posted
wait, why didn't he talk about the sudden change in direction post-acceleration from the sonic rainboom coupled with the capture of the falling ponies
posted
I was amused, but desperatly hope that this was a public high-school and not college. In the end I wish him luck in his career as a comedian and hope he doesnt have to reimburse his parents for wasted tuition.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: [nerdfight]
a) It is my opinion that when arguing about the physics or lack thereof of a show designed to appeal to eight year old girls, conducting yourself as if you were having an adult discussion just isn't a priority. The comedic value of having an overly serious and dramatic discussion about ponies outweighs whatever benefit I'd get from politely and accurately critiquing a youtube video on a forum that the physics instructor will never see.
b) Seriously, the show pretty explicitly spells out that their entire scientific framework is different than ours. If it were just a matter of "magic exists" there'd be a wide array of possible explanations with varying degrees of compatibility with modern physics. But when clouds are made in giant vats and moved around by pegasi, it's obvious that this world does not follow our rules. (They even have an episode where they discuss a different kingdom which DOESN'T follow their rules and instead follows ours, or at least something similar to ours. This isn't my opinion, it's explicit in the show).
[/nerdfight]
And yet, his premise is clearly that he is measuring the events against real world physics. It isn't wrong when that's his exact point.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think one can respect someone for using fun examples to teach physics while still making fun of them for the sheer ridiculousness of those examples. I wouldn't be on his case so much if he was using some other cartoon where it's not explicitly stated that the laws of reality are different.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see how what the show states is relevant when his premise is that the laws of reality are the same.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are free to state whatever premises you want, that doesn't make them accurate or useful. Stating "The Laws of Reality in the My Little Pony Universe are the same as ours" and then using math to prove that the My Little Pony Universe doesn't work is like saying "The Laws of Reality are different in Cleveland," making up some fake equations, and then using them to prove that Cleveland's reality is fundamentally broken.
Alternately, he could have started with the premise "My Little Pony uses the same rules found in the Harry Potter universe" and then demonstrated that Twilight's magical prowess must be absurdly ridiculous because she can lift an object without saying "Wingardium Leviosa." It would have been exactly as meaningful.
You can do that, I guess, but it's pretty silly. Cleveland will go on functioning using the same rules as Poughkeepsie, and Equestria will go on functioning without natural wind currents, unicorns that can levitate objects with their brain, and pegasi that can accelerate faster than their wings appear to beat and withstand G forces that would kill a human, creating sonic rainbooms that cause nearby adolescent ponies to spontaneously begin puberty.
It's still a productive exercise because it was a fun and engaging and illustrated stuff about physics. Things can be fun and engaging and informative about certain things while still having central premises that are wrong.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's wrong. He wasn't stating the central premise of the universe - although that's still an arbitrary thing - but the central premise of his approach. Since it is his approach, then it is his premise to set.
You can argue against him setting that premise, but you can't argue that his premise is "wrong." It isn't. He set it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hypothetical premises can be whatever you want. Factual premises have to be factual, and you need to be able to defend them.
If he had said "If the world of My Little Pony ran on regular physics, here's some problems you'd face", that's stating a hypothetical premise that's perfectly reasonable. I don't think that's what he does. (Rewatching it, I can see maybe interpreting his statement more along these lines. If that was your interpretation, then I don't disagree with you).
Edit: I've been using the word "premise" in the "logical argument" sense, not the "general idea behind his presentation" sense.
If you say "My Little Pony runs on physics and is therefore wrong," you're premise is factually inaccurate. In the same way that it'd be factually inaccurate to say "My Little Pony is a story about a bunch of male cockroaches." It's just plain not true.
[ May 25, 2011, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Raymond Arnold ]
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, on one hand, I totally did not see that remark, I was just going by my interpretation of the video content. In light of that I completely concede the point. (In particular after his explanation of the rating system).
On the other hand, I am firmly aware that this is the single most ridiculous conversation I have ever had, and I think my initial disclaimer made it clear that I was deliberately cultivating that ridiculousness.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Other than the annoying fade-in fade-out subtitle effect, that was one of the better Downfall parodies I've seen. Hitler even has a little character arc.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: Sooo... has anyone else been watching Season 2 of "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic"? Cuz god knows I have.
Points of possible discussion interest:
-How cool is Discord? -How crazy is Twilight Sparkle? -How awesome is canon!Luna?
Discord was pretty good. I was happy to hear some John de Lancie. The guy just can't break the typecast of playing characters who, well, bring discord.
I thought the episode with Twilight Sparkle delving into the depths of insanity was going too far. That was around the 10 minute mark. Little did I know that things were just getting started. By the end of the episode I was completely loving the craziness.
And I really liked the latest episode. Yay for canon indeed.
Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, Luna was terrific. Socially awkward, no adaptation to changes of the last 1000 years, with a fragile ego, and a desperate desire for acceptance. It's as if the writers are trying to maintain developed characters.
Pinkie Pie as a chicken was the funniest thing I have ever seen on the show.
Crazy Twilight was scary and sad.
Apparently there may be a South Park Brony episode (scroll a little bit). I have a feeling it won't go well, but we'll see. It's probably not be true anyway.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually was really mad that everyone was continuing a tradition of making Luna out to be an evil villain, with no respect for her feelings.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I actually was really mad that everyone was continuing a tradition of making Luna out to be an evil villain, with no respect for her feelings.
Pay attention to the end again.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The episode with Twilight Sparkle freaking out had one of the most organic "lesson learned" moments in the show. Both the setup and payoff was believable; the lesson actually had a purpose in the plot, rather than just being an expository summary of what the episode was about.
I liked how it was Twilight that helped Luna out first, they have pretty similar flaws like social awkwardness. I wonder if they'll explicitly resolve the issue of most ponies sleeping at night, which is what set her off 1000 years ago.
Posts: 80 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: Discord was pretty good. I was happy to hear some John de Lancie. The guy just can't break the typecast of playing characters who, well, bring discord.
Apparently, the character of Discord was actually written as an homage to Q (Lauren Faust is a huge Star Trek fan). Faust was hoping to get someone who could do a good de Lancie impression to play the role, and then someone suggested contacting de Lancie himself to see if he would be willing to do it. Which, fortunately, he was. So it wasn't so much typecasting as much as an actor purposely reprising on old role of his. Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: Discord was pretty good. I was happy to hear some John de Lancie. The guy just can't break the typecast of playing characters who, well, bring discord.
Apparently, the character of Discord was actually written as an homage to Q (Lauren Faust is a huge Star Trek fan). Faust was hoping to get someone who could do a good de Lancie impression to play the role, and then someone suggested contacting de Lancie himself to see if he would be willing to do it. Which, fortunately, he was. So it wasn't so much typecasting as much as an actor purposely reprising on old role of his.
Haha, I figured as much. The similarities were just too obvious for it not to be an homage. I'm glad they were able to get de Lancie himself to do the role.
Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I actually was really mad that everyone was continuing a tradition of making Luna out to be an evil villain, with no respect for her feelings.
Pay attention to the end again.
I thought the ending was ridiculous - yes, the underlying motivations for people wanting to be scared was consistent with being a sort of friend to Luna, but Twilight should not have assumed that the little kid would actually come up to Luna and explain it to her afterwards, rather than just repeating the earlier interaction and leaving Lunda feeling like crap.
Plus, while it may have been the best resolution given the existence of a 1000-year tradition, I would be pretty pissed if I came back from a thousand year banishment and people were only going to be friends with me if I pretended to conform to the monstrous stereotypes they have made up about me.
I do realize it's often better to own the quirks you've come to be associated with rather than fight them, but that's often a compromise, not something you actually want to strive for.
...
Wow, I apparently was really ticked off by this.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I... don't think that was the point? My sense was that the "people sometimes like being scared" thing was more about Nightmare Night than Luna per se. The character arc for Luna was not "Luna learns to enjoy being scary and conforming to a monstrous stereotype," but rather "Luna learns to lighten up and enjoy a more informal relationship with her subjects." Her acceptance of her role in the holiday is an illustration of the moral, not the moral itself. It's Twilight who learns, from Pinkie Pie, the secondary moral of "sometimes it's fun to be scared."
I'll grant that the show could've done a better job distinguishing the two different morals (and which characters learn them), though.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think those are perfectly good morals, but the part that bugged me was Twilight attempting to demonstrate the "it can be fun to be scared!" moral to Luna, who was busy trying to learn the "how to chill out and be friends" moral. As it happened, those two morals managed to dovetail for Luna, but Twilight shouldn't have expected them to.
posted
the quote is usually 'quit gettin' mad at video games' but i think today it should be adapted to 'quit gettin' mad at cartoon ponies'
P.S. ending montage was luna having learned to chill with people whether doing her ~scary thing~ for the kids, or not, so
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey now, there's nothing wrong with criticism of the show. I don't agree with Raymond Arnold on this point, but he has every right to express it.
Heck, I have my own little rant on how Twilight's freak-o-rama in "Lesson Zero" didn't work for me. I'd hope I'd be able to post about that without getting a Samp Sarcasmobroadside to the face.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: Heck, I have my own little rant on how Twilight's freak-o-rama in "Lesson Zero" didn't work for me. I'd hope I'd be able to post about that without getting a Samp Sarcasmobroadside to the face.
'quit gettin' mad at cartoon ponies' is not sarcasm, it's a valuable life lesson.
alternate answer: too late
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, "Art of the Dress" is a better song...
The criticism of the imperfect moralization might help the writers make a better show. They've already shown a willingness to shout out to the unintended fanbase.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
