Philly_SWAT
01-Dec-2006, 10:35 AM
The Alive Man,
Seeing as you are so fond of "scientific sounding terms" to define the topic at hand, how about using "Occam's razor". To quote from your favorite source, wiki:
Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation.
So given this widely accepted scientific principle, what seems more logical to you, that GAR, as a local filmmaker using limited budgets, limited means, and making a series of movies that are made as many as 20 years apart, that he intend simply for the movies to be set in "the now" ignoring the near-impossible task (and totally unnecesary task) of trying to try them all together using continuity throughout (i.e. no use of cell phones in Land seeing as they didnt exist in Night, etc.) or that a man who was in love with making movies, watching horror movies, and reading horror comics as a kid with no scientific training, chose to use RETCON and multi-convergence theories to weave his stories together?
Which is the "less complicated formulation" in your mind?
EDIT: I did not notice when posting this new thread that you already replied to this question in the other thread. I could not find your response. "The Stretch" may be the more simplistic choice between it and RETCON, but not between it and the choice I asked about. Perhaps if you could expand on your explanation, I could try to understand better. I am asking you which is the more simple answer, "the stretch", or "the truth", which is what I am calling my theory. I am surprised to hear that you have never heard of Occum's Razor, when you have heard of all your other scientific concepts. At the least, it was mentioned quite prominently in the movie "Contact" starring Jodie Foster.
Seeing as you are so fond of "scientific sounding terms" to define the topic at hand, how about using "Occam's razor". To quote from your favorite source, wiki:
Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation.
So given this widely accepted scientific principle, what seems more logical to you, that GAR, as a local filmmaker using limited budgets, limited means, and making a series of movies that are made as many as 20 years apart, that he intend simply for the movies to be set in "the now" ignoring the near-impossible task (and totally unnecesary task) of trying to try them all together using continuity throughout (i.e. no use of cell phones in Land seeing as they didnt exist in Night, etc.) or that a man who was in love with making movies, watching horror movies, and reading horror comics as a kid with no scientific training, chose to use RETCON and multi-convergence theories to weave his stories together?
Which is the "less complicated formulation" in your mind?
EDIT: I did not notice when posting this new thread that you already replied to this question in the other thread. I could not find your response. "The Stretch" may be the more simplistic choice between it and RETCON, but not between it and the choice I asked about. Perhaps if you could expand on your explanation, I could try to understand better. I am asking you which is the more simple answer, "the stretch", or "the truth", which is what I am calling my theory. I am surprised to hear that you have never heard of Occum's Razor, when you have heard of all your other scientific concepts. At the least, it was mentioned quite prominently in the movie "Contact" starring Jodie Foster.