|
What do the scientists in Life do that's dumb?
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
K. Waste posted:What do the scientists in Life do that's dumb? Doesn’t Ryan Reynolds pull the classic ‘disregards quarantine’ move when Calvin is crushing that guy’s arm? Oh, and Sho fucks up and gets the Cosmonauts killed
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
LadyPictureShow posted:Doesn’t Ryan Reynolds pull the classic ‘disregards quarantine’ move when Calvin is crushing that guy’s arm? Disregarding quarantine was the right move there, and would have possibly saved the station if he'd done it immediately like he wanted. As it was, he traded his life for the life of another, which is heroic, not dumb. The second was the result of a reasonable misapprehension given that he had been lied to about the extent of the quarantine procedures. Again, not dumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Is cloverfield 3 shallow and gripping enough to be a good workout movie Still looking for more of those
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:Is cloverfield 3 shallow and gripping enough to be a good workout movie Great fit for that. The story itself is whatever, but it moves fast and keeps introducing new crazy nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:Is cloverfield 3 shallow and gripping enough to be a good workout movie Nothing will ever top Chronical of Riddick for workout movies
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
Life wasn't the best movie, but I enjoyed it quite a bit. I'm a huge sucker for the genre though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:23
|
|
|
same. we need more stuck-in-prison buddy comedies
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Disregarding quarantine was the right move there, and would have possibly saved the station if he'd done it immediately like he wanted. As it was, he traded his life for the life of another, which is heroic, not dumb. Didn't skinny leg scientist disobey some orders, or at least got permission to do something extra? Also, didnt they not kill the alien thing when they clearly should have killed it? I cant remember anything specific, but I too seem to remember alot of dumb things happening that lead to everyone dying. And isnt it implied that they do something dumb so their ship crashes on earth probably killing everyone on earth eventually?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:Didn't skinny leg scientist disobey some orders, or at least got permission to do something extra? It’s worse than that. He actually hides the dangerous alien from his crew and lets it feast on his legs overnight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Did they not advertise Life much or something? This thread is the first time I can recall hearing about it, and after looking it up I really like the cast and genre.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
poo poo alien and motivations
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:It’s worse than that. He actually hides the dangerous alien from his crew and lets it feast on his legs overnight. I just thought it had latched on to him and he didn’t realize due to the paralysis?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
LadyPictureShow posted:Doesn’t Ryan Reynolds pull the classic ‘disregards quarantine’ move when Calvin is crushing that guy’s arm? Disregarding standard procedure because you believe there's a reasonable chance you can save someone's life isn't stupidity. Sho does not 'gently caress up,' he's under the impression that the Cosmonauts are there to rescue the survivors, he doesn't know that they're only there to push them all into deep space. Moreover, acts of altruism and desperation are not stupidity. They're realistic emotional responses to dire and uncertain situations that contribute to the dramatic tension of a narrative. When characters in a film are devoid of this, or are able to soberly overcome these emotions, this does not make the narrative better. If anything, it just results in the narrative becoming more plodding and contrived, evolving out of arbitrary circumstance rather than relating to the character's emotional and psychological state. Hence, we get The Cloverfield Paradox, the movie where the space-time continuum gets hosed, but everything proceeds in a level-headed and orderly fashion. We are merely told through computer read-outs and exposition that the fabric of reality is coming apart. FrankeeFrankFrank posted:Didn't skinny leg scientist disobey some orders, or at least got permission to do something extra? They attempt numerous times to kill Calvin, and it doesn't work because Calvin is too adaptable and intelligent. The ending of the film is not the result of stupidity. They do exactly what they're supposed to, but as the vessel is breaking apart, it alters the trajectory of the two pods so that the one they intended to shoot off into deep space falls to Earth, and the one they intended to fall to earth shoots off into deep space. This actually seems to be a very common misapprehension of the end of the film, even though implicitly nobody can actually point to how the characters are at fault. The plan fails, so they must have done something wrong. The straightforward narrative of the film is that things go wrong because of circumstances that the characters either couldn't possibly foresee, or that they have no control over. The one exception is when Hugh hides Calvin and lets it eat his leg, but dismissing this characterization as 'stupidity' is to fundamentally not engage with the possibility that it is possible for a character to be both completely lucid and intelligent, and also do something that negatively effects others. K. Waste fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Feb 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
Yeah, the takeaway appears to be that to avoid being "dumb," you must not have any values above your own self-preservation and must be an optimal, omniscient actor in attempting to achieve it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Could have done without the last 3 seconds of Cloverfield
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
The more I think about The Cloverfield Paradox, the more annoyed I am that they didn't even try to explain most of the things that happen. It's just weird stuff for the sake of being weird. Why was the guy full of worms? Why was he also full of the missing ship gyro? Why did the ship chew off the guy's arm, but the arm was okay, it was crawling around on its own, and how did the arm know that the gyro was inside the other guy? The movie was just full of nonsense and not even Chris O'Dowd could make it good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Disregarding quarantine was the right move there, and would have possibly saved the station if he'd done it immediately like he wanted. As it was, he traded his life for the life of another, which is heroic, not dumb. I must be mixing up the quarantine part with a different alien life movie, because I looked up the Wikipedia summary of it. And altruistic/helping friends or not, you can still make a bad split-second decision in a panic. Life would have been an even duller film if they went ‘Sorry Hugh! Quarantine protocols and all! Sucks, man.’ I maintain Sho made a dumb move, but I felt like that was panic and that scene where he was looking over the picture of his new baby overriding ‘better worry bout that alien’. Could someone at least clarify about Hugh apparently letting Calvin feast on him? I assumed he was hosed up from getting attacked and just couldn’t feel him on his legs. Was there some dialogue I don’t remember where he said ‘hey, BTW, got Calvin eating my legs. Have fun!’
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
LadyPictureShow posted:I must be mixing up the quarantine part with a different alien life movie, because I looked up the Wikipedia summary of it. You can make a bad split-second decision in a panic when acting altruistically, but Ryan Reynolds's character didn't. Sho's move was only dumb if we impart information on him – it wasn't a rescue – that we're explicitly told he didn't possess. Hugh let Calvin feed on him because he doesn't want to kill what's potentially the last of Calvin's kind, and he doesn't blame it for just trying to survive. He talks about this repeatedly in the movie. Again, sacrificing oneself for others is not inherently dumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
It's actually a really beautiful, meditative scene, probably the best in the whole picture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfUzaYV1xfE
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
[sees someone having courage in their convictions and finding nobility in death] "What a dumbass."
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:[sees someone having courage in their convictions and finding nobility in death] It's really just the same phenomenon you see of certain avid zombie movie-buffs imagining themselves as a super-proficient survivalist instead of that guy getting his guts eaten out while gurgling "Choke on 'em."
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
I get the emotional appeal of that, but in this case the pro fantasist should be imagining themselves as Calvin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
Holy poo poo -- Cloverfield Paradox was a great collection of scenes from other movies: - Alien (5?) where the dude is sucked out of the hole - Armageddon where Bruce Willis sacrifices himself for the sake of the crew - Star Wars at the beginning where they do a gigantic info dump to tell you everything you need to know - Oh PS the Cloverfield monster rears its head at the end like Jurassic Park T-Rex. Despite all that, what the hell it was fun. Wait. Hang on. He can't feel his arm, but his arm can write. So, it's the other dimensions' O'Brien's arm, knowing what to write despite the fact that THAT O'Brien is dead? Yeah. There's your paradox right there. The less I think about the story, characters, plot, logic, the more I enjoy it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to see a trained scientist and astronaut make questionable decisions that put his crew and the planet as a whole at risk and think “Wow, that’s not very wise.” I understand his motivation. I know what he’s trying to do. It’s still needlessly reckless and ultimately leads to every bad thing that happens afterward.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:I don’t think it’s unreasonable to see a trained scientist and astronaut make questionable decisions that put his crew and the planet as a whole at risk and think “Wow, that’s not very wise.” You do understand that nobody makes a movie called "... and everybody made the right decisions and everything went as expected." to be honest, this is something I say to myself when watching any movie. ANY movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
That movie was boring as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Again, sacrificing oneself for others is not inherently dumb. I don’t think anyone’s trying to sell this point. That’s like calling out Parker for rushing the Alien to try and fight it hand-to-hand because he didn’t want to light it up after it grabbed Lambert in Alien. It was a poor choice in retrospect, sure. But he tried to save his crew mate in a split second decision.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:The ending of the film is not the result of stupidity. They do exactly what they're supposed to, but as the vessel is breaking apart, it alters the trajectory of the two pods so that the one they intended to shoot off into deep space falls to Earth, and the one they intended to fall to earth shoots off into deep space. This actually seems to be a very common misapprehension of the end of the film, even though implicitly nobody can actually point to how the characters are at fault. The plan fails, so they must have done something wrong. The thing is, the fact that the vessel's debris alters the trajectory of the pods is really easy to miss, and without that bit of information it seems like they just hosed up and got in the wrong pods. If you're watching the movie while doing something else, or even in a social setting, I can pretty easily see someone not catching it and thinking the ending happened the way it did because the protagonists were dumbfucks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:I don’t think it’s unreasonable to see a trained scientist and astronaut make questionable decisions that put his crew and the planet as a whole at risk and think “Wow, that’s not very wise.” Yeah, I wouldn't have done what Hugh did either, but it's ridiculous to watch The Thing from Another World and be like, lol, dumbest scientist ever because the Dr. Carrington risks everyone's lives in an attempt to study the monster. It wasn't an error in reasoning. He cares about different things than most people, which makes him an interesting character. LadyPictureShow posted:I don’t think anyone’s trying to sell this point. That’s like calling out Parker for rushing the Alien to try and fight it hand-to-hand because he didn’t want to light it up after it grabbed Lambert in Alien. Yeah, I saw you said you were misremembering. Thanks for clarifying that. But I'm also talking about Hugh there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Was the entire husband subplot in Cloverfield 3 part of the reshoots? It felt so divorced from the main plot. Hell you could cut every scene that ties to it and it would be a improvement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:instead of that guy getting his guts eaten out while gurgling "Choke on 'em." "They're dead! They're loving dead and you wanna teach them tricks!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:The thing is, the fact that the vessel's debris alters the trajectory of the pods is really easy to miss, and without that bit of information it seems like they just hosed up and got in the wrong pods. If you're watching the movie while doing something else, or even in a social setting, I can pretty easily see someone not catching it and thinking the ending happened the way it did because the protagonists were dumbfucks. Well, yes. Movies are made to be paid attention to. There's a big difference between missing these shots in which one of the pods clearly crashes into ship debris and goes spinning out of trajectory...         ... and then conflating the conclusion of the narrative with a prejudice against the character's intelligence, which also isn't supported by the narrative. What the conclusion of the film conveys is that something didn't go according to plan. That this event is the culmination of the protagonists being "dumbfucks" is a reading that's already dependent on writing off the events of the film as results of the characters' incompetency. But as we have seen, this reading of events itself is fundamentally predicated on a lack of engagement with what is depicted and how this relates to the motivations of the characters; which are neither dumb, but also not dryly objective. Tying this back into the scene above, the point is clearly that we are supposed to be disoriented so that the twist that Calvin has reached earth actually comes as a shock. But spectators who weren't even paying attention to the movie are content to assume that these deliberate formal choices are just superficial content, that the reason Calvin reaches earth is because the characters are lazily written, that they 'accidentally' got into the wrong pods. The laziness here is entirely on the part of the imagination of the spectator. 'Hugh sacrificed himself to preserve an organism that threatens the entire world! A trained scientist would never do anything so reckless!'
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
Smets posted:The more I think about The Cloverfield Paradox, the more annoyed I am that they didn't even try to explain most of the things that happen. It's just weird stuff for the sake of being weird. The movie is garbage and has more plot holes than any other film in recent memory. Why don't they rotate scientists off during the mission? Even if they're the best in their respective fields, they won't be operating at anything like peak efficiency after being up there forever. And they were failing every test anyway. Why not rotate other capable scientists in and let the main crew get some R&R with their family. There's just no way they'd leave one team up there to fail over and over again for two years. Water doesn't flash freeze in space. So, so dumb. Weren't they on the other side of the sun from the Earth? So two Astronomical Units away? And they can shuttle to it in an hour or so? Really? The jubilation at finding the Earth on the other side of the sun was absurd. They are now several orders of magnitude further away from the Earth than anyone has ever gone. It would take like a year+ for any rescue effort to possibly reach them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
I remember there being a big rumor going around when Life was in theaters that Sony was thinking of using it as a backdoor prequel for where Venom gets his alien suit. Haven't seen Life nor did I do any research on the viability of that theory, but it's just dumb enough that I can see Sony doing it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
I liked the new Cloverfield but I'm reaaaally sick of JJ Abrams' annoying thing on all his projects where they set up a bunch of mysteries and basically say "gently caress it we'll figure out why/how/what it means later".
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 06:49
|
|
|
Altered Carbon is good stuff. I'm a sucker for Neo- Noir Cyberpunk stuff and this is right up my alley
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 08:02
|
|
|
I’ve only seen the first episode of Altered Carbon, but would anyone else say that the dialog was hard to make out at times? It seemed like there was a lot going on in the audio mix.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 13:40
|
|
|
That actually brings up soomething I've been curious about. I always keep subtitles on, in case I miss some audio or something. People coming by generally seem to ask for them off. Who else keeps captions on by default?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:That actually brings up soomething I've been curious about. I always keep subtitles on, in case I miss some audio or something. People coming by generally seem to ask for them off. I only turn it on when I'm watching something British, because I cannot for the life of me understand moon English.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 13:56
|
|