|
The only way to explain Spider-Man 3 is to assume Sam Raimi or whoever wrote the script or someone on the movie hates Kirsten Dunst. Half the movie is about her being a bitch and then getting punched in the face. You know what movie irritates the poo poo out of me? Gattaca. First of all, are you seriously telling me that people, within one generation, are going to repeal every discrimination, medical privacy, and disability law? That the old men in the government would actually do that? Also, why the hell would employers suck up skin flakes from keyboards to DNA test them? If you have such high security that you have to be positively identified by genetic testing to get into the building, what's the point of constantly inspecting everything inside? Are they afraid a janitor is accidentally going to do a shitload of computer programming? Oh, and what the hell kind of a job do you do where 90% of it is working at a desk in an office and then once in a while you go into space? Astronauts are, like, fighter pilots and poo poo, not Dilbert.
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2011 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Ambiguatron posted:The only way to explain Spider-Man 3 is to assume Sam Raimi or whoever wrote the script or someone on the movie hates Kirsten Dunst. Half the movie is about her being a bitch and then getting punched in the face. 0. I explain Spider-Man 3 as Avi Arad and every marketing dude finally excising some sort of leverage on Raimi because every mouthbreathing fan in existence was clamoring for Venom without actually knowing what that would entail. As for Gattaca.... 1. Ethan Hawke's character exposits that there are anti-discrimination laws still on the books, just that it's not really followed because it's really easy to get a genetic profile on someone from a handshake or doorknob. It falls under the same banner as a racist firm hiring a small quota of uneducated minorities, putting them on janitorial duty, and keeping a small slush fund to pay most regulators to look the other way, and saying they have a diverse workplace. Given how de-regulation is all the rage within the last two decades it's actually not that hard to believe a firm could get away with it. Plus the "thesis" in point 2 is hard to disagree with as a justification for suck actions. 2. One thesis of the movie is the question "Is it wrong to be elitist when there is a scientific, measurable and reprovable foundation for that elitism? What happens when you can empirically bet on who is 'Atlas' and who is 'parasite' and be right at least 51% of the time?" You'll notice that while Ethan Hawke's character is rarely if ever outright maligned or attacked for his "inferior" genetics he is without question seen as a member of a lower caste simply because the question of "how" his genetic code will express itself is different than the people whose parents said "Six foot two, blonde hair, metabolism slows at a rate of >1% a year." On top of that there's the unspoken implication that only the richer castes of society pre-genetics are able to afford modification for their children. That's a big and subtle reason Ethan Hawke's character is presented, as his parents are shown to have the funds and socioeconomic class to get genetic modification for their children but Ethan Hawke happens to be one of the last members of his caste to go through life 100% unmodified. He gets to see the caste system from both sides of the the modified/unmodified; rich/poor line. There's also the unspoken capitalist component, which isn't hard to extrapolate. "Who would you rather hire for your Fortune 100 company that deals in huge profit margins and risks a lot of capital, the triathlon runner with no history of lung cancer or the chain-smoker with a hacking cough and high cholesterol? Which seems like the riskier investment, all other qualities being equal?" The reality is that once you get up to the "astronaut" caste where physical, mental, and emotional excellence are requirements of the job then the guy who wasn't pre-selected to fit astronaut qualities is a huge financial liability. At best he stresses you out as you wonder whether or not he'll die in a gravity simulator, and at worst he dies and gives your firm a ton of bad publicity and flushes funding away. It's not malicious to not want to hire him, it's "good business" and logic that is hard to argue despite the human tendency to root for the underdog. So they do genetic tests because someone at the executive level knows that their firm attracts a huge number of pie-in-the-sky kids with a dream and some gumption, like Mr. Hawke, and they need to weed them out. On top of that there's the implication that once genetic modification was well into its first generation it became standard protocol to weed out anyone who wasn't fitting the genetic model of "excellence" in a case of outright discrimination. Such behavior isn't foreign these days either. Even though we're not at the level of genetic modification the higher up you go on the ladder the more intangible factors like "where you went to school" and "how powerful/wealthy is your family?" and "Are you important enough to us to look the other way about that summer in Thailand where you killed a hooker? You do know that if you gently caress up bad enough we'll use that as an excuse to get rid of you right?" become hidden but very real basis for hiring and employment discrimination and really muddle the supposed meritocracy up with notions of oligarchy, plutocracy, and general caste. It's nowhere near as bad as the world Gattaca presents, but Gattaca was meant to be an exaggeration of the kinds of discrimination that already exists. 3. I always assumed that the job in Gattaca was bureaucracy and paper-pushing that everyone has to do, physical training, and computer modelling/research/analysis for their missions. Still, you got me on that one. I think it ultimately came about because Gattaca wasn't made with a blockbuster budget, and they couldn't afford all the expensive sets/equipment nor imagination necessary to create an "astronaut of the future" experience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
The Berzerker posted:Where did you get that idea? Harry says he'll give Ock the tridium if he delivers Spider-Man. Ock asks how to find him, and Harry says "Parker, he takes pictures of Spider-Man for the Bugle - make him tell you where he is." (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
Vigilante Banana posted:Yeah, that actually bugs me a lot too. At one point Mark actually has the chance to have a real job doing what he loves to do, but he ends up rejecting the job because he doesn't want to be a sellout. Which is great and all, stick to your guns, buddy, except that his passion is filmmaking. So he wants to become a famous filmmaker, but he doesn't actually want to go through the available channels to do so. And yet, everyone's still pissed that "no one wants to pay me for my aaaaaaaart Yeah, he ends up working for a show like TMZ or Hard Copy, and then he and Roger sing "What You Own" later, which is a song entirely about consumerism and THE MAN and selling out and  . My question is... he was getting paid not only hourly but ALSO on commission, and was getting paid a lot considering he had Joanne working her lawyer magic for him, especially for a dude who was just starting out in the business, ESPECIALLY for working in New York. Why the hell didn't he use some of that money to go to film school or something if he was really that serious? Malaleb posted:That, and then the movie he makes is essentially a montage of home movie clips. The other part of Rent that bugs me is when Angel sings about murdering his neighbor's dog. And this is supposed to be a likable character that all of the characters love?! Oh, but it's okay, because it was Benny's wife's dog and Benny is a JERK and his wife is RICH and therefore she's a heinous bitch and Benny didn't like the dog anyways!  Also, the person who was talking about how they were all upset that they had to pay rent in their apartment: Benny had been Mark, Roger, and Maureen's roommate, a "bohemian" in the same lovely situation they were all in. When he met, fell in love with, and married Allison (they snottily call her "Muffy" because she's rich and everyone with money, except Joanne because she's a lesbian, are immediately assholes), he promised them that he wouldn't make them pay rent anymore, as his father-in-law owned the building, and he just wanted to be a cool bro. Well, when his father-in-law wanted to tear down all the buildings, Tent City, and The Performance Space, to build a state-of-the-art film and recording studio, he was sent to go collect rent from the tenants, despite Benny having promised his friends that rent wouldn't be an issue. Benny grew up really loving poor, and was obsessed with trying to impress his wife and father-in-law, as well as blinded with the amount of wealth they had. He knew drat well that Roger and Mark and everyone else wouldn't have the money to pay rent with, so he'd have legal grounds to evict them all, tear down the buildings, and build the studio. He also tries to bribe Roger and Mark in "You'll See" with jobs at the studio, to try to make up for taking away their home. So, yeah. Roger and Mark had PLENTY of opportunity to end up with cushy, well-paying jobs doing EXACTLY what they loved, with the best technology the times could afford... but no, they'd rather sit around, proclaiming how very bohemian and counter-culture they are, while making lovely home movies and never being able to write a song that isn't loving Musetta's Waltz. I mean, Benny even flat-out tells them in "La Vie Boheme" that they live in a lovely loving dump in the middle of the ghetto, and that they're blinding themselves into thinking they can actually survive with the way they're living.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 00:32
|
|
"
|
I have my issues with Rent (a few of which I mentioned earlier in the thread), but I pretty much just write off the overall concept as a fantasy for a certain segment of the population. Sort of like Pretty Woman, Death Wish, or The Hangover. It would be REALLY STUPID to behave like anyone in those movies, but gosh isn't it just fun to pretend that if you behave self-destructively it'll all work out?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 00:54
|
|
|
It's less a single moment, but the entire Wanted movie was enraging and awful. I'm a fan of the comics, and seeing what would have been an awesome super hero/super villain movie reduced to a story about assassins with bullet time(to sell the video games, I'm sure) was irritating. For anyone who hasn't read the comics(and you should because they're awesome), pretty much the only similarities between the two are some of the character names and that the main character has a dad. Seriously, how do you make a movie without even having the main villain of the story or 98% of the characters in it? It's a short series(only a few issues), so it wouldn't have been hard to compress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 01:16
|
|
|
Sorry the comic is poo poo. And it has a character that is also made out of poo poo. I don't think they would make a movie where the protagonist is an rear end in a top hat villain going to other dimensions to beat up not-Superman
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
In The Thomas Crown Affair [Brosnan version], what exactly is he doing to that painting when he steals it? Is he literally snapping it in half to bend it after he puts it in a container SMALLER than the painting and then folds the container? I don't understand it. I never understood it. Not a great movie anyway but what is happening? It's frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 01:49
|
|
|
Schlinky posted:All this gun talk just reminded me of Snatch. When Boris kills off Frankie Four-Fingers, before doing so he turns off his hearing aid. Furthermore, when Vinnie and Sol test out their guns, the noise is so loud they end up breaking their car windows. Dunno about heat, but in Snatch Boris is putting earplugs in, not messing with a hearing aid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 02:09
|
|
|
The movies been mentioned a few times, but my gripe with the new Star Trek movie is when old Spock is explaining what happened in his timeline. He gets to the part where Romulus gets destroyed by the magical super nova, he says "And then, the Unthinkable happened! *footage of Romulus being destroyed*". Spock, that wasn't unthinkable. That is exactly what you *knew* was going to happen, you were just hoping to stop it. I'm sure a ton of loving people were thinking about that exact thing happening. It completely ruins that whole scene for me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 04:22
|
|
|
In The Ring, the "ring" refers to the ring of light created by the lid being placed atop a well, as viewed from the bottom of the well. But if an unbroken ring of light were visible, the lid wouldn't be touching the sides, and would simply fall in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 04:50
|
|
|
Look a sunflower posted:In The Ring, the "ring" refers to the ring of light created by the lid being placed atop a well, as viewed from the bottom of the well. But if an unbroken ring of light were visible, the lid wouldn't be touching the sides, and would simply fall in. They put cellophane over the top and THEN put the lid on for extra effect. Duh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 05:01
|
|
|
Look a sunflower posted:In The Ring, the "ring" refers to the ring of light created by the lid being placed atop a well, as viewed from the bottom of the well. But if an unbroken ring of light were visible, the lid wouldn't be touching the sides, and would simply fall in. What bugs me about The Ring is that stupid loving pun. http://www.theringworldforum.com/koji.html posted:Some douchebag: It occurred to me that tape recorders and videotapes could be metaphors for "circle." For some reason this drives me up the goddamn wall.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
Horrorclaus posted:Dunno about heat, but in Snatch Boris is putting earplugs in, not messing with a hearing aid. Huh. Just checked it out the scene on youtube, you're right. My bad. Like I said, it's been a while since I've seen it though, so I might watch it again next week.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 07:51
|
|
|
Earlier in the thread someone mentioned I Am Legend. Despite the fact that the movie dies along with the dog halfway through, just be glad that they didnt go with the alternate ending of the movie, where in the climactic scene in his plexiglass laboratory, the head vampire/zombie/infected dude gets really angry at Will Smith and shows him a picture of a butterfly. It's then shown that the captured infected girl Dr. Smith was experimenting on and has strapped to the table has a butterfly tattoo, and the leader zombie just wants her back. Will Smith releases her, the infected leave and the 3 clean humans walk away into the sunset, hoping to find a cure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 08:57
|
|
|
Bargain bin Laden posted:This reminded me of The Next Gen episode where they find Scotty... In the end, Scotty's ship needs to be sacrificed so they can exit the Dyson Sphere, but they beam him through the shields which are holding the door open. That's because anything involving science in Trek scripts is made up on the spur of the moment to drive the plot: Ron Moore posted:He described how the writers would just insert "tech" into the scripts whenever they needed to resolve a story or plot line, then they'd have consultants fill in the appropriate words (aka technobabble) later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 09:23
|
|
|
Slightly late, but...JebanyPedal posted:Speaking of Heat, there's a part where Al Pacino shoots Tom Sizemore's character right in the center of his forehead while he has a hostage. Isn't that completely action movie? I don't think a cop would ever shoot someone with a hostage, and as I recall the hostage was a kid he was holding up right next to his own head, that's just stupid, he'd probably get suspended or fired for that. This is all true. It's kind of justifiable within the narrative, though, because Al Pacino's character is a total maniac of the 'doesn't play by your rules, turn in your badge, etc' variety. I'm pretty sure he's supposed to be a cokehead, even though we never see him using it--the wild mood swings, the manic tics, all that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 10:55
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:Believe it or not, it's the most faithful film to its literary source in history. What? No it's not. It takes several liberties with the plot. In the book Lucy for example is not the reincarnation of Dracula's wife, Dracula is not Vlad Tepes and he doesn't become vampire because he stabs a cross. Hopkins' Van Helsing is also pretty different from the book.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 11:22
|
|
|
TheTofuShop posted:Earlier in the thread someone mentioned I Am Legend. Despite the fact that the movie dies along with the dog halfway through, just be glad that they didnt go with the alternate ending of the movie, where in the climactic scene in his plexiglass laboratory, the head vampire/zombie/infected dude gets really angry at Will Smith and shows him a picture of a butterfly. It's then shown that the captured infected girl Dr. Smith was experimenting on and has strapped to the table has a butterfly tattoo, and the leader zombie just wants her back. Will Smith releases her, the infected leave and the 3 clean humans walk away into the sunset, hoping to find a cure. Just be glad that they missed the entire point of the story and the phrase "I am legend"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 11:25
|
|
|
I thought versions of I Am Legend were released with both endings? They're both pretty awful endings in their own ways.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 13:27
|
|
|
Stoatbringer posted:I thought versions of I Am Legend were released with both endings? They're both pretty awful endings in their own ways. I think it's on the DVD. Test audiences didn't like the original ending apparently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 15:33
|
|
|
TheTofuShop posted:Earlier in the thread someone mentioned I Am Legend. Despite the fact that the movie dies along with the dog halfway through, just be glad that they didnt go with the alternate ending of the movie, where in the climactic scene in his plexiglass laboratory, the head vampire/zombie/infected dude gets really angry at Will Smith and shows him a picture of a butterfly. It's then shown that the captured infected girl Dr. Smith was experimenting on and has strapped to the table has a butterfly tattoo, and the leader zombie just wants her back. Will Smith releases her, the infected leave and the 3 clean humans walk away into the sunset, hoping to find a cure. Actually I very much prefer that ending. It follows the book in that the entire point is that the "vampires" aren't monsters, but merely people looking out after their own. They only attacked Smith because he basically hunted them for what must have appeared as sport to them. Smith had it wrong all along, they weren't the monsters, he was. He was the boogeyman they hid from during the day. Which is the point of the titular phrase "I am legend". He was the last human, the legend those new people are afraid of. Perestroika has a new favorite as of 16:45 on Sep 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 16:43
|
|
TheTofuShop posted:Earlier in the thread someone mentioned I Am Legend. Despite the fact that the movie dies along with the dog halfway through, just be glad that they didnt go with the alternate ending of the movie, where in the climactic scene in his plexiglass laboratory, the head vampire/zombie/infected dude gets really angry at Will Smith and shows him a picture of a butterfly. It's then shown that the captured infected girl Dr. Smith was experimenting on and has strapped to the table has a butterfly tattoo, and the leader zombie just wants her back. Will Smith releases her, the infected leave and the 3 clean humans walk away into the sunset, hoping to find a cure. Except that's the good ending? (Not that you told it very well.) The ending that made most of the movie make sense and made the entire movie interesting? The ending like the book the movie was supposed to be based on? That ending? EDIT:^^^ The guy above me said it better.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
The Matrix: Reloaded I still enjoy this series despite its flaws, but one part really kills it for me. The fight scene with Agent Smith. Neo is flinging Smiths around and generally doing his super-badass thing. And then he picks up the pole. About here, Neo becomes CGI-Generated Neo and it's horribly obvious. It just doesn't look real in the slightest, and it has nothing to do with artistic effect. His face looks like an EQ-II character and the physical effects of his clothing seem too smooth. Mauzeraut has a new favorite as of 17:31 on Sep 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
Mauzeraut posted:The Matrix: Reloaded The matrix IS a computer generated image. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 17:36
|
|
|
I was actually just coming to this thread (GREAT thread, btw) to post about The Matrix. I irrationally hated both sequels the moment I heard they were being made. In truth, The Matrix simply doesn't need a sequel. It was fairly self-contained, and any unexplained pieces only served to make it more interesting. The sequels turned what could have been a "Great film!" in to a " Well, at least the first one was good."
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 18:57
|
|
|
Mauzeraut posted:The Matrix: Reloaded Yeah I remember back then people were going crazy over the burly brawl sequence and saying it was the best fight filmed. It looked terrible because everyone looked like fake rubber. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:There were a lot of things wrong with Spider-man 3. The symbiote that he took off like some sort of suit, the dancing scene, etc. But the part I hated the most, more than anything, was how much of a giant bitch Mary Jane was. I haven't seen the movie since it came out but wasn't Peter pretty self obsessed? He didn't seem to understand that, yes he has it much harder, but she has her own problems. Everything just sort of pales in comparison to him, but it was still important to her. It's as if Peter was the doctor and Mary Jane was the ice-cream tester. Actually, he might have had a point there... Anyway, I think it annoyed her that he always drew comparisons to his own situation instead of just being there for her. (which he wasn't most of the time) I mean, there's understanding, but it's still a relationship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 19:43
|
|
|
MillionsV posted:I was actually just coming to this thread (GREAT thread, btw) to post about The Matrix. Yeah, the first Matrix ended perfectly (probably because the Wachowskis had no idea how if it would sell). The sequels just reeked of "oh poo poo, better cash in quick". Maybe with more time they would have been better but the Matrix sequels suffer a similar problem to the Prequel Trilogy: the story just doesn't bear being fleshed out. Interesting side note: I was very skeptical when a co-worker told me The Matrix was the best movie of the year, maybe better than The Phantom Menace (TPM hadn't yet hit theaters). Oh how right he was...
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
Oh how i missed this thread, i have so much to sperg about. -James Camerons Avatar: During the final battle, when the Badguy Mc Clearlyevil chases Sully with his flying fortress of doom Michelle Rodrigez appears behind with her future chopper, strafes him then flies right through in front of it where her craft promptly riddled by millions of bullets in seconds. Why she doesn't fire any of her missiles on board? In case of her craft not having any missiles, why she flies past the FFoD instead of staying on its tail and keep shooting? The FFoD clearly doesn't have any weapons on the back, slower than the chopper and i am pretty sure if she persisted with her machine guns at least damaged it somehow without herself getting killed. On that topic, why the choppers don't have any kind of ejection mechanism since you don't have the risk of getting murdered by rotor/motor blades? Galewolf has a new favorite as of 21:11 on Sep 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
Galewolf posted:Oh how i missed this thread, i have so much to sperg about. I'm curious as to why Bad Guy Evil Man didn't just sever the link that Sully had to his body, or leave the drat capsule open with his mask off so he'd suffocate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:I'm curious as to why Bad Guy Evil Man didn't just sever the link that Sully had to his body, or leave the drat capsule open with his mask off so he'd suffocate. Don't they hijack the link pods before Cliche von Eyeroll do that? He sure tries to do it during the final battle but i am not sure if he had the chance to do it before. Galewolf has a new favorite as of 21:18 on Sep 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Actually I very much prefer that ending. It follows the book in that the entire point is that the "vampires" aren't monsters, but merely people looking out after their own. They only attacked Smith because he basically hunted them for what must have appeared as sport to them. Smith had it wrong all along, they weren't the monsters, he was. He was the boogeyman they hid from during the day. Which is the point of the titular phrase "I am legend". He was the last human, the legend those new people are afraid of. I just think the way they presented the rest of the movie kinda makes that ending a bit lackluster (for the movie) I do agree the book was about 30 times better than the movie though. Its a shame they just abandonded the actual theme of the book, and I think we can all agree that movie adaptation was pretty poorly put together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
There's a lot of things I could pick out about The Matrix: Reloaded, but the 100 Smiths is not among them. I thought it was cool and fun to watch even in spite of how fakey it looked in places. You know what isn't fun to watch though? Intro to Philosophy lectures in an action movie. I'm talking specifically about the scene where they see the French rear end in a top hat searching for the Keymaster or whatever he's called, and he's sipping on his wine. He then goes on a five-minute diversion from the movie about causality, and the protagonists leave. Then the guy's wife has to basically be the movie's deus ex machina, come in out of nowhere, and kick the plot in the rear end to get it moving again. The entire thing brings the movie to a screeching halt for what ultimately amounts to no good reason. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 23:46
|
|
|
Little Miss Sunshine was well received by critics, but I just don't see why. It really came off as self-indulgent tripe that gave each individual actor a chance to demonstrate EMOTION in their own little nugget.  Who's turn is it to have an emotional breakdown? I just did one. Mine isn't for another fifteen minutes. Oh, I'm up next.  As if the bloated drama weren't enough, you have the stereotypical "wacky grandpa" character, the naive "innocent child," the "rebel son," "suffering homosexual," and "husband and wife who just don't get along anymore." When the movie ends we're supposed to feel optimistic for this family that pulled their poo poo together just long enough (barely) to attend a pageant, but in reality they're returning home with a dead family member and in a worse situation than they started. But don't think about that! This type of movie can be done well, and it's called Win Win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2011 23:59
|
|
|
Since people have brought up The Matrix sequels, there was the final fight with Neo and Agent Smith in the last one, in the rain. They did their bullet time thing and had Smith punching through the rain, but the rain was long strips of water, instead of drops. Maybe it was deliberate, like RillAkBea said, it is computer generated, but it just bugged me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 00:15
|
|
|
Galewolf posted:James Camerons Avatar How do the Avatar bodies breath when the dudes aren't linked in or whatever to them? Shouldn't they die without being hooked up to some sort of life support system?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 00:51
|
|
|
Mr. Saturday posted:There's a lot of things I could pick out about The Matrix: Reloaded, but the 100 Smiths is not among them. I thought it was cool and fun to watch even in spite of how fakey it looked in places. You know what isn't fun to watch though? Intro to Philosophy lectures in an action movie. I'm talking specifically about the scene where they see the French rear end in a top hat searching for the Keymaster or whatever he's called, and he's sipping on his wine. He then goes on a five-minute diversion from the movie about causality, and the protagonists leave. Then the guy's wife has to basically be the movie's deus ex machina, come in out of nowhere, and kick the plot in the rear end to get it moving again. The entire thing brings the movie to a screeching halt for what ultimately amounts to no good reason. Amazing. Honestly, when I watch that movie, I just start it at the part where they meet the Merovingian. I skip everything else; it makes the movie quite fast paced and entertaining. Galewolf posted:On that topic, why the choppers don't have any kind of ejection mechanism since you don't have the risk of getting murdered by rotor/motor blades? Heck, some choppers nowadays DO have ejection systems, they just blow the blades off first. The US, at least, considers the pilot to be the most valuable asset. You can always build another plane, but a pilot with 10 years of experience can't be replaced.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Sex Hobbit posted:No dice. "But not just any kiss... the kiss of true love!" Not sure that would cover it. Price Eric said he was "going to find that girl and marry her", he was already in love with her, all they needed was the kiss.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Oh! Saving Private Ryan. I like the film. It's visually and emotionally powerful, and I'm willing to put up with the more cloying moments to get there. But a few standouts: The Nazis are all skinheads. You go to the effort to make a film so real that you give veterans flashbacks, but you're afraid people will like the Nazis if you give them period-accurate hair. Give us a little more credit, Steven. A lot has been made of Upham letting Mellish get killed. I agree. gently caress Upham for being a coward to the point it verges on treason. What gets mentioned less is that Upham's act of redemption is equally cowardly. Executing someone as he tries to surrender! How heroic! No, I don't care if he hurt your feelings by returning to fight for the Germans after you let him go. I don't get why the film ends with a shot of the American flag. The soldiers' sacrifice wasn't for America, in fact they spend the movie complaining that they wished they were fighting for America. It was about the sacrifice of the many for the one, and Ryan's burden as he grew old. Why the flag? Because America makes dubious military sacrifice possible? Because the flag feels bad for Ryan's guilt? Oh wait, it was to push the last bit of philosophical nuance out of the film with a bit of rah-rah.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 02:09
|
|