|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:They are spazzing because for about two years straight it's been the Batman Discusso forum and just lately it's gotten seriously awful. Not to mention it seems like it's "Holy poo poo this movie is THE WORST THING EVER!" now. But It does normally take 2 years for goons to turn on a movie.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 12:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:45 |
|
|
It's also a bandwaggon and people won't shut the gently caress up like that entire thread consisting entirely of :BATAMN-BOMB?:: I mean, Nolan movies are good, his Batman movies are good. Leave it, no FYAD/YCS poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 12:48
|
|
|
OK I suffered through Terminator Salvation and thought it was out of nowhere godawful. But now that I am wading through the TV series BSG I realized that some of Salvation's awfulness probably came from the popularity of BSG, and BSG's (at times) painful to me script writing and direction. Is this just how movies are going to be from now on, with some not onscreen actor always yelling what someone else is doing on screen? Is this because directors think we are not actually looking at the screen? Is there something I am not getting as to why these two share this incredibly annoying habit? (I know this is not the TV thread, but the similarities on this point leap out to such a degree that there must be something I am not getting as to why directors choose to have unofficial narrators during action scenes.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 13:56
|
|
EVERYTHING I SAY ABOUT JAPAN OR LIVING IN JAPAN IS COMPLETELY WRONG, BUT YOU BETTER BELIEVE I'LL 
ABOUT IT.
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:They are spazzing because for about two years straight it's been the Batman Discusso forum and just lately it's gotten seriously awful. The derails are really annoying but this was a quick question and answer that would already be forgotten if you weren't freaking out about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 21:41
|
|
|
ZenMaster posted:I assumed adding "porn" to a film description meant adding a modifier of "gratuitous", or "an excessive amount of". So is Annie Hall "East Coast Intellectual Porn"? Is Sense and Sensibility (pick your favourite) "Period Costume Porn"? Would Goodfellas be "Gangster Porn"? I'm just wondering. Also, if you download a whole pile of photos of cars at work, would it be alright if you were fired for "downloading porn"? Because really, nobody needs that many photos of Camaros. It's excessive and gratuitous. Pornographic!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 21:48
|
|
|
In District 9, what was the deal at the beginning about prawns derailing trains and wreaking other havok? I got the impression that a lot of myths about the prawns (like they would kill your pets or whatever) were just racial ignorance and a lot of the prawn's criminal behavior was just them acting out like any abused minority would. The movie goes to great lengths to show that the prawns are very much human on the inside, so why this barbaric, sociopathic behavior like derailing trains? Were they really doing this stuff or was it just the media blaming them out of ignorance? I really love the movie, but I watched it again recently for the first time since it was in theaters, and that part struck me as odd.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 21:53
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:So is Annie Hall "East Coast Intellectual Porn"? Is Sense and Sensibility (pick your favourite) "Period Costume Porn"? Would Goodfellas be "Gangster Porn"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 22:03
|
|
|
I call foul, "porn" implies little or no artistic value.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:In District 9, what was the deal at the beginning about prawns derailing trains and wreaking other havok? I got the impression that a lot of myths about the prawns (like they would kill your pets or whatever) were just racial ignorance and a lot of the prawn's criminal behavior was just them acting out like any abused minority would. The movie goes to great lengths to show that the prawns are very much human on the inside, so why this barbaric, sociopathic behavior like derailing trains? Were they really doing this stuff or was it just the media blaming them out of ignorance? Christopher and his son aren't really the best example of what Prawns are actually supposed to be like. They kind of point out that the regular Prawn is actually slightly developmentally challenged (compared to a human) and doesn't understand the consequences of actions. So since they like to break stuff they'd derail trains not really thinking that they'd be hurting anyone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 22:44
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Christopher and his son aren't really the best example of what Prawns are actually supposed to be like. They kind of point out that the regular Prawn is actually slightly developmentally challenged (compared to a human) and doesn't understand the consequences of actions. So since they like to break stuff they'd derail trains not really thinking that they'd be hurting anyone. I guess that makes sense. I think they said somewhere that most of the prawns on Earth were part of the working caste and had been separated from their leadership. Maybe you could say they're like children with no parents, and thus no sense of consequence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 22:49
|
|
|
Yeah, I remember some line in the opening 'documentary' part mentioning that their intelligence was decreasing for some reason having to do with their ship breaking down, or something... I can't remember specifics but there was some mention of why they were acting out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
Or the entire thing is just something made up by a bunch of "experts" who are trying to apply human standards to an alien species and use it as an excuse to lock them all up in a ghetto where they can be experimented on without anyone knowing. EDIT: I'm aware that the director says differently, but I think the message of the movie is a lot stronger if you realize that we do the same thing to HUMANS on this planet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 05:48
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:Or the entire thing is just something made up by a bunch of "experts" who are trying to apply human standards to an alien species and use it as an excuse to lock them all up in a ghetto where they can be experimented on without anyone knowing. I think this is a good point. When you're afraid of a certain group, you make wild accusations to make other people afraid. When everyone is afraid you can lock them up and treat them like dirt, and when they respond with violence and crime, you can just say "See? I told you so." Come to think of it, District 9 really has the same message at its core as Avatar. The difference is that one of them doesn't use cheap tricks to buy your sympathy. But yeah, I guess it's up to the viewer to decide the veracity of the opening segments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 05:54
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:I think this is a good point. When you're afraid of a certain group, you make wild accusations to make other people afraid. When everyone is afraid you can lock them up and treat them like dirt, and when they respond with violence and crime, you can just say "See? I told you so." Come to think of it, District 9 really has the same message at its core as Avatar. The difference is that one of them doesn't use cheap tricks to buy your sympathy. But yeah, I guess it's up to the viewer to decide the veracity of the opening segments. I thought there was a line from an expert saying something along the lines that they were so alien that what they might think is an artistic or expressive act for themselves, turned out to be a destructive and threatening act from the human perspective, which I think was dubbed over the train wrecking montage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 12:07
|
|
|
The thing to keep in mind is that the footage at the beginning and end is a case of unreliable narrator, since it's documentary footage from a media conglomerate that is in the weapon corporation's pocket (as shown by the speed and ease with which they manipulate it to turn people against Wikus) as well as being prey to human biases and ignorance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 12:16
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:I thought there was a line from an expert saying something along the lines that they were so alien that what they might think is an artistic or expressive act for themselves, turned out to be a destructive and threatening act from the human perspective, which I think was dubbed over the train wrecking montage. Too bad this theory falls flat once we meet Christopher and his son who are intelligent and normal and psychologically surprisingly human-like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 12:59
|
|
|
Factor Mystic posted:Too bad this theory falls flat once we meet Christopher and his son who are intelligent and normal and psychologically surprisingly human-like. Christopher was presented as more intelligent though. He could tell the difference between the two races technology while his friend another could't ("Is this it?" "No, this is human technology"). He was able to read and comprehend the human stuff ("This is not legal.") while the others were pissing in the street and sacrificing their friends shacks for cat food. Wickus even says that he's a smart one. He's presented as the only one who knows what's up, he isn't a slice in the life of your average prawn.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 18:01
|
|
|
I always thought Christopher was supposed to be Jesus. He strives to lead his people from oppression after receiving enlightenment from his origin, a higher power (the command module). Along the way he converts followers, in this case literally. And is triumphant when he flies up into the sky above his oppressors with a promise to return triumphantly. All that and the rather obvious name.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 22:48
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:The thing to keep in mind is that the footage at the beginning and end is a case of unreliable narrator, since it's documentary footage from a media conglomerate that is in the weapon corporation's pocket (as shown by the speed and ease with which they manipulate it to turn people against Wikus) as well as being prey to human biases and ignorance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2010 23:22
|
|
|
SubG posted:Wait...so you're implying some people take it at face value? When I was watching it I thought it was so ham-handed it was a little off-putting, like there might as well have been a big flashing red intertitle reading Social Satire or something. Like a Verhoeven film, only without the sense of humour. Hey, I'm not the one who started this derail. If there's one thing the "Crazy film interpretations" thread has shown me it's that there's no message to hamfisted or meant to be taken at face value that it will be overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 00:44
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:If there's one thing the "Crazy film interpretations" thread has shown me it's that there's no message to hamfisted or meant to be taken at face value that it will be overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 01:11
|
|
|
So were the bug things in District 9 aliens or what?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:Christopher was presented as more intelligent though. He could tell the difference between the two races technology while his friend another could't ("Is this it?" "No, this is human technology"). He was able to read and comprehend the human stuff ("This is not legal.") while the others were pissing in the street and sacrificing their friends shacks for cat food. Wickus even says that he's a smart one. The other aliens are basically ill-educated, or disenfranchised. Take a group of Americans and stick them in the middle of nowhere for 2 generations with no contact with any form of education or means of learning about their culture except through the stories of their parents and see how "intelligent" they act.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 02:31
|
|
|
I recently watched Blankman (loosely based on the In Living Color "Handi-man" character) and then remembered that a Homey D. Clown movie was in production. But now I see no sign of it. Was it canceled?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 03:08
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:Take a group of Americans and stick them in the middle of nowhere for 2 generations with no contact with any form of education or means of learning about their culture except through the stories of their parents and see how "intelligent" they act. Are you suggesting that this is not already an experiment in progress?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 03:42
|
|
|
Due to all the stupid and insane interpretations of movies, I refuse to believe movies have any meaning outside of the story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 06:14
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Due to all the stupid and insane interpretations of movies, I refuse to believe movies have any meaning outside of the story. I'd be happy with that so long as that also means that every David Lynch movie is declared meaningless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 12:23
|
|
|
Zogo posted:I recently watched Blankman (loosely based on the In Living Color "Handi-man" character) and then remembered that a Homey D. Clown movie was in production. But now I see no sign of it. Was it canceled? I think that train left the station about 18 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 16:25
|
|
|
From what I understand of D9 and one of my biggest problems with the social commentary aspect of D9, is that most of the Prawns are supposedly stupid because they're just worker drones. They don't have the capacity to think very well on their own. They don't have a queen so they're lost and acting badly. Christopher takes on the role of the Queen for whatever reason which is why he is intelligent and competent. Supposedly this is confirmed in the supplemental stuff on the DVD but I haven't actually seen it. I do just kind of have a problem with the race that you're showing as oppressed being actually incapable of bettering themselves. Maybe I'm wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 17:44
|
|
|
Zogo posted:I recently watched Blankman (loosely based on the In Living Color "Handi-man" character) and then remembered that a Homey D. Clown movie was in production. But now I see no sign of it. Was it canceled? I'd have thought if you saw Blankman you'd know the answer to that question.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 17:53
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:From what I understand of D9 and one of my biggest problems with the social commentary aspect of D9, is that most of the Prawns are supposedly stupid because they're just worker drones. They don't have the capacity to think very well on their own. They don't have a queen so they're lost and acting badly. Christopher takes on the role of the Queen for whatever reason which is why he is intelligent and competent. Supposedly this is confirmed in the supplemental stuff on the DVD but I haven't actually seen it. I do just kind of have a problem with the race that you're showing as oppressed being actually incapable of bettering themselves. Maybe I'm wrong though. I like it because of that. Does the fact that the Prawns aren't very smart(and really, they're 'workers' which doesn't mean they're completely devoid of any thought -- they did alright talking to Wikkus) ean they deserve to be treated the way they are? I don't think because a race may not be capable of bettering themselves is cause to opress them. Edit: I mean, it would have been easy to make them angelic, glowy-light aliens being mistreated, but they didn't. They made them disgusting, hard-to-understand and kind of dumb, which is more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 21:18
|
|
|
Concerning Homey D. Clown. I was hoping for a formal statement from Damon Wayans or the company as to where it went. There were references of it on the internet within the last two years but now I cannot find one morsel of information. I guess it's really gone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 21:37
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:I like it because of that. Does the fact that the Prawns aren't very smart(and really, they're 'workers' which doesn't mean they're completely devoid of any thought -- they did alright talking to Wikkus) ean they deserve to be treated the way they are? I don't think because a race may not be capable of bettering themselves is cause to opress them. Given how far the film goes to draw comparisons to real-life oppressed minorities, you don't find this problematic?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2010 21:40
|
|
|
Trying to think of some great movie performances by actors that weren't regarded as particularly good actors, or serious actors, prior to the role. Some that come to mind from recent history: - Marlon Wayans in Requiem for a Dream - Steve Zahn in Rescue Dawn - Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love - Katie Holmes in Pieces of April - Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting Married - Amy Adams in Junebug
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 08:21
|
|
|
What instances are there of a movie being made with the intention of retconning it in the sequel? Plenty of movie sequels exist which expand upon events in the original, or add details that weren't there. I'm sure plenty of movie sequels exist which retroactively modify the original, too. But in the latter case, that modification comes about because the creators of the second movie decided to retcon the first. Has anybody ever made a movie which finishes with the audience thinking that the story has been resolved in a specific way, but the director has deliberately misled the audience so as to blow their minds in the sequel? Like for Film 1, the killer is caught and sent to jail, everybody is happy, the end. Film 2: it turns out he wasn't the killer at all and actually there are hidden details all the way Film 1 which prove this and this was the plan from the beginning of the production of Film 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 12:40
|
|
|
Highlander 2 turned all the immortals into Aliens that for some reason were exiled to earth and given eternal life. I don't understand it either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 12:44
|
|
|
qntm posted:What instances are there of a movie being made with the intention of retconning it in the sequel? The only time I can think of something like that happening is the whole Gandalf thing from Fellowship of the Ring where you think he's dead but discover what really happens to him in The Two Towers. I don't think this happens too often because it requires actually having the sequel planned out when the first movie is written which just doesn't happen too often.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 12:54
|
|
|
qntm posted:What instances are there of a movie being made with the intention of retconning it in the sequel?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 13:10
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Trying to think of some great movie performances by actors that weren't regarded as particularly good actors, or serious actors, prior to the role. Some that come to mind from recent history: Jim Carrey in "The Truman Show", perhaps. I think that's a good candidate because it was shortly after his "Dumb and Dumber" type roles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:45 |
|
|
Why is the best movie about bigfoot Harry and The Hendersons? Sure, there's stuff like boggy creek but there haven't really been any decent movies about bigfoot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2010 14:43
|
|
