Why am I still getting replies from this? It was in freaking May.

Sure I guess, but it has to color it in some way. You’d have to be preeeetty good to say “I hate this so much” while making [this] as fantastic quality-wise as the other works you’ve done, this time with commitment and passion.

“Fans” of Metal Gear who couldn’t stop whining that they deserved closure.

Well there’s also this part where the entire game is precisely about how he’s bitter and dissatisfied with the game industry that demanded its existence. http://kotaku.com/5016255/no-pla…

No! It would be such a bad choice! 4 is objectively the worst one (even Kojima is disappointed by it), the most cynical and sell out of the bunch. On the gigantic list of things it did so wrong, it canonicalized MGS2, which up to that point was so much out there and fascinatingly so that it actually made more sense…

None of those facts are relevant to my query but indeed

Oh, you could win arguments with that.

Wait wait wait, what’s said at the very start is deeply interesting: “the Earth is moving at about 300 clicks relative to the Cosmic Background Radiation, which is the best we got in terms of a reference frame”

Hi there, have you some time today to speak about “entitlement”?

Long, long time Metal Gear Solid fan here.

Oh but these are legitimate concerns I can empathize with! Okay then, too bad you didn’t connect with the movie, I personally don’t think it’s his best work but I really, genuinely got what he was trying to say right into my very core and maybe that’s why I get very defensive when people call it pseudo-philosophical…

Okay so first, “writing” and “dialog” are not the same things! One is a subset of the other where writing entails everything regarding themes and structure and subtext and pace, etc. and dialog is just what characters say to each other.

Love is not a physical force no matter how many pseudo-philosophical bullshit you read, it’s a goddamn emotion.

It is. It works. It doesn’t violate any preestablished law of the movie. You don’t like it because it’s cheesy, not because it’s inconsistent —and you wish it were because then your frustration would be objective and rational rather than cynical and a bit childish— but there’s nothing wrong with admitting it to…

And what, the Force is dumb writing too? Just so you know, it’s literally the same thing. And I really literally mean literally. A force invisible yet everywhere which permeates our reality and allows the protagonist to resolve the second act conflict at the end of the movie and is also related in a way to self…

I do, but you’re still wrong. Admittedly, it was definitely a mistake to advertize the film as being hard science (if anything it’s the advertisers fault for having a binary model of hardness when we potentially could use dozens of shades) but it’s all in the framing. Nolan is terrible at dialog, but he’s pretty good…

Thing is, they could have explained very well in the intro. Like how the weapons they had, but they needed human fighters to pilot them because nothing beats their adaptability and capacity for teamwork. That’s all it would have taken.

Wait, do you think you are expected to actually believe the things you see in a movie? Of course nobody thinks love is a physical object in the real world. As well as nobody believes AI Lego monoliths actually exist. Are you confusing real life with fiction again?

Look, Nolan is pretty bad at dialog but thematically-wise, that a movie’s conflict be resolved by love is pretty much all movies ever. He could have tried to cast not such a wide net and get more creative, more complex, like in Hyperion where the sum of human consciousnesses create a hyperreal network that permeate…

Welp, I’m getting myself a self high five tonight.