life. “When I first sought it [sympathy], it was the love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affection with which my whole being overflowed, that I wished to be participated. . . . Once my fancy was soothed with dreams of virtue, of fame, and of enjoyment. . . . I was nourished with high thoughts of honor and devotion.” (154) He did not start out as an evil being, but rather was good by nature and exposed early in his life to good things. (Allen, g.s)
Frankenstein’s and society’s rejection of the monster, however, drove him to an uneven passionate pursuit for a companion. He forced Frankenstein to create a female monster, and he provided motivation by killing Frankenstein’s loved ones and threatening to kill more of them. The monster recalls in this final scene of Shelley’s novel how his desire drove him to evil. “. . . do you think that I was then dead to agony and remorse?--He . . . suffered not more in the consummation of the deed;--oh! Not the ten-thousandth portion of the anguish that was mine during the lingering detail of its execution. A frightful selfishness hurried me on. . . .” (153) At that point in the novel, the monster has changed from good in nature to evil in nature. His own desires are more important to him than the well-being of others and he is willing to commit murder in order ensure the fulfillment of his desire.
The second change the monster makes is becoming totally motivated by revenge. He becomes completely evil, not looking for a companion but only the unhappiness and suffering of Frankenstein, his creator. “... I was the slave, not the master of an impulse, which I detested, yet could not disobey. ... The contemplation of my demoniacal design became an insatiable passion.” (153-4) although the monster may have wanted to behave in an honorable way, he give up to his anger and decided to live for the purpose of ruining the life of Frankenstein.
All of these changes, though, after Frankenstein die. Upon seeing Frankenstein’s corpse, the monster is overcome by sorrow and remorse. He exclaims, “Oh, Frankenstein! Generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me?” (153) At this point, Shelley’s message about technology is most clear: Technology’s benefits and dangers dependent on its makers. Throughout the book, various passages have hinted about this idea: The early philosophers’ work is disapproved because of the ideas that the scientists believed in, such as the philosopher’s stone. Though their technology laid some foundations for other scientists, their work was considered “trash” because of the creators themselves. The monster’s changes and his ultimate fate mainly dependence on Frankenstein’s actions. (Vlasopolos)
As we have seen, when Frankenstein rejects his monster, the monster seeks companionship of another form as a result of Frankenstein’s actions. When Frankenstein destroys the second monster he was working on, the monster changes his entire reason for living. This also is purely because of the creator’s actions. On a more appreciate level; the monster’s predisposition for evil most likely was the result of the inventor’s state while he was working on his invention. Frankenstein was strike by an intense frenzy while he was working on his monster; as a result, he created an ugly creature that ultimately would be rejected by society and turn evil. The emotional state of the creator affected the technology he was responsible for.
Shelley’s message is a powerful one; however, it is messed up by the Kenneth branagh film version of her novel. In this version, the monster does not seem to undergo any changes at all, besides becoming angrier and seek for revenge. There is no clearer lesson to be learned about technology; in fact, one of the only messages showed by the movie is that of poetic justice, the “bad guy” getting what he deserves. The message about technology is ambiguous, but most likely has something to do with the mix-up of brain. (Aldiss, brain w)
By the end of the movie, the monster has become bad evil, as he became in the book. The reason for this is unclear--perhaps he has become more evil because he was scared by the people who had just chased him to the end of the world, or perhaps this is just the natural result of his criminal brain influencing his behavior. The message is that evil creates evil, which doesn’t provide any new insights about technology; it can be applied to nearly any situation, especially one with a monster involved. The monster is not used as a demonstration of how the creator affects his technology. Instead he is used to scare the movie audience and portray a horrific evil resulting not from the creator’s actions, but various mistakes and torturing.
Robert de niro portrayal of Frankenstein’s monster has created a false myth of an evil, unintelligent monster that is not at all similar to the one Shelley displays in her novel. Not only does the movie spread a false interpretation of Shelley’s work, it provides the public with no lasting message about technology or about the effects of misplaced human love. Shall we then seek revenge? Shall we destroy that what is evil? Of course not--Shelley gave us all to learn a lesson of tolerance and of correcting our mistakes. Perhaps if a more accurate film version of Frankenstein were available to the public, more people would be motivated to read the book and learn Shelley’s powerful message.

Dan Weisman
Comparative Literature 2BW
3-16-08
The Function of Prologues in Paradise Lost and The Spanish Tragedy
The prologue of a work of literature is an important tool for an author to both explicitly lay the foundation for the rest of their work and implicitly put their work into context. Prologues can serve a multitude of functions, including introducing key themes that will play out in the plot, establishing characters and plot devices, framing a story in relation to the works it is based upon, or simply entailing an author’s statement about their own work. In the case of both John Milton’s Paradise Lost and Thomas Kyd’s The Spanish Tragedy, nearly all of these prologue functions can be seen working in unison during the opening passages. Though the two works differ greatly in literary form, genre, and theme, their prologues share many similar traits. Both of them cover a vast amount of material in relatively few words. They introduce us to the worlds of each story, reveal the goals of each author, and instill a sense of self-awareness into the stories as well as the audience.
In Paradise Lost’s prologue, Milton first introduces us to the universe of his epic and the belief system it entails. He then openly states his own personal goals and aspirations for his work as a whole, as well as in relation to the classical literature that inspired it. This first-person address to the reader allows Milton to convey a sense of self-awareness towards his own process of literary creation. In The Spanish Tragedy’s prologue, Thomas Kyd introduces us to the universe of his play and the belief system it entails. Because his work is a play, Kyd then uses the character of Andrea’s ghost as a vehicle both to state his own personal goals and aspirations and to reference antiquity. By placing the main action of the plot in a play within a play, Kyd shows an astute self-awareness of his own creative process as a playwright. By examining the highly allusive prologues of Paradise Lost and The Spanish Tragedy, we can see that the authors both construct a broad framework on which to build the rest of their plots. This framework reveals key aspects of each work as a whole, including the intricate worlds and belief systems that drive each plot’s themes, their references to classic literature which position their works in relation to their forebears, and their sense of self awareness which allows each authors to grapple with the problem of literary creation.
In Paradise Lost’s prologue, Milton’s first few words are significant in establishing the world of the story and the important themes that will appear throughout. In the opening lines of the poem, Milton wastes no time in explicitly stating the subject of his epic. The first line reads “Of man’s first disobedience” (I.1). This is a clear way for Milton to express precisely what his poem will be about. He uses only two words to introduce both the main subject (“man”) and main theme (“disobedience”) that the entire poem will focus on. Milton mentions “man” in general terms to make it clear that his poem concerns all of mankind, and that the subject is not just a specific heroic protagonist like other epics. The theme of disobedience is the framework on which Milton constructs the rest of the poem; later in the plot, Satan’s tempting of man and man’s disobedience of God leads to man’s downfall, a point of comparison to Satan’s own disobedience and downfall. Milton’s meaning-laden opening line forces the reader to deduce the major themes of the epic.
Furthermore, Milton introduces his overwhelmingly Christian theology in the opening of his prologue. It is clear right away where Milton draws his inspiration from; he mentions “the fruit / Of that forbidden tree, whose mortal taste / Brought death into the world” (I.1-3) and the “loss of Eden” (I.5), which shows immediately that Paradise Lost’s story is a retelling of the first book of Bible, Genesis. Milton’s reproduction of a Bible story imbues his poem with the same set of beliefs and morals that Christianity entails, and this distinct belief system ties in with man’s disobedience. The “fruit” which “Brought death into the world” is both the literal fruit of the “forbidden tree” and the figurative fruit of Adam and Eve’s disobedience, which signifies the Christian belief that disobeying God is what brings pain into our lives; women experience the pain of childbirth in creating life, and all of mankind feels some sort of pain from “death” whether experiencing a painful demise themselves or the death of a loved one.
Milton adds another dimension to the moral universe of his poem when he evokes the Christian concept of forgiveness in the lines “till one greater man / Restore us, and regain the blissful seat” (I.4-5). This is a reference to the son of God, who will “Restore” humanity to our “blissful seat” in Heaven once we denounce our disobedience to God. Redemption and forgiveness is a distinct possibility later on in the plot as well; in Book XI, Adam and Eve’s prayers are heard by God and he answers them by allowing his son to eventually redeem mankind by becoming the “one greater man.” This forgiveness is only possible because Adam and Eve obey God’s commands after disobeying them, a contrast with Satan’s choice to never again obey God after his own fall. Milton introduces us to this Christian belief system of punishment and forgiveness to illuminate the moral structure of the poem and show us the divide between good and evil.
The Spanish Tragedy’s prologue lays the foundation for the play’s plot in a similar fashion to Paradise Lost’s prologue. Like Milton, Thomas Kyd starts his play by introducing the world of the plot and several key themes that set the play in motion. The first character who speaks is Don Andrea’s ghost, and although he is not the play’s protagonist, his opening words serve several important functions. He sets up the background of the play, introducing his own character as well as several of the main characters of the play, and establishes the genre as that of the revenge tragedy. First Andrea makes it clear he is an apparition, stating he is no longer “imprisoned in my wanton flesh” (I.i.2). By using words like “imprisoned” and “wanton” and emphasizing the death of his mortal character, Andrea establishes a negative and tragic tone that continues as the play goes on. The use of “wanton” also emphasizes the needlessness of our mortal bodies in the afterlife, when our souls become, as Andrea says, an “eternal substance” (I.i.1). Andrea declaring his living body a “prison” is a parallel to the way Milton defines mortal life as constant suffering and repentance for humans’ disobedience toward God.
Andrea also has parallels with Horatio, a character far more integral to the plot than he is. This parallel is foreshadowed by the fact that, as Andrea mentions, “By Don Horatio… / My funerals and obsequies were done” (I.i.26). Horatio was the man who put Andrea’s body and soul to rest, making it clear that Horatio is taking up the mantra of his friend Andrea and following in his footsteps in more ways than one. The connection between the two characters grows deeper as the audience discovers that Andrea and Horatio both “possessed a worthy dame / Which hight sweet Bel-Imperia by name” (I.i.10-11), and both end up being murdered by the same man (Balthazar). In this way, Andrea’s story of his own death can be seen as a foreshadowing and introduction to the crux of the play, in which Horatio’s character is murdered and sparks Heironimo, the protagonist, on a fervent quest for revenge similar to that of Andrea.
In addition to introducing the major subjects and themes of the play, The Spanish Tragedy’s prologue familiarizes the audience with the play’s complex belief system. Though Spanish Tragedy is similar to Paradise Lost in describing its moral universe in the opening lines, the belief system itself is much different in that it is a unique hybrid of Christian theology and pagan mythology. Andrea describes what happened after his death at the hands of Balthazar, saying “When I was slain, my soul descended straight / To pass the flowing stream of Acheron” (I.i.18-19). The use of “Acheron,” the famous river of Greek mythology where the dead are ferried to the underworld of Hades, is quite a departure from the Christian Hell described in Paradise Lost. Whereas Milton’s belief system seems to reject anything of pagan origin, Kyd wholeheartedly embraces Greek mythology, albeit within a more modern Christian setting. Kyd introduces this strange hybrid of Greek and Elizabethan religion to emphasize one of his most important themes: revenge. At the time the play was written, revenge was a taboo subject for Elizabethans, as they felt that vengeance should be a task left only to God. Kyd rejects this notion, instead leaving the decision regarding revenge to the pagan gods of the underworld, Pluto and his wife Proserpine. In a move Elizabethans surely would have deemed controversial, Proserpine sends Andrea back to earth with the spirit of Revenge so he can see his killer brought to justice. This device allows Kyd to circumvent his own time period’s sense of morality by allowing his play to exist in a universe where pagan mythology goes hand in hand with Christianity.
In addition to laying the foundation for the worlds and key themes of their stories, the prologues also allow each author to frame their work in relation to the classic works from which they draw inspiration. In the prologue of Paradise Lost, for instance, Milton references the great epic poems of the past in order to assert a position for his own epic poem. Milton repeatedly references antiquity, making allusions to earlier epic poems such as the Iliad, the Odyssey and the Aeneid. In these classical epics, the authors claim to draw inspiration from mystical spirits of creativity known as the muses. For instance, the first line of the Odyssey reads “Of man, sing in me Muse, and through me tell the story” and one of the first lines of the Aeneid reads “Tell me, O Muse.” There were nine classical muses whom the authors of these early epics claimed to have been inspired by, and legend has it they resided on Mount Helicon; as is mentioned in the notes, the “Aonian mount” is “Helicon, sacred to the Muses” (292). Milton frames his work in reference to the classics in very distinct terms, mentioning the “Heav’nly Muse” (I.6) from which he draws his own creativity. In simply mentioning a muse as the inspiration for his own epic poem, Milton shows that his poem will follow in the footsteps of traditional of epic poetry.
However, the key reason for Milton’s allusion to the classic epic poem formula is not just to pay tribute to the authors who came before him, but to express his belief that Paradise Lost will strive to surpass these classics. Milton references Mount Helicon when he says that his poem “intends to soar / Above th’ Aonian mount” (I.15), showing that he believes his inspiration and source material “soars” above theirs. Indeed, Milton sets out to write the greatest epic poem of all time, proclaiming that his poem “pursues / Things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme” (I.15-16). The “unattempted” aspiration that Milton “pursues” is to, as he puts it, “justify the ways of God to men” (I.26), a purpose that Milton feels is far loftier than the goals of his epic predecessors. He references the classical muses and Mount Helicon in order to draw a contrast between the nine classical muses and his own “Heav’nly” muse. Milton’s muse is far greater than their muses because Milton’s muse is the Holy Spirit itself, the same force that
“. . . didst inspire
That shepherd, who first taught the chosen seed,
In the beginning how the heav’ns and earth
Rose out of Chaos” (I.7-10).
On one level, this is an allusion to the spirit that imparted the Ten Commandments to Moses and laid the foundations for the Judeo-Christian worldview. On another level, the “shepherd” can be seen as a reference to Christ, since he is often depicted as a shepherd, and this is Milton’s assertion that, similar to how his poem will surpass the works that came before it, Christianity will usurp Judaism. The use of the word “seed” is also significant, as the word’s double meaning evokes both offspring and a plant seed, perhaps an implicit foreshadowing of the Tree of Knowledge. This shows Milton’s attempt to convey a deeper understanding of mankind to his readers and, in his mind, justifies his claims of having loftier goals than the classic epics.
Similarly, Spanish Tragedy, though it is a completely different form of literature than Paradise Lost, also references classic literature and epic poetry to frame the play in relation to literary history. Kyd extensively references the Aeneid in Andrea’s description of the underworld. For instance, when Andrea arrives in the underworld at the river of Acheron, a boatman named Charon refuses him passage across the river because, as Andrea states, “my rites of burial not performed, I might not sit amongst his passengers” (I.i.21-22). This is taken directly from the Aeneid, where the same “Charon” explains to Virgil’s hero Aeneas that he cannot ferry the dead across the river until they have been buried. Kyd’s vision of the underworld also shares the geography of Hell that Virgil creates in the Aeneid. Andrea says “Three ways there were: that on the right-hand side / Was ready way unto … / Where lovers live and bloody martialists” (I.i.59-60), and “The left hand path, declining fearfully, / Was ready downfall to the deepest hell” (I.i.63-64). These two segments of Hell are direct allusions to the Aeneid’s Hell, where lovers and martialists live in one area and the most evil sinners live in another. Kyd, however, like Milton, seeks to expand upon the work he references, allowing for a third “middle path” (I.i.72) where Andrea goes to discover his own fate. Just like Milton, Kyd shows respect for the famous literature of the past, but creates a world that expands the scope of what they established, asserting his play’s superiority.
Perhaps the most important aspect of the prologues which ties together their belief systems and their classical references to past works is the sense of self-awareness evoked by the authors. Paradise Lost’s prologue, for example, is openly self-aware; Milton speaks candidly, not assuming the role of any character except himself as the author. Throughout the prologue, Milton states “I thence / Invoke thy aid to my advent’rous song” (I.12-13), “Instruct me” (I.19), “what in me is dark / Illumine” (I.22-23), and “I may assert Eternal Providence” (I.25). All of this use of the first person in words like “I” and “me” for a poem which is not told from a first person perspective shows Milton’s self-awareness of his role as author and narrator. He wants his readers to become aware of his literary skill and knowledge to lend credibility to his cause of justifying “the ways of God to men.” This is why, when he introduces the belief system that will drive the plot, he is able to lend some authority to his words. Milton claims the Holy Ghost himself is speaking through him as the author, ensuring the reader of his faithfulness to Christian doctrine. This is also why Milton references the classic epics; he wants to show that as the author of his own sweeping epic, he has a great deal of knowledge about the history of epics as evidenced through his allusions. He claims that his superior theology justifies his statement that his poem “soars above” the classics. By becoming self-aware of his role as literary creator, Milton solves the problem of literary creation. He is able to create what he dubs the pinnacle of English literature out of his own faithfulness to his personal beliefs, coupled with his adherence to the classical literary forms.
Although Thomas Kyd is unable to directly address the audience as playwright due to the limitations of his medium, his prologue too is exceedingly self-aware in a manner similar to Milton’s prologue. Kyd uses the characters of Andrea and Revenge as an outlet for his own personal statement about his play, and like Milton, uses them to set up the play’s themes and beliefs as well as reference classic literature. Similar to Milton, Kyd uses his characters to make a statement on the belief structure of his play. The Christian and pagan hybrid universe that Andrea introduces allows for the play’s emphasis on the controversial theme of revenge. He also has Andrea reference classic epic poetry to assert his play’s position in literary history, and rather than reject classic belief systems outright like Milton, he simply modifies them to suit his play. This shows that Kyd, like Milton, creates his work of literature with the classic formula of literary creation in mind.
The nature of Andrea and Revenge in relation to the play as a whole is also significant. As Revenge says in the last line of the opening scene, “Here sit we down to see the mystery, / And serve for Chorus in this tragedy” (I.i.90-91). These two characters that introduce us to the world of the plot are made into audience members of the play themselves, and they “sit… down to see the mystery” just as the play’s real audience would have. They watch the main events of the plot occur in a play within a play, and make comments on it as the “Chorus.” This meta-theater setup can be seen as Kyd’s self-aware way of making comments on his own work, and bringing attention to the creation of theater to make the audience themselves aware of what went into the play they are seeing. This becomes even more apparent in the climax, when yet another play occurs within the play that Andrea and Revenge watch. This is how Kyd solves the problem of literary creation, not just by referencing antiquity as Milton does, but also by bringing to attention the representational nature of his medium.
In the prologues to Paradise Lost and The Spanish Tragedy, the authors lay a strong foundation for their stories in positing concrete belief systems that drive each works’ themes and referencing classic epic poetry to frame their works in relation to antiquity. The beliefs and references, while laying the groundwork for the rest of each plot, also add to a sense of self-awareness that both authors use to establish their literary role. In Paradise Lost’s prologue, Milton introduces a Biblical belief system which drives the themes of disobedience and redemption. He also references classic epic poetry, not only to pay tribute to his forebears, but also to use his Christian beliefs to assert his own poem’s superiority. The self-aware manner in which the prologue is constructed reveals to the reader Milton’s role as author, making apparent the beliefs and classical inspiration that entailed his process of literary creation. Similarly in The Spanish Tragedy’s prologue, Kyd introduces a hybrid Christian and pagan belief system that drives the theme of revenge. This belief system is itself a reference to classic epic poetry, and Kyd’s expansion of this classical universe asserts his play’s superiority. The self-aware manner in which the opening scene uses meta-theater reveals the viewer’s role as audience and Kyd’s role as playwright, making apparent his process of literary creation.
Works Cited
Kyd, Thomas. The Spanish Tragedy. New York: WW Norton, 1989.
Milton, John. Paradise Lost. London: Penguin Classics, 2000.
McLoone, Katherine. The Epic Prologue. Discussion Section: CL 2BW 1E. Week 6.
I have more of a life writing this review at 1145 pm than you guys do making these movies. . .

Offline Thor
  • *
  • 526 posts
  • 9
  • Awards IRC REGULAR: this user is one of the top irc chatters! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #119 on: November 28, 2008 10:21 PM »
I just forced myself to sit through it.

Nevermind the art style, nevermind that it's a bad rip off of another series, nevermind that this whole cartoon is a really long inside joke, this cartoon just... drags... on.... FOREVER