It looks like the day I find a non-pretentious halfwit playing critic will be the day unicorns come out of holes in the ground.
So the movie doesn't have a plot? let's see what a plot is:
-a secret plan or scheme to accomplish some purpose, especially a hostile, unlawful, or evil purpose:
-a plot to overthrow the government.
-Also called
storyline. the plan, scheme, or
main story of a literary or dramatic work, as a play, novel, or short story.
-to plan or scheme secretly; form a plot; conspire.
-
to devise or develop a literary or dramatic plot
Ok that's pretty basic, maybe we need something more clear:
“‘The king died and then the queen died,’ is a story.
‘The king died, and then the queen died of grief,’ is a plot.
The time-sequence is preserved, but the sense of causality overshadows it.”
So, a very basic definition of plot is a sequence of events that are connected by cause and effect.
Simply by respecting the definition of words, and not being stupid, we have to accept that ABA has a plot, but it's clearly not a event driven plot, it's a character driven plot. And what is that?:
A character-driven story is one focused on studying the characters that make up your story. Character-driven stories can deal with inner transformation or the relationships between the characters.
Whereas plot-driven stories focus on a set of choices that a character must make, a character-driven story focuses on how the character arrives at a particular choice. When you zoom into the internal conflicts, you tend to focus less on the external conflicts. The plot in a character-driven story is usually simple and often hyper-focused on the internal or interpersonal struggle of the character(s).
In a character-driven story, the plot is used to develop the character.
Many readers love character-driven stories because the author tends to put a premium on developing realistic, flawed, and human characters. Readers can see themselves or someone they love in these characters and, as a result, connect emotionally.
So connecting emotionally is a big deal. Now this goes into something else this guy is trying to push, the "emotional manipulation" angle. A great story can make you fall in love with either the world or the characters, or even both. So when is that manipulation and when is it... not?
-“Emotionally manipulative” is a dangerous term because, like “forced” or “pretentious,” it’s often used to describe things that simply didn’t appeal to you personally but you can’t actually critique in a meaningful way. That said, it’s also a very valid term
-But isn’t all storytelling basically emotional manipulation of one kind or another? It seems like you’re referring to emotional manipulation as a net negative when in reality any story that wants you to feel anything is being “emotionally manipulative.”
-You’re right – basically any work of art that seeks to elicit an emotional response in the viewer is trying to create emotions that weren’t naturally there, thus “emotionally manipulating” the viewer. It’s all a matter of degrees, and there’s no hard line, but I was mainly trying to pin down what people are generally talking about (and why they feel that way) when they use it a pejorative sense.
-I think a good barometer here might be “would someone with reasonably informed media preferences and no reason to be predisposed towards this character/story/situation be engaged by this drama?” Because I think the major reason the shortcut-style emotional manipulation is so common is that it is very successful (in fact, probably more successful than traditional storytelling) for audiences that want to be manipulated in a particular way. If you go to the movies wanting to watch a tragic love story and cry, goddamnit you are going to cry. If some single element of a fairly simplistic character deeply appeals to you, you will deeply care about what happens to them. If you want to watch somebody blow up Nazis and fist pump for justice, then yeah, you’ll do that too. Most people want to be manipulated, they just want to be manipulated in different ways.
I was going to go a but deeper but after seeing that he thinks
Avengers Endgame it is very clear that this guy is the epitome of a sneed, who ironically is very easy to manipulate with cheap trills and artificial problems. You can't genuinely think anything in the third act of that movie even makes sense when all they had to do is fly away with the gauntlet and defeat Thanos without risking everything like a bunch of retards with zero grasp in basic military strategy. This is not the first time a critic I think is wrong proves to be even a bigger moron than I thought he was. But I am done, it's certainly the last time I will pay any attention to these kind of people.