|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jun 7, 2014 12:42:45 GMT -5
Hello, Randall fans!
On average, how successful are you at convincing other 'Monsters' viewers that there's more to Randall Boggs than meets the eye? Is it frequent? Is it seldom? How persistent are you? Was there ever a time when you even had the opportunity to state your views, but chose not to bother? Also (not that it would happen), have you ever spoken to THE... first-class, A#1, take-the-cake wrong person about Randall? (You know the kind that would OPENLY belittle you, interrogate you, twist your words around and get ugly before they would even CONSIDER seeing your side?) If you've ever been seemingly overruled by such a person (I say 'seemingly' because we Randall supporters TRULY don't give up), or, for use of a better word, REJECTED, how then do you cope?
Also, have you ever succeeded in convincing anybody? Please feel free to share your worst experiences, as well as your best experiences... on all these points. |
|
|
|
Post by pitvipersnake on Jun 7, 2014 14:16:55 GMT -5
I managed to convince one person by just showing her the psychologist's report of all the character's that's posted on this blog.
I told another person who's never seen MI or MU what I thought about Randall so hopefully when she does see it she'll watch with an open mind.
Most people I talk to just say it's so long since they saw Monsters Inc. they don't really remember it. So it's rather pointless trying to talk about one of the characters because they just stare at you blankly.
The only other person I talk about Randall with is my Mum. Although I convinced her that Randall never cheated she still argues that he is the villain. Then we get sidetracked onto what we mean by the term 'villain' in a film and whether it's the writer's intentions or the viewer's interpretation that counts. So half the time I don't know if she's arguing the point because she thinks it's true or just for the sake of having a discussion. I know she doesn't like Monsters Inc. enough to really care one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Jun 7, 2014 14:26:23 GMT -5
I'm pretty good at it, but there are a lot of people who hate being presented with facts and do not want to take the time to read them. I'm very meticulous and detailed when I present an argument, which I was taught to be in Debate Class back in high school and college. Nowadays, with Twitter and texting, people cannot wrap their minds around actual paragraphs. Others get angry-you will see examples here-because in order to plead Randall's case, with regards to the fact that what happened to him was unfair, illegal and immoral in and of itself, it is necessary to point out that Mike and Sulley were no angels and did not deserve the accolades they've received. People who are really fond of them, and Mike especially since MU, get riled up about that because they do not want to hear that their darlings are less than perfect themselves. There are others who are so hung up on "bullies", and see both Randall and Johnny as no more than bullies, and then there are those who hate Randall because they believe he was going to kill Boo, and lots of other human kids, and refuse to see the picture any other way. They see the morality of what he was doing only from a human perspective.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Jun 7, 2014 18:26:45 GMT -5
These viewers who misread Randall are so IGNORANT. That's what made J.K. Rowling so great is because she made us THINK...
Consider Snape's careful word phrasing in the 'Spinner's End' scene from 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince': Snape says to Narcissa Malfoy, "Your sister doubts me... well, understand that over the years, I have played my part well - so well, I have deceived one of the greatest wizards of all time. Dumbledore is... A great wizard, only a fool would question it.". He mentioned TWO wizards, folks... not one!
Gullible viewers who haven't read the seventh book will automatically assume that he was saying he deceived Dumbledore, but in actuality, he was buttering up Voldemort for Bellatrix's sake in a backhanded way, calling HIM 'one of the greatest wizards of all time', while making her THINK he was referring to Dumbledore, and Snape's emphasis on the words 'A great wizard' is his own admission of truth to himself, and to them. NOW, he's no longer talking about Voldemort, he is talking about Dumbledore... and Snape did NOT say that he deceived Dumbledore, because he wasn't. His subtle choice of words turned out to be our guide into the real plot of Harry Potter. I wish Randall got the same respect.
|
|
