Know It All

I think people lie about how much stuff they know about stuff.  I think this because I do it myself and I imagine everyone does the same stuff I do.  Maybe they don't.  Maybe I'm particularly awful.  But probably not.  

I try not to do it as much as I used to, so often times when I suspect someone is acting like they know more than they really know, I think, "I can tell you're lying because I used to do that."

People do this partially just to protect their ego but also because they think they can get away with it.  Most people don't call other people on their bullshit, at least not to their faces, so it's easy to say you've read a book you haven't read or seen a movie you haven't seen because no one's going to go, "Prove it!"  At least, they usually won't. 

The reason I bring this up is because I saw the "Wolverine" movie today.  Whenever comic book movies come out, or movies based on anything, whether it's a TV show or a book or a previous movie, or even a real life story, someone always says it's not true enough to the source material.  This presupposes that the person complaining is familiar with the source material or else they wouldn't be able to make this observation.  Unless they heard it somewhere else, and are now just passing it off as if they knew it from their own background knowledge.

The problem is, how good or bad a movie is rarely depends on how true it is to some other form of media, but usually when people point out the differences between the original and the movie, they're doing so as a way of pointing out the movie's shortcomings.  This is usually before they've seen the movie, but can also be done after they've seen it, if they didn't like it.  If they did like it they don't seem to notice the discrepancies any more, or they claim the exact opposite.

For instance, the buzz about "The Passion of the Christ" both before and after the film's release often times revolved around how it was exactly like the Bible.  But, it doesn't take a genius to watch the movie and point out all the shit that's not in the Bible.  Thing is, none of that matters when it comes right down to it -- the book is one thing, the film is another.  But, it must matter to someone, otherwise why would it be perpetuated?

I guess that question gets to the root of the issue.  When you look for things outside of the movie itself to decide whether or not the movie was any good, that says more about you than it says about the movie itself.  It says you have some outside agenda that you're applying to the movie, and not just enjoying (or not enjoying) the movie on its own terms.  

When I was younger, say 12, I assumed all these people knew what they were talking about.  So I'd attempt to act like I knew what I was talking about as well.  Joke's on me -- I just ended up looking like an asshole.  

Now that I'm older, I wonder how it is that everyone has so much time to be so intimately aware of the source material of everything that it influences whether or not they like the new version.  My guess is they don't have the time and that they're just lying.  Sure, there are some things that are so popular that most people are aware of the basics.  But it seems even when somewhat obscure books/TV shows/whatever get made into films with only limited cult followings, suddenly everyone you meet has been the biggest fan since they were a kid and they're terribly insulted that anyone would dare "ruin" the original.  Even though you've never heard them talk about it before in your life, until it just happened to be on every other commercial.

Add to this the fact that a lot of source material isn't any good.  Take 1980s cartoons, for an example.  Sure, there were some episodes of TRANSFORMERS and GI JOE that were better than average, but it was always within the context of the fact that it was a terrible show -- so, when one episode happened to show even a slight glimmer of ambition, it was regarded as a classic, because the rest of the show sucked so much.  But people act as if these shows were Shakespeare and are not to be besmirched.  I loved shitty cartoons as much as the next guy when I was a kid, but when I sit through them today, it is not hard to tell that they're shitty.  So, if I hear the big budget TRANSFORMERS film is going to stray from the source material, my immediate reaction is not to be deeply offended.  My immediate reaction is, "Well, of course, the cartoon sucked."

I had a refreshing conversation the other day.  I say it was refreshing because it was honest.

ME:  Are you excited for Wolverine?

OTHER PERSON:  Yeah.  But, I don't know that much stuff about his whole origin.

ME:  Yeah.  Me neither.  I wouldn't know the difference if it was exactly like the comics or totally different.

OTHER PERSON:  Me neither.

ME:  But hey, who cares as long as it's good, right?

OTHER PERSON:  Right.

Incidentally, it wasn't very good.  But, it didn't suck as badly as I thought it would.  I mean, Wolverine still had claws that came out of his hands, and it would be difficult to convince me that that's not super sweet.