Perpetual_Doubt

Perpetual_Doubt t1_ja8fd52 wrote

Oh yeah I'm familiar with the black legend.

To be sure, nationalism tends to ignore inconvenient truths for the sake of a good story, but common appreciation of history will also ignore the more convoluted or less significant data - so it sometimes becomes hard to distinguish one from the other. Certainly at the time, the propagandists would have been in full swing - after all this was the time of the Wars of Religion. If we think social media today to be reductivist, that has nothing on the early printing press.

English policy in this period swung a bit wildly and without landing any significant blows. They were participants in the French Wars of Religion (for instance the disastrous campaign to try and help La Rochelle under Charles I) and bizarrely with the Netherlands iirc (despite backing the Netherlands in the wars of religion). I think in the Spanish-French War they didn't know which to back, and their involvement wouldn't have been too important anyway. I think James was criticised for not getting more involved in helping the Palatinate, but England was quite poor after Elizabeth so that was probably prudent.

All of that is fairly messy and doesn't produce an interesting narrative - and certainly not one to be championed by nationalists.

10

Perpetual_Doubt t1_ja7t4qt wrote

One of the reasons not to mention it was that England was a second rate power at the time. This is easy to miss given the later strength of the british empire - but back in the 16th century the Spanish Empire was one of, if not the most powerful nation in the world.

If I remember correctly the English Armada was meant to be opportunistic raids, while the Spanish Armada planned to entire subdue the English kingdom. This makes the former's humiliating failure far less significant than that of the Spanish Empire's.

163

Perpetual_Doubt t1_j92vu2z wrote

The Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland or Donkey in Shrek, are a cat and donkey respectively. Never mind their fantastical setting, if you had Donkey walking on two legs and declaring he was an engineer I would raise an eyebrow.

Same deal with the Jungle Book, if Bagheera had a doctorate and a snazzy waistcoat it would be... odd. Not saying you can't do it, but you'd usually want to have a good reason. Who Framed Roger Rabbit has a good reason - the distinction between humans and toons is the entire premise of the movie.

It's like Ebert said... it's not that you can't suspend disbelief, but what's the reason for?

−1

Perpetual_Doubt t1_j92fzkp wrote

>And you're completely wrong.

Not only am I not wrong, we are talking about a film which by any estimation was a box office bomb.

However this mix of styles is characteristic of the film in general, which mixes 3d and 2d animation, and 18th century technology and futuristic.

To my surprise reviews of the film were not particularly positive (69% nice on Rotten Tomatoes). To quote Robert Ebert

>I am not concerned about technical matters. I do not question why space ships of the future would look like sailing ships of the past. I can believe they could be powered by both rockets and solar winds. It does not bother me that deep space turns out to be breathable. I do not wonder why swashbuckling is still in style, in an era of ray guns and laser beams. I accept all of that. It's just that I wonder why I have to. Why not make an animated version of the classic Treasure Island ?

On the whole he gave the film a thumbs up, but he questioned the overall motives for these clashing decisions. Ultimately people's tolerance mileage is going to vary for its various flights of fancy. For me, it's seeing that the deuteragonist is a doctor who happens to be a bipedal dog whom all the characters pretend is not a dog. For others it might be using an 18th century galleon as a faster than light vessel.

−1

Perpetual_Doubt t1_j91quwh wrote

It may appear arbitrary, but note that such a mix is highly unusual. I can think of no other example. I cannot think what artistic contribution it can provide, and makes the pitching of the movie more difficult.

−11

Perpetual_Doubt t1_j6oojeb wrote

103

Perpetual_Doubt t1_ixe85ta wrote

Tony Robinson said the location was not at the base of Pompey's statue as that area was temporarily closed due to damage and it was instead in a more humble location nearby.

2

Perpetual_Doubt t1_iuht5oc wrote

13