Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This painfully dull and inane comment is about how op didnt like the article. If that interests you, you will enjoy it more than I did!



I gave up on the piece after a bit. It's purposefully and painfully obtuse and has far too much misdirection that serves no real purpose:

     SOMEHOW MY FATHER CONVINCED MY mother to squander a date night and watch David Lynch’s Dune when it was in the theaters in 1984. I was seven; my sister, five. When we asked about the movie, my mother or my father or both—they may’ve coordinated their anecdote—told me they knew they were in trouble when the theater manager handed out to everyone in the audience a one-sheet that attempted to explain the intricacies of the film’s logic.

     Now I am the theater manager. What’s worse, the production I hope to untangle is my own.

     So:

   In 1977, George Lucas released Star Wars. In 1980, he released a sequel, The Empire Strikes Back, and, in 1983, another sequel, Return of the Jedi. During Jedi’s production, and even after its release, Jedi was often referred to as Star Wars III. This is not to be confused with Star Wars Episode Three: Revenge of the Sith, a Star Wars prequel released in 2005. Also, until the end of 1982, Return of the Jedi was titled Revenge of the Jedi. This is not to be confused with Star Wars Episode Three: Revenge of the Sith.

     And:

   I write about two directors named David. David Lynch, who wrote and directed Blue Velvet and co-created/directed Twin Peaks, and David Cronenberg, who wrote and directed Videodrome and the 1986 remake of The Fly. I don’t mean for this to be confusing.

   And:

  Two excerpts from the screenplay for David Lynch’s Revenge of the Jedi appear in this essay. The first begins, “INTERIOR: DEATH STAR—MAIN DOCKING BAY”; the second begins, “INTERIOR: JABBA’S PALACE—HALLWAY.”

   Okay. Let’s begin.

This, to me, is not an enjoyable read.

There are far too many attention sinks in the world, and unfortunately we're only alive for a geologically infinitesimal instant.


These are film wonks doing film wonk things. It's ok if that's not interesting to you. Just like how they probably wouldn't be interested in a detailed story about the creation of a certain programming language.


Inventing details of film history and attributing fanfic to the subject is not what I would consider typical "film wonk things."


I'm happy to see the decline of the self-indulgent, cognoscente literary tradition.

I love words and language and reading, but rarely is expository writing the correct place for word orgies.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: